by: Jeff Cohen, t r u t h o u t | Perspective
I have a plan to get NBC out of last place in the ratings. I'm promising blockbuster audience and international buzz. As a once disgruntled ex-employee, I now just want to be positive and help NBC, which needs all the free advice it can get.
Here's my idea: A series of NBC News prime-time specials featuring spectacular ambushes of big-time criminals lured into what they expect to be pleasurable surroundings. But, with hidden cameras whirring, the startled villain is dramatically confronted with the evidence of his massive crimes as millions of viewers look on in scorn and righteous amusement.
If it sounds familiar, it's because NBC News has scored huge ratings with its "To Catch a Predator" sleaze-fest - in which potential sex offenders by the bushel were lured via the Internet to what they thought would be sex with kids and instead got caught by NBC cameras and cops in hiding.
But my proposal doesn't involve sex abusers. I'm talking about men who've launched illegal war, mass murder, torture, dictatorship. And they're household names.
[. . . ]
To lure Dick Cheney from his undisclosed location, NBC's "To Catch a War Criminal" producers could pretend to be booking "Meet the Press." Cheney has been as comfy on that show as Alec Baldwin on "Saturday Night Live." It came out under oath in the Scooter Libby trial that Vice President Cheney's office viewed "Meet the Press" as "our best format," a program in which Cheney could "control the message." Putting him on that show, testified his communications chief, "was a tactic we used often."
It was on "Meet the Press" after 9/11 that Cheney warned: "We have to work the dark side, if you will. We're going to spend time in the shadows."
Read more at trouthout.org
http://www.truthout.org/021709B
17 February, 2009
16 February, 2009
On Marilyn, the Illuminati, and the Father of Our Country
By Robert Eringer
February 14, 2009 12:00 AM
On Presidents Day we think mostly of George Washington, whom conspiracy theorists link to membership in the Illuminati. If you don't know about the Illuminati, you will this May, when the movie "Angels & Demons" (sequel to "The Da Vinci Code") is released. That version will come equipped with a great deal of hype.
Here's all you need to know:
The Illuminati was an anti-royal, anti-clerical secret society founded in Bavaria on May 1, 1776, by a disgruntled ex-Freemason named Adam Weishaupt, who envisioned a utopian super-state devoid of monarchs, clergymen and landowners.
Needless to say, monarchs, clergymen and landowners were not amused. They outlawed Illuminati membership in 1785 and drove it underground, where it organized the French Revolution, which toppled, well, the French monarch, the Church of France, and wealthy landowners.
Nearly a half-century later, a Yale University student named William Huntington Russell spent two semesters in Germany on a college exchange program and discovered the Illuminist occultism, which so entranced him, he took it home to New Haven, Conn. -- and created an American chapter: Skull & Bones. The mystic Bones number 322 derives from its year of incorporation (1832) as the Russell Trust Association, and its status as the second chapter (2) of the Illuminati. In 2004, two Yale "Bonesmen," George W. Bush and John Kerry, squared off for the U.S. presidency, setting conspiracy buffs atwitter.
"I suspect whatever bond exists among Skull & Bones members at school dissipates rapidly after graduation," a former senior CIA official told The Investigator."Far more dangerous to our country is the class system whereby graduates from Harvard and Yale and a few other top schools consider themselves some kind of ruling elite. Our new president, by the way, shares this elitism."
George Washington was not an Illuminist; he was a fervent Freemason, inducted as an "Entered Apprentice" into the "Craft" on November 4, 1752 (aged 21) at Masonic Lodge No. 4 in Fredericksburg, Va. From the White House to the Capitol Building and beyond, President Washington constructed the "Federal City" named after him to Masonic code, utilizing Masonic ritual and regalia at the laying of cornerstones -- a subject Dan Brown, author of "The Da Vinci Code," is expected to tackle in his next novel.
Radical rightists and lunatic leftists perceive a formal evolution of the Illuminati into the Round Table groups of the late 1800s, and the founding of (the UK) Chatham House and its American counterpart, the Council on Foreign Relations -- up to the Bilderberg Group and its better known spin-off, The Trilateral Commission. They subscribe to a belief that most everything that happens of any global significance -- assassinations, wars, 9/11, even hurricanes -- is part of a carefully choreographed grand design to form a single world government that would maintain control over everyone.
This school of thought (in this case, elementary school) in the 1970s produced two colorful conspiracy theorists: Peter Beter and Mae Brussell. Dr. Beter, a former Import-Export bank official, worked himself into weekly frenzies about "Soviet nuclear warheads buried in U.S. coastal waters!" He even provided precise longitudes and latitudes of every concealed warhead. A lake in West Virginia was cited -- and a panicked sheriff named Harley Mooney actually had it drained. Oops. No nuclear warhead.
"Darn Soviets," said Dr. Beter. "They moved it."
He also railed about "robotoids and automatons." In particular, Henry Kissinger, he claimed, had been replaced by a Soviet robotoid.
Three thousand miles away, in Carmel, Mae Brussell used her Sunday evening radio program to weave a vast web of conspiracy and intrigue around "The Gemstone File," which neatly tied everything from the assassination of JFK through Watergate to the late Greek shipping magnate Aristotle Onassis. The Gemstone File never won a Pulitzer, but it found a widespread underground audience and, circulated by photocopy, became a cult classic.
Both Dr. Beter and Ms. Brussell are no longer among us. A Brit named David Icke now holds their torch. He has propelled the so-called "Illuminati Conspiracy" to new heights, proclaiming that most world leaders are "hybrid reptilians" disguised as humans.
When it comes to Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez, and Robert Mugabe, we are inclined to believe him.
While on the subject of conspiracy theories, this being Valentine's Day, think of Marilyn Monroe. Almost every man who met Marilyn fell in love with her. And she fell in love with a number of men -- and married a few of them, including baseball great Joe DiMaggio and playwright Arthur Miller. Flirting with danger, she also fell in love with two married men: the Kennedy brothers -- first President JFK, then Bobby, the Attorney General.
To the President, Marilyn was just one in a series of bombshell actresses -- including Jayne Mansfield and Angie Dickenson -- who helped him relieve the pain of a damaged spine; Marilyn must have realized this, so she allowed JFK to pawn her off on his younger brother. Bobby she fell for, inferring from their pillow talk that he would divorce his wife Ethel and marry her. Soon, Marilyn's incessant, pesky phone calls to the Attorney General's office convinced Bobby that he had to terminate the affair.
Peter Lawford -- the British actor, Marilyn pal and Kennedy-in-law -- was consigned to convey the caddish communiquè.
Marilyn went bananas. She told Mr. Lawford that she would go public, maybe call a press conference. This would be part revenge for the fraternal double-whammy, and part calculation/rationalization that if Ethel learned of the affair, she would surely dump her husband and clear the deck for Bobby to do what Marilyn believed he truly wanted.
Mr. Lawford freaked and reported Marilyn's frame of mind to Bobby.
What happened next remains a mystery. But Marilyn Monroe was dead within a few days.
Some say she died from a self-administered drug overdose. Others say the overdose was assisted.
But one intelligence source we know suggests that an injection of a tiny amount of pure nicotine in the anus has the result of killing someone without leaving a mark.
We're still trying to get to the bottom of this.
The opinions in this column are Robert Eringer's and not necessarily those of the Santa Barbara News Press. If you have a story idea for The Investigator, contact him at eringer33@aol.com. State if your query is confidential.
February 14, 2009 12:00 AM
On Presidents Day we think mostly of George Washington, whom conspiracy theorists link to membership in the Illuminati. If you don't know about the Illuminati, you will this May, when the movie "Angels & Demons" (sequel to "The Da Vinci Code") is released. That version will come equipped with a great deal of hype.
Here's all you need to know:
The Illuminati was an anti-royal, anti-clerical secret society founded in Bavaria on May 1, 1776, by a disgruntled ex-Freemason named Adam Weishaupt, who envisioned a utopian super-state devoid of monarchs, clergymen and landowners.
Needless to say, monarchs, clergymen and landowners were not amused. They outlawed Illuminati membership in 1785 and drove it underground, where it organized the French Revolution, which toppled, well, the French monarch, the Church of France, and wealthy landowners.
Nearly a half-century later, a Yale University student named William Huntington Russell spent two semesters in Germany on a college exchange program and discovered the Illuminist occultism, which so entranced him, he took it home to New Haven, Conn. -- and created an American chapter: Skull & Bones. The mystic Bones number 322 derives from its year of incorporation (1832) as the Russell Trust Association, and its status as the second chapter (2) of the Illuminati. In 2004, two Yale "Bonesmen," George W. Bush and John Kerry, squared off for the U.S. presidency, setting conspiracy buffs atwitter.
"I suspect whatever bond exists among Skull & Bones members at school dissipates rapidly after graduation," a former senior CIA official told The Investigator."Far more dangerous to our country is the class system whereby graduates from Harvard and Yale and a few other top schools consider themselves some kind of ruling elite. Our new president, by the way, shares this elitism."
George Washington was not an Illuminist; he was a fervent Freemason, inducted as an "Entered Apprentice" into the "Craft" on November 4, 1752 (aged 21) at Masonic Lodge No. 4 in Fredericksburg, Va. From the White House to the Capitol Building and beyond, President Washington constructed the "Federal City" named after him to Masonic code, utilizing Masonic ritual and regalia at the laying of cornerstones -- a subject Dan Brown, author of "The Da Vinci Code," is expected to tackle in his next novel.
Radical rightists and lunatic leftists perceive a formal evolution of the Illuminati into the Round Table groups of the late 1800s, and the founding of (the UK) Chatham House and its American counterpart, the Council on Foreign Relations -- up to the Bilderberg Group and its better known spin-off, The Trilateral Commission. They subscribe to a belief that most everything that happens of any global significance -- assassinations, wars, 9/11, even hurricanes -- is part of a carefully choreographed grand design to form a single world government that would maintain control over everyone.
This school of thought (in this case, elementary school) in the 1970s produced two colorful conspiracy theorists: Peter Beter and Mae Brussell. Dr. Beter, a former Import-Export bank official, worked himself into weekly frenzies about "Soviet nuclear warheads buried in U.S. coastal waters!" He even provided precise longitudes and latitudes of every concealed warhead. A lake in West Virginia was cited -- and a panicked sheriff named Harley Mooney actually had it drained. Oops. No nuclear warhead.
"Darn Soviets," said Dr. Beter. "They moved it."
He also railed about "robotoids and automatons." In particular, Henry Kissinger, he claimed, had been replaced by a Soviet robotoid.
Three thousand miles away, in Carmel, Mae Brussell used her Sunday evening radio program to weave a vast web of conspiracy and intrigue around "The Gemstone File," which neatly tied everything from the assassination of JFK through Watergate to the late Greek shipping magnate Aristotle Onassis. The Gemstone File never won a Pulitzer, but it found a widespread underground audience and, circulated by photocopy, became a cult classic.
Both Dr. Beter and Ms. Brussell are no longer among us. A Brit named David Icke now holds their torch. He has propelled the so-called "Illuminati Conspiracy" to new heights, proclaiming that most world leaders are "hybrid reptilians" disguised as humans.
When it comes to Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez, and Robert Mugabe, we are inclined to believe him.
While on the subject of conspiracy theories, this being Valentine's Day, think of Marilyn Monroe. Almost every man who met Marilyn fell in love with her. And she fell in love with a number of men -- and married a few of them, including baseball great Joe DiMaggio and playwright Arthur Miller. Flirting with danger, she also fell in love with two married men: the Kennedy brothers -- first President JFK, then Bobby, the Attorney General.
To the President, Marilyn was just one in a series of bombshell actresses -- including Jayne Mansfield and Angie Dickenson -- who helped him relieve the pain of a damaged spine; Marilyn must have realized this, so she allowed JFK to pawn her off on his younger brother. Bobby she fell for, inferring from their pillow talk that he would divorce his wife Ethel and marry her. Soon, Marilyn's incessant, pesky phone calls to the Attorney General's office convinced Bobby that he had to terminate the affair.
Peter Lawford -- the British actor, Marilyn pal and Kennedy-in-law -- was consigned to convey the caddish communiquè.
Marilyn went bananas. She told Mr. Lawford that she would go public, maybe call a press conference. This would be part revenge for the fraternal double-whammy, and part calculation/rationalization that if Ethel learned of the affair, she would surely dump her husband and clear the deck for Bobby to do what Marilyn believed he truly wanted.
Mr. Lawford freaked and reported Marilyn's frame of mind to Bobby.
What happened next remains a mystery. But Marilyn Monroe was dead within a few days.
Some say she died from a self-administered drug overdose. Others say the overdose was assisted.
But one intelligence source we know suggests that an injection of a tiny amount of pure nicotine in the anus has the result of killing someone without leaving a mark.
We're still trying to get to the bottom of this.
The opinions in this column are Robert Eringer's and not necessarily those of the Santa Barbara News Press. If you have a story idea for The Investigator, contact him at eringer33@aol.com. State if your query is confidential.
Obama’s Masonic Inauguration
Who is this handsome gentleman?
Go on over to this website and find out!
Read about Obama’s ritual Masonic Inauguration.
“Meet the New Boss, the Same as the Old Boss”
http://darkmission.blogspot.com/
And have a great time.
Don’t forget to come back now, ya’ll hear?
Go on over to this website and find out!
Read about Obama’s ritual Masonic Inauguration.
“Meet the New Boss, the Same as the Old Boss”
http://darkmission.blogspot.com/
And have a great time.
Don’t forget to come back now, ya’ll hear?
15 February, 2009
Ezekiel Emanuel White House Health Care Policy Advisor
Obama! Kill Me Now!
Is dying a right, or a preference over the miserable state of life?
I have wondered when physician assisted suicide will begin to play a major role as the world goes down the dung hole. Here it is, in no time at all, the role of physician assisted suicide has come to the foreground with the appointment of Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm Emanuel’s brother, as “White House Health Care Policy Advisor.”
How far from "I'm depressed, I don't want to live" is
"I'm poor, I can't afford to live"?
From Wikipedia:
Dr. Ezekiel "Zeke" J. Emanuel (1957-) is a NIH bioethicist, a leading opponent of state-assisted suicide, and a proponent of a Guaranteed Healthcare Access Plan (GHAP).
Ezekiel is the son of Dr. Benjamin M. Emanuel, a former member of the Zionist militant organization Irgun, and a Chicago pediatrician.
His brothers are White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a former Democratic US Representative and Hollywood-based superagent Ari Emanuel.[1] He has an adopted sister, Shoshanna.
From
Whose Right to Die? By EMANUEL EZEKIEL
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/euthanasia/eu0007.html
The empirical studies of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia in the Netherlands (where the practices have long been accepted), the United States, and elsewhere indicate that pain plays a minor role in motivating requests for the procedures. A 1996 update of the comprehensive and rigorous 1991 Remmelink Report on euthanasia practices in the Netherlands revealed that in only 32 percent of all cases did pain play any role in requests for euthanasia; indeed, pain was the sole reason for requesting euthanasia in no cases. A study of patients in nursing homes in the Netherlands revealed that pain was among the reasons for requesting physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia in only 29 percent of cases and was the main reason in only 11 percent. A study of physicians in Washington State who admitted to having received requests for physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia revealed that severe pain played a role in only about a third of the requests.
A study of HIV-infected patients in New York found that interest in physician-assisted suicide was not associated with patients' experiencing pain or with pain-related limitations on function. My own recent study of cancer patients, conducted in Boston, reveals that those with pain are more likely than others to oppose physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. These patients are also more likely to say that they would ask to change doctors if their attending physician indicated that he or she had performed physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia. No study has ever shown that pain plays a major role in motivating patient requests for physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia.
What does motivate requests? According to studies, depression and general psychological distress. The Remmelink Report found that among Dutch patients the leading reason for requesting euthanasia was a perceived loss of dignity. The study of Washington State physicians found that the leading factors driving requests were fear of a loss of control or of dignity, of being a burden, and of being dependent. Among the New York HIV-infected patients the leading factors were depression, hopelessness, and having few — and poor-quality — social supports. In my own study, patients who were depressed were most likely to discuss euthanasia seriously, to hoard drugs for suicide, and to have read Final Exit, the Hemlock Society suicide manual.
Send your euthanasia request to the White House at obama.barack@fcboe.org:
Dear Barack,
I see that you have hired good ole Rahmmie's brother as your Health Care Policy Advisor.
I am poor. I can't afford to live.
OBAMA, Please KILL ME NOW!
Please write on the subject line:
OBAMA! KILL ME NOW!
Is dying a right, or a preference over the miserable state of life?
I have wondered when physician assisted suicide will begin to play a major role as the world goes down the dung hole. Here it is, in no time at all, the role of physician assisted suicide has come to the foreground with the appointment of Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm Emanuel’s brother, as “White House Health Care Policy Advisor.”
How far from "I'm depressed, I don't want to live" is
"I'm poor, I can't afford to live"?
From Wikipedia:
Dr. Ezekiel "Zeke" J. Emanuel (1957-) is a NIH bioethicist, a leading opponent of state-assisted suicide, and a proponent of a Guaranteed Healthcare Access Plan (GHAP).
Ezekiel is the son of Dr. Benjamin M. Emanuel, a former member of the Zionist militant organization Irgun, and a Chicago pediatrician.
His brothers are White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a former Democratic US Representative and Hollywood-based superagent Ari Emanuel.[1] He has an adopted sister, Shoshanna.
From
Whose Right to Die? By EMANUEL EZEKIEL
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/euthanasia/eu0007.html
The empirical studies of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia in the Netherlands (where the practices have long been accepted), the United States, and elsewhere indicate that pain plays a minor role in motivating requests for the procedures. A 1996 update of the comprehensive and rigorous 1991 Remmelink Report on euthanasia practices in the Netherlands revealed that in only 32 percent of all cases did pain play any role in requests for euthanasia; indeed, pain was the sole reason for requesting euthanasia in no cases. A study of patients in nursing homes in the Netherlands revealed that pain was among the reasons for requesting physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia in only 29 percent of cases and was the main reason in only 11 percent. A study of physicians in Washington State who admitted to having received requests for physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia revealed that severe pain played a role in only about a third of the requests.
A study of HIV-infected patients in New York found that interest in physician-assisted suicide was not associated with patients' experiencing pain or with pain-related limitations on function. My own recent study of cancer patients, conducted in Boston, reveals that those with pain are more likely than others to oppose physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. These patients are also more likely to say that they would ask to change doctors if their attending physician indicated that he or she had performed physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia. No study has ever shown that pain plays a major role in motivating patient requests for physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia.
What does motivate requests? According to studies, depression and general psychological distress. The Remmelink Report found that among Dutch patients the leading reason for requesting euthanasia was a perceived loss of dignity. The study of Washington State physicians found that the leading factors driving requests were fear of a loss of control or of dignity, of being a burden, and of being dependent. Among the New York HIV-infected patients the leading factors were depression, hopelessness, and having few — and poor-quality — social supports. In my own study, patients who were depressed were most likely to discuss euthanasia seriously, to hoard drugs for suicide, and to have read Final Exit, the Hemlock Society suicide manual.
Send your euthanasia request to the White House at obama.barack@fcboe.org:
Dear Barack,
I see that you have hired good ole Rahmmie's brother as your Health Care Policy Advisor.
I am poor. I can't afford to live.
OBAMA, Please KILL ME NOW!
Please write on the subject line:
OBAMA! KILL ME NOW!
Gaza: A wider view (the final update)
The finished essay with a final updated 'Orwellian Notes' for 15 February 2009 (title is link to article) by penucquem
13 February, 2009
Planet X Researcher Andy Lloyd does Roma!
“Mr. and Mrs. Darkstar” take Planet X to the Vatican!
"I think it's fair to say that conferences on the subject of 'Planet X' are a rare event. I was honoured to be asked to speak at this conference in Rome, but I was also a little sceptical about how many delegates would attend. I have several pages on the Dark Star website already translated into Italian, thanks to my friend Mattia. Even so, would that be sufficient to fill a conference hall full of people whose language I did not even share?
[....]
I set out six scenarios for the timing of Nibiru - two of them related to Zecharia Sitchin's original work, two of them related to my research, and the other two about 2003 and 2012. I tried to stick to the facts as much as possible, and stay neutral. I hope I achieved that, but I can't imagine that the talk was easy listening for the many delegates who were already convinced that the world will end in 3 years time. Still, that's what conferences are all about - to bring together an eclectic mix of opinions and research. It would be easy for me to go along with the current morbid interest in 2012 with a confirmatory nod - I'm sure my book sales and media exposure would climb as a result! But, at the end of the day, I don't think that the 2012 'event' will be catastrophic. At least, I don't think there is enough evidence to suggest this scenario."
See the details of "The Return of Planet X" conference at:
http://www.darkstar1.co.uk/roma.html
Taliban War Treasure – US Military Computers!
There is no way for the Powerful Oz to “win” this war.
Two empires have gone down before it.
U.S. IMPERIALISTS OUT OF AFGHANISTAN!
You are chasing a “shadow” – leave it alone. We all know the secret now. Osama bin Laden is already dead. You can stop the show now.
***************
The US Struggle to Keep the Taliban From Stealing What's Inside This Box
Wednesday 11 February 2009
by: Shahan Mufti, GlobalPost
Peshawar, Pakistan - Throughout the ages, this ancient Silk Road town near the border of Afghanistan has been the place where the black market thrives and the military spoils of empires are hawked openly.
Here in the storefronts you can still buy antique field rifles left over from the British presence of the 19th century and find uniforms and revolvers from the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
Now the shops in this industrial rim of Peshawar are filling with military equipment and computers looted from the most recent empire to bog down in this hostile and impenetrable terrain: the United States of America.
In the age of computerized high-tech warfare, it is not just American hardware available on the black market. Now there is also vital technology and information up for grabs and - as military officials here and in the U.S. fear - leaking into the wrong hands in this region where the Taliban and elements of Al Qaeda have a known presence.
I was recently able to purchase a U.S. military laptop for $650 from a small kiosk, which is known as the "Sitara Market," on the western edge of the sprawling open-air markets on the edge of Peshawar.
The laptop, which has clear U.S. military markings and serial numbers, contained restricted U.S. military information, as well as software for military platforms, the identities of numerous military personnel and information about weaknesses and flaws in American military vehicles being employed in the war in Afghanistan.
Continue reading at:
http://www.truthout.org/021209A
Two empires have gone down before it.
U.S. IMPERIALISTS OUT OF AFGHANISTAN!
You are chasing a “shadow” – leave it alone. We all know the secret now. Osama bin Laden is already dead. You can stop the show now.
***************
The US Struggle to Keep the Taliban From Stealing What's Inside This Box
Wednesday 11 February 2009
by: Shahan Mufti, GlobalPost
Peshawar, Pakistan - Throughout the ages, this ancient Silk Road town near the border of Afghanistan has been the place where the black market thrives and the military spoils of empires are hawked openly.
Here in the storefronts you can still buy antique field rifles left over from the British presence of the 19th century and find uniforms and revolvers from the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
Now the shops in this industrial rim of Peshawar are filling with military equipment and computers looted from the most recent empire to bog down in this hostile and impenetrable terrain: the United States of America.
In the age of computerized high-tech warfare, it is not just American hardware available on the black market. Now there is also vital technology and information up for grabs and - as military officials here and in the U.S. fear - leaking into the wrong hands in this region where the Taliban and elements of Al Qaeda have a known presence.
I was recently able to purchase a U.S. military laptop for $650 from a small kiosk, which is known as the "Sitara Market," on the western edge of the sprawling open-air markets on the edge of Peshawar.
The laptop, which has clear U.S. military markings and serial numbers, contained restricted U.S. military information, as well as software for military platforms, the identities of numerous military personnel and information about weaknesses and flaws in American military vehicles being employed in the war in Afghanistan.
Continue reading at:
http://www.truthout.org/021209A
12 February, 2009
An Inconvenient Debt
And here’s your “Inconvenient Truth”:
The Congressional Budget Office has said the House and Senate bills will result in so much government debt that within a few years it will crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next ten years than if the government had done nothing.
What a bloody SCAM! How about hitting everybody’s paycheck up there on “The Hill” and on “Wall Street”? Hey, Big O? Nobody’s talking about THAT, are they?
Central Bank Conspiracy
Whoever controls the money of a nation, controls that nation. --James A. Garfield, 20th U.S. Pres.
The plutocratic oligarchy reigns through their possession of the Central banks of the world; thus to understand who rules the world is to perceive the history of modern central banking. The first central bank was created in Sweden in 1656, which still exists today. Before the usurers were able to cause the European monarchies to obey them, they were the goldsmiths of the Middle Ages who loaned money to the masses and nobles alike. A Central bank, briefly, is a private corporation owned by professional blood-line banking families, who 'lend' money with interest to the government, thus forcing the government to be in perpetual debt to them. That is the origin of the "national debt". It is a debt intended to never be repaid, for who is supposed to pay it off? The State itself which the bankers control? From the moment a Central bank is established the State is no longer the monarchy, democracy, republic or dictatorship, but the Bank itself. That is what Amschel Mayer Rothschild meant when he summarised: Give me control of a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws.
The Bank of England was formed in 1694 by William Paterson, and the right to issue money was transferred from the Crown to the Bank, due to the ceaseless scheming of a cabal of loansharks to gain power. To quote Mr. Paterson: The bank hath benefit of interest on all monies which it creates out of nothing.
Or as Nathan Mayer Rothschild so aptly phrased it: I care not what puppet is put on the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply.
In 1791 the First Bank of the U.S. was founded--our very own central bank! But in 1811 when its 20 year charter came up for renewal it was denied, and Nathan Mayer Rothschild responded: "Either the application for renewal of the charter is granted, or the U.S. will find itself in a most disastrous war." Thus ensued the War of 1812, which influenced the re-commission of the Bank in 1816. As the years passed, these aristocrats of cash encountered a foe in President Andrew Jackson who abolished the bank in 1836. But these conspirators never quit, as they instigated and ignited the Civil War while loaning money to both the North and South(but always just a little bit more to the client they want to win). They thought Abraham Lincoln was their obedient slave, until he started printing "Greenbacks". Instead of continuing to borrow money from the private bankers like a hayseed, Lincoln ordered the State to print its own money free of interest, and thus he was subsequently assassinated. Many years passed between the passing of Lincoln and the conception of the Federal Reserve in 1913, but the genetic lineage of monetary masters remained the same, even up to now.
Now that their goal of global governance has been achieved, the function of politics becomes a continual means of preserving their power, through constant entertainment, toil and turmoil; thus securing their perpetuity over an ignorant bewildered humanity.
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences." --Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope
The plutocratic oligarchy reigns through their possession of the Central banks of the world; thus to understand who rules the world is to perceive the history of modern central banking. The first central bank was created in Sweden in 1656, which still exists today. Before the usurers were able to cause the European monarchies to obey them, they were the goldsmiths of the Middle Ages who loaned money to the masses and nobles alike. A Central bank, briefly, is a private corporation owned by professional blood-line banking families, who 'lend' money with interest to the government, thus forcing the government to be in perpetual debt to them. That is the origin of the "national debt". It is a debt intended to never be repaid, for who is supposed to pay it off? The State itself which the bankers control? From the moment a Central bank is established the State is no longer the monarchy, democracy, republic or dictatorship, but the Bank itself. That is what Amschel Mayer Rothschild meant when he summarised: Give me control of a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws.
The Bank of England was formed in 1694 by William Paterson, and the right to issue money was transferred from the Crown to the Bank, due to the ceaseless scheming of a cabal of loansharks to gain power. To quote Mr. Paterson: The bank hath benefit of interest on all monies which it creates out of nothing.
Or as Nathan Mayer Rothschild so aptly phrased it: I care not what puppet is put on the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply.
In 1791 the First Bank of the U.S. was founded--our very own central bank! But in 1811 when its 20 year charter came up for renewal it was denied, and Nathan Mayer Rothschild responded: "Either the application for renewal of the charter is granted, or the U.S. will find itself in a most disastrous war." Thus ensued the War of 1812, which influenced the re-commission of the Bank in 1816. As the years passed, these aristocrats of cash encountered a foe in President Andrew Jackson who abolished the bank in 1836. But these conspirators never quit, as they instigated and ignited the Civil War while loaning money to both the North and South(but always just a little bit more to the client they want to win). They thought Abraham Lincoln was their obedient slave, until he started printing "Greenbacks". Instead of continuing to borrow money from the private bankers like a hayseed, Lincoln ordered the State to print its own money free of interest, and thus he was subsequently assassinated. Many years passed between the passing of Lincoln and the conception of the Federal Reserve in 1913, but the genetic lineage of monetary masters remained the same, even up to now.
Now that their goal of global governance has been achieved, the function of politics becomes a continual means of preserving their power, through constant entertainment, toil and turmoil; thus securing their perpetuity over an ignorant bewildered humanity.
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences." --Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope
11 February, 2009
Is the Obama Administration pushing Hillary Clinton aside?
From talk.us.rhode-island
This is interesting. Is the administration shuuting her aside?
So where does all this leave Secretary of State Clinton?
While sympathy for Mrs. Clinton is outside the normal fare of these
columns, one cannot help but feel that she is surrounded by people who are,
at best, strangers and, at worst, enemies. The competition that has
historically occupied secretaries of State and national security advisers
seems poised to ratchet up to a new level in the current administration.
Hillary's essential problem is that she is an outsider in the current
mix. She was the adversary in the campaign, and Rice and Powers - at the
very least - know it well, having helped to run the campaign that dethroned
her. Can they - and she - be devoid of bitterness or at least of normal
human trepidation? Not very likely.
The fact is that the power of the secretary of State is not statutory,
nor does it flow from the prestige of the post's occupant. Former Gen. Al
Haig, once supreme commander of NATO and chief of staff to President Nixon,
found that out when he was undercut as secretary by the White House troika
of Mike Deaver, James Baker and Ed Meese. Bill Rogers, Eisenhower's attorney
general and Nixon's California confidant, found himself on the outs from the
moment he became secretary of State, with Henry Kissinger soaking up all the
power through his direct access to Nixon as national security adviser.
The power of the secretary of State flows directly from the president.
But Hillary does not have the inside track with Obama. Rice and Powers,
close advisers in the campaign, and Gen. Jones - whose office is in the
White House - all may have superior access. Holbrooke and Mitchell will have
more immediate information about the world's trouble spots.
So what is Hillary's mandate? Of what is she secretary of State? If
you take the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan out of the equation, what
is left? One would have to assume that the old North Korea hands in the
government would monopolize that theater of action. What, precisely, is it
that Hillary is to do? The question lingers.
And for this she gave up a Senate seat?
Hillary's incredible, shrinking role
By Dick Morris
Posted: 02/09/09 06:23 PM [ET]
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is finding that her job
description is dissolving under her feet, leaving her with only a vestige of
the power she must have thought she acquired when she signed on to be
President Obama's chief Cabinet officer.
Since her designation:
- Vice President Biden has moved vigorously to stake out foreign
policy as his turf. His visit to Afghanistan, right before the Inauguration,
could not but send a signal to Hillary that he would conduct foreign policy
in the new administration, leaving Hillary in the role of backup.
- Richard Holbrooke, the former Balkan negotiator and U.N. ambassador, has been named special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan. He insisted on
direct access to the president, a privilege he was denied during much of the
Clinton years.
- Former Sen. George Mitchell (D-Maine), negotiator of the Irish Peace
Accords, was appointed to be the administration's point man on Arab-Israeli
negotiations.
- Samantha Powers, Obama's former campaign aide, who once called
Hillary a "monster," has been appointed to the National Security Council
(NSC) as director of "multilateral affairs."
- Gen. James L. Jones, Obama's new national security adviser, has
announced an expansion of the membership and role of the NSC. He pledges to
eliminate "back channels" to the president and wants to grow the NSC's role
to accommodate the "dramatically different" challenges of the current world
situation.
- Susan Rice, Obama's new United Nations ambassador, insisted upon and
got Cabinet rank for her portfolio, and she will presumably also have the
same kind of access to Obama that she had as his chief foreign policy
adviser during the campaign.
By Dick Morris
Posted: 02/09/09 06:23 PM [ET]
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is finding that her job
description is dissolving under her feet, leaving her with only a vestige of
the power she must have thought she acquired when she signed on to be
President Obama's chief Cabinet officer.
Since her designation:
- Vice President Biden has moved vigorously to stake out foreign
policy as his turf. His visit to Afghanistan, right before the Inauguration,
could not but send a signal to Hillary that he would conduct foreign policy
in the new administration, leaving Hillary in the role of backup.
- Richard Holbrooke, the former Balkan negotiator and U.N. ambassador, has been named special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan. He insisted on
direct access to the president, a privilege he was denied during much of the
Clinton years.
- Former Sen. George Mitchell (D-Maine), negotiator of the Irish Peace
Accords, was appointed to be the administration's point man on Arab-Israeli
negotiations.
- Samantha Powers, Obama's former campaign aide, who once called
Hillary a "monster," has been appointed to the National Security Council
(NSC) as director of "multilateral affairs."
- Gen. James L. Jones, Obama's new national security adviser, has
announced an expansion of the membership and role of the NSC. He pledges to
eliminate "back channels" to the president and wants to grow the NSC's role
to accommodate the "dramatically different" challenges of the current world
situation.
- Susan Rice, Obama's new United Nations ambassador, insisted upon and
got Cabinet rank for her portfolio, and she will presumably also have the
same kind of access to Obama that she had as his chief foreign policy
adviser during the campaign.
So where does all this leave Secretary of State Clinton?
While sympathy for Mrs. Clinton is outside the normal fare of these
columns, one cannot help but feel that she is surrounded by people who are,
at best, strangers and, at worst, enemies. The competition that has
historically occupied secretaries of State and national security advisers
seems poised to ratchet up to a new level in the current administration.
Hillary's essential problem is that she is an outsider in the current
mix. She was the adversary in the campaign, and Rice and Powers - at the
very least - know it well, having helped to run the campaign that dethroned
her. Can they - and she - be devoid of bitterness or at least of normal
human trepidation? Not very likely.
The fact is that the power of the secretary of State is not statutory,
nor does it flow from the prestige of the post's occupant. Former Gen. Al
Haig, once supreme commander of NATO and chief of staff to President Nixon,
found that out when he was undercut as secretary by the White House troika
of Mike Deaver, James Baker and Ed Meese. Bill Rogers, Eisenhower's attorney
general and Nixon's California confidant, found himself on the outs from the
moment he became secretary of State, with Henry Kissinger soaking up all the
power through his direct access to Nixon as national security adviser.
The power of the secretary of State flows directly from the president.
But Hillary does not have the inside track with Obama. Rice and Powers,
close advisers in the campaign, and Gen. Jones - whose office is in the
White House - all may have superior access. Holbrooke and Mitchell will have
more immediate information about the world's trouble spots.
So what is Hillary's mandate? Of what is she secretary of State? If
you take the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan out of the equation, what
is left? One would have to assume that the old North Korea hands in the
government would monopolize that theater of action. What, precisely, is it
that Hillary is to do? The question lingers.
And for this she gave up a Senate seat?
We Hold These Truths by Richard C. Cook
Just wondering who might have the impetus to level a death threat against an economist? Someone who's got a stake in business as usual there in Washington?
You betcha.
"Cook’s observations are particularly relevant today, now that many of the same people who pushed for deregulation during the Clinton and Bush administrations have been appointed as key members of Obama’s economics team."
Book Review
We Hold These Truths by Richard C. Cook
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/richard-cook-its-time-to-fix-the-monetary-system-by-mike-whitney/
Richard Cook’s new book, We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform, cuts through the nonsense and reveals the root cause of today’s economic crisis; a privatized credit system gone haywire. This is first-class analysis from a prescient reformer whose message is just now catching fire. While the pundits are still hung up on subprime mortgages and toxic assets, Cook has peeled the cover off our deeply-flawed monetary system and exposed the rot within. This is where the change needs to begin.
We Hold These Truths is a timely book that challenges conventional thinking about credit and the role of banks. As the author points out, “In a system where the banks have a monopoly on the issuance of credit, they inevitably become the most powerful entity in the economy and therefore the most powerful politically as well.” Cook’s observations are particularly relevant today, now that many of the same people who pushed for deregulation during the Clinton and Bush administrations have been appointed as key members of Obama’s economics team. It’s clear that Wall Street has further tightened its grip on Washington even while it continues to wreak havoc on the financial system. It’s no wonder Thomas Jefferson concluded that, “Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.”
Cook’s strong suit is taking complex economic ideas and breaking them down for his readers. He devotes a fair amount of time to explaining the fundamental mismatch between what the country produces and its net earnings. This gap between GDP and purchasing power can only be filled through the issuance of credit. The problem is, that as borrowing increases, the ballooning debt becomes more unmanageable and the system begins to teeter. Wall Street’s reckless expansion of credit simulated prosperity for nearly a decade, but when the bubble burst, the financial system collapsed, creating the present downturn.
Cook believes that a National Dividend–which would come in the form of a check from the government to every man, woman and child in America–could make up for the loss in purchasing power and maintain economic stability. This is not “pie-in-the-sky” liberalism, but a reasonable proposal designed to stimulate business activity and avoid disruptive recessions. He also advocates public control of credit: community-run investment banks which operate as public utilities and provide low interest loans to consumers and businesses. These ideas were implemented during the Great Depression via the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) and the Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) They were successful programs that helped build America’s middle class while seizing control of the mortgage industry from Wall Street speculators.
Cook also supports a basic income guarantee for every American regardless of whether they work or not. This is a defining issue that should be debated in terms of the value we place on human dignity. Everyone deserves a minimal standard of living. The last time Congress considered such an initiative was Nixon’s Family Assistance Act of 1970. The “reverse income tax” was voted down by a coalition of southern Democrats who opposed it mainly on racial grounds. Senator George McGovern who supported the bill said that “it would have provided a basic underpinning of income for all Americans.” Income guarantees are stimulative and help maintain demand. They are good for the economy and demonstrate the nation’s commitment to provide for those who are most in need.
We Hold These Truths is a book for people who want to understand the current crisis without getting bogged down in hand-wringing and negativity. It’s a blueprint for removing the gangrenous parts of the financial system and for establishing a dividend-based system that better serves the public interest. Richard Cook has presented the ideas that are likely to shape the national debate on monetary reform for years to come. They are certainly worth our consideration. It’s a great read.
You betcha.
"Cook’s observations are particularly relevant today, now that many of the same people who pushed for deregulation during the Clinton and Bush administrations have been appointed as key members of Obama’s economics team."
Book Review
We Hold These Truths by Richard C. Cook
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/richard-cook-its-time-to-fix-the-monetary-system-by-mike-whitney/
Richard Cook’s new book, We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform, cuts through the nonsense and reveals the root cause of today’s economic crisis; a privatized credit system gone haywire. This is first-class analysis from a prescient reformer whose message is just now catching fire. While the pundits are still hung up on subprime mortgages and toxic assets, Cook has peeled the cover off our deeply-flawed monetary system and exposed the rot within. This is where the change needs to begin.
We Hold These Truths is a timely book that challenges conventional thinking about credit and the role of banks. As the author points out, “In a system where the banks have a monopoly on the issuance of credit, they inevitably become the most powerful entity in the economy and therefore the most powerful politically as well.” Cook’s observations are particularly relevant today, now that many of the same people who pushed for deregulation during the Clinton and Bush administrations have been appointed as key members of Obama’s economics team. It’s clear that Wall Street has further tightened its grip on Washington even while it continues to wreak havoc on the financial system. It’s no wonder Thomas Jefferson concluded that, “Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.”
Cook’s strong suit is taking complex economic ideas and breaking them down for his readers. He devotes a fair amount of time to explaining the fundamental mismatch between what the country produces and its net earnings. This gap between GDP and purchasing power can only be filled through the issuance of credit. The problem is, that as borrowing increases, the ballooning debt becomes more unmanageable and the system begins to teeter. Wall Street’s reckless expansion of credit simulated prosperity for nearly a decade, but when the bubble burst, the financial system collapsed, creating the present downturn.
Cook believes that a National Dividend–which would come in the form of a check from the government to every man, woman and child in America–could make up for the loss in purchasing power and maintain economic stability. This is not “pie-in-the-sky” liberalism, but a reasonable proposal designed to stimulate business activity and avoid disruptive recessions. He also advocates public control of credit: community-run investment banks which operate as public utilities and provide low interest loans to consumers and businesses. These ideas were implemented during the Great Depression via the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) and the Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) They were successful programs that helped build America’s middle class while seizing control of the mortgage industry from Wall Street speculators.
Cook also supports a basic income guarantee for every American regardless of whether they work or not. This is a defining issue that should be debated in terms of the value we place on human dignity. Everyone deserves a minimal standard of living. The last time Congress considered such an initiative was Nixon’s Family Assistance Act of 1970. The “reverse income tax” was voted down by a coalition of southern Democrats who opposed it mainly on racial grounds. Senator George McGovern who supported the bill said that “it would have provided a basic underpinning of income for all Americans.” Income guarantees are stimulative and help maintain demand. They are good for the economy and demonstrate the nation’s commitment to provide for those who are most in need.
We Hold These Truths is a book for people who want to understand the current crisis without getting bogged down in hand-wringing and negativity. It’s a blueprint for removing the gangrenous parts of the financial system and for establishing a dividend-based system that better serves the public interest. Richard Cook has presented the ideas that are likely to shape the national debate on monetary reform for years to come. They are certainly worth our consideration. It’s a great read.
CIA Meets Osama
According to the French newspaper "Le Figaro" of October 31, 2001 an agent of the CIA met with Osama bin-laden in a Dubai hospital in July 2001. While on the "World's Most Wanted" list no attempt was made to arrest him. The article reports that:
"During his hospitalization in July, he received the visit of the local representative of the CIA. This person was recalled to Washington on July 15, the day after bin-laden's departure for Quetta."
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0111/S00018.htm
If this information is legitimate it provides more proof to the theory that bin-laden is an agent of the State itself, contracted to play a staged role as the scripted 'archenemy'; leading his underground band of CIA-concocted radicals against the 'judeo-christian' West, to further the sociopolitical designs of the cryptic world rulers.
"During his hospitalization in July, he received the visit of the local representative of the CIA. This person was recalled to Washington on July 15, the day after bin-laden's departure for Quetta."
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0111/S00018.htm
If this information is legitimate it provides more proof to the theory that bin-laden is an agent of the State itself, contracted to play a staged role as the scripted 'archenemy'; leading his underground band of CIA-concocted radicals against the 'judeo-christian' West, to further the sociopolitical designs of the cryptic world rulers.
States Push to Take Back National Guard
Oooops. How will Obama get “his” war in Afghanistan? Time for ye olde draft?
http://www.truthout.org/021109J
Going on its seventh year, the Iraq war has taken its toll on not only the US military, but also on the states's National Guard units, which were called up when Congress passed the 2002 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) against Iraq. Now a growing state-level movement is working to keep the Guard at home.
Its logic: The AUMF's goals have been fulfilled. The authorization's explicit purposes were to defend the US against the "threat posed by Iraq" and to enforce UN Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq's alleged ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein - along with his supposed threat - is gone, and the UN resolutions are no longer relevant, so there's no longer a mandate to keep troops in Iraq.
The president can call up the states's Guard units in a time of war. But when the mandate for war becomes obsolete, say members of the Bring the Guard Home: It's the Law (BTGH) campaign, sending those troops overseas is illegal. BTGH members and their allies are now sponsoring a chain of bills and resolutions in states across the country, demanding an investigation into the legality of deploying the Guard to Iraq, and a refusal to comply with any illegal federal orders.
http://www.truthout.org/021109J
Going on its seventh year, the Iraq war has taken its toll on not only the US military, but also on the states's National Guard units, which were called up when Congress passed the 2002 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) against Iraq. Now a growing state-level movement is working to keep the Guard at home.
Its logic: The AUMF's goals have been fulfilled. The authorization's explicit purposes were to defend the US against the "threat posed by Iraq" and to enforce UN Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq's alleged ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein - along with his supposed threat - is gone, and the UN resolutions are no longer relevant, so there's no longer a mandate to keep troops in Iraq.
The president can call up the states's Guard units in a time of war. But when the mandate for war becomes obsolete, say members of the Bring the Guard Home: It's the Law (BTGH) campaign, sending those troops overseas is illegal. BTGH members and their allies are now sponsoring a chain of bills and resolutions in states across the country, demanding an investigation into the legality of deploying the Guard to Iraq, and a refusal to comply with any illegal federal orders.
Shepard Fairey, of Obama poster fame, arrested in Boston
Shepard Fairey has been forced to OBEY the Man in Boston.
For those who don’t’ know it, Shepard’s art career began as a RISD student in Providence when he placed a large sticker of Andre the Giant over the face of Vincent “Buddy” Cianci on a downtown billboard. The “Andre the Giant Has a Posse” sticker campaign then went worldwide!
*****************
BOSTON — A street artist famous for his red, white and blue "Hope" posters of President Obama was arrested in Boston, where he was wanted on warrants for tagging property with graffiti.
Shepard Fairey, 38, was arrested Friday night on his way to the Institute of Contemporary Art. Fairey was scheduled to deejay a kickoff event at the museum for his first-ever solo exhibition, called "Supply and Demand."
Two warrants were issued for Fairey on Jan. 24 after police determined he’d tagged property in two locations with graffiti based on the Andre the Giant street art campaign from his early career, Boston Police Officer James Kenneally said Saturday.
Fairey, of Los Angeles, is scheduled to be arraigned on the misdemeanor charges Monday in Brighton District Court, said Jake Wark, a spokesman for the Suffolk District Attorney. Wark said Fairey would also be arraigned on a default warrant related to a separate graffiti case in the Roxbury section of Boston.
Fairey has spent the last two weeks in the Boston area installing the ICA exhibit, giving public talks and creating outdoor art, including a 20-by-50 foot banner on the side of City Hall, according to a statement issued Saturday by the ICA.
The museum described the reason for Fairey’s arrest as "his efforts posting his art in various areas around the city."
"We believe Shepard Fairey has made an important contribution in the history of art and to popular thinking about art and its role in society," the statement said. "We are enthusiastic to be working with him and are pleased to be showing the first museum retrospective of his work."
The museum said Fairey was released a few hours after his arrest, but that could not immediately be confirmed by authorities. A California lawyer who has represented Fairey in the copyright case didn’t immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment on the arrest.
Ginny Delany, who was at the ICA Friday night, told The Boston Globe that Fairey’s arrest "makes him even more of a hero to me." "The fact that he is arrested for his art shows that it is meaningful to him and he cares about what he is doing," said Delany, a graduate student from Cambridge.
Fairey’s Obama image has been sold on hundreds of thousands of stickers and posters, and was unveiled at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington in the days before Obama’s inauguration. The image is the subject of a copyright dispute with The Associated Press.
Fairey argues his use of the AP photo is protected by "fair use," which allows exceptions to copyright laws based on, among other factors, how much of the original is used, what the new work is used for and how the original is affected by the new work.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1150628
For those who don’t’ know it, Shepard’s art career began as a RISD student in Providence when he placed a large sticker of Andre the Giant over the face of Vincent “Buddy” Cianci on a downtown billboard. The “Andre the Giant Has a Posse” sticker campaign then went worldwide!
*****************
BOSTON — A street artist famous for his red, white and blue "Hope" posters of President Obama was arrested in Boston, where he was wanted on warrants for tagging property with graffiti.
Shepard Fairey, 38, was arrested Friday night on his way to the Institute of Contemporary Art. Fairey was scheduled to deejay a kickoff event at the museum for his first-ever solo exhibition, called "Supply and Demand."
Two warrants were issued for Fairey on Jan. 24 after police determined he’d tagged property in two locations with graffiti based on the Andre the Giant street art campaign from his early career, Boston Police Officer James Kenneally said Saturday.
Fairey, of Los Angeles, is scheduled to be arraigned on the misdemeanor charges Monday in Brighton District Court, said Jake Wark, a spokesman for the Suffolk District Attorney. Wark said Fairey would also be arraigned on a default warrant related to a separate graffiti case in the Roxbury section of Boston.
Fairey has spent the last two weeks in the Boston area installing the ICA exhibit, giving public talks and creating outdoor art, including a 20-by-50 foot banner on the side of City Hall, according to a statement issued Saturday by the ICA.
The museum described the reason for Fairey’s arrest as "his efforts posting his art in various areas around the city."
"We believe Shepard Fairey has made an important contribution in the history of art and to popular thinking about art and its role in society," the statement said. "We are enthusiastic to be working with him and are pleased to be showing the first museum retrospective of his work."
The museum said Fairey was released a few hours after his arrest, but that could not immediately be confirmed by authorities. A California lawyer who has represented Fairey in the copyright case didn’t immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment on the arrest.
Ginny Delany, who was at the ICA Friday night, told The Boston Globe that Fairey’s arrest "makes him even more of a hero to me." "The fact that he is arrested for his art shows that it is meaningful to him and he cares about what he is doing," said Delany, a graduate student from Cambridge.
Fairey’s Obama image has been sold on hundreds of thousands of stickers and posters, and was unveiled at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington in the days before Obama’s inauguration. The image is the subject of a copyright dispute with The Associated Press.
Fairey argues his use of the AP photo is protected by "fair use," which allows exceptions to copyright laws based on, among other factors, how much of the original is used, what the new work is used for and how the original is affected by the new work.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1150628
10 February, 2009
I Kicked Barack Obama's Ass in High School!
Posted with permission from the author: Ron Patton
I Kicked Barack Obama's Ass in High School!
by Ron Patton
As Barack Obama enters the White House as the 44th President of the United States of America, the mainstream media has intentionally suppressed and covered up potentially, the most revealing news story of 2009: How I, Ron Patton, kicked Barack Obama’s ass in high school.
In 1975 and 1976, I lived in apartments with my mom across from Punahou School in Honolulu, HI. I attended a rival high school, St. Louis. After school, I’d catch the bus home, change into my hoop attire, featuring my prized Georgetown University jersey and venture onto enemy territory with some trepidation. As I walked closer to the outdoor courts, I saw a lanky, light-skinned papolo (black person) with a modest fro, shooting the basketball with pin-point accuracy. I asked him if he’d like to play some one-on-one, and in a deep voice he said, “Sure…” So we played about three games, all of them fairly close but I won all them. You see, my uncanny ability to drive to the hoop along with my razzle-dazzle Basketball Jones cross-over mesmerized and baffled the rigid, stiff-legged young lad, who was simply bewildered and awestruck by such a display of superior hoop-dom.
During the tail end of the third game, several classmates of the overwhelmed teenager arrived at the courts, with one of them yelling, “Barry…let‘s play!” Some funky soul brothers from the Bay area also arrived, bringing along a ghetto blaster, blaring out some Ohio Players tunes.
Somehow, we arrived at the decision to divide the teams up with me and the mainland dudes versus those youngsters from the home turf. Punahou’s finest played with lots of teamwork and tenacity but we won all of the games with greater skill, better trash talkin’ and good ol‘ fashioned, physical intimidation. During a game, one of my team mates dubbed me the “white rabbit.” I surmised his reasoning for such a perplexing title was due to my propensity to accelerate up and down the court with amazing speed. My secret for such a stellar performance: green tea and Drixoral (prescribed allergy medicine). I was in a zone, baby! During this merciless onslaught, B.O. appeared confounded and distraught, occasionally gazing upward for some divine comfort and guidance.
Meanwhile, we, the victors exchanged some old school jive and enthusiastically chanted, "Yes we can!" while Punahou’s down-trodden freshman team went to go practice in the gym. The humiliating defeat most likely provided them with the impetus to vastly improve their game, culminating with taking the state basketball championship in 1979. And surely, the thorough ass-kicking left an indelible impression on Barack “Barry” Obama, who decided to pursue bigger and better things.
You'd think he would have had the courtesy to hire me on his staff as Director of White House Athletics, but no such job offer as of this writing. Maybe he'll read this story and feel compelled to do the right thing. I'll wait patiently.
I Kicked Barack Obama's Ass in High School!
by Ron Patton
As Barack Obama enters the White House as the 44th President of the United States of America, the mainstream media has intentionally suppressed and covered up potentially, the most revealing news story of 2009: How I, Ron Patton, kicked Barack Obama’s ass in high school.
In 1975 and 1976, I lived in apartments with my mom across from Punahou School in Honolulu, HI. I attended a rival high school, St. Louis. After school, I’d catch the bus home, change into my hoop attire, featuring my prized Georgetown University jersey and venture onto enemy territory with some trepidation. As I walked closer to the outdoor courts, I saw a lanky, light-skinned papolo (black person) with a modest fro, shooting the basketball with pin-point accuracy. I asked him if he’d like to play some one-on-one, and in a deep voice he said, “Sure…” So we played about three games, all of them fairly close but I won all them. You see, my uncanny ability to drive to the hoop along with my razzle-dazzle Basketball Jones cross-over mesmerized and baffled the rigid, stiff-legged young lad, who was simply bewildered and awestruck by such a display of superior hoop-dom.
During the tail end of the third game, several classmates of the overwhelmed teenager arrived at the courts, with one of them yelling, “Barry…let‘s play!” Some funky soul brothers from the Bay area also arrived, bringing along a ghetto blaster, blaring out some Ohio Players tunes.
Somehow, we arrived at the decision to divide the teams up with me and the mainland dudes versus those youngsters from the home turf. Punahou’s finest played with lots of teamwork and tenacity but we won all of the games with greater skill, better trash talkin’ and good ol‘ fashioned, physical intimidation. During a game, one of my team mates dubbed me the “white rabbit.” I surmised his reasoning for such a perplexing title was due to my propensity to accelerate up and down the court with amazing speed. My secret for such a stellar performance: green tea and Drixoral (prescribed allergy medicine). I was in a zone, baby! During this merciless onslaught, B.O. appeared confounded and distraught, occasionally gazing upward for some divine comfort and guidance.
Meanwhile, we, the victors exchanged some old school jive and enthusiastically chanted, "Yes we can!" while Punahou’s down-trodden freshman team went to go practice in the gym. The humiliating defeat most likely provided them with the impetus to vastly improve their game, culminating with taking the state basketball championship in 1979. And surely, the thorough ass-kicking left an indelible impression on Barack “Barry” Obama, who decided to pursue bigger and better things.
You'd think he would have had the courtesy to hire me on his staff as Director of White House Athletics, but no such job offer as of this writing. Maybe he'll read this story and feel compelled to do the right thing. I'll wait patiently.
09 February, 2009
US Using British Atomic Weapons Factory for Its Nuclear Program
Guardian UK Report!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/09/us-uk-atomic-weapons-nuclear-power
The US military has been using Britain's atomic weapons factory to carry out research into its own nuclear warhead programme, according to evidence seen by the Guardian.
US defence officials said that "very valuable" warhead research has taken place at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston in Berkshire as part of an ongoing and secretive deal between the British and American governments.
The Ministry of Defence admitted it is working with the US on the UK's "existing nuclear warhead stockpile and the range of replacement options that might be available" but declined to give any further information.
Last night, opposition MPs called for a full parliamentary inquiry into the extent of the collaboration at Aldermaston and campaign groups warned any such deal was in breach of international law. They added that it also undermined Britain's claim to have an independent nuclear weapons programme and meant British taxpayers were effectively subsidising America's nuclear programme.
The US president, Barack Obama, while on the campaign trail said he wanted to eliminate nuclear weapons and that one of his first actions on taking office would be to "stop the development of new nuclear weapons". But the Pentagon is at odds with the president. The defence secretary, Robert Gates, and other senior officials argue that the US's existing arsenal needs to be upgraded and that would not constitute "new" weapons.
The report comes just as Paranoia's 50th issue calls for NO NUKES!
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com
Yes, We’re Matricidal:
Murdering Mother Earth One Forest,
One Species and One Atom at a Time
“What a sorry lot we humans are, particularly those of us immersed in the “American Way of Life.” Killing is indeed our business.”
Plus:
The Code Killers: An Exposé of the Nuclear Industry
Is Earth Becoming a Dune Planet?
Obama-Neptune Trance Formation in America
9/11 Inside Job! Interview with David Ray Griffin
DUE APRIL 1. PRE-ORDER NOW!
Thanks!
Joan
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/09/us-uk-atomic-weapons-nuclear-power
The US military has been using Britain's atomic weapons factory to carry out research into its own nuclear warhead programme, according to evidence seen by the Guardian.
US defence officials said that "very valuable" warhead research has taken place at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston in Berkshire as part of an ongoing and secretive deal between the British and American governments.
The Ministry of Defence admitted it is working with the US on the UK's "existing nuclear warhead stockpile and the range of replacement options that might be available" but declined to give any further information.
Last night, opposition MPs called for a full parliamentary inquiry into the extent of the collaboration at Aldermaston and campaign groups warned any such deal was in breach of international law. They added that it also undermined Britain's claim to have an independent nuclear weapons programme and meant British taxpayers were effectively subsidising America's nuclear programme.
The US president, Barack Obama, while on the campaign trail said he wanted to eliminate nuclear weapons and that one of his first actions on taking office would be to "stop the development of new nuclear weapons". But the Pentagon is at odds with the president. The defence secretary, Robert Gates, and other senior officials argue that the US's existing arsenal needs to be upgraded and that would not constitute "new" weapons.
The report comes just as Paranoia's 50th issue calls for NO NUKES!
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com
Yes, We’re Matricidal:
Murdering Mother Earth One Forest,
One Species and One Atom at a Time
“What a sorry lot we humans are, particularly those of us immersed in the “American Way of Life.” Killing is indeed our business.”
Plus:
The Code Killers: An Exposé of the Nuclear Industry
Is Earth Becoming a Dune Planet?
Obama-Neptune Trance Formation in America
9/11 Inside Job! Interview with David Ray Griffin
DUE APRIL 1. PRE-ORDER NOW!
Thanks!
Joan
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/
The Face on Mars
Click Image to Read
In 1976 the NASA "Viking" spacecraft orbited and photographed the planet Mars revealing what resembles ruined pyramidal geological formations and a gargantuan face existing on the surface in a region labeled "Cydonia." NASA of course affirms they are all natural configurations, while others, especially author Richard C. Hoagland, attest to their artificial construction.
In September 1958 Harvey Comic book series issue #2 published a story written and drawn by Jack Kirby entitled: "Race for the Moon." The cover reveals a mammoth alien Face on Mars, similar to the one seen in the famous Viking pictures. Random coincidence or intentional revelation by the occult oligarchy?
Any sane or honest government would immediately organize a manned expedition to Mars after the appearance of the tantalizing Viking photos were made public, instead of emphatically discounting them.
08 February, 2009
07 February, 2009
Death Threat Against Richard C. Cook
Town Hall Meeting in New York Canceled Due to Death Threat Against Monetary Reform Advocate Richard C. Cook
February 7, 2009
www.richardccook.com
Due to a death threat against monetary reform advocate Richard C. Cook, a Town Hall meeting scheduled to be held on February 27, 2009, as part of President Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Change” initiative, has been canceled. Cook had been asked to speak at the meeting and present his program called “Bailout for the People” that he has been advocating as a solution to the economic crisis.
The meeting had been organized by New York City activists to provide Cook a forum at a time when the Obama/Biden administration is soliciting ideas to address the deepening recession where over 1,500,000 people have lost their jobs in the last three months. Over the next several weeks, hundreds of Economic Recovery Meetings will be held around the country leading up to public hearings by Vice President Joe Biden’s economic recovery task force.
Cook has written prolifically on economic and monetary reform since retiring from the federal government as a Treasury Department analyst in 2007. During his 32-year government career he also worked for NASA and the Carter White House. Upon retirement he published a book on the space shuttle Challenger disaster entitled Challenger Revealed. More recently, Tendril Press has published his book, We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform.
February 7, 2009
www.richardccook.com
Due to a death threat against monetary reform advocate Richard C. Cook, a Town Hall meeting scheduled to be held on February 27, 2009, as part of President Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Change” initiative, has been canceled. Cook had been asked to speak at the meeting and present his program called “Bailout for the People” that he has been advocating as a solution to the economic crisis.
The meeting had been organized by New York City activists to provide Cook a forum at a time when the Obama/Biden administration is soliciting ideas to address the deepening recession where over 1,500,000 people have lost their jobs in the last three months. Over the next several weeks, hundreds of Economic Recovery Meetings will be held around the country leading up to public hearings by Vice President Joe Biden’s economic recovery task force.
Cook has written prolifically on economic and monetary reform since retiring from the federal government as a Treasury Department analyst in 2007. During his 32-year government career he also worked for NASA and the Carter White House. Upon retirement he published a book on the space shuttle Challenger disaster entitled Challenger Revealed. More recently, Tendril Press has published his book, We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform.
---------------------------------
Click the titles of the books to view them at Amazon.com.
Both are available at the Paranoids On-Line store, under Politics.
---------------------------------
Cook’s proposals are based on what he calls “Dividend Economics.” He cites as an example the annual citizens’ stipend under the Alaska Permanent Fund. Through what he is calling the “Cook Plan,” he is advocating a tax-free per capita payment of $1,000 per month through vouchers to be used for the necessities of life such as housing, food, and transportation. The vouchers, once redeemed, would be used to capitalize a new national network of community savings banks that would lend at low interest rates to revitalize local and regional economies.
Despite the threat, Cook spoke at another Organizing for Change meeting in Takoma Park, Maryland, on Saturday February 7. On February 27th, when the Town Hall meeting in New York had been scheduled, he plans to keep his appointment that afternoon to speak at the 8thCongress of the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network/Annual Conference of the Eastern Economic Association. At this conference he will present a paper entitled: “Bailout for the People: Dividend Economics and the Basic Income Guarantee.” Further details, along with a downloadable version of the paper, are available at his new website at www.richardccook.com.
Regarding the cancellation of the Town Hall meeting, a decision made jointly with the organizers, Cook said: “I have worked in the public eye my whole life for the government, as a whistleblower after the Challenger disaster, and as a writer. These things don’t frighten me. But in this instance, I cannot in good conscience expose my supporters and members of the public to the slight chance of harm in a relatively non-secure venue.” Cook also pointed out that the perpetrator of the threat has been identified and reported. He said the person used "vicious language" and called him a "traitor."
Cook’s proposals are based on what he calls “Dividend Economics.” He cites as an example the annual citizens’ stipend under the Alaska Permanent Fund. Through what he is calling the “Cook Plan,” he is advocating a tax-free per capita payment of $1,000 per month through vouchers to be used for the necessities of life such as housing, food, and transportation. The vouchers, once redeemed, would be used to capitalize a new national network of community savings banks that would lend at low interest rates to revitalize local and regional economies.
Despite the threat, Cook spoke at another Organizing for Change meeting in Takoma Park, Maryland, on Saturday February 7. On February 27th, when the Town Hall meeting in New York had been scheduled, he plans to keep his appointment that afternoon to speak at the 8thCongress of the U.S. Basic Income Guarantee Network/Annual Conference of the Eastern Economic Association. At this conference he will present a paper entitled: “Bailout for the People: Dividend Economics and the Basic Income Guarantee.” Further details, along with a downloadable version of the paper, are available at his new website at www.richardccook.com.
Regarding the cancellation of the Town Hall meeting, a decision made jointly with the organizers, Cook said: “I have worked in the public eye my whole life for the government, as a whistleblower after the Challenger disaster, and as a writer. These things don’t frighten me. But in this instance, I cannot in good conscience expose my supporters and members of the public to the slight chance of harm in a relatively non-secure venue.” Cook also pointed out that the perpetrator of the threat has been identified and reported. He said the person used "vicious language" and called him a "traitor."
Gaza: An alternative view behind the politic (expanded/revised)
LOTS of new information. Wanna get paranoid?? All the information included is painstakingly derived from mainstream or reliable sources [annotated]- also check out the appended 'Orwellian Notes' From penucquem, the ex Special Forces intelligence guy and retired investigator ;)
2012 is a Hoax
2012 is a Hoax in a long line of hoaxes, just like Comet Hale Bopp, Y2K. A lot of people are making good money on the idea of the last days: filmmakers, authors, survivalists, ministers, "remote viewers" (biggest hoaxers!) and anyone who wants to get on the gravy train. The Mayan calendar, Terence McKenna's "novel" idea, Zecharia Sitchin's Planet X, Biblical Prophecy, Nostradamus, and all the rest of the hooha is all disparate information that doesn't necessarily correlate. The ideas are out there, but you must be careful of merging such disparate information into a "coherent" image of "end times."
Nothing is going to happen in the skies, but the shit will hit the fan when people start behaving like crazy fools. We will create our own Armageddon because we want entertainment so badly. Forget about 2012. Let it dissolve, don’t give it any thought. Otherwise, we have hell to pay.
Planet X / Nibiru (the brown dwarf star) that is twin to our sun doesn't come into the inner solar system at all. According to physicist Barry Warmkessel, it does cause galactic alignments which increase the likelihood for being hit by comets. This however could occur tomorrow or could occur in a hundred years. It has nothing to do with 2012.
People have wrongly merged Sitchin's Earth Chronicles novels with 2012. Even Sitchin himself has recently jumped on that, when earlier he wasn't even talking about the 2012 date. It's ALWAYS a good idea to be prepared, have plenty of food and water stored away, get your survivalist checklist out and have a plan. But this could have more to do with your own government shenanigans and failure of global banking than something in the skies!
Thanks for listening.
Joan
P.S. The best advice on the following video is "get your head out of your ass."
The sun will never be in the center of the galaxy.
http://www.dailycommonsense.com/2012-galactic-alignment-hoax/
Hi, i have a question about the sun alignment in the center of the galaxy in 2012. Will the sun be in the EXACT center of the galaxy? or just lined up/next to the center of the sun. If you can, can you explain this to me. (15 years old) Thank you very much.
Answer
I can’t explain it because it is just an Internet hoax. There is no alignment with the center of the Galaxy in 2012 or any time. As to the Sun being in the center of the Galaxy, that it impossible; the Sun and solar system will always remain at about 30,000 light years from the galactic center. These stories on the Internet are simply lies, and I am sorry if they have been a problem for you. A lot of the stuff on the Internet is wrong, and you have to learn to distinguish the truth from the lies. One simple test is to ask if any of these claims are made by real scientists, or if they have been reported in newspapers or on TV news. The stories about alignments or disaster striking in 2012 do not pass this test.
David Morrison
NAI Senior Scientist
July 7, 2008
P.S.S.
Take the time to watch the film Kymatica and Get a Grip, People! This film explains the mythological archetypal relationships between myth, bible, astrology, astropsychology and catastrophism. It's awesome. Don't miss it whatever religion you subscribe to. Watch it without blinders! We're through the looking glass, people!
Nothing is going to happen in the skies, but the shit will hit the fan when people start behaving like crazy fools. We will create our own Armageddon because we want entertainment so badly. Forget about 2012. Let it dissolve, don’t give it any thought. Otherwise, we have hell to pay.
Planet X / Nibiru (the brown dwarf star) that is twin to our sun doesn't come into the inner solar system at all. According to physicist Barry Warmkessel, it does cause galactic alignments which increase the likelihood for being hit by comets. This however could occur tomorrow or could occur in a hundred years. It has nothing to do with 2012.
People have wrongly merged Sitchin's Earth Chronicles novels with 2012. Even Sitchin himself has recently jumped on that, when earlier he wasn't even talking about the 2012 date. It's ALWAYS a good idea to be prepared, have plenty of food and water stored away, get your survivalist checklist out and have a plan. But this could have more to do with your own government shenanigans and failure of global banking than something in the skies!
Thanks for listening.
Joan
P.S. The best advice on the following video is "get your head out of your ass."
The sun will never be in the center of the galaxy.
http://www.dailycommonsense.com/2012-galactic-alignment-hoax/
Hi, i have a question about the sun alignment in the center of the galaxy in 2012. Will the sun be in the EXACT center of the galaxy? or just lined up/next to the center of the sun. If you can, can you explain this to me. (15 years old) Thank you very much.
Answer
I can’t explain it because it is just an Internet hoax. There is no alignment with the center of the Galaxy in 2012 or any time. As to the Sun being in the center of the Galaxy, that it impossible; the Sun and solar system will always remain at about 30,000 light years from the galactic center. These stories on the Internet are simply lies, and I am sorry if they have been a problem for you. A lot of the stuff on the Internet is wrong, and you have to learn to distinguish the truth from the lies. One simple test is to ask if any of these claims are made by real scientists, or if they have been reported in newspapers or on TV news. The stories about alignments or disaster striking in 2012 do not pass this test.
David Morrison
NAI Senior Scientist
July 7, 2008
P.S.S.
Take the time to watch the film Kymatica and Get a Grip, People! This film explains the mythological archetypal relationships between myth, bible, astrology, astropsychology and catastrophism. It's awesome. Don't miss it whatever religion you subscribe to. Watch it without blinders! We're through the looking glass, people!
06 February, 2009
Poltergeist activity
The “Poltergeist activity” in these videos seems pretty real. Watch the whole thing and let me know. What do you think?
Government Overpaid for Wall Street Assets
OBVIOUSLY but here comes the admission . . .
The chumps running the U.S. got no lights on upstairs.
http://www.truthout.org/020609K
The federal government overpaid by about $78 billion for stock and other troubled assets when it bailed out big banks last year, and it lacks sufficient internal controls to police and protect taxpayers' investment in the institutions, government watchdogs said Thursday.
The new special inspector general for the bailout effort, formally called the Troubled Asset Relief Program, issued his first report Thursday and said that the Treasury Department needs to put more safeguards in place to protect taxpayers.
Neil Barofsky said that the Treasury Department, under the Bush administration, focused on purchasing assets from troubled banks and failed to put a plan in place for managing more than $279 billion in preferred stock that was acquired during the bailouts.
Now he's asking 319 financial institutions for detailed accountings of how $300 billion in taxpayers' bailout money has been spent. He said his office also would examine whether any bank had misrepresented the value of securities exchanged for the cash.
The chumps running the U.S. got no lights on upstairs.
http://www.truthout.org/020609K
The federal government overpaid by about $78 billion for stock and other troubled assets when it bailed out big banks last year, and it lacks sufficient internal controls to police and protect taxpayers' investment in the institutions, government watchdogs said Thursday.
The new special inspector general for the bailout effort, formally called the Troubled Asset Relief Program, issued his first report Thursday and said that the Treasury Department needs to put more safeguards in place to protect taxpayers.
Neil Barofsky said that the Treasury Department, under the Bush administration, focused on purchasing assets from troubled banks and failed to put a plan in place for managing more than $279 billion in preferred stock that was acquired during the bailouts.
Now he's asking 319 financial institutions for detailed accountings of how $300 billion in taxpayers' bailout money has been spent. He said his office also would examine whether any bank had misrepresented the value of securities exchanged for the cash.
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?
David Ray Griffin
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?
Highlights
An NBC “deep background” report in 2008 pointed out an additional problem: KSM and the other al-Qaeda leaders had been subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” i.e., torture, and it is now widely acknowledged that statements elicited by torture lack credibility. “At least four of the operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report,” this NBC report pointed out, “have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being “-tortured.’” NBC then quoted Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, as saying: “Most people look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a trusted historical document. If their conclusions were supported by information gained from torture, . . . their conclusions are suspect.”
This FBI report leaves only two possible explanations for Ted Olson’s story: Either he made it up or else he, like Deena Burnett and several others, was duped. In either case, the story about Barbara Olson’s calls, with their reports of hijackers taking over Flight 77, was based on deception.
The opening section of The 9/11 Commission Report is entitled “Inside the Four Flights.” The information contained in this section is based almost entirely on the reported phone calls. But if the reported calls were faked, we have no idea what happened inside these planes. Insofar as the idea that the planes were taken over by hijackers who looked “Middle Eastern,” even “Islamic,” has been based on the reported calls, this idea is groundless.
Was America attacked by Muslims on 911?
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
Much of America’s foreign policy since 9/11 has been based on the assumption that it was attacked by Muslims on that day. This assumption was used, most prominently, to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is now widely agreed that the use of 9/11 as a basis for attacking Iraq was illegitimate: none of the hijackers were Iraqis, there was no working relation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and Iraq was not behind the anthrax attacks. But it is still widely believed that the US attack on Afghanistan was justified. For example, the New York Times, while referring to the US attack on Iraq as a “war of choice,” calls the battle in Afghanistan a “war of necessity.” Time magazine has dubbed it “the right war.” And Barack Obama says that one reason to wind down our involvement in Iraq is to have the troops and resources to “go after the people in Afghanistan who actually attacked us on 9/11.”
The assumption that America was attacked by Muslims on 9/11 also lies behind the widespread perception of Islam as an inherently violent religion and therefore of Muslims as guilty until proven innocent. This perception surely contributed to attempts to portray Obama as a Muslim, which was lampooned by a controversial cartoon on the July 21, 2008, cover of The New Yorker.
As could be illustrated by reference to many other post-9/11 developments, including as spying, torture, extraordinary rendition, military tribunals, America’s new doctrine of preemptive war, and its enormous increase in military spending, the assumption that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked by Muslim hijackers has had enormous negative consequences for both international and domestic issues.
Is it conceivable that this assumption might be false? Insofar as Americans and Canadians would say “No,” they would express their belief that this assumption is not merely an “assumption” but is instead based on strong evidence. When actually examined, however, the proffered evidence turns out to be remarkably weak. I will illustrate this point by means of 16 questions.
Continue reading at:
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?
Highlights
An NBC “deep background” report in 2008 pointed out an additional problem: KSM and the other al-Qaeda leaders had been subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” i.e., torture, and it is now widely acknowledged that statements elicited by torture lack credibility. “At least four of the operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report,” this NBC report pointed out, “have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being “-tortured.’” NBC then quoted Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, as saying: “Most people look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a trusted historical document. If their conclusions were supported by information gained from torture, . . . their conclusions are suspect.”
This FBI report leaves only two possible explanations for Ted Olson’s story: Either he made it up or else he, like Deena Burnett and several others, was duped. In either case, the story about Barbara Olson’s calls, with their reports of hijackers taking over Flight 77, was based on deception.
The opening section of The 9/11 Commission Report is entitled “Inside the Four Flights.” The information contained in this section is based almost entirely on the reported phone calls. But if the reported calls were faked, we have no idea what happened inside these planes. Insofar as the idea that the planes were taken over by hijackers who looked “Middle Eastern,” even “Islamic,” has been based on the reported calls, this idea is groundless.
Was America attacked by Muslims on 911?
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
Much of America’s foreign policy since 9/11 has been based on the assumption that it was attacked by Muslims on that day. This assumption was used, most prominently, to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is now widely agreed that the use of 9/11 as a basis for attacking Iraq was illegitimate: none of the hijackers were Iraqis, there was no working relation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and Iraq was not behind the anthrax attacks. But it is still widely believed that the US attack on Afghanistan was justified. For example, the New York Times, while referring to the US attack on Iraq as a “war of choice,” calls the battle in Afghanistan a “war of necessity.” Time magazine has dubbed it “the right war.” And Barack Obama says that one reason to wind down our involvement in Iraq is to have the troops and resources to “go after the people in Afghanistan who actually attacked us on 9/11.”
The assumption that America was attacked by Muslims on 9/11 also lies behind the widespread perception of Islam as an inherently violent religion and therefore of Muslims as guilty until proven innocent. This perception surely contributed to attempts to portray Obama as a Muslim, which was lampooned by a controversial cartoon on the July 21, 2008, cover of The New Yorker.
As could be illustrated by reference to many other post-9/11 developments, including as spying, torture, extraordinary rendition, military tribunals, America’s new doctrine of preemptive war, and its enormous increase in military spending, the assumption that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked by Muslim hijackers has had enormous negative consequences for both international and domestic issues.
Is it conceivable that this assumption might be false? Insofar as Americans and Canadians would say “No,” they would express their belief that this assumption is not merely an “assumption” but is instead based on strong evidence. When actually examined, however, the proffered evidence turns out to be remarkably weak. I will illustrate this point by means of 16 questions.
Continue reading at:
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on-911/
05 February, 2009
Sirhan Sirhan
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media." --William Colby, CIA Director
The CIA-controlled mass-media wants the masses to believe that another "lone nut" in the shape of Sirhan Sirhan blew away RFK. Sirhan himself claims he remembers nothing of the actual shooting and to this day maintains his innocence. The gun Sirhan supposedly fired could only contain eight bullets, yet 13 were discovered at the crime scene, while the bullet that fatally wounded Kennedy was lodged in the back of his skull, in spite of Sirhan being in front of him. The LAPD discarded the forensic evidence thus preventing any future investigation.
Dr. Eduard Simpson examined Sirhan in prison and believed he had been hypnotized. Ex FBI-agent William Turner lent his support to the theory that Sirhan was a "Manchurian Candidate". The CIA's MK-ULTRA program investigated the feasibility of programming assassins who would not remember being programmed. The Artichoke project is described in somewhat censored memo of 1954:
"Can an individual be made to perform an act of attempted assassination involuntarily under the influence of ARTICHOKE? As a 'trigger mechanism' for a bigger project, it was proposed that an individual be induced to perform an act involuntarily, of attempted assassination against a prominent figure. After the act was performed, it was assumed that the SUBJECT would be taken into custody and thereby disposed of."
Evidence supports that Sirhan was a CIA-brainwashed assassin programmed by Dr. William Bryan of MK-ULTRA and "handled" by a mysterious woman in a polka-dot dress. Half a dozen witnesses reported seeing her fleeing the scene screaming "We shot him!". Sirhan's last memory prior to the shooting was of drinking coffee with a woman, who he said wore a polka-dot dress. The woman gave Sirhan his final preparations, using techniques mastered under the CIA hypnosis program MK-ULTRA.
We know beyond a reasonable doubt that the FED-CIA complex eliminated JFK because he was planning the dismantlement of the CIA and the authorization of Congress to begin printing the nation's currency instead of the privately-owned Federal Reserve. To be certain and not to risk being exposed for executing JFK or have RFK attempt the same actions as his brother they slayed him before he could get elected. The key to their perpetual power is their selection of obedient slaves in public office, like FDR, LBJ, Reagan, Bush, Obama etc..
The CIA-controlled mass-media wants the masses to believe that another "lone nut" in the shape of Sirhan Sirhan blew away RFK. Sirhan himself claims he remembers nothing of the actual shooting and to this day maintains his innocence. The gun Sirhan supposedly fired could only contain eight bullets, yet 13 were discovered at the crime scene, while the bullet that fatally wounded Kennedy was lodged in the back of his skull, in spite of Sirhan being in front of him. The LAPD discarded the forensic evidence thus preventing any future investigation.
Dr. Eduard Simpson examined Sirhan in prison and believed he had been hypnotized. Ex FBI-agent William Turner lent his support to the theory that Sirhan was a "Manchurian Candidate". The CIA's MK-ULTRA program investigated the feasibility of programming assassins who would not remember being programmed. The Artichoke project is described in somewhat censored memo of 1954:
"Can an individual be made to perform an act of attempted assassination involuntarily under the influence of ARTICHOKE? As a 'trigger mechanism' for a bigger project, it was proposed that an individual be induced to perform an act involuntarily, of attempted assassination against a prominent figure. After the act was performed, it was assumed that the SUBJECT would be taken into custody and thereby disposed of."
Evidence supports that Sirhan was a CIA-brainwashed assassin programmed by Dr. William Bryan of MK-ULTRA and "handled" by a mysterious woman in a polka-dot dress. Half a dozen witnesses reported seeing her fleeing the scene screaming "We shot him!". Sirhan's last memory prior to the shooting was of drinking coffee with a woman, who he said wore a polka-dot dress. The woman gave Sirhan his final preparations, using techniques mastered under the CIA hypnosis program MK-ULTRA.
We know beyond a reasonable doubt that the FED-CIA complex eliminated JFK because he was planning the dismantlement of the CIA and the authorization of Congress to begin printing the nation's currency instead of the privately-owned Federal Reserve. To be certain and not to risk being exposed for executing JFK or have RFK attempt the same actions as his brother they slayed him before he could get elected. The key to their perpetual power is their selection of obedient slaves in public office, like FDR, LBJ, Reagan, Bush, Obama etc..
United Nations' threat: No more parental rights
Parental Rights?
You should have "rights" just because you can pop one out that looks just like you? Where do these right wing Old Testament patriarchal fascists get this idea? Oh right. The Old Testament Patriarchy.
I have provided my opinion of each of the pacts below. This is only my personal opinion. Please comment if you agree or disagree.
United Nations' threat: No more parental rights
Expert: Pact would ban spankings, homeschooling if children object
http://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/11f46fc8eec730ef
According to the Parental Rights website, the substance of the CRC dictates the following:
Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.
GOOD
A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.
GOOD
Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
GOOD – “ADVICE” but not threats or warnings.
The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent's decision.
GOOD – HEHEHEHE!
A child's "right to be heard" would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.
GOOD! LOLOLOLOL!
According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children's welfare.
GOOD – WOWZA GOOD!
Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
GOOD – WHAT? NO MORE SWEAT SHOPS?
Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
NOT GOOD – “Teach” all religions and myths (with heckling and loud farting allowed) as well as morality without religion. God is the most immoral being that never existed.
Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
GOOD - since some parents HAVE sex with their children.
Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.
NOT GOOD, NOT GOOD
You should have "rights" just because you can pop one out that looks just like you? Where do these right wing Old Testament patriarchal fascists get this idea? Oh right. The Old Testament Patriarchy.
I have provided my opinion of each of the pacts below. This is only my personal opinion. Please comment if you agree or disagree.
United Nations' threat: No more parental rights
Expert: Pact would ban spankings, homeschooling if children object
http://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/11f46fc8eec730ef
According to the Parental Rights website, the substance of the CRC dictates the following:
Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.
GOOD
A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.
GOOD
Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
GOOD – “ADVICE” but not threats or warnings.
The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent's decision.
GOOD – HEHEHEHE!
A child's "right to be heard" would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.
GOOD! LOLOLOLOL!
According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children's welfare.
GOOD – WOWZA GOOD!
Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
GOOD – WHAT? NO MORE SWEAT SHOPS?
Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
NOT GOOD – “Teach” all religions and myths (with heckling and loud farting allowed) as well as morality without religion. God is the most immoral being that never existed.
Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
GOOD - since some parents HAVE sex with their children.
Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.
NOT GOOD, NOT GOOD
I Killed My Parents -- They Asked Me to Do It
By John West, Counterpoint Press. Posted February 5, 2009.
Sent to me today by Kenn Thomas over at Steamshovel Press
http://www.steamshovelpress.com/
He writes:
Conspiracy readers will recognize the name Louis Jolyon "Jolly" West, a psychiatrist renown for his participation in CIA mind control experiments. Jolyon West was Konformist's the first "Beast of the Month" way back in May 1997. For a quick review of his history, go to:
www.konformist.com/botm/volume01/botm0597.htm
The below explains what happened to him:
I Killed My Parents – They Asked Me to Do It
By John West, Counterpoint Press. Posted February 5, 2009.
In November 1998, John West's father, who had recently been diagnosed with cancer, asked him an extraordinary favor: help him commit suicide. After the tremendous weight of those words settled squarely on West's shoulders, he looked at his father and said the only thing he knew to say, "You got it." So, on the evening of July 2, 1999, John helped his father take a cocktail of pills. By morning, he was dead. The death was attributed to the cancer, and only West knew better. Months later, his mother asked West the same devastating favor and, again, he agreed. For more than a decade, West kept the secrets to himself, not even telling his sisters the role he had played. Now, he is coming out with his side of the story in The Last Goodnights: Assisting My Parents with Their Suicides Counterpoint Press, 2009). The following is an excerpt from the book.
***
I don't know what my booze bill was for that time, but I'm sure it was big. I had a good reason, though: I had to kill my parents. They asked me to. Actually, they asked me to help them with their suicides, and I did. And if that doesn't justify throwing back an extra glass or three of Jameson's on the rocks, then I don't know what does.
My father was Louis Jolyon "Jolly" West, MD, a world-renowned psychiatrist and former chairman of the department of psychiatry at the University of California, Los Angeles, age seventy-four. My mother was Kathryn "K" West, PhD, a respected clinical psychologist at the West Los Angeles (Brentwood) Veterans Administration Hospital, age seventy-five.
Jolly and K were wonderful people -- brilliant, academic medical professionals, highly cultured, and well rounded. Neither was at all religious, but both had deep insight into the human condition. They knew what was what. And they knew what they wanted.
So when they made their wishes clear to me, I wasn't about to argue. I respected my father and mother, and I loved them. And I believe, as they did, in freedom of choice, the right to personal privacy and self-determination -- which includes reproductive choice (as the law now recognizes, although it didn't used to), the right to refuse medical treatment (as the law now recognizes, although it didn't used to), and the right to choose death with dignity (as the law does not recognize -- not yet -- although a few states are getting close).
My father's desire to end his life did not shock me, especially since his newly discovered cancer -- a particularly vicious type -- was literally eating him up and would take him from playing tennis to lying dead in just five months. Should Jolly have been forced to endure a few more days or weeks of agony just to satisfy some people's notions that death should be "natural"?
And what about my mother? K had midstage Alzheimer's disease, plus osteoporosis and emphysema. Should she have been forced to deteriorate into a walking vegetable, soiling herself, wandering into traffic, hunched over like a crab, and coughing up blood, just because some people say that's how it's always been and always should be?
The full story is posted here:
http://www.alternet.org/rights/125352/i_killed_my_parents_--_they_asked_me_to_do_it/?page=1
Sent to me today by Kenn Thomas over at Steamshovel Press
http://www.steamshovelpress.com/
He writes:
Conspiracy readers will recognize the name Louis Jolyon "Jolly" West, a psychiatrist renown for his participation in CIA mind control experiments. Jolyon West was Konformist's the first "Beast of the Month" way back in May 1997. For a quick review of his history, go to:
www.konformist.com/botm/volume01/botm0597.htm
The below explains what happened to him:
I Killed My Parents – They Asked Me to Do It
By John West, Counterpoint Press. Posted February 5, 2009.
In November 1998, John West's father, who had recently been diagnosed with cancer, asked him an extraordinary favor: help him commit suicide. After the tremendous weight of those words settled squarely on West's shoulders, he looked at his father and said the only thing he knew to say, "You got it." So, on the evening of July 2, 1999, John helped his father take a cocktail of pills. By morning, he was dead. The death was attributed to the cancer, and only West knew better. Months later, his mother asked West the same devastating favor and, again, he agreed. For more than a decade, West kept the secrets to himself, not even telling his sisters the role he had played. Now, he is coming out with his side of the story in The Last Goodnights: Assisting My Parents with Their Suicides Counterpoint Press, 2009). The following is an excerpt from the book.
***
I don't know what my booze bill was for that time, but I'm sure it was big. I had a good reason, though: I had to kill my parents. They asked me to. Actually, they asked me to help them with their suicides, and I did. And if that doesn't justify throwing back an extra glass or three of Jameson's on the rocks, then I don't know what does.
My father was Louis Jolyon "Jolly" West, MD, a world-renowned psychiatrist and former chairman of the department of psychiatry at the University of California, Los Angeles, age seventy-four. My mother was Kathryn "K" West, PhD, a respected clinical psychologist at the West Los Angeles (Brentwood) Veterans Administration Hospital, age seventy-five.
Jolly and K were wonderful people -- brilliant, academic medical professionals, highly cultured, and well rounded. Neither was at all religious, but both had deep insight into the human condition. They knew what was what. And they knew what they wanted.
So when they made their wishes clear to me, I wasn't about to argue. I respected my father and mother, and I loved them. And I believe, as they did, in freedom of choice, the right to personal privacy and self-determination -- which includes reproductive choice (as the law now recognizes, although it didn't used to), the right to refuse medical treatment (as the law now recognizes, although it didn't used to), and the right to choose death with dignity (as the law does not recognize -- not yet -- although a few states are getting close).
My father's desire to end his life did not shock me, especially since his newly discovered cancer -- a particularly vicious type -- was literally eating him up and would take him from playing tennis to lying dead in just five months. Should Jolly have been forced to endure a few more days or weeks of agony just to satisfy some people's notions that death should be "natural"?
And what about my mother? K had midstage Alzheimer's disease, plus osteoporosis and emphysema. Should she have been forced to deteriorate into a walking vegetable, soiling herself, wandering into traffic, hunched over like a crab, and coughing up blood, just because some people say that's how it's always been and always should be?
The full story is posted here:
http://www.alternet.org/rights/125352/i_killed_my_parents_--_they_asked_me_to_do_it/?page=1
04 February, 2009
Whistleblower Harry Markopolos takes stand
Obama Admin and Bush Admin are kissing cousins: Tsk Tsk.
How's that for CHANGE? Get out there and "SERVICE" these people!
"SEC is incompetent, the securities industry's self-policing organization, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is very corrupt. That organization was headed until December by Mary Schapiro, President Barack Obama's new SEC chief."
The man who waged a decade-long campaign to alert regulators to problems in the operations of fallen money manager Bernard Madoff told Congress today that he had feared for his physical safety.
Harry Markopolos also assailed the Securities and Exchange Commission in his first appearance before lawmakers. The SEC failed to act despite receiving credible allegations of fraud from Markopolos about Madoff's operations over a decade.
Because of the agency's inaction, "I became fearful for the safety of my family," Markopolos said at the hearing of a House Financial Services subcommittee.
"The SEC is ... captive to the industry it regulates and is afraid" to bring big cases against prominent individuals, Markopolos asserted. The agency "roars like a lion and bites like a flea" and "is busy protecting the big financial predators from investors," he said.
He spoke as several top-level SEC officials, including the agency's enforcement director, sat three rows back in the packed hearing room, awaiting their turn to testify before the panel.
While the SEC is incompetent, the securities industry's self-policing organization, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is "very corrupt," Markopolos charged. That organization was headed until December by Mary Schapiro, President Barack Obama's new SEC chief.
Read more at
http://www.truthout.org/020409R
How's that for CHANGE? Get out there and "SERVICE" these people!
"SEC is incompetent, the securities industry's self-policing organization, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is very corrupt. That organization was headed until December by Mary Schapiro, President Barack Obama's new SEC chief."
The man who waged a decade-long campaign to alert regulators to problems in the operations of fallen money manager Bernard Madoff told Congress today that he had feared for his physical safety.
Harry Markopolos also assailed the Securities and Exchange Commission in his first appearance before lawmakers. The SEC failed to act despite receiving credible allegations of fraud from Markopolos about Madoff's operations over a decade.
Because of the agency's inaction, "I became fearful for the safety of my family," Markopolos said at the hearing of a House Financial Services subcommittee.
"The SEC is ... captive to the industry it regulates and is afraid" to bring big cases against prominent individuals, Markopolos asserted. The agency "roars like a lion and bites like a flea" and "is busy protecting the big financial predators from investors," he said.
He spoke as several top-level SEC officials, including the agency's enforcement director, sat three rows back in the packed hearing room, awaiting their turn to testify before the panel.
While the SEC is incompetent, the securities industry's self-policing organization, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is "very corrupt," Markopolos charged. That organization was headed until December by Mary Schapiro, President Barack Obama's new SEC chief.
Read more at
http://www.truthout.org/020409R
The West and Islam
Briefly, each nation is occupied by a central bank, wherein exists the true power base which commands the entire political, economic and media machinery of a state.
They who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of the government and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people. --Reginald McKenna, British Chancellor of the Exchequer 1915-16
Islam is a threat only insofar as the West wants it to be. The western governments possess sufficient economic and military might to prevent muslims from entering their nations. But even though the CIA controlled mass-media propaganda continuously repeats that the West is involved in a "war on terror" with fanatical Islam, they clandestinely desire islamic immigration so they can exploit it to further their police-state environment in pursuance of a regressive slave-society. The end justifies the means.
The Machiavellian State can benefit from the presence of muslims in two primary ways. The first stratagem resides in allowing them entry in expected anticipation of an actual 'terrorist attack', so they can capitalize upon it and expand their totalitarian agenda. The NSA and CIA knows what the islamic-jihadist creed teaches and that most of the muslim world perceives America as the "Great Satan" deserving of ruin, due to U.S. interference and machinations. Hence no intelligent government would willingly permit millions of potential terrorist risks into the "homeland", along with neglecting to assiduously secure America's borders, unless the State has ulterior designs or motives. The other method is where the State itself commits the terrorism(911) and then accordingly incriminates the selected fabricated muslim scapegoats.
Whichever modus operandi they employ, the sole beneficiary is the State, as the covert Federal Reserve/Council on Foreign Relations cabal increase their socioeconomic power through new liberty destroying legislation which forces people to be searched at airports and spied upon etc. The main tactic of the 'war on terror' is not to combat Al-Qaeda(a CIA creation/invention), but to psychologically condition the masses into viewing the State as their benevolent protector, while sporadically releasing CIA produced audio/video tapes of "bin-laden" condemning the West. They will only attempt to augment their power as the years progress until the whole nation becomes a third-world version of Orwell's dystopian 1984.
They who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of the government and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people. --Reginald McKenna, British Chancellor of the Exchequer 1915-16
Islam is a threat only insofar as the West wants it to be. The western governments possess sufficient economic and military might to prevent muslims from entering their nations. But even though the CIA controlled mass-media propaganda continuously repeats that the West is involved in a "war on terror" with fanatical Islam, they clandestinely desire islamic immigration so they can exploit it to further their police-state environment in pursuance of a regressive slave-society. The end justifies the means.
The Machiavellian State can benefit from the presence of muslims in two primary ways. The first stratagem resides in allowing them entry in expected anticipation of an actual 'terrorist attack', so they can capitalize upon it and expand their totalitarian agenda. The NSA and CIA knows what the islamic-jihadist creed teaches and that most of the muslim world perceives America as the "Great Satan" deserving of ruin, due to U.S. interference and machinations. Hence no intelligent government would willingly permit millions of potential terrorist risks into the "homeland", along with neglecting to assiduously secure America's borders, unless the State has ulterior designs or motives. The other method is where the State itself commits the terrorism(911) and then accordingly incriminates the selected fabricated muslim scapegoats.
Whichever modus operandi they employ, the sole beneficiary is the State, as the covert Federal Reserve/Council on Foreign Relations cabal increase their socioeconomic power through new liberty destroying legislation which forces people to be searched at airports and spied upon etc. The main tactic of the 'war on terror' is not to combat Al-Qaeda(a CIA creation/invention), but to psychologically condition the masses into viewing the State as their benevolent protector, while sporadically releasing CIA produced audio/video tapes of "bin-laden" condemning the West. They will only attempt to augment their power as the years progress until the whole nation becomes a third-world version of Orwell's dystopian 1984.
03 February, 2009
Beyond the Dutroux Affair
Beyond the Dutroux Affair
The reality of protected child abuse and snuff networks
I hesitate to post this but I hesitate longer to not post it because it’s truly too important to deny or ignore.
Warning: The information in this article is not suited for anyone below the age of 18, as it involves extreme sexual violence against children. A certain amount of normally-illegal visual evidence (it is censored) has been included.
"What you have to understand, John, is that sometimes there are forces and events too big, too powerful, with so much at stake for other people or institutions, that you cannot do anything about them, no matter how evil or wrong they are and no matter how dedicated or sincere you are or how much evidence you have. This is simply one of the hard facts of life you have to face."
- Former CIA director and Cercle member William Colby giving advice to his friend senator John DeCamp, urging him to quit his investigations into the Franklin child abuse affair and to write a book about his experiences (The Franklin Coverup, 2nd edition, foreword).
"From East Belfast's Kincora Boys' Home, via Leicestershire, Staffordshire and London, to the children's homes of Clwyd, we have witnessed 25 years of cover-up. Cover-up, not to protect the innocent but to protect the regularly named elements of the British establishment who surface whenever widespread evidence of child abuse is exposed. From the public schools right through to the Catholic and Anglican churches, child abuse has been allowed a special place of sanctuary... Social workers, police, security services, local and national political figures remain the common factors in the fall-out from the [child abuse] inquiries... In case after case the cycle is described - a child is 'taken into care', then abused in a home, handed on to an outside pedophile ring and out on to the rent-boy/prostitution circuit beyond, if they live that long... Journalists find themselves battling first with authority, then with the libel laws, to publish the truth about a vast web of abuse."
The power of the Dutroux affair and its X-Dossiers is that it will enable anyone to see how a state can be controlled and undermined by a cabal that is able to place its own members in crucial positions in any investigation that might lead to its own exposure. The question of why the majority of the media is so cooperative is the only aspect that cannot be fully explained in this article, although it can be shown that the media is willingly working with official investigators in manipulating and debunking all aspects of an investigation that are not appreciated by the cabal.
Some might find it unethical to publish the names of mere suspects, especially when talking about child abuse. The author fully agrees with this argument, but only under normal circumstances in which an investigation is carried out the way it should be.
This has not happened in the Dutroux affair, in which the honest, competent and dedicated researchers, together with the most important witnesses, have unjustly been persecuted, harassed, tarred and feathered by the media and the judiciary, with help from some of the alleged child abusers. That's why the investigation, which has been dead and buried for many years now, should be taken public. And let's not forget that the X-Dossiers involve a whole range of witnesses whose claims overlap and in many cases involve highly specific details that have been verified by detectives. It can also be argued that the mainstream press was anything but discrete in late 1996 when they published the names of the politicians Elio Di Rupo and Jean-Pierre Grafe as alleged child abusers. The evidence these claims were based on was meager to say the least and many times less powerful than the combined testimonies of the X-witnesses. But, of course, the purpose of this event was not to inform the public; it was an effort to discredit the rumors about high level involvement in child abuse networks. It was known that sooner or later the X-witnesses would reach the news and this was one of the pre-emptive strikes against these witnesses.
Please read more at
Institute for the Study of Globalization and Covert Politics
http://www.isgp.eu/dutroux/Belgian_X_dossiers_of_the_Dutroux_affair.htm#privateintel
The reality of protected child abuse and snuff networks
I hesitate to post this but I hesitate longer to not post it because it’s truly too important to deny or ignore.
Warning: The information in this article is not suited for anyone below the age of 18, as it involves extreme sexual violence against children. A certain amount of normally-illegal visual evidence (it is censored) has been included.
"What you have to understand, John, is that sometimes there are forces and events too big, too powerful, with so much at stake for other people or institutions, that you cannot do anything about them, no matter how evil or wrong they are and no matter how dedicated or sincere you are or how much evidence you have. This is simply one of the hard facts of life you have to face."
- Former CIA director and Cercle member William Colby giving advice to his friend senator John DeCamp, urging him to quit his investigations into the Franklin child abuse affair and to write a book about his experiences (The Franklin Coverup, 2nd edition, foreword).
"From East Belfast's Kincora Boys' Home, via Leicestershire, Staffordshire and London, to the children's homes of Clwyd, we have witnessed 25 years of cover-up. Cover-up, not to protect the innocent but to protect the regularly named elements of the British establishment who surface whenever widespread evidence of child abuse is exposed. From the public schools right through to the Catholic and Anglican churches, child abuse has been allowed a special place of sanctuary... Social workers, police, security services, local and national political figures remain the common factors in the fall-out from the [child abuse] inquiries... In case after case the cycle is described - a child is 'taken into care', then abused in a home, handed on to an outside pedophile ring and out on to the rent-boy/prostitution circuit beyond, if they live that long... Journalists find themselves battling first with authority, then with the libel laws, to publish the truth about a vast web of abuse."
The power of the Dutroux affair and its X-Dossiers is that it will enable anyone to see how a state can be controlled and undermined by a cabal that is able to place its own members in crucial positions in any investigation that might lead to its own exposure. The question of why the majority of the media is so cooperative is the only aspect that cannot be fully explained in this article, although it can be shown that the media is willingly working with official investigators in manipulating and debunking all aspects of an investigation that are not appreciated by the cabal.
Some might find it unethical to publish the names of mere suspects, especially when talking about child abuse. The author fully agrees with this argument, but only under normal circumstances in which an investigation is carried out the way it should be.
This has not happened in the Dutroux affair, in which the honest, competent and dedicated researchers, together with the most important witnesses, have unjustly been persecuted, harassed, tarred and feathered by the media and the judiciary, with help from some of the alleged child abusers. That's why the investigation, which has been dead and buried for many years now, should be taken public. And let's not forget that the X-Dossiers involve a whole range of witnesses whose claims overlap and in many cases involve highly specific details that have been verified by detectives. It can also be argued that the mainstream press was anything but discrete in late 1996 when they published the names of the politicians Elio Di Rupo and Jean-Pierre Grafe as alleged child abusers. The evidence these claims were based on was meager to say the least and many times less powerful than the combined testimonies of the X-witnesses. But, of course, the purpose of this event was not to inform the public; it was an effort to discredit the rumors about high level involvement in child abuse networks. It was known that sooner or later the X-witnesses would reach the news and this was one of the pre-emptive strikes against these witnesses.
Please read more at
Institute for the Study of Globalization and Covert Politics
http://www.isgp.eu/dutroux/Belgian_X_dossiers_of_the_Dutroux_affair.htm#privateintel
White phosphorus (weapon)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5447590.ece
I am reporting on white phosphorus chemical weapons being used in Gaza.
If anyone thinks I'm saying anything else, I'm reporting on white phosphorus chemical weapons being used in Gaza. The U.S. has also used white phosphorus in Iraq. It is a banned weapon of mass destruction unless used only as a "smokescreen." Thus, the smokescreen for the smokescreen.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about military applications. For more general information, see allotropes of phosphorus#White phosphorus.
White phosphorus (WP) is a flare- and smoke-producing incendiary device[1] or smoke-screening agent that is made from a common allotrope of the chemical element phosphorus. The main utility of white phosphorus munitions is to create smokescreens to mask movement from the enemy, or to mask his fire. In contrast to other smoke-causing munitions, WP burns quickly causing an instant bank of smoke. As a result of this, WP munitions are very common -- particularly as smoke grenades for infantry; loaded in defensive grenade dischargers on tanks and other armored vehicles; or as part of the ammunition allotment for artillery or mortars.
However, white phosphorus has a secondary effect. While much less efficient than ordinary fragmentation effects in causing casualties, white phosphorus burns quite fiercely and can set cloth, fuel, ammunition and other combustibles on fire. It also can function as an anti-personnel weapon with the compound capable of causing serious burns or death.[2] The agent is used in bombs, artillery, and mortars, short-range missiles which burst into burning flakes of phosphorus upon impact. White phosphorus is commonly referred to in military jargon as "WP". The slang term "Willy(ie) Pete" or "Willy(ie) Peter", dating from World War I and common at least through the Vietnam War, is still occasionally heard.
White phosphorus weapons are controversial today because of their potential use against civilians. While the Chemical Weapons Convention does not designate WP as a chemical weapon, various groups consider it to be one. In recent years, the United States, Israel, and Russia have used white phosphorus in combat.
The United States' use of white phosphorus in Iraq in the Iraq War has resulted in considerable controversy amongst critics of the war. Initial field reports referred to white phosphorus use against insurgents,[3] but its use was officially denied until November 2005,[4] when the Department of Defense admitted[5] to the use of white phosphorus while stating that its use for producing obscuring smoke is legal and does not violate the CWC.[6] A DoD spokesman has also admitted that WP "was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants", though not against civilians.[7]
Effects on humans
White phosphorus can cause injuries and death in three ways: by burning deep into tissue, by being inhaled as a smoke, and by being ingested. Extensive exposure by burning and ingestion is fatal.
[edit] By burning
Incandescent particles of WP cast off by a WP weapon's initial explosion can produce extensive, deep second and third degree burns. One reason why this occurs is the tendency of the element to stick to the skin. Phosphorus burns carry a greater risk of mortality than other forms of burns due to the absorption of phosphorus into the body through the burned area, resulting in liver, heart and kidney damage, and in some cases multiple organ failure.[43] These weapons are particularly dangerous to exposed people because white phosphorus continues to burn unless deprived of oxygen or until it is completely consumed. In some cases, burns are limited to areas of exposed skin because the smaller WP particles do not burn completely through personal clothing before being consumed.
[edit] By inhalation of smoke
Burning WP produces a hot, dense white smoke. Most forms of smoke are not hazardous in the kinds of concentrations produced by a battlefield smoke shell. Exposure to heavy smoke concentrations of any kind for an extended period (particularly if near the source of emission) does have the potential to cause illness or even death.
WP smoke irritates the eyes and nose in moderate concentrations. With intense exposures, a very explosive cough may occur. However, no recorded casualties from the effects of WP smoke alone have occurred in combat operations and to date there are no confirmed deaths resulting from exposure to phosphorus smoke.
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has set an acute inhalation Minimum Risk Level (MRL) for white phosphorus smoke of 0.02 mg/m³, the same as fuel oil fumes. By contrast, the chemical weapon mustard gas is 30 times more potent: 0.0007 mg/m³ [44].
[edit] By oral ingestion
The accepted lethal dose when white phosphorus is ingested orally is 1 mg per kg of body weight, although the ingestion of as little as 15 mg has resulted in death.[45] It may also cause liver, heart or kidney damage.[43] There are reports of individuals with a history of oral ingestion who have passed phosphorus-laden stool ("smoking stool syndrome")[45]
I am reporting on white phosphorus chemical weapons being used in Gaza.
If anyone thinks I'm saying anything else, I'm reporting on white phosphorus chemical weapons being used in Gaza. The U.S. has also used white phosphorus in Iraq. It is a banned weapon of mass destruction unless used only as a "smokescreen." Thus, the smokescreen for the smokescreen.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about military applications. For more general information, see allotropes of phosphorus#White phosphorus.
White phosphorus (WP) is a flare- and smoke-producing incendiary device[1] or smoke-screening agent that is made from a common allotrope of the chemical element phosphorus. The main utility of white phosphorus munitions is to create smokescreens to mask movement from the enemy, or to mask his fire. In contrast to other smoke-causing munitions, WP burns quickly causing an instant bank of smoke. As a result of this, WP munitions are very common -- particularly as smoke grenades for infantry; loaded in defensive grenade dischargers on tanks and other armored vehicles; or as part of the ammunition allotment for artillery or mortars.
However, white phosphorus has a secondary effect. While much less efficient than ordinary fragmentation effects in causing casualties, white phosphorus burns quite fiercely and can set cloth, fuel, ammunition and other combustibles on fire. It also can function as an anti-personnel weapon with the compound capable of causing serious burns or death.[2] The agent is used in bombs, artillery, and mortars, short-range missiles which burst into burning flakes of phosphorus upon impact. White phosphorus is commonly referred to in military jargon as "WP". The slang term "Willy(ie) Pete" or "Willy(ie) Peter", dating from World War I and common at least through the Vietnam War, is still occasionally heard.
White phosphorus weapons are controversial today because of their potential use against civilians. While the Chemical Weapons Convention does not designate WP as a chemical weapon, various groups consider it to be one. In recent years, the United States, Israel, and Russia have used white phosphorus in combat.
The United States' use of white phosphorus in Iraq in the Iraq War has resulted in considerable controversy amongst critics of the war. Initial field reports referred to white phosphorus use against insurgents,[3] but its use was officially denied until November 2005,[4] when the Department of Defense admitted[5] to the use of white phosphorus while stating that its use for producing obscuring smoke is legal and does not violate the CWC.[6] A DoD spokesman has also admitted that WP "was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants", though not against civilians.[7]
Effects on humans
White phosphorus can cause injuries and death in three ways: by burning deep into tissue, by being inhaled as a smoke, and by being ingested. Extensive exposure by burning and ingestion is fatal.
[edit] By burning
Incandescent particles of WP cast off by a WP weapon's initial explosion can produce extensive, deep second and third degree burns. One reason why this occurs is the tendency of the element to stick to the skin. Phosphorus burns carry a greater risk of mortality than other forms of burns due to the absorption of phosphorus into the body through the burned area, resulting in liver, heart and kidney damage, and in some cases multiple organ failure.[43] These weapons are particularly dangerous to exposed people because white phosphorus continues to burn unless deprived of oxygen or until it is completely consumed. In some cases, burns are limited to areas of exposed skin because the smaller WP particles do not burn completely through personal clothing before being consumed.
[edit] By inhalation of smoke
Burning WP produces a hot, dense white smoke. Most forms of smoke are not hazardous in the kinds of concentrations produced by a battlefield smoke shell. Exposure to heavy smoke concentrations of any kind for an extended period (particularly if near the source of emission) does have the potential to cause illness or even death.
WP smoke irritates the eyes and nose in moderate concentrations. With intense exposures, a very explosive cough may occur. However, no recorded casualties from the effects of WP smoke alone have occurred in combat operations and to date there are no confirmed deaths resulting from exposure to phosphorus smoke.
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has set an acute inhalation Minimum Risk Level (MRL) for white phosphorus smoke of 0.02 mg/m³, the same as fuel oil fumes. By contrast, the chemical weapon mustard gas is 30 times more potent: 0.0007 mg/m³ [44].
[edit] By oral ingestion
The accepted lethal dose when white phosphorus is ingested orally is 1 mg per kg of body weight, although the ingestion of as little as 15 mg has resulted in death.[45] It may also cause liver, heart or kidney damage.[43] There are reports of individuals with a history of oral ingestion who have passed phosphorus-laden stool ("smoking stool syndrome")[45]
02 February, 2009
Gaza War Crimes
Charges Filed Against 15 Israeli Officials
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/gaza-horror-charges-filed-against-15-israeli-officials/
International attorneys have filed war crime charges against 15 Israeli political and military officials including Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak.
Palestinian and international efforts continue to institute legal proceedings for the prosecution of Israeli officials in the commission of war crimes.
Although Israeli forces are involved in thousands of cases, local experts such as the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights believe that the recent major attacks on the Gaza Strip will be successfully prosecuted.
“They were well-documented, televised and the world was paying attention,“ a member of the Gaza City team commented.
After the very public detection of large-scale atrocities which included the use of white phosphorus bombs in enclosed civilian areas and the liquidation of children there is little defense, PNN reported.
Fifteen specific names are now pending for prosecution in The Hague’s war crimes tribunal.
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/gaza-horror-charges-filed-against-15-israeli-officials/
International attorneys have filed war crime charges against 15 Israeli political and military officials including Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak.
Palestinian and international efforts continue to institute legal proceedings for the prosecution of Israeli officials in the commission of war crimes.
Although Israeli forces are involved in thousands of cases, local experts such as the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights believe that the recent major attacks on the Gaza Strip will be successfully prosecuted.
“They were well-documented, televised and the world was paying attention,“ a member of the Gaza City team commented.
After the very public detection of large-scale atrocities which included the use of white phosphorus bombs in enclosed civilian areas and the liquidation of children there is little defense, PNN reported.
Fifteen specific names are now pending for prosecution in The Hague’s war crimes tribunal.
Obama and The Banksters
Stealing from the rich, giving to the poor, Barack Obama is a self styled Robin Hood.
Now he has a chance to turn his arrows toward the Banksters. What will he do???
Last week, President Obama called it "shameful" that the bank executives, who took taxpayer money through the bailout last fall, paid themselves large bonuses. While the vast majority of the public agrees with this view, there is little that President Obama can directly do about these bonuses at this point.
However, with more bailout money on the way (probably much more), President Obama will be in a position to seriously constrain executive compensation in the future at the banks that are subsisting on government largess. However, before we even get to Round II of the bailout, there is some quick business that he should attend to right here in Washington.
Last month, on the day before Christmas, Fannie Mae announced that it had reconstituted its board of directors. According to The Washington Post, the nine directors will receive annual pay of $160,000 each (more if they chair a committee), while the chair of the board will take home $290,000 a year.
This pay seems rather high for two reasons. First, being a director is a very part-time job. A director's duties almost certainly require an average of less than one day a week. This means that the $160,000 annual salary for board members would translate into a full-time salary of more than $800,000.
The other reason this pay package is so disturbing is that Fannie Mae is currently in conservatorship. It is being run as a government company, with most of the oversight responsibilities of a corporate board being handled by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. In other words, Fannie Mae's new directors are effectively getting paid $160,000 a year at a part-time government job, which is even more part-time than usual, because a government agency is actually doing most of their work.
So, why are these people getting $160,000 for a part-time job, almost five times the pay of a typical worker? We can skip the "great skills" story. Three of the ten directors were on the board when Fannie slipped into bankruptcy last year. Obviously, these folks were sleeping at the point when a board's intervention could have made a difference. If this failure is not sufficient to keep a director from being reappointed, then there is no reason to believe that the seven new members have any special skills.
In short, the Fannie directors give us another classic example of people in business getting large paychecks in instances where they provide no obvious value. The unusual aspect in this situation is that they are actually on the government payroll at the moment, since Fannie is effectively bankrupt. This gives President Obama the opportunity to crack down on this abuse.
BUT WILL HE?
Read more at Truthout.org:
http://www.truthout.org/020209A
Now he has a chance to turn his arrows toward the Banksters. What will he do???
Last week, President Obama called it "shameful" that the bank executives, who took taxpayer money through the bailout last fall, paid themselves large bonuses. While the vast majority of the public agrees with this view, there is little that President Obama can directly do about these bonuses at this point.
However, with more bailout money on the way (probably much more), President Obama will be in a position to seriously constrain executive compensation in the future at the banks that are subsisting on government largess. However, before we even get to Round II of the bailout, there is some quick business that he should attend to right here in Washington.
Last month, on the day before Christmas, Fannie Mae announced that it had reconstituted its board of directors. According to The Washington Post, the nine directors will receive annual pay of $160,000 each (more if they chair a committee), while the chair of the board will take home $290,000 a year.
This pay seems rather high for two reasons. First, being a director is a very part-time job. A director's duties almost certainly require an average of less than one day a week. This means that the $160,000 annual salary for board members would translate into a full-time salary of more than $800,000.
The other reason this pay package is so disturbing is that Fannie Mae is currently in conservatorship. It is being run as a government company, with most of the oversight responsibilities of a corporate board being handled by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. In other words, Fannie Mae's new directors are effectively getting paid $160,000 a year at a part-time government job, which is even more part-time than usual, because a government agency is actually doing most of their work.
So, why are these people getting $160,000 for a part-time job, almost five times the pay of a typical worker? We can skip the "great skills" story. Three of the ten directors were on the board when Fannie slipped into bankruptcy last year. Obviously, these folks were sleeping at the point when a board's intervention could have made a difference. If this failure is not sufficient to keep a director from being reappointed, then there is no reason to believe that the seven new members have any special skills.
In short, the Fannie directors give us another classic example of people in business getting large paychecks in instances where they provide no obvious value. The unusual aspect in this situation is that they are actually on the government payroll at the moment, since Fannie is effectively bankrupt. This gives President Obama the opportunity to crack down on this abuse.
BUT WILL HE?
Read more at Truthout.org:
http://www.truthout.org/020209A
9/11 - A Matter of Semantics
Most 9/11 researchers (including David Ray Griffin, because I asked him) don’t bother to specifically state “who” took down the towers, but point to the vast evidence that the towers did not fall by fire or the weight of the airplanes, but rather were imploded. (In fact the buildings were specifically built to with-“stand” the weight of a 707, and a 747 doesn’t weigh that much more.)
First, Many people do not “want to believe” the benevolent U.S. government was involved to any major degree in 9/11 due to the discomfort level in accepting it. There is no psychological comfort level attainable with regard to this subject. But yet when you say “CIA” you’re no longer speaking about an agency of the U.S. government. The CIA has become a “rogue” secret group with no accountability or oversight. The CIA is not entirely like saying “the U.S. government”. Also the "U.S. government" is riddled with foreign agents. And "the U.S. government" was never really your friend anyway. So that’s our first semantic hoop.
Second, If the U.S. government “covered up” the the true perps of 9/11, it could be on “national security” grounds. David Ray Griffin points out massive errors, oversights and lies in the 9/11 Commission Report in his many books, 7 to date. This is a coverup very similar to the Warren Commission Report in many ways, as Griffin also points out. Anyone who has not read any of Griffin's books is in no position to say what they believe.
There is more than one possible scenario regarding Bush Administration “complicity”. David Ray Griffin’s “Levels of complicity” from The New Pearl Harbor (his first book on 9/11) are a really good way to explain these possible scenarios. Al Hidell and I wrote an article entitled 9-11 and Peculiar Behavior (written in 2002) to clarify. The following is from that article and the link to it is below.
Following is a concise articulation of Griffin's attempt to clarify what us conspiracy nuts might mean when we allege "official complicity":
1. Construction of a False Account. The view that US officials played no role in facilitating the attacks and did not expect them, but constructed a false account of what really happened, perhaps for reasons of national security, the embarrassment factor, or to exploit the attacks to enact their own agenda.
2. Something Expected by Intelligence Agencies. The view that although they had no specific information about the attacks in advance, some intelligence agencies did expect some attacks to occur and did nothing to prevent them.
3. Specific Events Expected by Intelligence Agencies. The view that intelligence agencies (but not the White House) had specific information about the timing and targets of the attacks.
4. Intelligence Agencies Involved in Planning. The view that intelligence agencies (but not the White House) actively participated in the attacks.
5. Pentagon Involved in Planning. The view that the Pentagon (but not the White House) actively participated in the attacks.
6. Something Expected by the White House. The view that the White House expected some sort of attacks and did nothing to stop them.
7. Specific Advanced Knowledge by the White House. The view that the Bush Administration had specific foreknowledge of the events, including targets and timing.
8. White House Involved in Planning. The view that the Bush Administration itself was a party to planning the attacks.
http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/peculiarbehavior.html
01 February, 2009
CIA Destroyed Twin Towers
On February 27, 1933 the German Reichstag went down in flames. The Nazis incriminated a Dutch communist named Marinus van der Lubbe, while the rest of the world viewed it with scepticism as being ignited by the Nazis themselves. They hypothesized that the Nazis employed it as a convenient pretext to give Hitler new dictatorial fascist powers through the ensuing passage of the 'Enabling Act' of March 24.
Since WWII most historians, books, and politicians of the West enthusiastically support this 'conspiracy theory' that the Nazis destroyed the Reichstag, yet when confronted with the thematically related 'conspiracy theory' that the U.S. government demolished the World Trade Center on 9/11 and blamed it on Osama bin Laden they reject it completely.
One of the major anomalies of 9/11 was the extended delay of the government in sending up Air Force jets to intercept the "hijacked" planes, in spite of being notified and having ample time to prevent them colliding with the Twin Towers. Another unusual occurence was the total collapse of the buildings as if they came down from an internal controlled demolition. The government even admitted that they imploded WTC Building #7 years after the fact.
The scenario that most likely transpired was that the CIA(in collusion with the Israeli Mossad) remotely-controlled two rogue airliners into the WTC and then accordingly inculpated real or fictitious 'muslim terrorists' as the 'evil-doers'. This was done to precipitate America into a war upon innocent foreign middle-eastern nations, and to further diminish the civil liberties of U.S. citizens through the ironically named 'Patriot Act.' The owner of the WTC was Larry Silverstein. Maybe he is another of these 'loyal Americans' with dual Israeli citizenship.
Since WWII most historians, books, and politicians of the West enthusiastically support this 'conspiracy theory' that the Nazis destroyed the Reichstag, yet when confronted with the thematically related 'conspiracy theory' that the U.S. government demolished the World Trade Center on 9/11 and blamed it on Osama bin Laden they reject it completely.
One of the major anomalies of 9/11 was the extended delay of the government in sending up Air Force jets to intercept the "hijacked" planes, in spite of being notified and having ample time to prevent them colliding with the Twin Towers. Another unusual occurence was the total collapse of the buildings as if they came down from an internal controlled demolition. The government even admitted that they imploded WTC Building #7 years after the fact.
The scenario that most likely transpired was that the CIA(in collusion with the Israeli Mossad) remotely-controlled two rogue airliners into the WTC and then accordingly inculpated real or fictitious 'muslim terrorists' as the 'evil-doers'. This was done to precipitate America into a war upon innocent foreign middle-eastern nations, and to further diminish the civil liberties of U.S. citizens through the ironically named 'Patriot Act.' The owner of the WTC was Larry Silverstein. Maybe he is another of these 'loyal Americans' with dual Israeli citizenship.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)