Thursday, October 29, 2009

The CIA and Drug Trafficking



Next time you see a junkie sprawled at the curb in the downtown of your nearest city, or read about someone who died of a heroin overdose, just imagine a big yellow sign posted next to him or her saying: “Your Federal Tax Dollars at Work.” {more - dave lindorff}





The CIA
America's Premier International Terrorist Organization




Videos.....

An Unholy Alliance - 1996 documentary examines the CIA's connection to the global drug trade, with a focus on opium and heroin.

The Mena Connection - An independent group of researchers in Arkansas are charging that Governor Bill Clinton is covering up an airport used by the CIA and major cocaine smugglers in a remote corner of the Ozark mountains.

American Drug War - The C.I.A. Involvement In Drug Smuggling...The people that benefit the most, the bankers that launder the money.

Gary Webb on CIA Trafficking of Cocaine

The CIA and Crack Cocaine

CIA - The Drug Affair

CIA jet crashes with 4 tons of cocaine

Ron Paul on CIA Drug Trafficking

_____________

Globalist banks work hand in hand with the CIA in the drug money laundering.
Drug Trade Props Up World Economy

When we think of the international drug trade, we usually think of financial support being funneled to Columbian insurgents or Taliban fighters. Propping up the world banking system is not what usually comes to mind. However, the illicit drug trade may in fact be one of the world’s few growth industries at the moment, with little unemployment, maximum profits, and a plethora of cash-hungry banks ready to lend a hand.

The head of the United Nation’s Office on Drugs and Crime said that profits from the illicit drug trade were being used “to keep banks afloat in the global financial crisis,” Reuters reported last week. In an interview with Profil, an Austrian news magazine, UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa warned that “in many instances, drug money is currently the only liquid investment capital.” Costa’s Office on Drugs and Crime uncovered evidence that “interbank loans were funded by money that originated from drug trade and other illegal activities,” Costa said. “There were signs that some banks were rescued that way.”

Specifically, Costas said interbank credits have been financed by drug money. “It is naturally hard to prove this, but there are indications that a number of banks were rescued by this means.” While most banks have money laundering rules in place, “now criminals stash their funds in cash sums which can be up to hundreds of millions of dollars.”

Viewed from a macroeconomic perspective, drug money represents scarce investment capital for banks. “In many instances,” Costa said, “drug money is currently the only liquid investment capital to buy real estate, for example.”

Costa would not name any countries or banks which may have been involved. He did note that the current global financial crisis was a “golden opportunity” for crime groups needing to launder money, and that the laundering of illegal funds was “certainly happening across the board,” Veronika Oleksyn of AP reported. Costa said the information came from contacts with prosecutors and banking representatives in various countries.

Costa also told the BBC that South American drug trafficking threatens to economically destabilize Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and West Africa. He estimated that the worldwide illegal drug economy was now worth about $323 billion per year. “If you look at agriculture markets, it is the most important,” according to the Drug War Chronicle account of the Profil article. “According to our calculations, the wholesale value of illegal drugs is more than $90 billion, in the range of world meat and grain trade. The street trade we access at a volume of over $320 million.” {source}

People Arrested for Drug Law Offenses this Year - 1,525,458

Number of CIA employees arrested this year for drug law offenses - 0



Secretary of Defense Robert Gates worked directly under CIA Director William Casey and was heavily involved in the CIA Iran/Contra drug and arms smuggling schemes.



Current CIA Director Leon Panetta, former Clinton Chief of Staff, knows full well what the CIA is up to in its drug trafficking in Afghanistan and elsewhere.




Hamid Karzai's brother 'on CIA payroll'

CBS video

The Afghan drug trade is the big money maker. Don't expect any change in that even if Karzai is ousted. Irish4Palistine speculates that the outing of Karzai's brother as a CIA asset is just a game of 'change' where everything will remain the same.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

The Final words on the Palestinian / Israeli problems


The Final words on the Palestinian / Israeli problems
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1123063.html


Hamas is not the real problem

October 23, 2009

By Henry Siegman

Ha’aretz has courageously and repeatedly exposed the deceitfulness of this and previous Israeli governments’ pretense that their goal is to find a viable Palestinian peace partner. It is therefore important to guard against the implication of the question - whether Israel should engage Hamas in peace talks - posed by the paper, namely that Israeli governments have had an interest in holding peace talks if only they could find a willing partner. Time and again, when presented with a choice between peace and continuing Israel’s expropriation of Palestinian land, Israeli governments have chosen land over peace. Indeed, an American president who shows the slightest signs of taking peacemaking seriously is immediately suspected - not only by Israeli governments but by Israel’s public - of anti-Israel, if not anti-Semitic, motivations.

Israeli governments have avoided dealing with Hamas not because they fear that engaging the organization might not produce a peace agreement, but because they know they could not manipulate Hamas the way they have been able to manipulate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas - namely, by using content-less peace talks as a fig leaf for the continued expansion of the settlement enterprise. Israeli governments have latched onto Abbas as their peace partner of choice not because of his “moderation” - his conditions for a peace agreement are not much different from those of Hamas (after all, Hamas has agreed to allow Abbas to conduct peace talks on behalf of a unity government) - but because negotiations with Abbas shield them from the need to deal with Hamas while at the same time enabling them to claim that he is incapable of delivering popular support for the compromises he needs to make. It is a classic case of having your cake and eating it too.

If an Israeli government were truly interested in reaching a peace accord that would end the occupation and establish a viable Palestinian state, it could do so only with a government that includes both major Palestinian political parties, Hamas and Fatah. It is precisely because Israeli governments know this that they have consistently incited Fatah to engage in fratricidal conflict with Hamas, and threatened to cut off the perks extended to Abbas and his colleagues should he even think of joining it in a unity government.

Undoubtedly, this view of Israel’s various governments, and particularly of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, may be dismissed by some as overly harsh. After all, didn’t Ariel Sharon seek to reverse his earlier rejectionism by turning Gaza back to the Palestinians, and did not Hamas repay his good intentions with rocket assaults on Israel’s civilian population?

The answer to both of these questions is “No.” No, Sharon did not intend the removal of the Gaza settlements to reverse Israel’s settlement enterprise in the West Bank. Its purpose was the exact opposite: to obtain president George W. Bush’s consent for the deepening and widening of Israel’s hold on the West Bank. And no, Hamas did not send rockets into Sderot - a war crime no matter what their purpose - in order to repay Sharon for his generosity, but in response to the prime minister’s strangling of Gaza, also a war crime.

The man in Israel best qualified to know exactly what Sharon had in mind is Dov Weisglass. He was not only Sharon’s closest confidant, political advisor, personal lawyer, and chief of the Prime Minister’s Bureau, but also the one who negotiated the deal with the United States over the removal of the Gaza settlements on behalf of Sharon. Here is how Weisglass described that deal, in an interview in Ha’aretz:

“What I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements [i.e., the major settlement blocs in the West Bank] would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns.... The significance [of the agreement with the United States] is the freezing of the political process. And when you freeze that process you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent a discussion about the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package that is called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed from our agenda indefinitely. And all this with [President Bush’s] authority and permission... and the ratification of both houses of Congress.”

That is why the first question should not be, “Should Israel talk to Hamas?” but rather, “Should Israel be allowed by the United States and the international community to continue its settlement enterprise to the point of irreversibility?” Netanyahu has already broken his promise to President Barack Obama regarding a limited moratorium on construction outside the settlement blocs. Construction in those settlements continues stealthily. An appropriate response to this continuing deceit would be an American engagement with Hamas, conditioned on Hamas’ implementation of its promise to allow Abbas to negotiate a peace agreement on behalf of a unity government. This would be a clear indication by the United States and the international community that the answer to that first question is “No.”

Henry Siegman is director of the U.S./Middle East Project and a former national director of the American Jewish Congress and of the Synagogue Council of America.

No fix soon on Palestinian question Arnaud de Borchgrave
No fix soon on Palestinian question

Arnaud de Borchgrave

October 26, 2009
http://www.washingtontimes.com//news/2009/oct/26/no-fix-soon-on-palestinian-question/print/


Unless former Sen. George J. Mitchell, President Obama's special Middle Eastern envoy, is prepared to commute by government executive jet for the next five to 10 years, this isn't a bad time to turn in his badge.

Israel's vice prime minister and minister for strategic affairs in Israel's 32nd government Moshe Ya'alon talked his way through Washington's corridors of power this week, spelling out the Jewish state's refurbished negotiating posture for a Palestinian state. Bottom line: The Nobel Peace Prize will not help Mr. Obama's quest for an independent homeland for the Palestinians by the end of his first term. Even if re-elected, the geopolitical prize would most probably elude him again.

Israel wants to slow down the whole process of negotiations with the Palestinians. Mr. Obama wants both parties to accelerate. But Congress seldom allows any daylight between Israeli and U.S. positions.

Israel has scuttled its from-the-top-down negotiating strategy that had Mr. Mitchell meeting with Israeli and Palestinian leaders who then mouthed platitudes until their next meeting. The new posture is what Israeli topsiders call from-the-bottom-up. In other words, you start with itemized minutia, for which Mr. Mitchell's good offices would be a waste of his manifold talents. Key topics like final borders, the return of refugees, the dismantling of Israeli settlements, the status of East Jerusalem, a security fence along the Jordan River against terrorist infiltrators from Jordan - all would be postponed sine die.

The ostensible reason for the change is the refusal of Palestinian interlocutors to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, a national home for Jews from anywhere (there are about 15 million in the world, including 5.5 million in Israel, 6 million in North America, 2.5 million in Europe and Russia).

Instead, the Israelis want to talk about the details of a truly demilitarized Palestinian entity. Haggling over the number of guns and ammo depots allowed for a non-army military with non-army uniforms would keep negotiators busy for months. Air rights would be disallowed by Israel. But Palestinians want small commuter aircraft that would fly to Amman, Jordan and Damascus, Syria. Israeli settlements now sit astride the West Bank's water aquiver. Palestinians want their share. This would entail dismantling part of the $2.5 billion wall-fence-razor wire that snakes 420 miles in and out of the West Bank. That, too, could stretch months into years.

The more Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud hard-liners think about the strategic dimension of an independent state, the more they conclude it would be a victory for Muslim radicals. Hamas, the radical Palestinian organization that now rules Gaza, is entirely dependent on Iran's Revolutionary Guard-cum-Mullah regime. It also has a strong underground in the West Bank.

As Gen. Ya'alon adjusts his geopolitical specs, he sees nothing but 360-degree trouble for Israel. A revanchist Palestinian state on its borders, staring wistfully at Israel's Mediterranean border, which was once Palestine's, could quickly morph into a hostile entity. Israel's strategic thinkers also see the Sunni-Shia conflict rearing its ugly face in Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Yemen. On the mental map, the laser pointer traces an axis of trouble from Afghanistan to Pakistan to Iran, to Iraq, to Egypt, Sudan, Somalia.

The ruling Likud Party sees the entire region divided between "Jihadis and moderates," with radical Islam aligned against the West, a struggle that started with Islamist revolutionaries seizing power in Iran in 1979. Western civilization, say Israel's leaders, is the jihadis' "main enemy." So further territorial concessions in the West Bank, they now conclude, merely empowers jihadis. This alone should convince Mr. Mitchell that he is embarked on mission impossible.

As proof of their latest arguments, Likud leaders say moderate Arab leaders' recognize the main threat to their region is Iran, not Israel. So the core of the Mideast problem is Iran and its nuclear ambitions, not the Arab-Israeli dispute. They hope for tougher sanctions between now and the end of the year. They see the Iranian regime a shambles with the Revolutionary Guards struggling to keep control against the "twitter" revolutionaries. And if Tehran hangs tough into 2010, Mr. Netanyahu plans to reassess the military option - with or without the United States.

For the first time, Israeli leaders concede privately Iran does indeed possess formidable asymmetrical retaliatory capabilities that go from mining the Strait of Hormuz, interrupting 25 percent of the world's oil flow, to mayhem up and down the Gulf, all of which could shoot oil up to $300 or more and plunge Western economies into an outright depression. But they also believe the U.S. Navy would quickly demine Hormuz and silence Iranian missile batteries firing at U.S. warships.

This, of course, would bring the United States into open conflict with Iran. And while Mr. Obama might hesitate to be cast as Israel's only ally in a regional war, Congress would quickly lend support to Israel.

Israel's leaders were stunned by the Goldstone report, commissioned by the U.N., on the Jewish state's 2008 assault on Gaza in which almost 1,400 Palestinians, including 900 civilians, and only 13 Israeli soldiers were killed. Richard Goldstone, the South African Jewish jurist who led the investigation and authored the U.N. report, accused Israel of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Predictably, he was quickly tagged as a "self-hating Jew." But he is one of his country's most respected personalities, at the forefront of the struggle against apartheid and a key legal architect of the new South Africa.

All of which has led some to speculate the two-state solution for the Palestinians and Israel has gone the way of the dodo. Former U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali told this reporter in Cairo last week, "This is now headed for a one-state solution. But it's probably 10 years away."

Does all this mean that Israel has a historically short "shelf life"? Said one ranking Likud official, "We've had 100 years of Zionism, 62 years as a Jewish state, and we're now 6 million. With what we've achieved in science, agriculture, the military, we're not about to disappear."

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Backstroking the Jewish Tomorrow



by Gilad Atzmon

Earlier today in a conference in Jerusalem titled “Facing Tomorrow”, Israel's leading politicians shared their vision of Israel's future.

Following the recent agreement announced by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s chief, Mohammad ElBaradei regarding Iranian Uranium enrichment, Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak called on the international community “to give Iran a deadline for halting its nuclear program and impose additional sanctions against Tehran”. For some reason the Israelis are convinced that Nuclear energy is a ‘Jew only property’. The Jewish state insists on keeping its neighbours in a state of nuclear panic alert.

Tzipi Livni, another dedicated warmonger, is now an enthusiastic supporter of the ‘Two State Solution’. “Establishment of a Palestinian state is the only way of preserving Israel's Jewish character”, she said. At last, the Left and right Wing Zionists are in agreement with each other. Someone should remind the ‘born again dove’ Livni that the Jewish state she refers to is located on stolen Palestinian land, Tel Aviv, Be’er Sheva and Haifa and are all part of occupied Greater Palestine.

Interior Minister Eli Yishai of Shas (an Israeli religious party) blamed the Palestinians for the stalemate in the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. “Unfortunately, the other side [Palestinians] lacks the ability to make brave decisions,” he said.

Minister Yishai is absolutely right. The Palestinians are not ‘brave’ enough to agree to live in concentration camps, they do not agree to the occupation of their land either. These facts take the Jewish leadership by total surprise. I’ll tell you why. The history of the Holocaust teaches us that the Jewish leadership at the time was actually very willing to collaborate with the Nazis all the way through. In fact it was the Judenrate* that managed and organised the mass deportation of European Jews from the ghettos to the camps. To follow Yishai’s logic, unlike the Palestinians, the Nazi era Jewish councils were taking some brave decisions. Seemingly the Palestinians are not ‘brave’ enough to do the same.

Even President Obama engaged himself with issues to do with the Jewish future. Here is his message to the conference:

"The American people and the Israeli people share a faith in the future, a belief that democracies can shape their own destiny and that opportunities should be available to all"

The only question to be asked here, is whether President Obama meant ‘opportunities for all’, or did he mean opportunities for Jews only? As far as Nuclear energy is concerned, already in June President Obama reiterated that Iran has some “right to nuclear energy provided it takes steps to prove its aspirations are peaceful”. I would urge Obama to accept that opportunities for nuclear weapons should also be ‘available to all’. Not just the Israelis but every country in the region. In order to be consistent Obama has to choose between either clearing Israel of its pile of WMD or otherwise encourage every other country in the region to pile up nuclear bombs just to restrain Israel's proven murderous inclinations by power of deterrence.

However, far more crucial at this stage is to urge Obama to make it clear to the Israelis that by saying ‘opportunities should be available to all” he refers also to Palestinian children who are starved and slaughtered by the Israeli armed forces on a daily basis.

By now, after ten months in office, President Obama should grasp that the notion of ‘opportunities to all’ is not just foreign but in total opposition to the philosophy of the Jewish state, an apartheid racially orientated state

* Judenräte (singular Judenrat; for "Jewish council") were administrative bodies that the Nazis required Jews to form in the German occupied territory of Poland and later in the occupied territories of the USSR.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

The American Economy: Killing the Goose that Lays the Golden Egg


What Were We Thinking?


As a culture, the current mix of generations, especially in the US, has made some choices. Choices which, in hindsight, leave the adult in us asking, “What were we thinking?”

We made a series of bad choices and suffered the credit crisis because of it. Now, as a nation, we are in the middle of making an even worse choice, one that will leave us with no good choices - only choices of pretty bad to awful. Let’s begin with a quote from a recent client letter by my friends at Hayman Advisors (in Dallas).

“Western democracies, communistic capitalists, and Japanese deflationists are concurrently engaging in what may be the largest, global financial experiment in history. Everywhere you turn, governments are running enormous fiscal deficits financed by printing money. The greatest risk of these policies is that the quantitative easing will persist until the value of the currency equals the actual cost of printing the currency (which is just slightly above zero).

“There have been 28 episodes of hyperinflation of national economies in the 20th century, with 20 occurring after 1980. Peter Bernholz (Professor Emeritus of Economics in the Center for Economics and Business (WWZ) at the University of Basel, Switzerland) has spent his career examining the intertwined worlds of politics and economics with special attention given to money. In his most recent book, Monetary Regimes and Inflation: History, Economic and Political Relationships, Bernholz analyzes the 12 largest episodes of hyperinflations - all of which were caused by financing huge public budget deficits through money creation. His conclusion: the tipping point for hyperinflation occurs when the government’s deficit exceed 40% of its expenditures.

“According to the current Office of Management and Budget (OMB) projections, US federal expenditures are projected to be $3.653 trillion in FY 2009 and $3.766 trillion in FY 2010, with unified deficits of $1.580 trillion and $1.502 trillion, respectively. These projections imply that the US will run deficits equal to 43.3% and 39.9% of expenditures in 2009 and 2010, respectively. To put it simply, roughly 40% of what our government is spending has to be borrowed. [Emphasis mine]

“One has to ask whether the US reached the critical tipping point. Beyond the quantitative measurements associated with government deficits and money creation, there exists a qualitative aspect to such a scenario that may be far more important. The qualitative perceptions of fiscal and monetary policies are impossible to control once confidence is lost. In fact, recent price action in metals, the dollar and commodities suggests that the market is already anticipating the future.”

Let me point out that the deficits for 2010 assume a rather robust recovery, and so they could turn out to be much worse, especially if unemployment continues to rise and Congress decides (rightly) to extend unemployment benefits.

The interest on the national debt in fiscal 2008 was $451 billion. Even though the debt has exploded, the interest for fiscal 2009 is down to “only” $383 billion. My back-of-the-napkin estimate says that is over 20% of total 2009 tax receipts. I guess when you take interest rates to zero and really load up on short-term debt, it helps lower interest costs. (More on that future problem later.) http://www.savingsbonds.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

The fiscal deficits are projected to be about 11% of nominal GDP, which is now roughly $14.3 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office currently projects that deficits will still be $1 trillion in ten years.

Last spring I published as an Outside the Box a very important paper by Dr. Woody Brock on why you cannot grow government debt well above nominal GDP without causing severe disruptions to the overall economic system. If you have not read it, or would like to read it again, click here.

I am going to reproduce just one table from that piece. Note that this was Woody’s worst-case assumption, adding 8% of GDP to the debt each year, and not the 11% we are experiencing today. The Congressional Budget Office projections are now even worse, and that assumes a very rosy 3% or more growth in the economy for the next five years. Under Woody’s scenario, the national debt would rise to $18 trillion by 2015, or well over 100% of GDP, depending on your growth assumptions. Take some time to study the tables, but I am going to focus on 2015 and not the outlier years.

jm100909image001

$1.5 trillion dollars means that someone has to invest that much in Treasury bonds. Let’s look at where the $1.5 trillion might come from. Let’s assume that all of our trade deficit comes back to the US and is invested in US government bonds. Today we found out that the latest monthly trade deficit was just over $30 billion, or $370 billion annualized (which is half what it was a few years ago). That still leaves $1.13 trillion that needs to be found to be invested in US government debt (forget about business and consumer loans and mortgages).
Killing the Goose
$1.13 trillion is roughly 8% of total US GDP. That is a staggering amount. And again, that assumes that foreigners continue to put 100% of their fresh reserves into dollar-denominated assets. That is not a safe assumption, given the recent news stories about how governments are thinking about whether to create an alternative to the dollar as a reserve currency. (And if I was watching the US run $1.5 trillion deficits with no realistic plans to cut back, I would be having private talks too. They would be idiots not to do so.)

There are only three sources for the needed funds: either an increase in taxes or people increasing savings and putting them into government bonds or the Fed monetizing the debt, or some combination of all three.

Now the Fed is in fact monetizing a portion of the debt as part of its quantitative easing program, and US consumers are saving more. Tax receipts are way down. I can tell you there is a great deal of angst in New Orleans tonight about the Fed monetization. This is traditionally a “gold bug” conference, and many of the participants and speakers see only inflation in our future.

Long-time readers know that I think the Fed has been able to get away with its rather large monetization program because of the massive deflationary forces let loose in the world by the credit crisis, which is forcing a monster deleveraging regime all over the world. Where has all the money gone that the Fed has printed? Right back onto the Fed’s balance sheet as bank reserves. The banks are not lending, so this money does not get into the system in the usual manner associated with fractional reserve banking. Until that happens, and is accompanied by increasing wages and employment, inflation is not in our immediate future.

And this brings us to our conundrum. You cannot continue to run deficits significantly larger than nominal GDP for too long without risking the demise of the economic system. Ask Argentina or any of the other nations where hyperinflation occurred, as detailed in the study mentioned above. But we are in a deflationary environment, so the Fed can monetize the debt far more than any of us suppose without risking immediate and spiraling inflation.

But there is a limit to the Fed’s ability to do so without causing real inflation. First, as long as the Fed is independent, at some point they will simply have to tell Congress we can no longer monetize the debt. While I am sure that some of you doubt they would do so, the Fed officials and economists I have been around are pretty adamant about that. There is a line they will not be pushed past. It may be further than I like, but it is there.

The Fed cannot simply buy up all the debt needed to fund the government. Again, no one on the FOMC would either advocate or allow that. That would in fact start us down a very dangerous path rather quickly. Therefore, they must have a large number of willing bond buyers outside the Fed. The good news, gentle reader, is that we will find someone to buy that debt. That is also the bad news. Let’s go back 30 years.

Legend now has it that Paul Volker single-handedly took the inflation bull by the horns and ripped them off. Now, it took fortitude to do that in the face of certain recession and high unemployment. Those were not fun days. But his partner in the deed was the bond market. Bond investors simply demanded higher returns, because they were really worried about inflation.

At some point, if we do not get the government deficit under control, the bond market is once again going to react. Seemingly overnight, real (inflation-adjusted) rates are going to rise, and will do so rapidly. And I am not talking about 1 or 2%. You just cannot have 8% of a $14-trillion GDP go into US government debt every year, forever, at today’s low real rates.

Let’s play a thought game. If you take 8% of US consumer spending and save it, and it finds its way into government bonds, you have reduced consumer spending and therefore the actual GDP. But how about those who want to invest in stocks? Foreign bonds and currencies? New businesses? Loans of all types? How much are we going to have to save to get the necessary capital? How high will the saving rate have to be to finance all those other activities in a world where debt securitization is still anemic?

Some will point to Japan and their government debt-to-GDP ratio, which will soon be over 200%, a far cry from where we are today. Why can’t we grow our debt to 200%? Because the Japanese have long had a culture of saving and investing in government bonds. It’s what you do to support the country. But even they will run into a wall as their savings rate continues to drop, because so many of their citizens are retired and are now selling bonds to finance retirement. They too are running massive fiscal deficits, on the order of the size of the US deficits. And does anyone really want to have two lost decades, like Japan?

How long can we go before there is an upheaval? I don’t know. The markets can remain irrational or complacent for a lot longer than most of us think. It could be years. Or not. Suddenly, it will be July 2008 and the bond vigilantes stampede.

But now, we seemingly can borrow with no consequences. The deflation that is in the air, plus the lack of bank lending holds, down the normal inflation impulses. We as a nation are leveraging ourselves up. We’re partying like it’s still 2005. The music is playing and we are dancing. Our Congress is trying to figure out how to run even higher deficits.

At some point, the consequences will be significant. There are two paths, and it is not clear which one we will take. First, we might see inflation kick in and actual rates rise. Since so much of our national debt is short-term debt, that means yet another rise in the deficit as rates rise. Mortgage rates rise, putting pressure on the housing market. There will be even more pressure on commercial mortgages. Consumer debt will be harder to get and cost more. It will mean funding costs for businesses will rise, and that hurts employment. It would be a return to the 1970s of high interest rates and stagnant growth in a very slow-growth environment.

Second, we could see deflation kick in and, even though rates stay more or less where they are, real (after-deflation) rates could rise as they did in the ’30s and in Japan.

Some of my most knowledgeable friends argue for the inflation side, and others take the deflation side. I tend to think the Fed will fight deflation until we get inflation, but the consequences will not be pleasant. There is no benign path.

How can we avoid such an upheaval? The only way is to make some very difficult choices. There have to be some adults making the choices, as the teenagers now in control clearly cannot make them.

As I have written in the past, we can run deficits of 2% of GDP for a very long time, which in a few years would be about $300 billion. It is my belief that if the bond market and world investors saw a credible plan to put us on a path to a deficit no larger than 2% of GDP, the dire upheaval that is in our future could be avoided.

But that will mean some painful choices. It is not a matter of pain or no pain, it is just deciding when and how bad it will be. The longer we wait, the worse the consequences.


Let’s Play Turn It Around


There are businessmen who are called turnaround specialists. They come into companies that are sick but have a basic competency, and that with the right management can be made into viable concerns. Generally, the choices the new management makes are painful to those involved, but they are necessary if the enterprise is to remain a going concern.

So, for the next few pages, I am going to suggest some things we can do to turn the US around. They are not easy fixes, and I know a lot of readers will not like what they read or will disagree on points. But something like this is going to have to be done, or we risk killing the goose.

First, we must acknowledge the deficit is out of control, and spending must be cut. If we raise taxes by as much as the Obama administration now wants to, we will most assuredly put the country back into a deep recession in 2011. Think what raising taxes in 1937 did to a nascent recovery. A $3-trillion-dollar budget is 20% of the US economy. That is just simply too much.

Quick fact. The most credible studies show that government expenditures exert no multiplier effect on the economy. Actually, they show them to be very slightly negative. This is not just in the US. However, the tax effect has a multiplier of 3! If we raise taxes by $300 billion in 2011, that will slam the economy in the face. Further, we will collect less taxes than projected, as economic activity will fall.

You cannot cure a too much debt problem with more debt. We cannot borrow our way into prosperity. Every crisis of the past decades has been a result of too much debt and leverage and we seem to want to repeat the past mistakes, hoping that this time it will be different. It won’t.

Ok, now let’s play the Turnaround Hammer Game.

+ We should start with a 5% acrossthe-board cut in spending in all programs. Federal employees, except for military personnel, should see a 5% cut in pay as part of that program. The average federal worker makes $75,419 a year, while the average in the private sector is $39,751. The rest of us are taking pay cuts in the form of higher taxes. No cost of living increases, etc. We are on an austerity program and need to do what it takes. If a program is deemed too important to be cut, then another program has to be cut more.

Then the next year another 2.5% cut across the board. And then an absolute freeze on the overall budget size until the deficit is 2% or less of GDP.

+ Social Security must be fixed now. We all know that it is going to have to be done, so why not just do it? Means testing should be a part of the mix. As an idea, for every $10,000 in income a retiree has, he gets $1,000 less in SS payments. And increase the retirement age down the road. When SS was launched, retirement age was 65. But the average life span was 65. There are other things we can do, but whatever our poison of choice is, we need to take it.

+ Medicare must be revised, with real health-care reform. The national debt is $56 trillion if we count unfunded liabilities, much of which is Medicare. It will become a nightmare around the middle of the next decade. Adding more expenses now without cutting elsewhere makes no sense. If we kill the goose, no one will get anything excect very empty promises.

Side note: there actually is a lot of waste in the system. Software should be written that analyzes every patient and procedure and produces an outcomes-based analysis of what is reasonable, rather than throwing every test at every patient. And the government should make sure, even if it has to spend the money, that the updated system is in place in every hospital and clinic in the country. And doctors should be given access to it so they can decide what type of care is appropriate to prescribe. And health-care reform means tort reform.

Today, I got a note from a friend of mine who just had yet another heart attack. It seems his stent is now blocked by 50%. He is a vet, and his primary care is the Veterans Administration. The Veterans Hospital system will not do a procedure to unblock the stent until it is 70% blocked. He does not have any money, so he is simply waiting to have another heart attack. I am really looking forward to government-run health care.

+ Each year we allow almost 1 million immigrants into the US, mostly family of people already here. I suggest that for the next two years we stop that. Instead, let anyone who can buy a home, passes basic screening, and can demonstrate the ability to pay for health insurance immigrate to the US and get a temporary green card. If they behave, then the card becomes permanent after four years.

We almost immediately put a floor on the housing market, absorb the excess homes, and within a year the housing-construction market, along with the jobs that are now gone, will be back. That is stimulus that costs the taxpayers nothing.

+ While I can’t believe I am writing this, taxes are going to have to rise, if for no other reason than this Congress is hell bent on raising taxes. But rescinding the entire Bush tax cuts, plus adding a 10% surcharge as Congress wants to do in one fell swoop, is an absolute guarantee of a recession. So do it gradually over (say) 4 years, and then reinstitute the cuts when the deficit is under 2% of GDP. Remember the negative tax-multiplier effect of raising taxes. And the definitive work on that was done by Obama’s chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, Christina Romer.

We should consider a VAT tax and a major cut/reorganization of the corporate tax. We need to encourage corporations to hire more, and you do that by taxing less. Let’s make our corporations more competitive, not less. Our taxes are much higher than those of any of our major competitors. And please forget that insane carbon tax. If you want to cut emissions, do it straightforwardly by raising taxes significantly on gasoline. Don’t back-door it on consumers. (And I am NOT advocating such a policy.)

+ An aggressive tax benefit for new venture-capital money that is invested in new technologies will result in new industries. The only way we can grow our way out of this mess is to create whole new industries, like we did in the late ’70s and ’80s. (Think computers and the internet and telecom.)

+ Unemployment is likely to continue to rise and last longer than ever before. We have to take care of the basic needs of those who want work but can’t find it. Unemployment insurance should be extended to those who are still looking for work past the time for benefits to expire, and some program of local volunteer service should be instituted as the price for getting continued benefits after the primary benefits time period runs out. Not only will this help the community, but it will get the person out into the world where he is more likely to meet someone who can give him a job. But the costs of this program should be revenue-neutral. Something else has to be cut.

+ We have to re-hink our military costs (I can’t believe I am writing this!). We now spend almost 50% of the world’s total military budget. Maybe we need to understand that we can’t fight two wars and support hundreds of bases around the world. If we kill the goose, our ability to fight even one medium-sized war will be diminished. The harsh reality is that everything has to be re-evaluated. As an example, do we really need to be in Korea? If so, why can’t Korea pay for much of the cost? They are now a rich nation. There are budgetary fiscal limits to being the policeman for the world.

+ Glass-Steagall, or some form of it, should be brought back. Banks, which are subject to taxpayer bailouts, should not be in the investment banking and derivatives-creating business. Derivatives, especially credit default swaps, should be on an exchange, and too big to fail must go. Banks have enough risk just making loans. Leverage should be dialed down, and hedge funds selling what amounts to naked call options in any form, derivative or otherwise, should be regulated.

Let me see, is there any group I have not offended yet? But something like I am suggesting is going to have to be done at some point. There is no way we can continue forever on the current path. At some point, we will hit the wall. The fight between the bug and the windshield always ends in favor of the windshield. The bond market is going to have to see a credible effort to get back to a reasonable deficit, or we risk a very difficult economic environment. The longer we wait, the worse it will be.

It is not going to be easy to persuade a majority of Americans that we need to do something now. More realistically, we are going to probably have to begin to experience a crisis of some type to get politicians motivated to do something.

This last Tuesday, I spoke to the Financial Leadership Association at the University of Texas at Dallas. It was mostly undergraduates, and my assigned topic was how financial research impacts our investment decisions. In touched on the topic above, in less detail, but pointing out that at some point we are going to have to bring the deficit under reasonable control. I got some push-back, as some could not understand why we just couldn’t keep running deficits, as we simply owe it to ourselves. I tried to explain, but for a few of them I was not getting through (though I think most got it). And these were the finance students! I shudder to think what the sociology department would be like.

We are not going back to normal, although it is likely we will see some form of Statistical Recovery. But we cannot get complacent. Somewhere out there is the real potential for another crisis, which will dwarf the last one. You will not want to be long much of anything when it happens, except hedged or liquid investments. Though admittedly, this could go on for a long time. I just don’t know how long “long” is. Other than it will be too long and then not long enough.

Saturday, October 10, 2009

Warmonger Wins Peace Prize



By Paul Craig Roberts

It took 25 years longer than George Orwell thought for the slogans of 1984 to become reality.

“War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery,” “Ignorance is Strength.”

I would add, “Lie is Truth.”

The Nobel Committee has awarded the 2009 Peace Prize to President Obama, the person who started a new war in Pakistan, upped the war in Afghanistan, and continues to threaten Iran with attack unless Iran does what the US government demands and relinquishes its rights as a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.

The Nobel committee chairman, Thorbjoern Jagland said, “Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.”

Obama, the committee gushed, has created “a new climate in international politics.”

Tell that to the 2 million displaced Pakistanis and the unknown numbers of dead ones that Obama has racked up in his few months in office. Tell that to the Afghans where civilian deaths continue to mount as Obama’s “war of necessity” drones on indeterminably.

No Bush policy has changed. Iraq is still occupied. The Guantanamo torture prison is still functioning. Rendition and assassinations are still occurring. Spying on Americans without warrants is still the order of the day. Civil liberties are continuing to be violated in the name of Oceania’s “war on terror.”

Apparently, the Nobel committee is suffering from the delusion that, being a minority, Obama is going to put a stop to Western hegemony over darker-skinned peoples.

The non-cynical can say that the Nobel committee is seizing on Obama’s rhetoric to lock him into the pursuit of peace instead of war. We can all hope that it works. But the more likely result is that the award has made “War is Peace” the reality.

Obama has done nothing to hold the criminal Bush regime to account, and the Obama administration has bribed and threatened the Palestinian Authority to go along with the US/Israeli plan to deep-six the UN’s Goldstone Report on Israeli war crimes committed during Israel’s inhuman military attack on the defenseless civilian population in the Gaza Ghetto.

The US Ministry of Truth is delivering the Obama administration’s propaganda that Iran only notified the IAEA of its “secret” new nuclear facility because Iran discovered that US intelligence had discovered the “secret” facility. This propaganda is designed to undercut the fact of Iran’s compliance with the Safeguards Agreement and to continue the momentum for a military attack on Iran.

The Nobel committee has placed all its hopes on a bit of skin color.

“War is Peace” is now the position of the formerly antiwar organization, Code Pink. Code Pink has decided that women’s rights are worth a war in Afghanistan.

When justifications for war become almost endless--oil, hegemony, women’s rights, democracy, revenge for 9/11, denying bases to al Qaeda and protecting against terrorists--war becomes the path to peace.

The Nobel committee has bestowed the prestige of its Peace Prize on Newspeak and Doublethink.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Internet Death List


Internet Death List

By: Peter Chamberlin

The human race must learn to be more than just cattle. We move like a herd, we think like a herd, we are controlled like a herd. We are about to be stampeded into thousands of slaughterhouses, just like the end of all livestock herds.

Perhaps we are more accurately compared to industrious ants in a global ant farm? We are trapped in an enclosed environment by an unseen sadistic hand, which collapses our carefully dug tunnels and incinerates us with magnifying glasses. Many independent ants try to get a glimpse of our tormentors, spending hours speculating about the motives of those who so cruelly command our fate. It is important to our overlords that they identify who all of these free-thinking rebellious ants are, in order that they might be marked and sorted-out for termination.

The masters of our universe always follow this pattern in stamping-out resistance to their immoral plans. The American government has carefully planned for the elimination of all those who resist their master plan to dominate all things on this earth. Through covert operations with code names like Phoenix, Condor and Gladio, they have methodically used torture, terrorism and murder to identify and eliminate all potential left/liberal resistance to its ultra right-wing plans for allied nations.

According to researcher John Dinges, at the center of each of these CIA terror campaigns was a data collection system, used to collect the lists for the death squads to target. The idea was always to use covert agents to artificially stimulate the production of an organized left, in order to identify all those who might one day be compelled to rise in opposition. While the liberal resistance rose-up, the hard-core right (which was a reflection of the US government’s belief system) was massively built-up, waiting for the inevitable day of conflict.

In America today, we see the same game plan being playing-out. When the liberal resistance explodes in reaction to the sight of the slaughterhouse, coming into view, then the herd will be culled, removing all the free-thinking trouble-makers who resist the stampede. To that end, lists have been drawn-up of war-resisters, in preparation for the round-up. The Internet was given to the American people for just that purpose.

The American resisters are self-identifying themselves by their Internet searches and activities, in effect, signing their names to subversive lists every time they surf conspiracy or antiwar sites, or dare to express themselves on any forum. This is the sinister motive behind the seemingly benign creation of the Internet. Every technological innovation in communications is co-opted into servicing the malignant government plans through the insertion of “backdoors” and the secret installation of government software.

The Patriot Act provided the long-awaited opportunity to launch a nationwide dragnet to find the new radicals. Mass surveillance of all the American people was authorized. All phone calls and emails will soon be monitored to compile lists of growing personal networks. This will help the government to identify potential radicals who are not yet politically active, or those who do not use the Internet. All the plans for replacing democracy with the police (martial law, FEMA camps, FISA bill) are steps that have been taken in preparation for the day when the people will justify the use of these fascist measures against them, in reaction to the bombing of Iran, another “false flag” terror attack, a general uprising, or some other undefined “emergencies.”

The Internet itself is the “backdoor” into the most private secrets of every web surfer. Not only is the Internet the backdoor, but it serves as an instrument for subversive agitation, for agents provocateurs to cultivate “extremist beliefs systems,” and the spreading of radicalization, just as the government claims in its public witch hunt, known as the “Homegrown Terrorism Act.” But the real hidden issue, that the grand inquisitors of the homegrown radical hunt will not examine is – how much of the radicalization and the extremist beliefs are the natural products of moral outrage and acts of self-defense, and much of it is the product of secret government agencies’ handiwork, meant to inflame a radical leftist movement?

How much of the division today within the antiwar and anti-fascist movements has been caused by covert disinformation agents, sowing half-true government propaganda? How many of the divisions in the 911 Truth Movement were manufactured by these agents of division? The movement cannot unite around a central issue because every issue has been splintered. This is evidence that the government’s secret plans are succeeding. If we cannot unite around a common understanding of events, including the identification of the real masters of America, before they give that dreaded final order (for us), then there will be no immovable mass of united Americans standing squarely in the path of their incoming irresistible force.

Who are the conspirators? Are the principle powers behind the plot to be described as international bankers, Zionists, Illuminati, or some mysterious combination of all of them, as has been described in detail by former British spy John Coleman, in “Committee of 300”? Elements of all these subversive secretive groups are definitely the financial powers driving the New World Order, but, on another level, they are merely pawns as well, dancing to the tunes of the CIA puppeteers. All lesser conspiracies must be subject to one primary driving group of plotters. Many (if not most) of the conspiracy sites on the Internet are agency creations, serving to divide and mislead the real truth-seekers in a thousand different directions. The right-wing conspiracy against freedom is driven by leftist impersonators.

Many of the sources of new conspiracy theories keep turning-out to have connections to various intelligence agencies, like Coleman, who is alleged to have been a member of MI6. This calls his veracity into question, especially considering that his work largely ignores the Zionist connection to world events, blaming everything on the super-secret “Committee,” that he alone knows the inner workings thereof.

Another questionable source of alternative conspiracy theories was Joe Vialls (a.k.a. “Ari Ben-Menashe,” formerly of the Israeli Mossad). His constant usage of insider information to support his wild theories, such as Israel’s military plans for Iraq’s oil pipelines led many people to question his work. His “Operation Shekhinah” report was validated after the US invasion of Iraq. His report on the Falklands War about gigantic new oil fields was confirmed by recent reports of vast oil fields recently discovered off the coast of Brazil. Vialls later discredited himself with exposes which never came true, like a planned al Qaida attack on the US using airliners spreading ricin, and another called “Fortress America,” which allegedly involved 250,000 Israeli assassins in the United States.

What really destroyed Joe’s credibility with the 911 movement was his attempt to cover-up CIA and Mossad involvement in the attacks, blaming them instead upon the French, the Russians and the Germans. He ignored the obvious fact that America and Israel had wanted the war on terrorism, which the terrorist attacks would justify. His theory was that the attack on the New York financial center was revenge committed upon the Zionist bankers, intended to disrupt their oil pipeline steal underway in Central Asia.

In spite of all of this, Joe Vialls provided invaluable insights into the countless intrigues unfolding around pipelines and oil fields. Just as his information on Iraqi pipelines and South American oil fields proved to be true and very helpful in understanding conspiracy motives in the war on terrorism, his revelations concerning conflict with Russia over Central Asian oil and gas fields help us to understand the benefits to be obtained from our standoff with Putin. As hard as it may be to believe, the continuity of freedom in the Western world may very well rest in the hands of a former general of the KGB.

If Joe Vialls was really a Mossad mole, then why did he base his theories about the Israeli connection to the war on terrorism on the darkest anti-Semitic beliefs, making his work unreadable to a majority of Americans? His theories concerning the inner workings of the conspiracy are worth examining, regardless of how his seemingly racist views on the importance and rank of the Zionists in the plot have been portrayed.

Joe’s version of the conspiracy known as the “war on terror” –

“The Jewish State is a true parasite, wholly dependent on massive American funding in order to survive. Remove that funding either intentionally or accidentally, and the Jewish State would be overrun and destroyed in a matter of months…

So what is a poor parasite to do, when its host appears to be running out of the fiscal nourishment it depends on for its very survival? Most normal parasites would seek out a new host, but this is an impossible task for the Jewish State. There is simply no other country on earth capable of generating sufficient revenue to cope with the greed and corruption in Tel Aviv.”

In Joe’s view, the coming collapse of the American economy would take Israel down with us. It was therefore imperative for both Israel and America that the United States seize the Middle Eastern oil fields and pending pipeline routes, in order to base the American/Israeli economies on this new source of unlimited wealth. Israel was to become the “new Rotterdam,” the hub of oil world, even as Rotterdam was the axis of the world’s diamond market. Despite Vialls’ anti-Israeli views, even though the war on terrorism was exactly what America and Israel desired, he maintained that:

“9/11 was a calculated high-tech surgical strike against the Zionist banking heart of New York City,” [carried-out by the French, Russian and German intelligence services]

It is obvious that Joe Vialls was correct about American and Israeli goals, to seize the oil fields of the Middle East and the Caspian Sea region, in order to pipe this strategic resource away from Russia and China, into American tankers and the strategic reserves that we maintain for Israel. His contentions about the power of “New York (Jewish) money” are also correct. The fascist ethnic-cleansing policies of the Israeli military did provide the bloody template that was to be used throughout the war on terrorism, in order to subjugate and rob the Muslim people. It seems that most of his reporting was usually dead-on, except when he relied on intelligence leaks from inside the Israeli establishment, which then proved to be misinformation.

As far as his most startling claims in “Fortress America,” about the secret army of 250,000 Israeli war veterans being sent to the US, to eliminate the targeted enemies of Israel and the patriot militias, only time will tell, whether he was right or wrong. But we must keep in mind, that America’s radicals and extremists are being targeted to be rounded-up and eliminated by some right-wing force. This hardcore group of right-wing killers may as well be Israelis.

Whether the conspiracy against American freedom, known as the New World Order, is the culmination of an ancient Jewish conspiracy to elevate a group of men who claim to be “God’s chosen people,” therefore God’s representatives upon this earth, or merely an extensive intelligence operation that has co-opted this ancient conspiracy, making it the centerpiece of its plans, is still uncertain. One thing that is certain, is that the writer of these words, and all of you who read these words have been marked for “disappearance,” or termination. In the end, it will matter very little about the nationality of the man who shoves the gun in our faces, for whoever he proves to be, he will surely be an immoral monster.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

The Zionist Gang that Bankrupted General Motors



Ezra Merkin became a controlling owner of Israel's Bank Leumi shortly before he got his hands on GMAC in 2006. Here he shakes the hand of the notorious war criminal Ariel Sharon as he hands him a check for $500 million. Ehud Olmert (center) held secret meetings in New York City on September 10, 2001. Merkin's private Israeli bank has a branch in Switzerland that contains billions of stolen dollars held in secret numbered accounts....

http://newsfromthewest.blogspot.com/

General Motors did not fall due to natural forces. Like the twin towers on 9-11, GM was taken down. Like 9-11, GM was sabotaged from the inside. The corporate raiders who took down GM are part of the same network of Jewish Zionists who brought down the World Trade Center.

How much is the truth about the huge financial and terror crimes changing our world worth to you?


The bankruptcy of General Motors (GM) is very similar to the collapse of the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9-11. Both catastrophic events are described in the controlled media as having occurred due to natural forces, while actually they are both the results of sabotage carried out by insiders. In both cases, the people who brought down the operation were Trojan Horses, people who had bought their way into positions of control in order to destroy them. The people behind the destruction of GM and the WTC are corporate raiders of the worst kind.

General Motors did not simply collapse as a result of market forces; it was bankrupted by corporate raiders who had infiltrated the company and taken control of its finances. Likewise, the evidence indicates that the twin towers of the World Trade Center did not collapse due to the stresses associated with the plane crashes; they were prepared in advance to be demolished using extremely powerful explosives, including tons of nano-thermite, or super-thermite. This was facilitated by the people who had obtained control of the towers shortly before 9-11, namely Larry Silverstein and the former Israeli commando Frank Lowy.

What is most remarkable is that these events are closely related. The same people are involved in the conspiracy to plunder and destroy both the World Trade Center and General Motors. This article identifies some of the key people and reveals the strategy behind the destruction of one of America's oldest companies.

BANKRUPTING GENERAL MOTORS

General Motors Corp. filed for bankruptcy on June 2, 2009, as the Zionist-run Obama administration provided unprecedented federal funding and oversight. The bankruptcy filing by GM was the third-largest in American history and the largest ever in U.S. manufacturing. Now that GM is facing restructuring, its assets will be taken over for pennies on the dollar. The notorious corporate raider Carl C. Icahn, for example, is reportedly looking at taking over Delphi Chassis Systems.

So, how did GM go bankrupt? If one looks at the sales figures for GM, it simply does not make sense. In 2007, GM was the largest producer of vehicles in the world, manufacturing 13 percent of the total, and had the largest slice of the U.S. car and truck market with 23.4 percent of domestic sales.


In 2007, GM led in global production and U.S. market share. Graphics from Wikinvest.

Globally, GM sold 9.4 million cars and trucks in 2007, an increase of 3 percent over 2006. GM's 2007 tally was, in fact, the second best global sales total in the company's 100-year history and marked the third consecutive year the company had sold more than 9 million vehicles. That doesn't sound like a company on the brink of collapse, does it? In its 100-year history GM had been through much worse downturns, such as the Great Depression and the Second World War, yet GM managed to survive and thrive. What is so different about the management at GM in the past few years that it caused America's biggest auto manufacturer to go into bankruptcy despite three consecutive bumber years of global sales?

George Richard (Rick) Wagoner became president and chief executive officer of GM on June 1, 2000. The value of GM stock started the month of May 2000 at its peak of over $93 per share. The day Wagoner became CEO the stock finished at $69.81. By the end of the year it was worth less than $51 per share. GM stock had fallen to about $35 when Wagoner was elected chairman on May 1, 2003. Why promote a CEO who was clearly taking the company down the drain?

Despite the falling stock price, Wagoner remained CEO and chairman of GM until March 29, 2009. Under Wagoner's leadership GM suffered more than $85 billion in losses -- losing $82 billion in the last 4 years! Why wasn't Wagoner replaced earlier? How was GM selling more cars than ever but losing more and more money? It simply doesn't make sense.


Were his hands tied? Rick Wagoner (center) with Mark Neporent (left), COO of Cerberus, and Eric Feldstein (right), chief executive of GMAC and treasurer of General Motors Corp. This photo is from the 2006 announcement of the Cerberus deal for a majority stake in GMAC in which Bernard Madoff's partner-in-crime, J. Ezra Merkin, became chairman of GMAC. Is Wagoner responsible for $85 billion in losses at GM - or was he just a useful idiot?

In 2008, GM sold 8.35 million cars and trucks globally under the following brands: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, GM Daewoo, Holden, Hummer, Opel, Pontiac, Saab, Saturn, Vauxhall and Wuling. GM's largest market is the U.S., followed by China, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Canada, Russia, and Germany. Despite three years of record sales, GM lost $18.8 billion during the first 6 months of 2008; by late October, its stock had dropped 76 percent, and it was considering a merger with Chrysler.

At the time the GM-Chrysler merger was being considered, Chrysler was primarily owned (80.1 percent) by the private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, L.P., headed by Stephen A. Feinberg and Jacob Ezra Merkin. Cerberus is named after the mythological three-headed dog of Hell. It should be noted that Feinberg and Merkin also controlled General Motors Acceptance Corp. (GMAC), the financial services branch of GM.

GM sold 51 percent of GMAC in 2006 to Feinberg's private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management LP, and Jacob Ezra Merkin became chairman of GMAC. Had the merger gone through, Feinberg and Merkin would have probably become majority owners of both GM and Chrysler. This appears to have been the plan. Feinberg and Merkin, the owners of GMAC, had plundered and conspired to bring down GM so that they could take it over.

When Cerberus gained control of GMAC, they hurt GM's domestic sales by raising the credit requirements for car loans. Feinberg and Merkin reportedly raised the credit requirements so high that they caused a very sizable chunk of sales to be lost due to customers' inability to secure financing. Cerberus reportedly used this tactic to pressure GM into selling or trading their remaining stake in GMAC.


Ezra Merkin became a controlling owner of Israel's Bank Leumi shortly before he got his hands on GMAC in 2006. Here he shakes the hand of the notorious war criminal Ariel Sharon as he hands him a check for $500 million. Ehud Olmert (center) held secret meetings in New York City on September 10, 2001. Merkin's private Israeli bank has a branch in Switzerland that contains billions of stolen dollars held in secret numbered accounts.

Merkin is clearly a criminal. He is one of the key players of the multi-billion dollar criminal fraud carried out by Bernard Madoff. Merkin secretly diverted untold billions to Madoff's fraudulent investment fund. One of Merkin's funds lost $1.8 billion of investor cash with Madoff. Merkin was seen as "the Golden Boy controlling the Golden Goose."

Feinberg and Merkin were also controlling co-owners of Israel's Bank Leumi, which had been privatized in 2005 under finance minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Bank Leumi also has off-shore banks and a branch in Switzerland in which billions of dollars are held in secret numbered accounts.

It was reported on December 30, 2008, that the U.S. Treasury would provide $6 billion more for GMAC, headed by Merkin and the extremely secretive Feinberg. Feinberg is so secretive his Who's Who biography says he is deceased!


Stephen A. Feinberg, Ezra Merkin's partner-in-crime.

The U.S. Treasury was reportedly buying a $5 billion stake in GMAC and lending $1 billion to GM. This "loan" was in addition to $13.4 billion of taxpayer dollars the Treasury had already lent to GM and Chrysler LLC. Once again, a plundered and bankrupted company was being "bailed-out" with taxpayer funds.

Merkin had been chairman of GMAC since November 2006. GMAC reportedly lost nearly $8 billion while Merkin was in charge. Despite Merkin's huge losses at GMAC and his involvement in the Madoff criminal scam, the U.S. government evidently had no problem providing billions of taxpayer dollars to Merkin, whose Ariel Fund was one of the largest funds feeding billions to Bernie Madoff's financial black hole. Madoff reportedly "lost" some $50 billion, or more.

Jacob Ezra Merkin, orthodox Jew and devoted Zionist, finally resigned as chairman of GMAC on January 9, 2009. How was Merkin allowed to remain in control of the privately-held GMAC operation for so long despite his history of financial fraud?

WHO RAN GMAC?

GMAC is a very interesting operation. A wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors since 1919, GMAC provided customers with more than $1.4 trillion in credit to finance more than 162 million vehicles. Originally designed to provide financing for people buying GM vehicles, it branched out into other fields, such as real estate. GMAC Commercial Mortgage (GMACCM), for example, provided the funds for Larry Silverstein and the former Israeli commando Frank Lowy to take over the World Trade Center in July 2001. The towers served as the collateral. GMAC Commercial Mortgage sold $563 million in bonds backed by a loan to Silverstein Properties for its purchase of the towers. If Silverstein and Lowy were part of the conspiracy to destroy the World Trade Center, the people controlling GMACCM would probably also be. Who was controlling the purse strings at GMAC in 2001 when Silverstein was negotiating to obtain control of the World Trade Center?


Larry Silverstein, here with his daughter Lisa, made billions of dollars from the destruction of the World Trade Center. He is the former chairman of the UJA-Federation of New York, the largest Zionist fund-raising organization in the world.

At GMAC, the person in charge of the money was Eric A. Feldstein, born in Brookline, Mass. in 1959. Feldstein had worked in the office of the treasurer at GM Corp. from 1981-91 and was regional treasurer in Europe from 1991-93. In 1993, he returned to New York as assistant treasurer. In March 1996, he was named executive vice president and chief financial officer of GMAC and chairman of the GMAC Mortgage Group, where he oversaw corporate activities responsible for general finance, audit, and worldwide borrowings.

Feldstein became treasurer of General Motors in November 1997, and was elected vice president the following month. In June 2001, Feldstein was named General Motors' vice president, finance, and corporate treasurer. When GM and GMAC failed in 2008, Feldstein went to work for Feinberg and Merkin at Cerberus, joining the team named after the three-headed dog of Hell. At Cerberus, Feldstein was made executive vice president.


Eric Feldstein, the treasurer of GM, laughs with Rick Wagoner and Mark Neporent, COO of Cerberus, as the Zionist-run fund took majority control of GMAC. By this point, GM was well on its way to losing $85 billion - all during Feldstein's term as GM corporate treasurer and vice president in charge of finance.

Eric Feldstein is the son of Donald Feldstein, a high-ranking member of a number of Zionist organizations in New York and New Jersey. The elder Feldstein is one year older than Larry Silverstein and has a long history of leadership in the same Zionist organization as Silverstein. Donald Feldstein was an executive director of the United Jewish Appeal-Federation Jewish Philanthropies in New York City from 1976-81. This is the huge Zionist fund-raising organization that Larry Silverstein headed as the chairman of the board and where he is an honorary board member. The connection between Donald Feldstein and Larry Silverstein at this Zionist organization certainly played a role in Eric Feldstein's decision to use GMAC money to back Silverstein's bid for the World Trade Center. It is through such Zionist organizations like the UJA-Federation and the secretive order of B'nai B'rith, an international organization of Jewish Freemasons, that the Zionist network functions. In this way actions and decisions that affect whole nations can be made without anyone outside the "community" being aware.

GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corp., under the leadership of Donald Feldstein's son, provided an $800 million loan to fellow Zionists Silverstein and Lowy to back their bid for the soon-to-be privatized World Trade Center in the summer of 2001. This privatization deal, initiated by the Zionist Ronald Lauder and managed by Lewis Eisenberg of the Port Authority, was finalized at the end of July 2001. The WTC complex was finally put into private hands – Zionist hands – only 6 weeks before it was demolished and pulverized with super-thermite.

FELDSTEIN JOINS ETON

After being fired from GMAC, Eric Feldstein went to work for Cerberus in March 2008. Three months later he became CFO at Eton Park Capital Management. Eton Park is a hedge fund run by 42-year-old Eric M. Mindich, formerly with Goldman Sachs, and Alan R. Batkin, the vice chairman of the fund. Batkin, 64, is the senior partner at Eton Park. Although Feldstein lost billions as the head of GMAC and was fired because he had destroyed the 90-year-old company, Mindich and Batkin made him chief financial officer at Eton Park. Feldstein's colossal failure at GMAC evidently did not bother them. He was clearly being rewarded for a job well done.

Alan Batkin, the vice chairman at Eton Park, is very highly connected. Batkin was, for example, vice chairman of Kissinger Associates Inc. from 1990 through 2006. It is, however, his executive positions at some of the biggest companies of Israel, such as Israel Discount Bank (IDB) and Discount Investment Corporation, Ltd., that reveal the intense Israeli character of Eton Park. (The IDB has been privatized and is also closely tied to the Madoff scam.)

Alan R. Batkin is a member of the board of governors of Tel Aviv University and is treasurer of PEC Israel Economic Corp. (part of Discount Investment Corporation, Ltd.) where he has served as CEO, president, and director. He also served as the Chief Executive Officer and President of Orama Ltd. (a venture capital firm founded in 1999 to support companies in the Israeli technology sector; a subsidiary of IDB Group, Ltd.)

From 1972 to 1990, Batkin was an investment banker at Lehman Brothers, where he a Managing Director for 14 years. Batkin has been, since 1999, a director of Overseas Shipholding Group Inc. (OSG), which owns and manages a large fleet of transatlantic oil tankers. As a director of OSG, Batkin works with Solomon Merkin, the brother of Jacob Ezra Merkin. Their father, Hermann Merkin, was one of the owners of the company along with the Recanati family of Israel Discount Bank. Batkin is also vice chairman and a director of Hasbro Inc. since 1992.


Solomon Merkin

Batkin was a director of Infinity Broadcasting Corp. since April 1992. Infinity provided popular talk radio with a distinctly pro-Israel point of view. Foremost among Infinity's talk show staff was Howard Stern, a vulgar and controversial radio personality. Other national radio performers employed by Infinity included Don Imus, Larry King, G. Gordon Liddy and Rush Limbaugh. Infinity merged with CBS Radio in 1997.

Alan Batkin is a scion of the intensely Zionist Batkin and Tenzer families and the son of Stanley Irving Batkin, a leading Zionist figure since the 1930s. Stanley Batkin is a recipient of Israel's Prime Minister's Medallion (1974) and the City of Jerusalem Medal (1976). These awards are given to Zionists for extraordinary service to Israel. The elder Batkin has served, since the founding of the state of Israel, as an executive of the following organizations (among many others): the Zionist Organization of America; the State of Israel Bond Committee; the Jewish Theological Seminary; State of Israel Bonds; Israel's Weizmann Institute of Science; Friends of Bezalel Academy of Arts & Design, Inc.; and Yeshiva University Museum.

Sources and Recommended Reading:


Bollyn, Christopher, "The Israeli Who Will Run the Obama White House," November 6, 2008


Bollyn, Christopher, "Update on Madoff's Guilty Plea," March 12, 2009


Bollyn, Christopher, "Who is Bernard Madoff, the man behind the $50 billion fraud?" updated March 24, 2009


General Motors Data, Wikinvest


General Motors' U.S. Sales History, Domestic Brands, 1908-2008, Automotive News, June 1, 2009


General Motors' Top Ten Markets in Europe, 2008"Obama gambles on reviving GM from bankruptcy," Reuters, June 2, 2009

MEMRI'S MISTRANSLATION


Things Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not do:

1) deny the Holocaust;
2) say that Israel should be wiped off the map;
3) develop a nuclear weapons program

Intro

With the Iranian election results disputed (a dispute that the incumbent will likely win), I think it’s important to revisit the American conventional wisdom about the Iran and its president. Suspicious sources and a lazy media echo-chamber have instilled many misconceptions into the American public’s mind about Iran. This is worrisome because such misconceptions leave the American public vulnerable for the type of hawkish manipulations that led us into the Iraq war, and so for that reason US attitudes towards Iran need reexamining.

Nuclear Weapons Program

Top among the controversies surrounding Iran is the issue of their nuclear development. One goal of Iran’s energy policy is to use nuclear energy for domestic energy needs so that more of Iran’s oil supplies can be diverted for foreign sale.

In developing their domestic nuclear energy program Iran has often skirted certain IAEA regulations, with the ostensible reason being that strict adherence to the rules has allowed the US to sabotage nuclear development contracts forged between Iran and other countries. This evasion of IAEA directives has been the primary basis on which Iran has been accused of having a nuclear weapons program.

However, in 2007, part of a United States National Intelligence Estimate was leaked that concluded that Iran had not worked on a nuclear weapons program since 1993. Ironically, Iran’s first nuclear weapons programs was facilitated by America in the 1950s.

“Vanish from the page of time” vs. “wiped from the map”

Since he was elected in 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has received much criticism on his comments regarding Israel. The most famous of these was given in a speech called “A World Without Zionism” in which he quoted a line from Ayatollah Khomeini.

An improper English translation painted him as calling for Israel to be “wiped from the map.” When word got out there was an international uproar. As it happens, in Persian there is no such idiom. More accurate translations read “The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem must [vanish from] the page of time.”

The focus of the speech was a hopeful vision of a world free from Western oppression of Muslims, and, in context, it is clear that this is not policy—much less a military threat. In fact, Iran has never made a military threat against Israel. Israel has against Iran, though—many, many times.

Holocaust Denial

Ahmadinejad has also met sharp international criticism over his comments on the Holocaust. The widespread and misleading allegation is that he denies that the Holocaust ever occurred.

It is undoubtedly true that Ahmadinejad has raised some uncomfortable questions about the Holocaust. Indeed, in December 2006, he even convened a conference to explore historical evidence for the Holocaust, and he also occasionally referred to people making “a myth” of the Holocaust.

However, as Iran Specialist Professor Shiraz Dossa states, while Ahmadinejad’s “rhetoric has been excessive and provocative,” he“has not denied the Holocaust or proposed Israel’s liquidation. What Ahmadinejad has questioned is the mythologizing, the sacralization, of the Holocaust.”

Ahmadinejad’s inflammatory statements are all in the context of the Palestinian struggle. The questions are put in terms of skepticism towards the Holocaust’s use in justifying Zionist colonialism in Palestine. The intellectual exploration, undoubtedly born of a deep, sometimes justified, mistrust for the West, has never crossed the line into outright denial of the Holocaust.

When such statements have been conflated with anti-Semitism, Ahmadinejad has repeatedly clarified his position with statements like “creating an objection against the Zionists doesn’t mean that there are objections against the Jewish.”

Conclusion

Undoubtedly, the recent election dispute in Iran leaves one questioning the democratic scruples of the country’s leadership. Ahmadinejad’s Iran is far from the idyllic liberal democracy. But, however great the fervor for Ahmadinejad’s opponent, one need be careful not to lose sight of how unfairly Western caricatures of Iran have influenced attitudes toward the incumbent worldwide—a habit long in the making and likely slow to change.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Mir-Hossein Mousavi's Iran/Contra Connection?



What do Michael Ledeen (the American 'neo-conservative'), Mir-Hossein Mousavi (the Iranian presidential candidate of 'chagne') and Adnan Khashoggi (the opulent Saudi Arabian jet-setter) have in common?

They are all good friends and associates of Manuchehr Ghorbanifar (an Iranian arms merchant, an alleged MOSSAD double agent, and a key figure in the Iran/Contra Affair, the arms-for-hostages deals between Iran and the Reagan administration). In one or two, at most three, degrees of separation, these people hung out in the same circles and very likely drank to the same toasts.

You can find all kinds of trivia about Ghorbanifar in the Walsh Report on the Iran/Contra affair. In Chapter 8, for example, we learn:
"Ghorbanifar, an Iranian exile and former CIA informant who had been discredited by the agency as a fabricator, was a driving force behind these proposals [for arms-for-hostages deal];" or, "Ghorbanifar, as broker for Iran, borrowed funds for the weapons payments from Khashoggi, who loaned millions of dollars to Ghorbanifar in "bridge financing'" for the deals. Ghorbanifar repaid Khashoggi with a 20 percent commission after being paid by the Iranians," (see: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_08.htm).
Here is a bit from an article by Time magazine that shows Ghorbanifar's circle of associates; it is from a January 1987 cover story (The Murky World of Weapons Dealers; January 19, 1987):
"By [Ghorbanifar's] own account he was a refugee from the revolutionary government of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini, which confiscated his businesses in Iran, yet he later became a trusted friend and kitchen adviser to Mir Hussein Mousavi, Prime Minister in the Khomeini government. Some U.S. officials who have dealt with Ghorbanifar praise him highly. Says Michael Ledeen, adviser to the Pentagon on counterterrorism: "[Ghorbanifar] is one of the most honest, educated, honorable men I have ever known." Others call him a liar who, as one puts it, could not tell the truth about the clothes he is wearing," (emphasis added).
This second bit is from Chapter 1 of Walsh Iran/Contra Report: (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_01.htm)
"On or about November 25, 1985, Ledeen received a frantic phone call from Ghorbanifar, asking him to relay a message from [Mir-Hossein Mousavi] the prime minister of Iran to President Reagan regarding the shipment of the wrong type of HAWKs. Ledeen said the message essentially was "we've been holding up our part of the bargain, and here you people are now cheating us and tricking us and deceiving us and you had better correct this situation right away.''
[...]
"In early May, North and CIA annuitant George Cave met in London with Ghorbanifar and Nir, where the groundwork finally was laid for a meeting between McFarlane and high-level Iranian officials, as well as financial arrangements for the arms deal. Among the officials Ghorbanifar said would meet with an American delegation were the president and prime minister [Mousavi] of Iran and the speaker of the Iranian parliament," (emphasis added).
And to remind how Michael Ledeen became involved in the Iran/Contra affair in 1985, here is a bit from Chapter 15 of Walsh Report (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_15.htm):
"[McFarlane] authorized Michael A. Ledeen, a part-time NSC consultant on anti-terrorism, to ask Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres to check on a report that the Israelis had access to good sources on Iran. By early August 1985, Ledeen's talks had led to a direct approach by Israeli officials to McFarlane, to obtain President Reagan's approval to ship U.S.-supplied TOW missiles to Iran in exchange for the release of American hostages in Beirut. McFarlane said he briefed the President, Regan, Shultz, Weinberger, Casey and perhaps the Vice President about the proposal in July and August 1985.40 McFarlane said that Casey recommended that Congress not be informed of the arms sales."
There you have it. Now, I'm no investigative journalist, so I'll leave it to the professionals to dig deeper into this.

But, I do have to wonder aloud: Seeing how we cannot ignore his 'neo-con' credentials and that Michael Ledeen maintained his very good relations with Ghorbanifar, (who at least used to be) a good friend of Mir-Hossein Mousavi (the 'candidate of change' in the Iranian presidential elections); and given the support that Mousavi's candidacy has been receiving from the American 'moderates', maybe this kind of 'change' is the 'regime change' the Americans have had in mind for Iran?

Monday, June 15, 2009

The Judeo-Christian oxymoron or the real clash of civilizations


The Judeo-Christian oxymoron or the real clash of civilizations

Andrew Winkler, The Rebel Media Group

Whenever it comes to the dreadful Mid-East conflict, Zionst controlled media and politicians like to invoke Judeo-Christianity as opposed to radical Islam. It’s one of those deliberately misconstrued expressions that Jews like to use in order to confuse and manipulate us. They know very well that what the term ‘Judeo-Christianity’ implies, a common Judeo-Christian heritage does not exist.

Christian churches as we know them are the last thing that Jesus had on his mind when he lead his revolt against the oral traditions of the Pharisees. What after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple was codified as the mother of all hate literature, the Babylonian Talmud, was nothing short of a Satanic heresy of the Old Testament or Torah.

Real nature of Christianity

When killing Jesus didn’t stop his followers from challenging the Pharisees, one of their top inquisitors, Apostle Paul, came up with the brilliant idea of redirecting their missionary efforts towards the Gentiles. To make the new ‘faith’ more palatable for Gentiles and less of a threat to the Pharisees, Paul and his fellow moles incorporated all sorts of popular elements from other religions. The Egyptian Isis cult became the model for the Christian adoration of the Virgin Mary, Jesus miracles are copyright infringements of the tales of the Greek God Hercules, and Roman Mithraism was ruthlessly gutted for the layout of Christian churches, liturgies and even the celebration of Jesus’ birth. In fact it was common practice for Christians to simply kick the Mithrais people out of their temples and convert them to churches.

Christianity is Judaism minus the oral tradition of the Pharisees plus lots of features stolen of competing Mediterranean religions. The only part that Christians, Jews and – let’s not forget – Muslims supposedly share, have effectively been abandoned by the Jews, even though they will never admit that.. The Pharisees and – their modern descendents – the rabbis have always been quite frank about the fact that they are putting “the Law”, that is their perverted re-interpretations of the Torah, above “God’s word”.[1]

In spite of this brilliant strategy of the Pharisees, of fighting off Jesus’ challenge, Christianity, their own creation, was still making inroads amongst Jews. Too harsh and hateful was the rabbinic oppression and too attractive Jesus proposition of universal love and forgiveness. That’s why they had to create a competing faith, Islam, designed to destroy or weaken the Christian threat. Muslims all over the world are amazed by the rapid victory of the faithful troops against the collapsing Roman Empire.[2] What they don’t realize is that this victory was financially and politically engineered by Jewish bankers. This also explains why Jews had such a privileged position in the Arab and Ottoman empires and were routinely entrusted with the day to day running of the countries.

When the Catholics kings of Spain forced the Jews to convert or move to Holland, things massively changed. Suddenly there was a whole group of rich and powerful Jews who no longer could profit from helping the Muslim rulers to oppress the local Christians. So they quickly destroyed the Muslim monopoly on the profitable slave and spice trade, which is how European colonialism came about. The raise of England and Holland was the direct result of the Spanish decision to kick out the Jews.

The Jew-engineered cock fight between Christians and Muslims continued. When England converted from coal fired to oil fired war ships, it was deemed necessary to take over control of Arab oil. The Young Turks movement of crypto-Jews were created and bankrolled by London bankers, with the sole purpose of destroying the Ottoman Empire. To upset Western Christians with the Turks, a massive genocide was organized on Christian Armenians. The Zionist movement was lobbied to choose Palestine as location for the future Jewish State. Germany was enticed to enter into a war with England to put pressure on the Brits to help the Zionists fulfill their dream of Greater Israel, which conveniently extends from the Euphrates to the Nile. When Britain gave in to the pressure in the Balfour declaration, Germany’s Jews did their bit to sabotage the German war effort.

The raise of Hitler

The only problem was how to bully enough European Jews into moving to Palestine to effectively control the Middle-East.. That’s why Hitler came along, the real father of the Jewish State. His raise to power was bankrolled by Jewish bankers. The last thing he was going to do is kill all European Jews. Rounding up the Jews and imprisoning them into concentration camps was done for two reasons: to protect them from the Allied terror bombing and to prepare for their emigration to the future state of Israel. The Nazis in cooperation with the Jewish press did a wonderful job at making Europe’s Jews feel unwelcome, even fear for their lives.

The war on terror

A lot of people argue whether the war on terror is a war for oil or a war for Israel, as if their was a difference. For the Jewish bankers war is business and business is war. The meeting rooms of Jewish corporations are called ‘war rooms’ for a good reason. Jewish business predators like Bill Gates are known for their aggressive ‘take no prisoners’ approach and have no qualm about profiteering from war. The Jew-engineered clash of civilizations is nothing but the latest version of the two thousand year old Jewish war for profit. It’s time for Christian and Muslim families to learn their lessons and stop providing the cannon fodder for the Jews.

Footnotes:

[1] Even without the Pharisean heresies, the Torah is quiet a piece of work. It’s full of lust for blood, cruel punishment and genocide against the perceived enemies of the Chosen ones. You’d think you can’t top that kind of hatred, until you study the Talmud. If you don’t believe me on that matter, I suggest you read Michael Hoffman’s “Judaism Discovered”.

[2] Jews don’t really learn from their mistakes. Their tendency of creating new enemies to fight old enemies they created themselves always bites them in the back, like it does today with Hezbollah and Hamas, which were supposed to weaken the PLO.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

The History of the Financial Crisis


Here are a few quotes which may explain at least part of what's going on financially:


“Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce... And when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.”
- President James Garfield (he was assassinated within 4 months).

"If the people only understood the rank injustice of our Money and Banking system, there would be a revolution before morning."
- Andrew Jackson

“[Banks] do not really pay out loans from the money they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional money would be created. What they do when they make loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits to the borrowers' transaction accounts."
- 1960s Chicago Federal Reserve Bank booklet entitled “Modern Money Mechanics”

"You do not have too many workers, you have too little money in circulation, and that which circulates, all bears the endless burden of unrepayable debt and usury...[the Colonial Scrip was issued] with our money [with no interest owed to anyone.]”
- Benjamin Franklin, explaining to the British parliament why the American colonies were prosperous while Britain experienced rampant unemployment and poverty.

"[It was] the poverty caused by the bad influence of the English bankers on the Parliament which has caused in the colonies hatred of the English and . . . the Revolutionary War."
- Benjamin Franklin

"There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt."
- John Adams

"The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes."
- Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, 1952

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies...The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the Government, to whom it properly belongs."
- Thomas Jefferson

"A power has risen up in the government greater than the people themselves, consisting of many and various powerful interests, combined in one mass, and held together by the cohesive power of the vast surplus in banks."
- John C. Calhoun, Vice President of the United States

"There is an evil which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by…corporations. The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses."
- James Madison

“Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are US government institutions They are not… they are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the US. for the benefit of themselves and their foreign and domestic swindlers, and rich and predatory money lenders. The sack of the United States by the Fed is the greatest crime in history. Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers, but the truth is the Fed has usurped the government. It controls everything here and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will”.
-Congressman Charles McFadden, Chairman, House Banking and Currency Committee, June 10, 1932

“The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is eager to enter into close relationship with the Bank for International Settlements….The conclusion is impossible to escape that the State and Treasury Departments are willing to pool the banking system of Europe and America, setting up a world financial power independent of and above the Government of the United States… The United States under present conditions will be transformed from the most active of manufacturing nations into a consuming and importing nation with a balance of trade against it.”
- Congressman McFadden, quoted in the New York Times (June 1930)

"The real truth of the matter is that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government since the days of Andrew Jackson."
- Franklin D Roosevelt

“This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the defects remedied very soon.”
-Robert Hemphill, Credit manager of Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta.

“The Founding Fathers of this great land had no difficulty whatsoever understanding the agenda of bankers, and they frequently referred to them and their kind as, quote, ‘friends of paper money. They hated the Bank of England, in particular, and felt that even were we successful in winning our independence from England and King George, we could never truly be a nation of freemen, unless we had an honest money system. Through ignorance, but moreover, because of apathy, a small, but wealthy, clique of power brokers have robbed us of our Rights and Liberties, and we are being raped of our wealth. We are paying the price for the near-comatose levels of complacency by our parents, and only God knows what might become of our children, should we not work diligently to shake this country from its slumber! Many a nation has lost its freedom at the end of a gun barrel, but here in America, we just decided to hand it over voluntarily. Worse yet, we paid for the tyranny and usurpation out of our own pockets with “voluntary” tax contributions and the use of a debt-laden fiat currency!”.
-Peter Kershaw, author of the 1994 booklet “Economic Solutions” “I have never seen more Senators express discontent with their jobs … we have been accomplices to doing something terrible and unforgivable to this wonderful country… we have given our children a legacy of bankruptcy. We have defrauded our country to get ourselves elected”.
-John Danforth, Republican Senator from Missouri, in an interview in The Arizona Republic on April 22, 1992

These statements were made during hearings of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, September 30, 1941.

Members of the Federal Reserve Board call themselves “Governors”. Governor Eccles was Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board at the time of these hearings.

Congressman Patman: “How did you get the money to buy those two billion dollars worth of Government securities in 1933?”

Governor Eccles: “Out of the right to issue credit money.”

Patman: “And there is nothing behind it, is there, except our Government’s credit?”

Eccles: “That is what our money system is. If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldn’t be any money.”

Congressman Fletcher: “Chairman Eccles, when do you think there is a possibility of returning to a free and open market, instead of this pegged and artificially controlled financial market we now have?”

Governor Eccles: “Never, not in your lifetime or mine.”

"The privileged princes of these new economic dynasties, thirsting for power, reached out for control over government itself. They created a new despotism and wrapped it in the robes of legal sanction. ...And as a result the average man once more confronts the problem that faced the Minute Man....
- Franklin Roosevelt

"I care not what puppet (sits on) the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain's money supply controls the British empire, and I (when he ran the Bank of England) control the British money supply."
- Nathan Rothschild

Caveat: Most - but not all - of the quotes have been verified as historically accurate. For background on many of the quotes, see this.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

L'Etat palestinien est inévitable



L'Etat palestinien est inévitable! Elle a été revendiqué même par l'ONU en 1947 avant la création de l'Etat d'Israél en 1948!
Obama ne fait que rappeler les résolutions du Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU durant les dernières années.
Même les dirigeants sionistes ont même fini par reconnaitre ses vérités, des années aprés qu'eux même ont participé à la création de cet Etat, dont le premier responsable du Congrés juif international, Nahum Goldmann, qui dans son ouvrage qui reste d'actualité "Ou va Israël"? insiste sur la nécessité de sa création?
Liserz cet ouvrage, il est trés intéressant.

Pour ce qui est de la sémantique de "L'Etat juif" je vous recommande un livre trés intéressant du Professeur israélien Schomo Sand, intituté "Comment le peuple juif fut inventé"?
Dans un extrait révélateur, sans écrit :"Les juifs forment-ils un peuple? Contrairement à une idée perçue, la diaspora ne naquit pas de l'expulsion des hébreux de Palestine, mais de conversions successives en Afrique du Nord, en Europe du Sud et au proche Orient.".
Ces idées contenus dans ce livre intéressant, à mon humble connaissances historiques, remettent en cause globalement en détail, les thèses des idôles du Sionisme international, à leur tête bien sur son fondateur Théodor Hertzel!

Les détails contenus dans ce livre de Sand, selon ma première lecture, ébranlent parfaitement un des fondements de la pensée des sionistes, particulièrement la thèse qui voulait dire que "les juifs soient les descendants du royaume de David".
Selon Sand qui remet en cause cette "croyance juive" mais ne remet pas en cause comlétement la légiitimité de l'existance et de la souveraineté de l'Etat d'Israél,; cependant celui-ci se discrédite, soutient-il, par son caractère exclusivement ethnique, engendré par le "racisme" des idéologues sionistes.

Sand poursuit "Tout israélien sait, sans l'ombre d'un doute, que le peuple juif existe depuis qu'il a reçu la Torrah dans le Sinaï, et qu'il en est le descendant direct et exclusif (..) D'ou vient cette interprétation de l'histoire juive? Elle est l'oeuvre, depuis la seconde moitie du XX siècle, de talentueux reconstructeurs de l'histoire, du passé, dont l'imagination fertile a inventé, sur la base de morceaux de mémoire religieuse, juive et chrétienne, un enchaînement généalogique continu du peuple juif".

Selon toujours Sand, les historiens sionistes n'ont cessé, depuis, de réitérer ces "vérités bibliques", devenus nourriture quotidienne de l'éducation nationale. Mais voila qu'au cours des anées 1980, "la terre tremble, ébranlant ces mythes fondateurs de l'idéologie sionistes"!.
Contrairement aux idées véhiculées par les icônes du Sionisme, sand écrit "Les découvertes de la nouvelle archéologie contredisent la possibilité d'un grand exode au VIII siècle avant notre ère (..) A défaut d'un exil depuis la Palestine romanisée, d'où viennent les nombreux juifs qui peuplent le pourtour de la Méditerranée dès l'antiquité? De la révolte des Maccabées au IIe siècle avant notre ère, à la révolte de Bar-Kokhba, au IIe siècle après J.C, le judaïsme fut la première religion prosèlyte. les Asmonéens avaient déja converti de force les Iduméens du sud de la Judée et les Iturée de galilée, annexés au "peuple d'Israél".
Des vérités historiques qui demandent plus d'attention.

Le livre de Sand est à lire surement....


Jewish bankers have created all the wars in history.

This one in Iraq, especially. All the big wars of the last two
centuries. All the brushfires happening now. Perhaps you have lost
someone in one of these wars.

Perhaps not. Either way, you should know why they happen, because it
is your ignorant support that allows them to needlessly kill millions
of innocent people.

You have been deceived as to the reasons for these wars, your opinion
shaped by the limiting and slanting of all the information you have
received throughout your life, but most especially from the varied
categories of popular media (principally TV). It turns out that every
single one of these categories is controlled by Jews, from your
first-grade schoolbook to your post-graduate dissertation. And above
all, don't forget Hollywood, which has shaped the world mind in a
savagely Jewish way.

H.G. Wells said humankind's mental and moral progress stopped in the
1770s. That was when Meyer Rothschild began to capture the world's
finances with the fortune he made off the American Revolutionary War,
the first formula fracas in which both sides were funded by the same
source. This formula has been followed ever since, by which the
central banks buying the corruption of politicians enables them to
fleece the populace without regard for any kind of life, especially
human. This predatory and primitive penchant perhaps is the basic
human drive, but it has by no one been so ruthlessly and efficiently
practiced as by the current Jewish network of international banks and
funds, which are the depraved offspring of Rothschild and the Jewish
philosophy.

Why it is impossible for Jews to tell the truth

For a Jew to tell the truth about his heritage, he would have to admit
he is a poseur, pretending to be a citizen of one country or another
but really part of a secret cult plugged into the power structure that
has been created in every country using fraud, bribery, blackmail and
murder.

For a Jew to tell the truth about his heritage, he would have to
confess that his holy book slanders the ideal personality of Jesus
Christ in the most pornographic ways, and justifies doing the most
horrible things to people simply because they are not Jews. Jewish
teachings of both the Torah and Talmud preach a genocidal philosophy
of excrement and blood that will eventually destroy them, because the
gift always returns to the giver.

For a Jew to honestly tell what his tribe has done to the world would
cause him to be instantly murdered by the crowd, because he has
prostituted your daughters, killed your children, and ruined your
life's work .... no matter who you are .... if you're not a Jew. There
are many non-Jews who take the payoff, and participate in the millions
of deliberately diversionary trails that have greatly assisted the
Jewish cause, but if you're a Jew, you wouldn't want to talk about
them much, either, because, as the Talmud says, a Jew who reveals
Jewish secrets to a non-Jew must be killed. Actually, it says both of
them must be killed. It is that kind of book, and that kind of people.

For a Jew to tell you the real truth, he would have to tell you that
the greatest Jewish philosopher, Maimonides, said the all those
so-called human beings who are not Jewish must be either killed or
enslaved, and he was only echoing the many toxic tractates of the
Talmud, which drone on endlessly about the need to kill or enslave all
those who are not Jews.

What most non-Jews do not realize is that this objective has just
about been completely accomplished, and the stupid, sleeping,
exploited non-Jewish populace does not even realize it.

This is the true status of human evolution.

The Marrano phenomenon guarantees the doom of Jews ...

The term "Marrano" was coined for Jews who fled Spain and Portugal
during the Middle Ages after being forced to convert to Christianity.
Few people today really understand the the Inquisition was staged by
the Roman church to identify Jews who only pretended to convert, hence
also the term "conversos."

Such distinguished names as John D. Rockefeller, Theodore Roosevelt
and Fidel Castro are descended from Marrano Jews, who escaped to other
countries (principally the Muslim Ottoman Empire) in order to avoid
persecution. The persecution occurred because Jews tend to take over
societies in which they live because of their superior aptitude in
controlling money and media. This enables them to falsify history and
enslave non-Jews, which is why they have been kicked out of some 78
countries over the course of human history.

But the Marrano phenomenon has a much wider application in our
contemporary world. The recent revelations that such well-known
politicos as John Kerry, Madeleine Albright and Wesley Clark - they
all recently "discovered" they had Jewish ancestors - typifies the
disingenuousness by which Jews hide their identities. But no longer is
this done to escape persecution. Now the purpose is more to conceal
their true purpose, which is to take control of societies in which
they pretend to be citizens.

In America, this has long been accomplished. The wars in which America
has lost so many sons and daughters were all engineered by Jewish
puppeteers controlling American presidents. Take note of the names -
Edward Mandel House (Wilson), Bernard Baruch (Franklin Roosevelt),
Henry Kissinger (Nixon), and Richard Perle/Paul Wolfowitz (the
Bushes).

This is why the rest of the world regards the U.S. as a Jewish
country, with no compassion and no honesty.

Germans have pretty much lost their ethnic identity to Jews who have
usurped their family names. This has also happened to the English,
whose landscape names - Brooks, Rivers, Hills, etc. - as well as
mineral names - gold, silver, diamond - have been expropriated by Jews
to conceal their real identities.

The result of all these deceptions is this. Jews absolutely cannot be
trusted to tell the truth - about their names, about their history, or
about their intentions.

As we attempt to detox the insanity that is destroying the world, we
need to put Jewish lies at the top of our list.

The Jews are truly doomed for their perfidy, and politicians in Israel
have claimed that if any nation attempts to destroy the insane Jewish
nation of Israel, Jews will take the rest of the world with them with
their not-so-secret nuclear arsenal. This may be the only truth the
Jews, in their long and sordid history, have ever told.

The End Game


This falls in the “you had better take it seriously” category, as it is the continuation, or End Game, of the New World Order. It also explains every President’s obsession with the destruction of law and civil liberties. The mass murder of four billion is better carried out by a fascist state than one with civil liberties. Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were just sideline warm ups.

Overpopulation is a primary concern of the elite, and it was the subject of a recent clandestine meeting of billionaire “philanthropists” in New York. Elitists veil their agenda with the humanitarian rhetoric of the need to naturally reduce world population by means of contraception and education, whereas in reality, as we have exhaustively documented, their program has its origins in the inhumane pseudo-science of eugenics which first flourished in Britain, and the ideology of racial and genetic superiority that was later adapted by the Nazis with the aid of Rockefeller funding.

Why? Peak Oil.

This was all laid out in 2004 by Micheal Ruppert in Crossing The Rubicon, which masterfully ties oil, Wall Street, drugs, and accurately predicted the housing and credit crisis all in a book on 9-11. In it, he considers the elites motivations.
There are many factors that the rulers of the American Empire now have to manage as they read their own delusional map of the world. They have to:
  • apportion dwindling resources among competitors, some of whom possess nuclear weapons;
  • maintain and expand their control over enough of the oil and gas remaining to ensure their global dominance and maintain order among the citizens of the Empire;
  • simultaneously manage a collapsing global economic system, made possible by hydrocarbon energy and in which the growing population is demanding more things that can only be supplied by using still more hydrocarbon energy;
  • acknowledge that they cannot save their own economy without selling more of these products;
  • control the exploding demand for oil and gas from engineered recessions and wars that break national economies;
  • hide the evidence that they are systematically looting the wealth of all the people on the planet –even their own people– in order to maintain control;
  • maintain a secret revenue stream to provide enough off the books capital for the purpose of providing themselves a distinct economic and military advantage, improving their technological posture, and funding covert operations;
  • repress any dissent and head off any exposure of their actions;
  • convince the population that they are honorable so they can maintain control after oil supplies have dwindled to the point of energy starvation.

It’s the first bullet on dwindling resources and the extermination of two thirds of the planets human population.

How important are hydrocarbons for food production are skid mark one recognized oil expert puts it this way:” if the fertilizers, partial irrigation, and pesticides were withdrawn, corn yields for example would drop from 130 bushels per acre to about 30 bushels.” Well that’s bad news in more ways than you can think. The same applies in varying degrees to any crop: week, alfalfa, lettuce, celery, onions, tomatoes; anything that commercial agricultural produce is. Oil and gas are irreplaceable in the world is in to continue pumping out enough food to feed 6.5 billion people. And that says nothing about the additional 2.5 billion people that are projected to be here before the middle of the century. Organic farming and promote culture is responsible and respectful of nature and may ultimately be nearly as productive as hydrocarbon-based agriculture. But the infrastructure is not in place to implement it. You could ask several billion people to stop eating for your O2 while we switch over to work out the bugs. Do you want to volunteer? Would you volunteer your children? So what about all the evil cattle, pigs, and chickens that feed on grain and corn.

The chart says it all. Human population growth goes hand in hand with oil, more accurately cheap oil. It’s a party the former cannot attend without the latter, and that one is getting scarce. The planet can’t feed us all post peak oil, and the elites know and hide this.

In May 2001 a statement from the national energy policy produced by Vice President Cheney’s national energy policy development group (NEPDG) and could further at the pending crisis:

America in the year 2001 faces the most serious energy shortage since the oil embargoes of the 1970s. Estimates indicate that over the next 20 years, US oil consumption will increase by 33%, natural gas consumption by well over 50%, and the demand for electricity will rise by 45%.

U. S. energy consumption is expected to increase by about 32% by 2020. Between 2020 and 2000, US natural gas demand is projected by the energy information administration to increase by more than 50%.

Yet we produce 39% less oil today than we did in 1970 the year of peak production in the US, leaving us ever more reliant on foreign suppliers in our present course, America 20 years from now will import nearly 2 of every three barrels of oil a condition of increased dependency on foreign powers it did not always have America’s intentions at heart.

But it gets more heartless than that, as Sir Charles Olton Darwin wrote in 1952.

The fifth revolution will come when we have spent the stores of coal and oil that have been accumulating in the earth during hundreds of millions of years… It is to be hoped that before then other sources of energy will have been developed… Without considering the detail here, it is obvious that there will be a very great difference in the ways of life…. With a convenient substitute for the president feels is found or not there will be no doubt that there will be a great change in ways of life this change may be justly called a revolution but it differs from the preceding ones in that there is no likelihood of its leading to increased population, but even perhaps the reverse.

Darwin’s observations were reinforced by geologist Walter Youngquist in 1999.

He wrote:

world population will have to adjust to a lesser food supplies by a reduction in population. Pimental and Pimental (1996) stated:” the nations of the world must develop a plan to reduce the global population from near 6 billion to about 2 billion. If humans do not control their numbers, nature will.” Because stopping and then turning around and freight train of population growth and only be done gradually, this is a project that should be started now (Colen, 1995). If it is not done famine is likely to ensue.

Now see how that 6 billion to about 2 billion works out to two thirds? Coincidence theory doesn’t persuade me, so I say it’s Trudeau’s two thirds. That’s the two thirds of you and me wiped off the face of the earth because the elites are too busy laughing at the crazy conspiracy theorists.

Revealingly, Trudeau said that elitists see Alex Jones as an annoyance but tolerate him because they believe Jones as well as Trudeau himself are, “desensitizing people to these realities,” - which in a way works to their benefit.

“I’ve been told that’s why I still get invited on the yachts,” added Trudeau.
Meanwhile back on my planet, round one, third from the sun, the beat goes on.

Geologist J. Hansen, among the first to raise the issue of a global oil crisis resulting in population overshoot and collapse, came to the same conclusion in

The Longage of Critters Problem”:

But when the above scenario seems inevitable, the elites will simply depopulate most of the planet with buy weapons. When the time comes, it will be the only logical solution to their problem. It’s a first strike tactic that leaves built-in infrastructure and other species in place and allows the elites to perpetuate their own genes into the foreseeable future.

So there it is, the mass murder of two thirds of us for which the crashing of the Soviet economy and the extermination camps of Hitler’s were just trial runs, all in the name of controlling what remains and perpetuating their power into the foreseeable future.

It’s really crystal clear if you just take the blinders off, which we had best do before the End Game becomes game over....

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Israel is controlled by religious fanaticism


by Shulamit Aloni for Ha'aretz

Not very long ago, during Rabbi Meir Kahane's racist rantings, the late writer and journalist Amos Elon gave me a copy of a letter Lord Rothschild sent to Herzl in August 1902. In the letter, Rothschild explains why he refuses to support the establishment of a Jewish state in the Land of Israel. He writes that he "should view with horror the establishment of a Jewish colony pure and simple; such a colony would be Imperium Imperio; it would be a Ghetto with the prejudice of the Ghetto; it would be a small petty Jewish state, orthodox and illiberal, excluding the Gentile and the Christian."

Nevertheless, and despite phenomena like Kahane, the hope prevailed here over the years that Rothschild's harsh vision would prove false; that Israel would indeed "ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex," and "guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture," as stated in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State.

Time has passed and many heirs to Kahane have arisen - not only among a greedy and savage multitude but also among "the public's chosen representatives" in the Knesset and government. The latter are busy preparing blatantly racist laws and sending armed police to thwart Palestinian-initiated international cultural events because the regime believes the Arabs of the Land of Israel, the native Palestinians, are not worthy of being called human beings. According to the writers of these laws, the Arabs are certainly not entitled to human rights, not to mention a cultural and intellectual life, and never mind property, land and a home, because thousands of years ago God promised this land to Abraham and his seed.

Most regrettably and disgracefully, everything that Lord Rothschild predicted is coming to pass in our time. In our blackest dreams and in the hardest times since the struggle to establish the state, we never imagined that those who call themselves disciples of Ze'ev Jabotinsky would impose terror and fear here using deranged racist legislation. We never imagined that they would use the destruction of the court system to try to prevent any possibility of achieving social justice and a humane attitude. This is something essential in every democratic society toward every man, woman and child, irrespective of origin, race, religion and sex.

For 42 years we have been occupying, oppressing and stealing lands that are not ours. To be free in our land do we need to become thieving Cossacks, uprooters of trees, burners of fields and harassers of women, the elderly and the very young? "We have this land, we have it," goes the song, but what should have been said is "We have the power, we have it, we have the money, we have it, and we are allowed, we are," to starve an entire population, imprison it and annihilate it using air strikes, cluster bombs and white phosphorous. Because we are the lords of the land and God has chosen us to rule. For the shame of it.

"A unique people," wrote David Ben-Gurion. Alas, for that uniqueness. Instead of a Jewish and democratic state they have delivered us a Jewish state controlled by religious fanaticism, one that maintains the purity of the race. They have delivered a democracy in the most primitive sense - not the preservation of democratic values but rule by the demos, the populace that is dictating the transformation of Israel into a totalitarian ethnocracy.

Hooray for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman - they are eradicating everything we built, everything we dreamed about and everything we fought for.

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

For 300 years Britain has outsourced mayhem. Finally it’s coming home

[It is a great day in the Western media when the British confess that their government is the biggest, longest-running criminal enterprise in human history. For humanity's sake let us pray that The Crown is finished.]

Opium, famine and banks all played their part in this country’s plundering of the globe. Now it’s over, we find it hard to accept

The past 15 years have produced the cash-for-questions racket, the Hinduja and EcclestoneBAE corruption probe, the cash-for-honours caper and the cash-for-amendments scandal. By comparison to the outright subversion of the functions of government in some of these cases, the is small beer. Any one of them should have prompted the sweeping political reforms we are now debating. But they didn’t. affairs, the lies and fabrications that led to the invasion of Iraq, the forced abandonment of the

The expenses scandal, by contrast, could kill the Labour party. It might also force politicians of all parties to address our unjust voting system, the unelected Lords, the excessive power of the executive, the legalised blackmail used by the whips, and a score of further anachronisms and injustices. Why is it different?

I believe that the current political crisis has little to do with the expenses scandal, still less with Gordon Brown’s leadership. It arises because our economic system can no longer extract wealth from other nations. For the past 300 years, the revolutions and reforms experienced by almost all other developed countries have been averted in Britain by foreign remittances.

The social unrest that might have transformed our politics was instead outsourced to our colonies and unwilling trading partners. The rebellions in Ireland, India, China, the Caribbean, Egypt, South Africa, Malaya, Kenya, Iran and other places we subjugated were the price of political peace in Britain. After decolonisation, our plunder of other nations was sustained by the banks. Now, for the first time in three centuries, they can no longer deliver, and we must at last confront our problems.

There will probably never be a full account of the robbery this country organised, but there are a few snapshots. In his book Capitalism and Colonial Production, Hamza Alavi estimates that the resource flow from India to Britain between 1793 and 1803 was in the order of £2m a year, the equivalent of many billions today. The economic drain from India, he notes, “has not only been a major factor in India’s impoverishment … it has also been a very significant factor in the industrial revolution in Britain”. As Ralph Davis observes in The Industrial Revolution and British Overseas Trade, from the 1760s onwards India’s wealth “bought the national debt back from the Dutch and others … leaving Britain nearly free from overseas indebtedness when it came to face the great French wars from 1793″.

In France by contrast, as Eric Hobsbawm notes in The Age of Revolution, “the financial troubles of the monarchy brought matters to a head”. In 1788 half of France’s national expenditure was used to service its debt: the “American War and its debt broke the back of the monarchy”.

Even as the French were overthrowing the ancien regime, Britain’s landed classes were able to strengthen their economic power, seizing common property from the country’s poor by means of enclosure. Partly as a result of remittances from India and the Caribbean, the economy was booming and the state had the funds to ride out political crises. Later, after smashing India’s own industrial capacity, Britain forced that country to become a major export market for our manufactured goods, sustaining industrial employment here (and avoiding social unrest) long after our products and processes became uncompetitive.

Colonial plunder permitted the British state to balance its resource deficits as well. For some 200 years a river of food flowed into this country from such places as Ireland, India and the Caribbean. In The Blood Never Dried, John Newsinger reveals that in 1748 Jamaica alone sent 17,400 tons of sugar to Britain; by 1815 this had risen to 73,800. It was all produced by stolen labour.

Just as grain was sucked out of Ireland at the height of its great famine, so Britain continued to drain India of food during its catastrophic hungers. In Late Victorian Holocausts, Mike Davis shows that between 1876 and 1877 wheat exports to the UK from India doubled as subsistence there collapsed, and several million died of starvation. In the North-Western provinces famine was wholly engineered by British policy, as good harvests were exported to offset poor English production in 1876 and 1877.

Britain, in other words, outsourced famine as well as social unrest. There was terrible poverty in this country in the second half of the 19th century, but not mass starvation. The bad harvest of 1788 helped precipitate the French revolution, but the British state avoided such hazards. Others died on our behalf.

In the late 19th century, Davis shows, Britain’s vast deficits with the United States, Germany and its white dominions were balanced by huge annual surpluses with India and (as a result of the opium trade) China. For a generation “the starving Indian and Chinese peasantries … braced the entire system of international settlements, allowing England’s continued financial supremacy to temporarily co-exist with its relative industrial decline”. Britain’s trade surpluses with India allowed the City to become the world’s financial capital.

Its role in British colonisation was not a passive one. The bankruptcy, and subsequent British takeover, of Egypt in 1882 was hastened by a loan from Roths­child’s bank whose execution, Newsinger records, amounted to “fraud on a massive scale”. ­Jardine Matheson, once the biggest narco-trafficking outfit in history (it dominated the Chinese opium trade), later formed a major investment bank, Jardine Fleming. It was taken over by JP Morgan Chase in 2000.

We lost our colonies, but the plunder has continued by other means. As Joseph Stiglitz shows in Globalisation and its Discontents, the capital liberalisation forced on Asian economies by the IMF permitted northern traders to loot hundreds of billions of dollars, precipitating the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98. Poorer nations have also been strong-armed into a series of amazingly one-sided treaties and commitments, such as trade-related investment measures, bilateral investment agreements and the EU’s economic partnership agreements. If you have ever wondered how a small, densely populated country which produces very little supports itself, I would urge you to study these asymmetric arrangements.

But now, as John Lanchester demonstrates in a fascinating essay in the London Review of Books, the City could be fatally wounded. The nation that relied on financial services may take generations to recover from their collapse. The great British adventure – three centuries spent pillaging the labour, wealth and resources of other countries – is over. We cannot accept this, and seek gleeful revenge on a government that can no longer insulate us from reality.

Why now? It’s not as if this is the first time Britain’s representatives have been caught out. The history of governments in all countries is the history of scandal, as those who rise to the top are generally the most ambitious, ruthless and unscrupulous people politics can produce. Pushing their own interests to the limit, they teeter perennially on the brink of disgrace, except when they fly clean over the edge. So why does the current ballyhoo threaten to destroy not only the government but also our antediluvian political system?

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Allowing Guilty Pleas and Death Penalties Without Trial for Alleged 9/11 Plotters Would Be the Ultimate Obstruction of Justice


The tin-pot dictator will not let the media talk to the American prisoner captured when his plane crashed.

The dictator says that the prisoner confessed to a horrible murder, and has pleaded guilty.

And so - the dictator announces - there will be no trial, just a death sentence. Indeed, the prisoner is Christian, and the dictator says that the prisoner has asked for martyrdom according to his religious beliefs.

Would the rest of the world believe this is fair?

Of course not. Moreover, world opinion would assume that the prisoner might very well be innocent of the murder charges, especially if it comes out that any confessions were made during extreme torture.

This is exactly the situation we have currently with the prisoners at Guantanamo.

As the New York Times reports:

The Obama administration is considering a change in the law for the military commissions at the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, that would clear the way for detainees facing the death penalty to plead guilty without a full trial.

The provision could permit military prosecutors to avoid airing the details of brutal interrogation techniques. It could also allow the five detainees who have been charged with the Sept. 11 attacks to achieve their stated goal of pleading guilty to gain what they have called martyrdom.

Raw Story clarifies that:

This option would principally be aimed at a group of detainees accused of planning the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

This is not simply a ploy to cover up the fact that these prisoners were brutally tortured.

It is also a way to silence them forever, so that they can never tell what their real role was in the 9/11 attacks, and who they received assistance from, and how they were able to convince the mightiest military the world has ever known to stand down from standard air defense protocols on 9/11.

Does Innocence Matter?

Remember, most of those held at Guantanamo and tortured were actually innocent.

According to NBC news:
  • Much of the 9/11 Commission Report was based upon the testimony of people who were tortured
  • At least four of the people whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report have claimed that they told interrogators information as a way to stop being "tortured."
  • One of the Commission's main sources of information was tortured until he agreed to sign a confession that he was NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO READ
  • The 9/11 Commission itself doubted the accuracy of the torture confessions, and yet kept their doubts to themselves

The self-confessed "mastermind" of 9/11 also confessed to crimes which he could not have committed. He later said that he gave the interrogators a lot of false information - telling them what he thought they wanted to hear - in an attempt to stop the torture. We also know that he was heavily tortured specifically for the purpose of trying to obtain false information about 9/11 - specifically, that Iraq had something to do with it.

Indeed, the Senate Armed Services Committee found that the entire U.S. torture program was geared around techniques specifically aimed at extracting false confessions (and see this).

This Would Be Unprecedented

Remember, allowing guilty pleas would not follow standard criminal or even military procedure. Normally, prosecutors in military trials are normally required to prove guilt in a trial even against service members who want to plead guilty.

And in normal American criminal trials, the judge has to make sure that the defendant understands that he is pleading guilty, that he has the capacity to understand what that means, and that he wishes to accept the consequences. But some of the prisoners have been tortured until they are literally crazy, and may not understand what they are pleading guilty to or even what the death penalty means.

Obstruction of Justice

In addition, the government has obstructed justice at every turn regarding 9/11. Indeed, even the 9/11 Commissioners themselves now say this:

  • The Commission's co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) "obstructed our investigation"
  • The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) - who led the 9/11 staff's inquiry - said "At some level of the government, at some point in time...there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described .... The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years.... This is not spin. This is not true."

The torture sessions of the alleged 9/11 suspects were in fact videotaped, but the CIA illegally destroyed the videotapes, so that the extent of torture and the prisoner's actual words will never be known (and see this).

Allowing these prisoners to now be executed without trial would be the ultimate obstruction of justice. It would be just like killing the captured American Christian and putting him to death based upon his supposed "confessions" and his supposed wish to become a Christian martyr.

Indeed, the analogy would be closer to the current situation if the murder in the tin-pot dictator's country were suspicious (for example, if the dictator had received numerous warnings that the victim's life was in danger but had provided no protection), and if the dictator had used the murder as the main excuse to strip away all of the liberties and freedoms in his country and to launch several wars against other nations which he had long wanted to invade.

The world would obviously insist that the prisoner receive a fair trial both to establish his innocence or guilt and to see if the dictator's rationale for launching wars and crushing the rights of his people was an honest one.

The "messy problem" which the proposal seeks to dispose of is not simply the torture of the prisoners. It is also the fact that the government has no real evidence for its version of 9/11....because 9/11 is an inside job by the Siamese twins, CIA/MOSSAD+AMAN/OSP.....

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

"True Story of the Bilderberg Group" and What They May Be Planning Now



Daniel Estulin's "True Story of the Bilderberg Group" and What They May Be Planning Now -

For over 14 years, Daniel Estulin has investigated and researched the Bilderberg Group's far-reaching influence on business and finance, global politics, war and peace, and control of the world's resources and its money.

His book, "The True Story of the Bilderberg Group," was published in 2005 and is now updated in a new 2009 edition. He states that in 1954, "the most powerful men in the world met for the first time" in Oosterbeek, Netherlands, "debated the future of the world," and decided to meet annually in secret. They called themselves the Bilderberg Group with a membership representing a who's who of world power elites, mostly from America, Canada, and Western Europe with familiar names like David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel, Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Lloyd Blankfein, George Soros, Donald Rumsfeld, Rupert Murdoch, other heads of state, influential senators, congressmen and parliamentarians, Pentagon and NATO brass, members of European royalty, selected media figures, and invited others - some quietly by some accounts like Barack Obama and many of his top officials.

Always well represented are top figures from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), IMF, World Bank, Trilateral Commission, EU, and powerful central bankers from the Federal Reserve, the ECB's Jean-Claude Trichet, and Bank of England's Mervyn King.

For over half a century, no agenda or discussion topics became public nor is any press coverage allowed. The few invited fourth estate attendees and their bosses are sworn to secrecy. Nonetheless, Estulin undertook "an investigative journey" that became his life's work. He states:

"Slowly, one by one, I have penetrated the layers of secrecy surrounding the Bilderberg Group, but I could not have done this withot help of 'conscientious objectors' from inside, as well as outside, the Group's membership." As a result, he keeps their names confidential.

Whatever its early mission, the Group is now "a shadow world government....threaten(ing) to take away our right to direct our own destinies (by creating) a disturbing reality" very much harming the public's welfare. In short, Bilderbergers want to supplant individual nation-state sovereignty with an all-powerful global government, corporate controlled, and check-mated by militarized enforcement.

"Imagine a private club where presidents, prime ministers, international bankers and generals rub shoulders, where gracious royal chaperones ensure everyone gets along, and where the people running the wars, markets, and Europe (and America) say what they never dare say in public."

Early in its history, Bilderbergers decided "to create an 'Aristocracy of purpose' between Europe and the United States (to reach consensus to rule the world on matters of) policy, economics, and (overall) strategy." NATO was essential for their plans - to ensure "perpetual war (and) nuclear blackmail" to be used as necessary. Then proceed to loot the planet, achieve fabulous wealth and power, and crush all challengers to keep it.

Along with military dominance, controlling the world's money is crucial for with it comes absolute control as the powerful 19th century Rothschild family understood. As the patriarch Amschel Rothschild once said: "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes its laws."

Bilderbergers comprise the world's most exclusive club. No one buys their way in. Only the Group's Steering Committee decides whom to invite, and in all cases participants are adherents to One World Order governance run by top power elites.

According to Steering Committee rules:

"the invited guests must come alone; no wives, girlfriends, husbands or boyfriends. Personal assistants (meaning security, bodyguards, CIA or other secret service protectors) cannot attend the conference and must eat in a separate hall. (Also) The guests are explicitly forbidden from giving interviews to journalists" or divulge anything that goes on in meetings.

Host governments provide overall security to keep away outsiders. One-third of attendees are political figures. The others are from industry, finance, academia, labor and communications.

Meeting procedure is by Chatham House Rules letting attendees freely express their views in a relaxed atmosphere knowing nothing said will be quoted or revealed to the public. Meetings "are always frank, but do not always conclude with consensus."

Membership consists of annual attendees (around 80 of the world's most powerful) and others only invited occasionally because of their knowledge or involvement in relevant topics. Those most valued are asked back, and some first-timers are chosen for their possible later usefulness.

Arkansas governor Bill Clinton, for example, who attended in 1991. "There, David Rockefeller told (him) why the North American Free Trade Agreement....was a Bilderberg priority and that the group needed him to support it. The next year, Clinton was elected president," and on January 1, 1994 NAFTA took effect. Numerous other examples are similar, including who gets chosen for powerful government, military and other key positions.

Bilderberg Objectives

The Group's grand design is for "a One World Government (World Company) with a single, global marketplace, policed by one world army, and financially regulated by one 'World (Central) Bank' using one global currency." Their "wish list" includes:

-- "one international identify (observing) one set of universal values;"

-- centralized control of world populations by "mind control;" in other words, controlling world public opinion;

-- a New World Order with no middle class, only "rulers and servants (serfs)," and, of course, no democracy;

-- "a zero-growth society" without prosperity or progress, only greater wealth and power for the rulers;

-- manufactured crises and perpetual wars;

-- absolute control of education to program the public mind and train those chosen for various roles;

-- "centralized control of all foreign and domestic policies;" one size fits all globally;

-- using the UN as a de facto world government imposing a UN tax on "world citizens;"

-- expanding NAFTA and WTO globally;

-- making NATO a world military;

-- imposing a universal legal system; and

-- a global "welfare state where obedient slaves will be rewarded and non-conformists targeted for extermination."

Secret Bilderberg Partners

In the US, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is dominant. One of its 1921 founders, Edward Mandell House, was Woodrow Wilson's chief advisor and rumored at the time to be the nation's real power from 1913 - 1921. On his watch, the Federal Reserve Act passed in December 1913 giving money creation power to bankers, and the 16th Amendment was ratified in February creating the federal income tax to provide a revenue stream to pay for government debt service.

From its beginnings, CFR was committed to "a one-world government based on a centralized global financing system...." Today, CFR has thousands of influential members (including important ones in the corporate media) but keeps a low public profile, especially regarding its real agenda.

Historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. called it a "front organization (for) the heart of the American Establishment." It meets privately and only publishes what it wishes the public to know. Its members are only Americans.

The Trilateral Commission (discussed below) is a similar group that "brings together global power brokers." Founded by David Rockefeller, he's also a leading Bilderberger and CFR Chairman Emeritus, organizations he continues to finance and support.

Their past and current members reflect their power:

-- nearly all presidential candidates of both parties;

-- leading senators and congressmen;

-- key members of the fourth estate and their bosses; and

-- top officials of the FBI, CIA, NSA, defense establishment, and other leading government agencies, including state, commerce, the judiciary and treasury.

For its part, "CFR has served as a virtual employment agency for the federal government under both Democrats and Republicans." Whoever occupies the White House, "CFR's power and agenda" have been unchanged since its 1921 founding.

It advocates a global superstate with America and other nations sacrificing their sovereignty to a central power. CFR founder Paul Warburg was a member of Roosevelt's "brain trust." In 1950, his son, James, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: "We shall have world government whether or not you like it - by conquest or consent."

Later at the 1992 Bilderberg Group meeting, Henry Kissinger said:

"Today, Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all people of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil....individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by their world government."

CFR planned a New World Order before 1942, and the "UN began with a group of CFR members called the Informal Agenda Group." They drafted the original UN proposal, presented it to Franklin Roosevelt who announced it publicly the next day. At its 1945 founding, CFR members comprised over 40 of the US delegates.

According to Professor G. William Domhoff, author of Who Rules America, the CFR operates in "small groups of about twenty-five, who bring together leaders from the six conspirator categories (industrialists, financiers, ideologues, military, professional specialists - lawyers, medical doctors, etc. - and organized labor) for detailed discussions of specific topics in the area of foreign affairs." Domhoff added:

"The Council on Foreign Relations, while not financed by government, works so closely with it that it is difficult to distinguish Council action stimulated by government from autonomous actions. (Its) most important sources of income are leading corporations and major foundations." The Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford Foundations to name three, and they're directed by key corporate officials.

Dominant Media Partners

Former CBS News president Richard Salant (1961 - 64 and 1966 - 79) explained the major media's role: "Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have."

CBS and other media giants control everything we see, hear and read - through television, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, films, and large portions of the Internet. Their top officials and some journalists attend Bilderberg meetings - on condition they report nothing.

The Rockefeller family wields enormous power, even though its reigning patriarch, David, will be 94 on June 12 and surely near the end of his dominance. However, for years "the Rockefellers (led by David) gained great influence over the media. (With it) the family gained sway over public opinion. With the pulse of public opinion, they gained deep influence in politics. And with this politics of subtle corruption, they are taking control of the nation" and now aim for total world domination.

The Bilderberger-Rockefeller scheme is to make their views "so appealing (by camouflaging them) that they become public policy (and can) pressure world leaders into submitting to the 'needs of the Masters of the Universe.' " The "free world press" is their instrument to disseminate "agreed-upon propaganda."

CFR Cabinet Control

"The National Security Act of 1947 established the office of Secretary of Defense." Since then, 14 DOD secretaries have been CFR members.

Since 1940, every Secretary of State, except James Byrnes, has been a CFR member and/or Trilateral Commission (TC) one.

For the past 80 years, "Virtually every key US National Security and Foreign Policy Advisor has been a CFR member.

Nearly all top generals and admirals have been CFR members.

Many presidential candidates were/are CFR members, including Herbert Hoover, Adlai Stevenson, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter (also a charter TC member), George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and John McCain.

Numerous CIA directors were/are CFR members, including Richard Helmes, James Schlesinger, William Casey, William Webster, Robert Gates, James Woolsey, John Deutsch, George Tenet, Porter Goss, Michael Hayden, and Leon Panetta.

Many Treasury Secretaries were/are CFR members, including Douglas Dillon, George Schultz, William Simon, James Baker, Nicholas Brady, Lloyd Bentsen, Robert Rubin, Henry Paulson, and Tim Geithner.

When presidents nominate Supreme Court candidates, the CFR's "Special Group, Secret Team" or advisors vet them for acceptability. Presidents, in fact, are told who to appoint, including designees to the High Court and most lower ones.

Programming the Public Mind

According to sociologist Hadley Cantril in his 1967 book, The Human Dimension - Experiences in Policy Research:

Government "Psycho-political operations are propaganda campaigns designed to create perpetual tension and to manipulate different groups of people to accept the particular climate of opinion the CFR seeks to achieve in the world."

Canadian writer Ken Adachi (1929 - 1989) added:

"What most Americans believe to be 'Public Opinion' is in reality carefully crafted and scripted propaganda designed to elicit a desired behavioral response from the public."

And noted Australian academic and activist Alex Carey (1922 - 1988) explained the three most important 20th century developments - "The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy."

Web of Control

Numerous think tanks, foundations, the major media, and other key organizations are staffed with CFR members. Most of its life-members also belong to the TC and Bilderberg Group, operate secretly, and wield enormous power over US and world affairs.

The Rockefeller-Founded Trilateral Commission (TC)

On page 405 of his Memoirs, David Rockfeller wrote:

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

In alliance with Bilderbergers, the TC also "plays a vital role in the New World Order's scheme to use wealth, concentrated in the hands of the few, to exert world control." TC members share common views and all relate to total unchallengeable global dominance.

Founded in 1973 and headquartered in Washington, its powerful US, EU and East Asian members seek its operative founding goal - a "New International Economic Order," now simply a "New World Order" run by global elites from these three parts of the world with lesser members admitted from other countries.

According to TC's web site, "each regional group has a chairman and deputy chairman, who all together constitute the leadership of the Committee. The Executive Committee draws together a further 36 individuals from the wider membership," proportionately representing the US, EU, and East Asia in its early years, now enlarged to be broadly global.

Committee members meet several times annually to discuss and coordinate their work. The Executive Committee chooses members, and at any time around 350 belong for a three-year renewable period. Everyone is a consummate insider with expertise in business, finance, politics, the military, or the media, including past presidents, secretaries of state, international bankers, think tank and foundation executives, university presidents and selected academics, and former senators and congressmen, among others.

Although its annual reports are available for purchase, its inner workings, current goals, and operations are secret - with good reason. Its objectives harm the public so mustn't be revealed. Trilaterals over Washington author Antony Sutton wrote:

"this group of private citizens is precisely organized in a manner that ensures its collective views have significant impact on public policy."

In her book, Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, Holly Sklar wrote:

Powerful figures in America, Europe, and East Asia let "the rich....safeguard the interests of Western capitalism in an explosive world - probably by discouraging protectionism, nationalism, or any response that would pit the elites of one against the elites of another," in their common quest for global dominance.

Trilateralist Zbigniew Brzezinski (TC's co-founder) wrote in his Between Two Ages - America's Role in the Technotronic Era:

"people, governments and economies of all nations must serve the needs of multinational banks and corporations. (The Constitution is) inadequate....the old framework of international politics, with their sphere of influence....the fiction of sovereignty....is clearly no longer compatible with reality...."

TC today is now global with members from countries as diverse as Argentina, Ukraine, Israel, Jordan, Brazil, Turkey, China and Russia. In his Trilaterals Over America, Antony Sutton believes that TC's aim is to collaborate with Bilderbergers and CFR in "establishing public policy objectives to be implemented by governments worldwide." He added that "Trilateralists have rejected the US Constitution and the democratic political process." In fact, TC was established to counter a "crisis in democracy" - too much of it that had to be contained.

An official TC report was fearful about "the increased popular participation in and control over established social, political, and economic institutions and especially a reaction against the concentration of power of Congress and of state and local government."

To address this, media control was essential to exert "restraint on what newspapers may publish (and TV and radio broadcast)." Then according to Richard Gardner in the July 1974 issue of Foreign Affairs (a CFR publication):

CFR's leadership must make "an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece," until the very notion disappears from public discourse.

Bilderberg/CFR/Trilateralist success depends on finding "a way to get us to surrender our liberties in the name of some common threat or crisis. The foundations, educational institutions, and research think tanks supported by (these organizations) oblige by financing so-called 'studies' which are then used to justify their every excess. The excuses vary, but the target is always individual liberty. Our liberty" and much more.

Bilderbergers, Trilateralists and CFR members want "an all-encompassing monopoly" - over government, money, industry, and property that's "self-perpetuating and eternal." In Confessions of a Monopolist (1906), Frederick C. Howe explained its workings in practice:

"The rules of big business: Get a monopoly; let Society work for you. So long as we see all international revolutionaries and all international capitalists as implacable enemies of one another, then we miss a crucial point....a partnership between international monopoly capitalism and international revolutionary socialism is for their mutual benefit."

In the Rockefeller File, Gary Allen wrote:

"By the late nineteenth century, the inner sanctums of Wall Street understood that the most efficient way to gain a monopoly was to say it was for the 'public good' and 'public interest.' "

David Rockefeller learned the same thing from his father, John D., Jr. who learned it from his father, John D. Sr. They hated competition and relentlessly strove to eliminate it - for David on a global scale through a New World Order.

In the 1970s and 1980s, Trilateralists and CFR members collaborated on the latter's "1980 Project," the largest ever CFR initiative to steer world events "toward a particular desirable future outcome (involving) the utter disintegration of the economy." Why so is the question?

Because by the 1950s and 1960s, worldwide industrial growth meant more competition. It was also a model to be followed, and "had to be strangled in the cradle" or at least greatly contained. In America as well beginning in the 1980s. The result has been a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, shrinkage of the middle class, and plan for its eventual demise.

The North American Union (NAU)

The idea emerged during the Reagan administration in the early 1980s. David Rockefeller, George Schultz and Paul Volker told the president that Canada and America could be politically and economically merged over the next 15 years except for one problem - French-speaking Quebec. Their solution - elect a Bilderberg-friendly prime minister, separate Quebec from the other provinces, then make Canada America's 51st state. It almost worked, but not quite when a 1995 secession referendum was defeated - 50.56% to 49.44%, but not the idea of merger.

At a March 23, 2005 Waco, Texas meeting, attended by George Bush, Mexico's Vincente Fox, and Canada's Paul Martin, the Security and and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) was launched, also known as the North American Union (NAU). It was a secretive Independent Task Force of North America agreement - a group organized by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE), the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations, and CFR with the following aims:

-- circumventing the legislatures of three countries and their constitutions;

-- suppressing public knowledge or consideration; and

-- proposing greater US, Canadian and Mexican economic, political, social, and security integration with secretive working groups formed to devise non-debatable, not voted on agreements to be binding and unchangeable.

In short - a corporate coup d'etat against the sovereignty of three nations enforced by hard line militarization to suppress opposition.

If enacted, it will create a borderless North America, corporate controlled, without barriers to trade or capital flows for business giants, mainly US ones and much more - America's access to vital resources, especially oil and Canada's fresh water.

Secretly, over 300 SPP initiatives were crafted to harmonize the continent's policies on energy, food, drugs, security, immigration, manufacturing, the environment, and public health along with militarizing three nations for enforcement.

SPP represents another step toward the Bilderberg/Trilateralist/CFR goal for World Government, taking it one step at a time. A "United Europe" was another, the result of various treaties and economic agreements:

-- the December 1951 six-nation European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC);

-- the March 1957 six-nation Treaty of Rome establishing the European Economic Community (EEC);
also the European Atomic Energy Commission (EAEC) by a second Treaty of Rome;

-- the October 1957 European Court of Justice to settle regional trade disputes;

-- the May 1960 seven-nation European Free Trade Association (EFTA);

-- the July 1967 European Economic Community (EEC) merging the ECSC, EAEC and EEC together in one organization;

-- the 1968 European Customs Union to abolish duties and establish uniform imports taxing among EEC nations;

-- the 1978 European Currency Unit (ECU);

-- the February 1986 Single European Act revision of the 1957 Treaty of Rome; it established the objective of forming a Common Market by December 31, 1992;

-- the February 1992 Maastricht Treaty creating the EU on November 1, 1993; and

-- the name euro was adopted in December 1995; it was introduced in January 1999 replacing the European Currency Unit (ECU); euros began circulating on January 2002; they're now the official currency of 16 of the 27 EU states.

Over half a century, the above steps cost EU members their sovereignty "as some 70 to 80 per cent of the laws passed in Europe involve just rubber stamping of regulations already written by nameless bureaucrats in 'working groups' in Brussels or Luxembourg."

The EU and NAU share common features:

-- advocacy from a influential spokesperson;

-- an economic and later political union;

-- hard line security, and for Europe, ending wars on the continent between EU member states;

-- establishment of a collective consciousness in place of nationalism;

-- the blurring of borders and creation of a "supra-government," a superstate;

-- secretive arrangements to mask real objectives; and

-- the creation of a common currency and eventual global one.

Steps Toward a North American Union

-- the October 4, 1988 Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the US and Canada, finalized the previous year;

-- at the 1991 Bilderberg meeting, David Rockefeller got governor Bill Clinton's support for NAFTA if he became president;

-- on January 1, 1994, with no debate under "fast-track" rules, Congress approved WTO legislation;

-- in December 1994 at the first Summit of the Americas, 34 Hemispheric leaders committed their nations to a Free Trade of the Americas agreement (FTAA) by 2005 - so far unachieved;

-- on July 4, 2000, Mexican president Vincente Fox called for a North American common market in 20 years;

-- on February 2001, the White House published a joint statement from George Bush and Vincente Fox called the "Guanajuato Proposal;" it was for a US-Canada-Mexico prosperity partnership (aka North American Union);

-- in September 2001, Bush and Fox agreed to a "Partnership for Prosperity Initiative;"

-- the September 11, 2001 attack gave cover to including "security" as part of a future partnership;

-- on October 7, 2001, a CFA meeting highlighted "The Future of North American Integration in the Wake of Terrorist Attacks; for the first time, "security" became part of a future "partnership for prosperity;" also, Canada was to be included in a "North American" agreement;

-- in 2002, the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI) was established in Montreal "to address the issues raised by North American integration as well as identify new ideas and strategies to reinforce the North American region;"

-- in January 2003, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE - composed of 150 top CEOs) launched the "North American Security and Prosperity Initiative" calling for continental integration;

-- in April 2004, Canadian prime minister Paul Martin announced the nation's first ever national security policy called Securing an Open Society;

-- on October 15, 2004, CFR established an Independent Task Force on the Future of North America - for a future continental union;

-- in March 2005, a CFR report titled Creating a North American Community called for continental integration by 2010 "to enhance, prosperity, and opportunity for all North Americans;" and

-- on March 23, 2005 in Waco, Texas, America, Canada and Mexico leaders launched the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) - aka North American Union (NAU).

Secretive negotiations continue. Legislative debate is excluded, and public inclusion and debate are off the table. In May 2005, the CFR Independent Task Force on the Future of North America published a follow-up report titled Building a North American Community - proposing a borderless three-nation union by 2010.

In June and July 2005, the Dominican Republic - Central America Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA) passed the Senate and House establishing corporate-approved trade rules to further impoverish the region and move a step closer to continental integration.

In March 2006, the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) was created at the second SPP summit in Cancun, Mexico. Composed of 30 top North American CEOs, it serves as an official trilateral SPP working group.

Secret business and government meetings continue so there's no way to confirm SPP's current status or if Barack Obama is seamlessly continuing George Bush's agenda. In an earlier article, this writer said:

SPP efforts paused during the Bush to Obama transition, but "deep integration" plans remain. Canada's Fraser Institute proposed renaming the initiative the North American Standards and Regulatory Area (NASRA) to disguise its real purpose. It said the "SPP brand" is tarnished so re-branding is essential - to fool the public until it's too late to matter.

Bilderbergers, Trilaterists, and CFR leaders back it as another step toward global integration and won't "stop until the entire world is unified under the auspices and the political umbrella of a One World Company, a nightmarish borderless world run by the world's most powerful clique" - comprised of key elitist members of these dominant organizations.

In April 2007, the Transatlantic Economic Council was established between America and the EU to:

-- create an "official international governmental body - by executive fiat;

-- harmonize economic and regulatory objectives;

-- move toward a Transatlantic Common Market; and

-- a step closer to One World Government run by the world's most powerful corporate interests.

Insights into the 2009 Bilderberg Group Meeting

From May 14 - 17, Bilderbergers held their annual meeting in Vouliagmeni, Greece, and according to Daniel Estulin have dire plans for global economies.

According to his pre-meeting sources, they're divided on two alternatives:

"Either a prolonged, agonizing depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline and poverty (or) an intense but shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency."

Other agenda items included:

-- "the future of the US dollar and US economy;"

-- continued deception about green shoots signaling an end to recession and improving economy later in the year;

-- suppressing the fact that bank stress tests were a sham and were designed for deception, not an accurate assessment of major banks' health;

-- projecting headlined US unemployment to hit 14% by year end - way above current forecasts and meaning the true number will be double, at minimum, with all uncounted categories included; and

-- a final push to get the Lisbon Treaty passed for pan-European (EU) adoption of neoliberal rules, including greater privatizations, fewer worker rights and social benefits, open border trade favoring developed over emerging states, and greater militarization to suppress civil liberties and human rights.

After the meeting, Estulin got a 73-page report on what was discussed. He noted that "One of Bilderberg's primary concerns....is the danger that their zeal to reshape the world by engineering chaos (toward) their long term agenda could cause the situation to spiral out of control and eventually lead to a scenario where Bilderberg and the global elite in general are overwhelmed by events and end up losing their control over the planet."

Estulin also noted some considerable disagreement between "hardliners" wanting a "dramatic decline and a severe, short-term depression (versus others) who think that things have gone too far" so that "the fallout from the global economic cataclysm" can't be known, may be greater than anticipated, and may harm Bilderberger interests. Also, "some European bankers (expressed great alarm over their own fate and called the current) high wire act 'unsustainable.' "

There was a combination of agreement and fear that the situation remains dire and the worst of the crisis lies ahead, mainly because of America's extreme debt level that must be resolved to produce a healthy, sustainable recovery.

Topics also included:

-- establishing a Global Treasury Department and Global Central Bank, possibly partnered with or as part of the IMF;

-- a global currency;

-- destruction of the dollar through what longtime market analyst Bob Chapman calls "a stealth default on (US) debt by continuing to issue massive amounts of money and credit and in the process devaluing the dollar," a process he calls "fraud;"

-- a global legal system;

-- exploiting the Swine Flu scare to create a WHO global department of health; and

-- the overall goal of a global government and the end of national sovereignty.

In the past, Estulin's sources proved accurate. Earlier, he predicted the housing crash and 2007 - 2008 financial market decline, preceded by the kind of financial crisis triggered by the Lehman Brothers collapse. Watch for further updates from him as new information leaks out on what the world's power elites have planned going forward.

Estulin will be the featured guest on The Global Research News Hour Tuesday, June 2. He can be heard live or afterwards through the program archive...

MKUltra CIA/LDS MIND CONTROL

Recovering Monarch victims speak of ongoing trauma through
"ritual abuse", ...

www.mormon.citymax.com/LDSMKUltra.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
www.despotovic.com/pages/book01/

This book is written to destroy trauma-based mind control before
it destroys the human race.

To the best of our knowledge the statements made in this book
are factual, although they may not reflect the latest or
currently accepted methodology among each and every faction of
the New World Order, which carries out Monarch-type programming

Perhaps the weather is too stormy to plant the truth. Pray to
the Lord of the Harvest.

Billy Graham runs big operations all over the world under the
disguise of evangelism. Another of the countless religious
covers, that works with the Network's/Illuminati's drug
activities involves the Mormon Bishop warehouses, which are used
to store cocaine. Monarch slaves are involved with this.
Different religious labels hide the same criminal Network. By
the way, when giving the Patriarchal Blessing, the Mormon
Patriarch if he has a Monarch slave will use hypnosis and
triggers to convince the person what their future will be like.

The blue prints of the Portland Mormon Temple at Lake Oswego, OR
which sets over a secret underground programming site, were
changed overnight after they were looked at. The original
blueprints showed that Lake Oswego had allowed a building code
to broken. The blueprint was changed, showing that Lake Oswego's
city employees were working along with the Mormon church and the
CIA to keep everything running smooth with their high tech
secret underground programming center,

ORGANIZATIONS PRACTICING TRAUMA-BASED MIND CONTROL

Air Force Intelligence
Army Intelligence (such as CIC)
Atomic Energy Commission, AEC
British Intelligence, in. MI-6, MI-5, & the Tavistock Institute
Catholic Church (incl. Jesuits)
Central Intelligence Agency, CIA (aka Agency, Company, Langley)
Defense Intelligence Agency, DIA
Freemasonry (esp. the Palladium Rite)
Mossad (Mossad le Aliyah Beth)
Mormon Church
National Security Agency (NSA)
Naval Intelligence (ONI, Office of Naval Intelligence)
------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

Preparing for World War III



Preparing for World War III

Written by Robert Singer

The following Glossary, abbreviations and essay will help the reader understand how Albert Pike Grand Master of the Luciferian group known as the Order of the Palladium wrote a letter dated August 15, 1871 that graphically outlined plans for World War III that was seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order.

The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the “agentur” of the “Illuminati” between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm … Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. [1]

Judaism: Jews collectively who practice a religion based on the Torah and the Talmud.

Zionism: an organization of Jews who believed the Jewish people needed a nation of their own to escape persecution.

RothIsm or Rothschildism: abbreviation for The Zionist movement corrupted and co-opted by The House of Rothschild and their agents to advance a New World Order agenda.

RBZJ: The Rothschild Backed Zionist Jews, acronym used when referring to anyone connected to or related to the House of Rothschild.

RAGENT: Abbreviation for a Rothschild Agent

The House of Rothschild (the Rothschilds): Global financial empire founded in the late 18th century by a dynasty of Khazars, an ancient people from Georgia. [2]

The Rothschilds control a vast portion of the world’s wealth and are the hidden hand behind all the social-cataclysms: the French, Russian and American Revolutions; Communism, Capitalism, World Wars and the Modern State of Israel. The Rothschilds are not the Jews of the bible and do not practice Judaism.

Mel Gibson would have been correct if he had claimed, The Rothschilds are responsible for all the wars in the world. The “Labour Leader” newspaper of Britain on December 19, 1891 referred to the Rothschilds when they wrote:

This blood-sucking crew has been the cause of untold mischief and misery in Europe during the present century, and has piled up its prodigious wealth chiefly through fomenting wars between States which ought never to have quarreled. Wherever there is trouble in Europe, wherever rumors of war circulate and men’s minds are distraught with fear of change and calamity you may be sure that a hook-nosed Rothschild is at his games somewhere near the region of the disturbance (ibid, p. 12).

In “Imperialism,” writer J. A. Hobson wrote: “No Great War could be undertaken by any European State…if the house of Rothschild and its connections set their face against it” (ibid, p, 25).

The “Labour Leader” did not use the term Jew because the Rothschilds are the descendants of Khazars; they are not of Abraham’s Seed.

Rothschild founded and funded the Zionist movement to further a New World Order agenda. At the first Zionist conference Theodor Herzl, a Rothschild agent (Ragent) makes it clear Rothschildism (RothIsm) is not about saving Jews,

It is essential that the sufferings of Jews….become worse….this will assist in realization of our plans….I have an excellent idea….I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth….The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends. [3]

UN Resolution (GA 181)

August 29, 1897 Theodor Herzl, the founder of RothIsm at the First Zionist Congress predicted that within fifty years there would be a Jewish state. UN Resolution (GA 181) partitioned Palestine in 1947.

RothIsm is a political movement to encourage, force if necessary, Jews to move to Palestine. All Jews were encouraged; it didn’t matter if you were of Abraham’s seed, you left for Palestine or else.

Herzl picking 1947 as the end of the Diaspora and the return of the Jews to the “Holy Land” is either one of those “bizarre coincidences”, like the same person winning the lottery three weeks in a row, or the partition of Palestine, finalized in 1947, was part of Rothschilds plan for a New World Order, “to effect complete and total control over every human being on the planet and to dramatically reduce the world’s population by two thirds.”

Rothschild’s secret societies, The Bavarian Illuminati, Order of Perfectibilists, the Skull and Bones are no longer classified as prehistoric science fiction and have their origins in the ancient religions and the occult: Jesuits, Knights Templar, Rosicrucians, Freemasons and the Kabbalah.

In 2003, 60 Minutes aired a segment about Alexandra Robbins, staff member at the New Yorker. Robbins, a Yale graduate, penetrated the wall of silence around the Skull and Bones, the American branch of Rothschild’s secret society and authored the best seller Secrets of the Tomb: Skull and Bones, the Ivy League, and the Hidden Paths of Power.

Members of the Skull and Bones include some of the most powerful men of the 20th century.

J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Abraham Kuhn and Solomon Loeb are all connected to the Rothschilds Global financial empire and secret societies. They are members of the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, France, and Germany or, for that matter, any central bank anywhere in the world.

RothIsm was not-so-secretly funded when Baron Edmond (Binyamin) de Rothschild purchased 90,000 acres in Palestine launching Israel’s future initially as an agricultural society. After the early settlers arrived, they wanted Rothschild to “take his hands from it.” Baron Edmond responded, “I created the Yishuv, I alone. Therefore no men, neither colonists nor organisations have the right to interfere in my plans”

Lord Moyne, the British Secretary of State in Cairo, in 1942 tried to interfere in Baron Edmond’s plan when he declared “the Jews were not the descendants of the ancient Hebrews and that they had no “legitimate claim” on the Holy Land. In favor of limiting Jewish immigration into Palestine, he was accused of being “an implacable enemy of Hebrew independence,” and on November 6, 1944 Lord Moyne was murdered by two members of the Stern Gang (Yitzhak Shamir’s group). [4]

A Jewish State, a sacrilege, can be found in the Bible

A Jewish state can be found in the book of Revelation. John, an Apostle of Jesus on the Isle of Patmos in 90 A.D., was told to “Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter.” John wrote:

And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months (1279 days). And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in Sackcloth. Revelation 11:2&3

Herzl correctly predicted the 1947 UN partition but John, in the spirit, was taken up into heaven and saw that the holy city would be underfoot for forty-two months given over to non-Jewish people until 1967 (688 A.D. + 1279 years), when in the first hours of the Six-day war Jews took control of East Jerusalem and the prophesy in Sackcloth ended when they had their own state on May 14th 1948 (688 A.D. + 1260 years). [5]

Grand Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, believed RothIsm is “the work of Satan, a sacrilege, a blasphemy” and The Holocaust, he wept, “was a direct result of RothIsm, a punishment from G-d.”

Rothschild was well aware of Jewish history and Jews, according to the Christian New Testament, persecuted and crucified Jesus Christ and most of his early followers. America’s traditional churches in the 19th Century would never stand for a Jewish occupation of Jesus’ homeland.

Rothschild Backed Zionist Jews (RBZJ) and a con artist Cyrus Scofield were used to change America and its religious orientation by the use of the Scofield Reference Bible from Oxford University Press.

Scofield, after being released from prison was introduced to Samuel Untermeyer, the President of the Koren Hayesod, and the RothIsm movement in America.

Untermeyer, an attorney, was instrumental in preparing the Federal Reserve Banking law in 1910, and the financing of Scofield’s Reference bible.

The Scofield bible has hundreds of easy-to-read footnotes in the margins and at the bottom of the pages that misleadingly weave parts of the Old and New Testaments together as though the same people wrote them at the same time. The most convincing evidence of RothIsm influence on Scofield are the notes themselves, below are examples taken from the revised 1967 Edition:

For a nation to commit the sin of anti-semitism brings inevitable judgment.

God made an unconditional promise of blessings through Abram’s seed to the nation of Israel to inherit a specific territory forever.

In fact there is no sin of anti-semitism in the bible and Abraham did not bequeath a “specific territory” to his descendants.

Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell weave Scofield’s “Jews” into Genesis 12:3, “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” and falsely conclude:

God has blessed America because America has blessed the Jew. If this nation wants her fields to remain white with grain, her scientific achievements to remain notable, and her freedom to remain intact, America must continue to stand with Israel.

John McArthur, author, pastor at Grace Community Mega-Church came up with a “Just War” explanation for the Iraq War because of Scofields “specific territory” note. On CNN he told Larry King, “Iraq is ‘a just war’ because Iraq has not only rejected the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but has done everything it can possibly do to stamp out the people of God, namely Israel.”

Robertson, Falwell and McArthur because of Scofield, ignore the central tenets of Christianity: Seeking peace and loving one’s enemies, “Peace be with you, that the meek and those who work for peace — rather than the powerful and violent — are blessed by God.”

Then he will say to those on his left (Robertson et all), ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ “They will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ MT 25:41

Pre-millennialism, Dispensationalism, Judeo-Christianity and “Christian Zionism” all rely on the Scofield footnote “A Curse Laid Upon Those Who Persecute The Jews” to justify the Iraq war and Israel’s human rights violations in Gaza and the West Bank. [6]

It is impossible to overstate the influence of Cyrus Scofield and the Oxford Press on twentieth-century Christian and Jewish sectarian beliefs. With limitless advertising and promotion, the Scofield Bible became the most important instrument for spreading the message of Christian Zionism: that the Modern State of Israel is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

Uganda is not Jerusalem

In 1903, Joseph Chamberlain, the British Colonial Secretary, brought the “Uganda Project”, a Jewish settlement in East Africa, to Theodore Herzl. Herzl initially rejected the idea but the April 1903 Kishinev pogrom, the Medieval Outbreak where 49 Russian Jews were killed, 92 severely wounded, 500 slightly wounded changed his mind and he recommended the controversial solution as a temporary measure.

Herzl did not live to see the rejection of the Uganda Plan in 1905. He, and further discussion of a homeland other than Palestine, died unexpectedly when Herzl was 44.

David Wolfson succeeded Herzl but he failed to convince the Young Turks to give up Palestine after the Ottoman Empire collapsed. Dr. Otto Warburg (related to Paul and Max, Rothschild’s agents) was put in charge and the movement was moved to Berlin.

WWII is over but not for the Palestinians

The war ended in 1945 and after the bitterest episode in Jewish history the refugees were moved from Concentration to Displaced Persons camps until the world was willing to give the Holocaust survivors the Palestinian’s Land.

As the United Nations debated a resolution to divide the Palestinian land, the UN- appointed mediator Count Folke Bernadotte thought the resolution offended

Basic principles to prevent these innocent victims of the conflict [Palestinians were not to blame for the Holocaust] from returning to their homes, while Jewish immigrants flood into Palestine and, what’s more, threatening to permanently replace the dispossessed Arab refugees who have been here for centuries.” He described, “Zionist pillage on a grand scale and the destruction of [Palestinian] villages without apparent military need.

His report (U.N. Document A. 648) was filed on September 16, 1948. The next day Count Bernadotte and his assistant were assassinated in the part of Jerusalem occupied by the Zionists. [7]

Finally the British navy attacked the 4,500 Holocaust survivors (“Exodus 1947”) on their way to Palestine and a Rothschild Homeland was a fait accomplis.

On May 14, 1948, the British Mandate over Palestine expired and Rothschild had established the Jewish State, located in the only place in the world that could have a clash of civilizations, Jerusalem.

The Jews return to the “Holy Land” portends Armageddon.

Armageddon, the final battle, will come when someone blows up the Dome of the Rock. That magnificent golden domed mosque built on the site of Solomon’s Temple (the abomination of desolation) is preventing the return of the messiah. Radical Christians and Jews believe Christ will not come back to earth until the Jews rebuild the Temple.

Should the Dome be demolished, then for the first time in history, thanks to Sadaam Hussein when he destroyed 90 percent of Iraq’s Wetlands, 200 million people could cross the Euphrates for a holy war in Jerusalem. [8]

A war that will rid the planet of millions of useless eaters.

The Rothschild New World Order only needs 500 million of us for slaves.

Part 2: World War I, II: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened

Part 3: Adolph Hitler: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened

Part 4: How did Hitler lose the war: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened

Footnotes

[1] 4. Cmdr. William Guy Carr: Quoted in Satan: Prince of This World, Albert Pike received a vision, which he described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. http://www.threeworldwars.com/albert-pike2.htm

[2] Shlomo Sand, When and How the Jewish People was Invented, Arthur Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, published in 1976.

[3] From the diaries that Theodor Herzl kept between 1895 and 1904 — Part I, pp. 16

[4] Original document in German Auswertiges Amt Archiv, Bestand 47-59, E224152 and E234155-58. Complete original text published in: David Yisraeli, The Palestinian Problem in German Politics 1889-1945 (Israel: 1947) pp. 315-317.

[5] The Mosque of Omar built in 688 A.D., The Dome of the Rock is the correct identification of the abomination of desolation. Biblical scholars acknowledge the words of Ezekiel who wrote, “I have appointed thee each day for a year.” http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9109

[6] Reverend Jerry Falwell erroneously denied that many evangelicals opposed the U.S.-led war in Iraq. Appearing opposite Sojourners editor-in-chief Reverend Jim Wallis on the February 11 edition of FOX News’ Hannity & Colmes, Falwell called Wallis’s claim that “evangelicals around the world were against the war in Iraq” “baloney” and remarked: “You could fit your [antiwar evangelical] crowd in a phone booth.” After Wallis told Falwell that “there are evangelical Christians who don’t share your pro-war views,” Falwell replied, “I know — you and William Sloane Coffin.” Coffin is a longtime peace activist and former Yale University chaplain.

[7] For the assassination of Count Bernadotte see the report sent to the UN the same day as the attack (17 September 1948) by General A. Lundstrom (who was sitting in Bernadotte’s car). See also the book published by the same general for the 20th anniversary of the crime : L’assassinat du Compte Bernadottel, printed in Rome (pub. East. A. Fanelli) in 1970 under the title : ‘Un tributo a la memoria del Comte Folke Bernadotte’. Also Ralph Hewins’ book : ‘Count Bernadotte, his life and work’ (Hutchinson, 1948). And in the Milanese weekly Europa’, Baruch Nadel’s confessions (quoted in Le Monde, 4 and 5 July 1971).

[8] In 1994, 60 percent of the wetlands were destroyed by Saddam Hussein’s regime. They were drained to permit military access and greater political control of the native Marsh Arabs.

Monday, June 1, 2009

La Franc-Maçonnerie est l'outil colonial sioniste qui est derriere chaque attentat, chaque coup d'etat dans les pays arabes



Islam Contre la Franc-Maçonnerie ou la fin de la colonisation



Les Rubriques thématiques du Grand Orient Arabe


Le Grand Orient Arabe publie sur son site d'Etude et de Recherche (http://www.grandorientarabe.org) des articles sur l'Islam et la Franc-Maçonnerie, sur l'Islam ésotérique et initiatique... Au sommaire de ses rubriques on pourra lire: HISTORIQUE: - La Franc-Maçonnerie au Moyen-Orient : Aperçu - Loges et Francs-Maçons Arabes ( avant 1950 ) : Liban, Syrie, Palestine, Egypte, Jordanie, Algérie, Maroc, Tunisie.. ETUDES ET RECHERCHES: - Déclaration de la Grande Loge Unie d'Angleterre sur la Franc-Maçonnerie et la Religion. - Islam et Franc-Maçonnerie: a) les "FATWAS" anti-maçonniques b) l'Opposition des intégristes musulmans. - La Franc-Maçonnerie au Proche et Moyen Orient et au Maghreb. - La Franc-Maçonnerie Algérienne: le tournant de 1899-1902. - La Franc-Maçonnerie en Egypte: " L'existence en 1818 de deux Loges travaillant au Rite Egyptien de CAGLIOSTRO" PLANCHES: JANVIER 2009 - L'enseignement du patrimoine culturel méditerranéen - DRUZES : La Symbolique des Couleurs ( Analogie avec la Franc-Maçonnerie ). FEVRIER 2009 - Salomon dans les traditions ésotériques. - Une lecture Soufie du Coran. - Zoroastre : L'Héritage Spirituel. - Swedenborg et Ismaéliens : Convergences MARS 2009 - Les structures ésotériques de l'Islam. AVRIL 2009 -Jamal-al-Din al- AFGHANI : Panislamiste et Franc-Maçon. - L'Islam Libéral. MAI 2009 - LA Tolérance selon les "Frères de la Pureté"(Ikhwan al Safa). - Chiisme : Le concept de "Wilayat al Faqih". BIBLIO: Introduction du livre "Secrets initiatiques en Islam et rituels maçonniques" Livres sur l'Islam Esotérique et initiatique. DIVERS et LIENS: Sites d' Obédiences et de Loges dans les Pays Arabes Liens: Wikipédia, Blog Maçonnique, Meubles et Objets Maçonniques... Lien de la Franc-Maçonnerie Universelle: Un article sur CAGLIOSTRO ( voir partie consacrée au Moyen-Orient). Conférences, Colloques, Symposium Memphis-Misraim, Hommage à Fabrice O'Driscoll Les Elections Législatives au LIBAN du 7 Juin 2009: La Position du Grand Orient Arabe... Catholiques et Francs-Maçons: L'Intervention de l'Abbé Eric de Beukelaer ( Belgique ). R.°.O.°.A.°.R.°. Rite Oriental Ancien Rectifié......

Sunday, May 31, 2009

Jewish Anti-Semitism Towards Jesus and Christianity


Jewish Anti-Semitism Towards Jesus and Christianity
Published May 10, 2009

ANTI+SEMITE

Any person with 3 functioning brain cells and paying even a microbe’s
worth of attention to the open assault on Christianity these days by
organized Jewish groups will assume it to be either a trick question or
a joke of some sorts, meaning the publication in the Jewish Forward
(considered to be the most “prestigious” of all Jewish newspapers
littering the American literary landscape these days) of Jay
Michaelson’s piece “Do Jews Have a Jesus Problem?”

–And with good reason. After all this–the heyday of highly-publicized
Jesus–bashing on the part of Jewish groups–is as rare these days as the
Jewish state’s denials of having deliberately used phosphorus against
Palestinian civilians in her recent masterpiece in Old Testament
butchery known as “Operation Cast Lead”.

Lest we forget, this is the era when nice Jewish girls like Sarah
Silverman make as part of their shtick that infamous “I hope the Jews
did kill Christ…I’d do it again. I’d f****** do it again—in a second” as
well as the recent tv production in Israel put together by her cousins
where the mother of Jesus was depicted as a woman who slept around and
pleasured herself with an assortment of sexual-gratification devices and
Jesus as an obese slob too heavy to walk on the sea of Galilee.

Nevertheless, in this day and age where Jews are “living large” in their
obvious distaste for the person of JC, the Forward’s Jay Michaelson asks
in the most serious of tones that question concerning Jewish antipathy
towards the Son of Man that to all but the truly uninformed is a
no-brainer of sorts. Of course, it is not an exploratory piece meant to
discover the yeas or nays of such a thesis, but rather as a way of
introducing the idea “Yeah, we Jews certainly do have a “Jesus problem”
and are completely justified and now you’re going to find out why and if
it offends you well then too fuckin’ bad.”

Of course Michaelson is not as brash or incautious as to use brusque
language like that. Rather than the overtly-violent approach in
violating the reader’s mind, he prefers instead that tried-and-true
date-rape drug, meaning the various methods perfected by his cohorts in
Hollywood who for generations now have dominated the business of turning
the masses into asses through opinion-molding and laboratory-tested
means of persuasion. Specifically, the author prepares the reader for
the science fiction that is to follow in the typically-Jewish fashion of
depicting the Chosenites ALWAYS as the victim (never the victimizer) and
incapable of doing an evil act that results in some form of negative
blowback. Possibly aware of the fact that people these days are growing
increasingly weary of sitting through the same nerve-grating opera of
Jewish kvetching over their eternal persecution, he lets loose the first
salvo in his assault on historical accuracy with a joke of sorts–

“You’ll have to forgive us Jews for being a little nervous. Two thousand
years of Christian love have worn down our nerves.”



Immediately obvious (or at least should be) is that this is going to be
YET ANOTHER (imagine that) discussion of how terribly treated the Jews
have been throughout history and how “isn’t it just terrible” and “who
can blame them for their feelings” and “this is why you Gentiles are
getting what you deserve” whenever Jewish interests produce YET ANOTHER
(imagine that) movie, column or documentary slandering Christian
culture. Short of the never-ending commentaries and documentaries
concerning Jesus being gay or else merely a fictional character who
never existed, there is the legalese to deal with–the banning of
Nativity scenes at Christmas time while the most racist, extremist of
Jewish elements from the Chabad Lubavitch sect light their infernal
menorah at every public location in the US, including the White House
itself. Done in such a way as to immediately put the
organically-anti-Christian nature of “Jewishness” in its typical role
(meaning all the result of–you guessed it–persecution and suffering on
the part of the eternal victims) it continues in the same vein–

“That says it all, doesn’t it? The scars of anti-Semitism and missionary
activity, the pathos-drenched sense of humor, the contempt for
Christianity — this is certainly how I regarded our local majority
religion as I was growing up. When I was a child, Christianity was like
the big, stupid bully: at once idiotic, and overwhelmingly powerful.
Couldn’t they see how ridiculous their religion was? A virgin birth?
Santa Claus? An Easter Bunny? A messiah who got killed, but actually
died for our sins? And yet, these were the people running our country,
telling us which days we get off from school and which we don’t, and
playing their insidious music every winter.”

As stated earlier, just like with all things involving the delusional,
bizarre- mundo world of Jewish thought processes, where everything is
upside down, backwards, convoluted and–pardon the French here–just plain
“effed” up, any discussion of Jewish contempt for Jesus Christ and the
religion/culture He founded must, repeat MUST be cast–not in the light
of historical accuracy and honesty, but rather in a
carefully-constructed drama Jews find most comfortable–meaning where
persecution, persecution, and even more persecution are the main
characters, along with all the other major players and themes
contributing to their history of suffering and woe–Anti-Semitism.
Bigotry. Intolerance. Them as the sacrificial lamb, having NEVER done
anything obnoxious, criminal, or offensive that might have acted as the
catalyst responsible for bringing the present situation into existence.
No examination of conscience on their part to see what THEY may have
done to contribute to the situation, nor even a consideration of the
possibility that in some way they were–dare we use the word
here–culpable and that the bed they now lie in is one of their own making.

Of course, those who remember even a smattering of what they heard in
Sunday school or who have spent even a moderate amount of time reading
through the New Testament understand full well that the entire premise
upon which the backwards piece appearing in the Forward rests is one of
pure fantasy and selective memory on the part of a person living in a
state of denial and obviously with something to hide when it comes to
the history of his people. The Jews and their “Jesus problem” did not
begin with the mean old “big, stupid bully” Christians and their
“idiotic and overwhelmingly powerful“ religion who were “running the
country” and deciding “which days” school was cancelled and their
“insidious music every winter.” To believe that Jews’ “Jesus problem”
began with the Christians meting out revenge on the Chosenites because
of Jesus’ crucifixion can take place only amongst those wearing special
3-d type glasses blocking out mountains of relevant historical fact
while allowing relatively small amounts of over-inflated fantasy to pass
through.

But then, we must take stock of the fact that this is 2009, a
continuation of the “Jewish century” (as Jewish writer Yuri Slezkine
wrote in his book of the same name), an age where reality-shapers in
media, academia, politics or wherever can create just about any illusion
they want and make it appear real. Where the murder of over a million
Iraqis in the span of just a year is swept from human consciousness as
if mere microbes of sand. Where Jewish math–no matter what the
equation–always adds up to “6 million” (and even in the face of
scientifically impossible criteria) and where Hollywood produces
blockbuster movies such as “Independence Day” the star character of
which is a Jewish nerd who invents a computer virus and with it saves
the entire human race from an apocalyptic alien invasion.

The truth is, going through the motions here and bringing some
historical sanity back into the discussion of Jewish hostility towards
Jesus is for all intents and purposes probably a big waste of time.
After all, Christians today have fully infused into their thinking the
idea that the people (and mindset) responsible for murdering JC are
still God’s favorite creatures, all their past deeds (including
genocide) notwithstanding. Today’s “Jesus Freaks” (as they are viewed by
Jews) are (obediently) more worried about Ahab the Arab then they are
about today’s great, great grandchildren of those who swore a blood oath
20 centuries ago to wipe out the new religion based on the virtues of
peace, justice, and compassion. For sure, this present concoction known
as Christian Zionist Dispensationalism is a madness that has but one
cure which we cannot deliver here, meaning death and standing
face-to-face with Jesus Himself as He explains what perfect morons His
supposed followers were for handing the keys to the kingdom over to the
barbarians at the gate.

Nevertheless, for the sake of posterity, here we go all the same.

The beginning of the Jews and their “Jesus problem” FAR predates any
such “persecutions” they claim to have suffered in succeeding centuries.
Truth be told, the sad story begins with Herod (called “King of the
Jews” in his time) who sent his personal butchers out to kill all the
little boys 2 years old and under in Bethlehem upon hearing that the
Messiah had arrived, threatening to undo the Jewish power structure at
that time. Following this late-term abortion on a mass-scale business,
some 30 years later we have Jesus announcing Himself and his intentions,
specifically to “bring freedom for the prisoners” and to “release the
oppressed.”

And what was the reaction on the part of these innocent,
pure-as-the-wind-driven-snow/righteousness-loving Jews who had such
close communication with the Almighty that they could claim in the most
chauvinistic way they were his “Chosen” people? Did they welcome Jesus
and His message of truth, justice and compassion? Did they fall on their
knees and rejoice that indeed God had made good on His word and had sent
them a savior to rescue them from their miserable, self-aggrandizing,
obnoxious, violent, haughty behavior?

Perish the thought fellow earthlings. Their response was to form a mob
and attempt to eliminate the person of Jesus by throwing Him over a
cliff to His death. So much for Jewish hospitality and open-mindedness
they are constantly crowing about.

That pretty much set the tone for the next 3 years that were to follow.
How many times had they taken up stones to kill Him? How many times had
He remained in Galilee, far to the north, knowing that the Jews in Judea
were waiting to take His life? Why is it He took only one Jew–Judas–into
his circle of trust and filled the balance with Galileans? How many
times did the Jews accuse Him of being a sorcerer and possessed by the
devil? It was a 3 year war between the Jews and Jesus that ended with
their conspiring to bring him up on false charges and have him killed.
They even plotted to have Lazarus–an innocent man Jesus rose from the
dead–murdered in the interests of undoing Jesus’ recent public relations
victory.

In that time period, there were no pogroms, no holocausts, no round-ups,
no expulsions…No yellow hats, no Star-of-David patches or numbers
tattooed on people’s arms. Jewish hostility to Jesus, or, as Michaelson
put it in the Forward, the Jew’s “Jesus Problem” began with their
rejection of His council and concern for their well-being, plain and simple.

And not just Him, mind you, but His followers as well. People like
Stephen, Peter, Paul, and the rest who preferred dying as free men to
living as slaves to the Jewish mindset. Stoned to death, crucified
upside down, beheaded. Those not killed were harassed, harangued, chased
from town to town and by whatever means possible deprived of their life,
liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Any sane person must ask certain questions here, not the least of which
is “How does someone NOT like this guy, this Jesus of Nazareth?” After
all, for 3 years, He healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, fed
thousands, brought the dead back to life and gave a particularly
neurotic group of people the answers they needed to live happy,
productive lives as ordinary citizens on planet earth to be followed up
with the grand finale, meaning eternity in the afterlife. How does
someone or a group of someones react with such hostility to such a
thing? What is this allergy they possessed (and continue to possess) to
certain virtues such as humility, forgiveness, forbearance and mercy
that would drive them to such madness?

The answer really is quite simple actually–Jesus and His message was
like an anti-biotic of sorts to the highly contagious/highly
infectious/highly pathological sickness known as Jewish thinking.

Remember that the Jews were (are) products of men such as Moses, Joshua,
David, Saul, Solomon, et al who gave them more bang for their buck then
the hated carpenter from Galilee. These men were the kinds of saviors
the Jews could appreciate. Moses brought death and misery upon the
Egyptians after Pharaoh discovered the wealthy and influential
Israelites were treacherous by nature and thus forced them to do honest
work for a living rather than engaging in speculation and despoiling the
Egyptian people of their life, liberty and property as the Israelite
Joseph had previously done. The “god” preached about and promoted by
these men was the kind of deity the Jews wanted, one who would bring
them riches, power, successful wars, plagues upon their enemies, etc,
etc, etc.

And then, along comes this Jesus of Nazareth–from Galilee, of all
places, considered to be an outland where only Gentiles would want to
live and a place from which “no good could ever come“. A CARPENTER to
boot, an occupation consigned for those who were enslaved by the
Israelites in the Old Testament. Did He bring the aforementioned riches,
power, successful wars, plagues upon their enemies, etc, etc, etc?

Of course not. He brought rebuke and criticism, a complete repudiation
of this central tenet of Jewish thinking which is “We are God’s chosen
people and can do whatever the f***we want to anyone and they better not
say a f****** word about it”. He brought humility, compassion,
righteousness, honesty, and the rest –”qualities” that the Jews had no
use for, and in the end, they had been Jewed out of the messiah they
felt they deserved and killed Him because of it.

And yet, in this discussion of the Jews and their “Jesus problem”, not a
MENTION of any of this from Michaelson or any of his fellow lying,
self-deceived Chosenites. No, their feelings for Jesus and His message
is all the product of the “persecution” they received from the mean old
“big, stupid bully” Christians and their “idiotic and overwhelmingly
powerful“ religion who were “running the country” and deciding “which
days” school was cancelled and their “insidious music every winter” and
NOT the tone set by their forefathers who dealt with Jesus and His
followers like a gang of thugs and terrorists.

“But wait!” the astute interject–“How can this discussion be taking
place in the first place? After all, this is the age where discussing
Jewish antipathy towards that “hewer of wood” from Galilee and His
teachings is verboten. When such discussion does take place–as logically
it should–the hounds of hell from all the various Jewish groups such as
ADL and SPLC descend upon the offending commentator for daring to
resurrect all those “old canards” and rip him to pieces with all the
usual business of “anti-Semitism”.

Of course, the obvious answer to this no-brainer question is as obvious
as stink on sweaty armpits. In the first case, Michaelson is a Jew
writing for a Jewish publication. That’s ok–The Jews can talk about
their less-than-favorable feelings for Jesus all they want and it’s a
case of “no worries, mate”, whereas when someone from outside the
Chosenite country club does so it becomes a case of “ALL HANDS ON
DECK–IMPENDING HOLOCAUST”.

The real irony (and insanity) in all of it though is exposed when the
same Jewish logic shoved down the throats of every human being over the
course of the last 60 years is applied to the whole mix. To be against
1, count ‘em, ONE Jew for whatever reason is to be an anti-Semite.
Thinking that convicted spy Jonathon Pollard should remain in prison for
having stolen and then sold to Israel over 1 million pages of
highly-classified material that led to the execution of over 1,000 US
intelligence assets makes one an anti-Semite. Believing the Rosenbergs
got what they deserved for selling America’s nuclear secrets to the
Soviet Union makes one an anti-Semite. Being outraged that the two spies
for AIPAC having the espionage charges against them dropped makes one
anti-Semitic. Noting the religious and national loyalties of individuals
with names such as Perle, Wolfowitz, Schumer, Abrams, Emmanuel, Feith et
al and noting the prominent role they played in pushing America into an
apocalyptic war against two Muslim countries makes one anti-Semitic.

However, being decidedly anti-Christian or having a “Jesus problem” (as
the self-aggrandizing bigot Michaelson put it in his recent Forward
article) does not make one an anti-Semite. This, despite the fact that
one of the notions Jewish interests are constantly shoving down the
gullets of Christians world-wide these days is that “Jesus was a Jew”
with the end goal of making gullible Christians believe these is a
kinship existing between them and their spiritual nemesis from the
synagogue when in truth there is not.

By definition then, to be against Jesus means to be an anti-Semite, and
by extension to be against even ONE–count ‘em, ONE of His 1,000,000,000
followers around the world means to be anti-Semitic as well. And yet,
with the same perfect hypocrisy that is the calling card of the Jewish
mindset, believing Jesus’ mother Mary was a prostitute who conceived Him
while menstruating is not anti-Semitic, but rather “progressive“.
Believing He “got what he deserved” in His crucifixion, that He was a
sexual deviant and sorcerer and suffers in hell by being boiled in a
cauldron of feces and semen is not anti-Semitic, but rather a case of
“freedom of religion“. Producing movies defaming Jesus and his followers
is not Jew-hatred. Rather, it is Christians getting what they deserve
for 2,000 years of Jewish “persecution”.

Not that any of this should be anything new. Again, at the risk of
repetition, if it is one thing history has taught it is that the Jews
and their Israelite predecessors–despite the high-sounding titles of
some of their publications such as ‘The Forward”–were, are and most
likely always will be the most backwards-thinking people ever to have
walked God’s green earth.

Besides Jesus Himself, perhaps it was the prophet Jeremiah (another
“anti-Semite” stoned to death by the Jews for his refusal to see things
“their way“ ) who said it best-

‘I will pronounce my judgment on these people (the Jews) because of
their wickedness in forsaking me…

Although you wash yourself with an abundance of soap the stain of your
guilt is still before me…

As a thief is disgraced only when caught, so too is the house of Israel
disgraced…they, their kings and officials, priests and prophets have
turned their backs to me and not their faces…

In vain did I punish these people and yet they did not respond to
correction…

Your sword has devoured your prophets like a ravening lion…

Even the worst of other women can learn from your ways…

On your clothes men find the lifeblood of the innocent poor, and yet in
spite of all this you dare to say ‘I am innocent!’…

These people are fools…They do not know me. They are senseless children
and have no understanding. They are skilled in evil and know not how to
do good…

Go up and down the streets of Jerusalem…Look around and search her
squares…If you can find but one person who deals honestly and seeks the
truth I will forgive this city…

Among these people (the Jews) are wicked men who lie in wait like men
who snare birds…Their house are full of deceit, they have become rich
and powerful and have grown fat and sleek and their evil deeds have no
limit…

They defend neither the orphans nor the poor…

Should I not punish them for this? Should I not avenge myself upon a
nation such as this?

Violence and destruction resound in her and her sickness is ever before me…

And yet, their ears remain closed and the word of the Lord is offensive
to them. They find no pleasure in it…

From the least to the greatest, all are greedy for gain, prophet and
priest alike, all practice deceit…

No, they have no shame at all and do not even know how to blush…

They cling to deceit and no one repents of his wickedness, saying ‘what
have I done?’

No one speaks the truth…They have taught their tongues to lie and they
weary themselves with sinning…

Therefore I will bring upon them a disaster they cannot escape and
although they cry out to me, I will not listen to them…

Do not pray for these people nor plead for them, because I will not
listen in the time of distress…

Instead, I will destroy them with the sword, famine and plague and will
pour out on them the calamity they deserve…

You have rejected me, so I will lay hands on you and destroy you, for I
can no longer show you compassion…

Your wealth and your treasures I will give away as plunder, because of
all the sins of your country…

I am against you, Jerusalem, and will punish you as your deeds deserve
and will kindle a fire in your forests that will consume everything
around you…

Through your own fault you will lose the inheritance I gave you, for you
have kindled my anger and it will burn FOREVER…


Friday, May 29, 2009

West plots to supplant United Nations with Global NATO



West Plots To Supplant United Nations With Global NATO

Rick Rozoff

nato67666.jpg


Stop NATO

Ten years ago it first became evident to the world that moves were afoot in major Western capitals to circumvent, subvert and ultimately supplant the United Nations, as the UN could not always be counted on to act in strict accordance with the dictates of the United States and its NATO allies.

At that time in 1999 the NATO alliance was waging what would become a 78-day bombing war against Yugoslavia in flagrant contravention of the United Nations and of international law in general.

As two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council – the five permanent members being the main victorious World War II allies, with the People’s Republic of China having replaced the Republic of China (Taiwan) in 1971 and with Russia as the successor state to the Soviet Union – exactly China and Russia, not being NATO members states, opposed that war and in several other instances the use of sanctions and military force against nations targeted for both by the West.

The first indication that the United Nations was marked for marginalization, selective application (and exploitation) or even de facto dissolution, however, occurred three years earlier in 1996 when the United States single-handedly browbeat the other fourteen then members of the Security Council to depose Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and replace him with Kofi Annan, who the preceding year had been appointed UN special envoy to NATO and authorized the NATO bombing in Bosnia behind the back of Boutros-Ghali.

Boutros-Ghali was deprived of the traditional second term for not authorizing NATO’s bombing of Bosnian Serb targets in 1995 and for speaking the truth about the deadly Israeli bombing of a refugee camp in Qana, Lebanon in the following year when 106 civilians were killed and 116 injured.

As former Clinton and Bush administrations’ National Security Council counter-terrorism adviser Richard Clarke acknowledged:

“[Madeleine] Albright and I and a handful of others (Michael Sheehan, Jamie Rubin) had entered into a pact together in 1996 to oust Boutros-Ghali as Secretary General of the United Nations, a secret plan we had called Operation Orient Express, reflecting our hope that many nations would join us in doing in the UN head.

“In the end, the US had to do it alone (with its UN veto) and Sheehan and I had to prevent the President from giving in to pressure from world leaders and extending Boutros-Ghali’s tenure, often by our racing to the Oval Office when we were alerted that a head of state was telephoning the President. In the end Clinton was impressed that we had managed not only to oust Boutros-Ghali but to have Kofi Annan selected to replace him.” [1]

By 1999, however, even having a UN secretary general handpicked and forced upon the world by Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright wasn’t sufficient to meet NATO’s requirements as it finalized plans for its first war, the Operation Allied Force aerial assault against Yugoslavia.

The US and its Alliance allies could not be assured of gaining a majority of votes in the 15-member Security Council to authorize the war and even if successful in that regard could not be certain that Russia, China or both would not veto the resolution.

So the United Nations, whose procedures and requirements for 54 years had been observed even in the breach, was now disregarded, downgraded and severely if not mortally wounded, not yet having recuperated from the blow of ten years ago.

American and NATO subordinate Annan officiated over the debasement and humiliation of the organization he headed and never once criticized NATO’s waging war without a United Nations mandate and in open defiance of the institution.

Guarantor Of Peace Versus World’s Only Military Alliance

The Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations identifies the purpose of the UN’s founding in 1945 as being “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind” and “to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest.” [2]

To accentuate and complete the message that NATO had launched its post-Cold War transformation from Euro-Atlantic military bloc to self-designated and sole international arbiter of conflicts within and between nations and of the authorization of extraterritorial military force, with the concomitant usurpation of the role of the United Nations, on April 23-24 NATO held its 50th anniversary jubilee summit in Washington D.C.

Unveiling what it called its new Strategic Concept, the summit also issued a Washington Declaration which inter alia stated “We are charting NATO’s course as we enter the 21st century” and “We pledge to improve our defence capabilities to fulfill the full range of the Alliance’s 2lst century missions.” [3]

Video clips and photographs of the summit at the time revealed what 21st Century NATO was intended to become: With the US’s Bill Clinton and Britain’s Tony Blair at the center of other world leaders, the flags of nearly fifty nations – nineteen full NATO member states, 25 Partnership for Peace affiliates and others – decked the auditorium. As did the NATO flag, a facsimile of a compass with its four arms pointed to north, south, east and west.

The message could not have been more clear, more irrefutable: A new world organization, an expanded version of a Western military bloc, was replacing that which had emerged from the smoldering ruins of a war that had cost over fifty million human lives.

NATO lost no time and spared no effort in implementing its plans for the new millennium. In addition to its military deployment in Bosnia the bloc continued its occupation of the Serbian province of Kosovo.

In 2001 it inaugurated a military deployment in Macedonia, Operation Allied Harmony, after armed invasions of the nation by an extremist offshoot of the NATO-allied Kosovo Liberation Army based in Kosovo, and later in the year it participated in the American invasion and occupation of Afghanistan where NATO continues its first ground war almost eight years later.

It insinuated itself into the Darfur region of western Sudan in 2005 and thus was simultaneously engaged in operations in three continents in that year.

Or as then State Department Deputy Assistant for European Affairs and later US ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker said of 2005, NATO was “engaged in eight simultaneous operations on four continents.” [4]

In the last five years of the 20th Century and the first five of the 21st NATO had evolved from a regional alliance based in Western Europe to a global force contending with the United Nations for the number and geographical range of the missions it was conducting.

That expansion in both extent and essence was not limited to frequently overshadowing and nullifying the role of the UN, but has also been a component in undoing the entire post-World War II order of which the UN was the cornerstone.

Results Of World War II Undone: Inauguration Of Post-Post-Yalta World

In early May of 2005 US President George W. Bush paid what the State Department must have intended as a “freedom crusade” tour to the capitals of two former Soviet republics, Latvia and Georgia.

The choices were deliberately selected to antagonize Russia, which has borders with both, as Latvia has disenfranchised millions of the minority residents of the country who are 40% of the total, especially ethnic Russians and other Slavs (Europe’s only “non-citizens”), and has permitted the rehabilitation of Nazi Waffen SS veterans as “defenders of the nation,” and Georgia has been a thorn in Russia’s side since its formerly US-based head of state Mikheil Saakashvili came to power on the back of the “rose revolution” of late 2003 with the assistance of US governmental and non-governmental funds and direction. That antagonism reached a breaking point last August with the five-day war between Georgia and Russia.

Bush overtly baited Russia in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi with comments like “Before there was a purple revolution in Iraq or an orange revolution in Ukraine or a cedar revolution in Lebanon, there was a rose revolution,” [5] “In recent months, the world has marvelled at the hopeful changes taking place from Baghdad to Beirut to Bishkek [Kyrgyzstan],” [6] and that thanks to Georgia, “freedom is advancing to the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea and around the world,” [7] as an image of his face was projected onto a giant screen in the background.

Earlier in the Latvian capital of Riga Bush delivered a blunt and unprecedented attack on the Yalta Conference of 1945 and its aftermath. The historical meeting of Britain’s Winston Churchill, the US’s Franklin Roosevelt and the Soviet Union’s Josef Stalin in February of that year was denounced by Bush with such characterizations of the summit as constituting one of “the injustices of our history,” which “followed in the unjust tradition of Munich and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact,” and that “the legacy of Yalta was finally buried, once and for all” in 1991. [8]

This animus against the post-World War II system that evolved out of the Yalta and later Potsdam conferences remained a recurring motif for Bush, who in his last appearance as US president at a NATO summit in Bucharest, Romania in 2008 denounced “the bitter legacy of Yalta” and to demonstrate what the post-post-Yalta era was intended to be added, “I spoke those words on the soil of a nation on the Baltic. Today, on the soil of a Black Sea nation, I have come to see those words fulfilled. The NATO alliance that meets here this week now stretches from the shores of Klaipeda [Lithuania] to the beaches of Neptun [Romania].

“[O]ur Alliance must also decide how to respond to requests by Georgia and Ukraine to participate in NATO’s Membership Action Plan. These two nations
inspired the world with their Rose and Orange revolutions….

“As NATO allies fight…in Iraq and Afghanistan, our Alliance is taking on other important missions across the world. In the Mediterranean, NATO forces are patrolling the high seas…as part of Operation Active Endeavor. In Kosovo, NATO forces are providing security and helping a new democracy take root in the Balkans….NATO is no longer a static alliance….It is now an expeditionary alliance that is sending its forces across the world….” [9]

To understand the nature of this abiding, visceral, monomaniacal hostility toward what with a comparable degree of venom Zbigniew Brzezinski for years has contemptuously derided as the post-Yalta world, excerpts from a column by Indian journalist Siddharth Varadarajan immediately after Bush’s Riga speech of 2005 are quoted below.

“[Bush's] attack on Yalta shows the U.S. is not interested in cooperative security.

“Historians of the Cold War will not have missed the significance of President George W. Bush choosing Riga as the venue for his speech on Saturday repudiating the 1945 Yalta Agreement.

“[W]hen Mr. Bush said in Riga that Yalta was ‘one of the greatest wrongs of history’ because it traded the freedom of small nations for the goal of stability in Europe, he was not merely echoing Cold War dogma. He was also sending out a message to the world — and particularly to Great Powers like Russia and China — that the era of collective security established at
Yalta and later, at the United Nations, is decisively over. And that if the restraints placed by this system ever come in the way of U.S. national interests, they will be brushed aside.” [10]

Varadarajan included in his piece this quote from President Franklin Roosevelt on March 1, 1945 on the meaning of Yalta as it was understood at the time:

“The Crimea Conference was a successful effort by the three leading Nations to find a common ground for peace. It ought to spell the end of the system of unilateral action, the exclusive alliances, the spheres of influence, the balances of power, and all the other expedients that have been tried for centuries — and have always failed. We propose to substitute for all these, a universal organisation in which all peace-loving nations will finally have a choice to join.” [11]

The universal organization Roosevelt referred to only 42 days before his death was the United Nations, which would come into existence formally on October 24, 1945.

On the very day that Bush traduced Yalta and its legacy in Latvia, his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin said on the same topic, “I am deeply convinced that the essence of the 1945 Yalta accords was as follows: The anti-Hitler coalition’s leaders strove to build a new international system that would prevent the revival of nazism, and that would shield the world from destructive global conflicts,” explicitly mentioning the United Nations Organization and its Charter. [12]

Bush’s statement in Riga, “the significance of the venue” having been pointed out above, was calculatingly delivered in the capital of a country that has witnessed a disturbing revival of Nazi revisionism, apologetics, nostalgia and rehabilitation in recent years. Animosity toward the Yalta principles, including their most enduring institutional embodiment, the United Nations, means preferring in some manner what preceded the Yalta conference to what came after it. That either means the state of affairs in Europe before World War II or – that during the war years of 1939-1945.

Von Sponeck’s Warning: Subverting The United Nations From Within

This past February Hans von Sponeck, former UN Assistant Secretary General and UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, wrote a probing indictment called The United Nations and NATO for a Swiss Journal.

It it he warned that “The world of the 192 UN member states has come to a fork in the road. One way leads to a world focused on the well being of society, conflict resolution and peace, i.e. to a life of dignity and human security with social and economic progress for all, wherever they may be as stated in the United Nations Charter. Down the other road is where the nineteenth century ‘Great Game’ for power will be further played out, a course which, in the twenty-first century, will become more extensive and dangerously more aggressive than ever.

“This road supposedly leads to democracy, but in truth it is all about power, control and exploitation.” [13]

Contrasting explicitly what the above excerpt had done tacitly, he remarked of his former employer and its would-be replacement:

“A comparison of the mandates of the United Nations and of NATO shows clearly how opposed the purposes of these two institutions are. In the 63 years of its existence, the United Nations mandate has remained the same.

“The United Nations was created to promote and maintain worldwide peace. NATO exists to assure the self-interest of a group of 26 UN member countries.” [14]

In a section of his article titled “21st century NATO incompatible with UN Charter,” von Sponeck added, “In 1999, NATO acknowledged that it was seeking to orient itself according to a new fundamental strategic concept. From a narrow military defense alliance it was to become a broad based alliance for the protection of the vital resources” needs of its members. Besides the defense of member states’ borders, it set itself new purposes such as assured access to energy sources and the right to intervene in ‘movements of large numbers of persons’ and in conflicts far from the boarders of NATO countries. The readiness of the new alliance to include other countries, particularly those that had previously been part of the Soviet Union, shows how the character of this military alliance has altered.”

“[T]he United Nations monopoly of the use of force, especially as specified in Article 51 of the Charter, was no longer accepted according to the 1999 NATO doctrine.

“NATO’s territorial scope, until then limited to the Euro-Atlantic region, was expanded by its member to encompass the whole world in keeping with a strategic context that was global in its sweep.” [15]

In a following section named “UN-NATO-accord: incompatible with UN Charter,” he exposed a clandestine accord signed between the secretaries general of NATO and the United Nations, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and Ban Ki-moon, respectively, on September 23, 2008, which “took place without any reference to the United Nations Security Council.

“In the generally accepted agreement of stated purposes, one reads of a
‘broader council’ and ‘operative cooperation, for example in ‘peace
keeping in the Balkans and in Afghanistan. Both secretaries general committed themselves to acting in common to meet threats and challenges.

“The UN/NATO accord is anything but neutral and will thus not remain without serious consequences.” [16]

Shortly after the unauthorized pact signed behind the backs of the UN Security Council, in addition to the General Assembly, by NATO chief Scheffer and Ban, who has proven to be as obsequious toward and obedient to the interests of the West as his predecessor had been, the Russian press reported:

“Russia’s representative to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, said that in the document there is not a single word on the UN’s leading role in ensuring stability in the world.

“NATO and the United Nations have signed a new cooperation accord on prerogatives for UN member states – but have angered Russia by not telling them about it in advance.” [17]

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was similarly caught off guard and indignant alike, stating “”We knew that the UN and NATO secretariats were
drawing up an agreement. And we assumed that before the signing, its draft should be shown to the member states. But it never happened,” accusing Scheffer and Ban of operating secretly and in violation of UN norms.

“The Russian minister said that he discussed the problem with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. ‘I did not hear any reasonable explanations. It surprised me,’ said Lavrov….’We asked the leadership of the two secretariats what it might mean. We’re awaiting answers.’” [18]

Another Russian report added, “Russia has recently vented its displeasure over what it called the ‘furtive signature’ of a cooperation agreement between the secretariats of the United Nations and NATO, which took place late last month. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov complained that this country, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, was not even consulted on the matter.

“Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said recently that Moscow and other UN members had not been consulted on the essence of the UN-NATO cooperation agreement, although, he said, the document contained clauses that concern the prerogatives of UN member states.” [19]

A third source referred to Russian Foreign Minister spokesman Andrei Nesterenko who, in stressing that the surreptitious pact was “riding roughshod over Moscow’s interests,” affirmed that “a big question mark currently hangs over the professional skills of some UN officials, who try to involve the UN Secretary-General in covert activities.” [20]

An Azerbaijani news source added, “If the agreement, signed in September, is only confirming the status quo, it can be surprising why the information about it was not published on the NATO website, which even has a special section called ‘NATO’s relations with the United Nations.’ This fact perpetuates Russia’s perception of NATO as a hostile bloc.” [21]

In a news dispatch titled “UN and NATO team up behind Russia’s back,” Russian envoy to NATO Dmitry Rogozin – who was himself not informed of the backroom deal – said “NATO should fully acknowledge the UN’s universal role and not try to substitute UN functions.” [22]

In the article discussed earlier, Hans von Sponeck asked “Is the United Nations accord with NATO – a military alliance with nuclear weapons – in contradiction with Article 2 of the United Nations Charter, which requires that conflicts be resolved by peaceful means? Can UN and NATO actions be distinguished when three of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are also NATO members? How can future violations of international law by NATO be legally prosecuted? Is an institution like NATO, which in 1999, without a UN mandate, unlawfully bombed Serbia and Kosovo, a suitable partner for the United Nations?” [23]

And in a section entitled “UN mandate makes NATO obsolete,” he finished with “Any evaluation of the UN/NATO pact must take into account that NATO is a relic of the Cold War; that NATO, as a Western alliance, is regarded with considerable mistrust by the other 166 United Nations member states; that a primary NATO aim is to assert, by military means, its energy and power interests in opposition to other United Nations member states and that the United States, a founding member of the NATO community, in the most unscrupulous ways, has disparaged the United Nations and broken international law.

“It is urgent that one or several member states petition the International Court of Justice to rule on the interpretation of the UN/NATO pact of 23 September 2008, in conformity with the Courts statutes.

“The people of the world have a right to request such a ruling and a right to expect an answer.” [24]

Think Tank Origins: NATO Undermining The UN From Inside And Out

The current US permanent representative (ambassador) to NATO is Netherlands-born Ivo Daalder, who like so many others of his type cut his foreign policy teeth in the Balkans in the 1990s. In fact he was the director for European Affairs on the National Security Council under President Bill Clinton, where he was in charge of Bosnia policy. Although a Clinton appointee Daalder criticized his chief during the 1999 war against Yugoslavia, calling for a ground invasion of the country in addition to the devastating air war.

The day after President Barack Obama announced the selection of Daalder for the NATO post, a news account from his homeland described him as a “liberal hawk” who was “a signatory to the January 2005 Project for a New American Century letter to Congress urging an increase in the number of troops in Iraq. The Project for a New American Century is a neoconservative think-tank linked to the American Enterprise Institute, where much of the foreign policy of the Bush administration originated.

“He often wrote about the right (or duty) of the international community to use military and humanitarian action to intervene in countries that fail to meet their responsibilities.” [25]

At the time of his nomination Daalder was a Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy Studies at The Brookings Institution. He is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

The day after the Dutch feature appeared, the print edition of Russia Today
television had this to say:

“Barack Obama’s administration sees NATO as the nucleus for a global
organization of democracies that will eventually replace the United Nations, believes an influential Russian newspaper [Kommersant].

“Washington wants NATO to expand by inviting counties like Australia, Japan, Brazil and South Africa and become a global organization tackling not only security issues but also epidemics and human rights….The next US Ambassador to NATO Ivo H. Daalder is a great supporter of this idea.

“Daalder, an expert at the Brookings Institution and a foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama during the election campaign, is a strong proponent of the so-called Concert of Democracies.

“The idea, coined by the think-tank Princeton Project on National Security, is that the United Nations is outdated….” [26]

The source added that “Daalder believes that NATO is a prototype of the proposed concert, being an alliance of democracies with a long success record, and can be extended to the new global organization” and that “a source in the White House [says] that Vice President Joe Biden is among the supporters of the Concert of Democracies.” [27]

As the American magazine Newsweek reported late last year under the headline Fighting Wars of Peace, “Vice President-elect Joe Biden called during the campaign for imposing a no-fly zone in Darfur and, a year earlier, advocated committing ‘U.S. troops on the ground’ if necessary. And Hillary Clinton, the incoming secretary of state, was a forceful advocate of the interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo during her husband’s administration.

“[A]s Ivo Daalder, [a] prominent Obama adviser, and Robert Kagan have pointed out, between 1989 and 2001 America dispatched significant military force to foreign hot spots so often — once every 18 months — that intervention became something of a standard weapon of U.S. foreign policy, and one with bipartisan support.” [28]

The genesis of the “war for peace” Concert of Democracies concept under NATO auspices and in opposition to the UN, at least as far as Daalder is concerned, may have been in a “guest” column in the Washington Post over five years ago called An Alliance of Democracies and co-authored by Daalder and James Lindsay, then vice president and director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

In the article Daalder and his colleague leave no doubt as to which institution global NATO stands in opposition to:

“An immediate problem is that the United Nations lacks the capability to make a difference. Its blue-helmeted troops can help keep the peace when warring parties choose not to fight. But as we learned in the Balkans, they cannot make peace where none exists. And as we saw in the 12 years preceding the Iraq war, the United Nations cannot enforce its most important resolutions. The deeper problem is that these reform proposals do not go to the heart of what ails the organization: It treats its members as sovereign equals regardless of the character of their governments.

“The idea of sovereign equality reflected a conscious decision governments made 60 years ago that they would be better off if they repudiated the right to meddle in the internal affairs of others. That choice no longer makes sense.

“Today respect for state sovereignty should be conditional on how states behave at home, not just abroad.

“We need an Alliance of Democratic States. This organization would unite nations with entrenched democratic traditions, such as the United States and Canada; the European Union countries; Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia; India and Israel; Botswana and Costa Rica.” [29]

Analogous demands have been voiced over the past few years by former Spanish prime minister Jose Aznar, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and spokesman James Appathurai and US Republican Party candidates in last year’s presidential election Rudolph Giuliani and John McCain, alternately identified as an alliance, a concert or a league of democracies. In 2007 the now deceased US congressman Tom Lantos, at the time chairman of the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, said that “NATO should seriously consider expanding into a global alliance including democratic countries such as Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Israel,” and posed the rhetorical query “Would it not make the (NATO) Supreme Allied Commander feel more comfortable about upcoming global crises if he would have a NATO of a global reach?” To which the commander identified, Gen. Bantz John Craddock, replied: “From a best military advice perspective, it would indeed
be enormously helpful to have more democratic, peace-loving nations as part of the alliance.” [30]

The advocates of the ultimate “coalition of the willing” call for expanding NATO from its current 28 full members, 22 Partnership for Peace states in Europe, the South Caucasus and Central Asia, seven Middle Eastern and North African nations in the Mediterranean Dialogue, six Persian Gulf countries covered under the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative and several individual Contact Countries – in total over a third of the nations in the world – into a comprehensive, worldwide political-economic-military bloc with members in six of the world’s seven continents and with its eye set on the remaining one, Antarctica.

The nations targeted for the NATO-led Alliance of Democracies include Australia, Botswana, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, India, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa and South Korea inter alia.

From Design To Execution: Ivo Daalder

Daalder would follow up on this initiative two and a half years later, this time in a forum generously provided him by the International Herald Tribune, sister publication of the New York Times, the other main pillar of the American “free press,” and co-written by the Council on Foreign Relations’ James Goldgeier.

The piece in question, “For global security, expand the alliance,” states:

“NATO must become larger and more global by admitting any democratic state that is willing and able to contribute to the fulfillment of the alliance’s new responsibilities.

“Other democratic countries share NATO’s values and many common interests – including Australia, Brazil, Japan, India, New Zealand, South Africa and South Korea – and all of them can greatly contribute to NATO’s efforts by providing additional military forces or logistical support….”

The contribution is urgent because “NATO militaries are stretched thin by the many new missions they are called on to perform in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as in the Sudan, Congo and other parts of Africa.”

The column raised the stakes to a degree that is deeply unsettling, fraught as they are with the threat of nothing less than world war.

“Collective defense, enshrined in Article 5’s dictum that an attack on one member is an attack on all, must remain at the core of an expanded alliance as it has in the past. For the United States, such commitments
elsewhere would not be novel, as it already guarantees, either formally or informally, the security of countries such as Australia, Israel, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea.

“[A]ll NATO members contributed to the grand coalition that reversed Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, which is not even a democracy. If Australia or Japan were attacked, would the European democracies simply shrug their shoulders?” [31]

Far more is involved than the deployment of troops, warships and warplanes to all parts of the globe on the arbitrary decision of the major NATO partners, as unparalleled a danger to the world as that is.

In speaking of Washington’s ongoing global missile shield program – one that could neutralize the potential for nations, Russia and China come immediately to mind, to maintain a deterrent or retaliation capacity and thus serve as an invitation for a first strike – in March of 2007 US Assistant Secretary of State John Rood asserted that planned interceptor missile sites in Poland and the Czech Republic “would be integrated with existing radar sites in the United Kingdom and Greenland as well as missile defense interceptors in California and Alaska,” adding that at the time some fourteen nations were already involved in the plans, including “Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Israel, India, Japan, the Netherlands and Ukraine. Taiwan is also participating….

“[There] is a cooperative understanding among the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, Israel, Italy and Denmark to conduct government-to-government and industry-to-industry missile defense cooperation.” [32]

The correlation between the non-NATO nations mentioned as members of a concert or alliance of democracies under NATO leadership and those being integrated into the global interceptor missile system is striking.

While still US State Department Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs and before being appointed Ivo Daalder’s predecessor as ambassador to NATO, Kurt Volker said:

“[A]s NATO is active in places like Afghanistan or Iraq or Darfur, we are working together with countries that share NATO’s values and that are capable of contributing to security, such as Australia or New Zealand or South Korea or Japan, and we would like to find ways to cooperate with these countries….

“Some countries which, from a geographic standpoint, see themselves as front line states, have a high interest in theater missile defense, and other countries say it’s something we ought to do….For the U.S. there is no such thing as theater missile defense because we look at missile defense in a global scale….” [33]

The complement to the above, popularly referred to as Star Wars or Son of Star Wars, is an even more dangerous threat: Space war.

Last November Russia, as it has routinely done for years at UN General Assembly meetings, urged “UN member-states to join the moratorium on the deployment of weapons in outer space.”

The nation’s ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, pointed out that “it is on Russia’s initiative that the UN General Assembly has been adopting resolutions, for many years now, aimed at the prevention of an arms race in space.

“The only one who objected to the adoption of this resolution was the United States – this was earlier this year.” [34]

Another report revealed that “Washington does plan to deploy its ABM system
elements in near-Earth orbits, and it is only Russia that can counter such plans.

“In the United Nations 166 countries have voted for the Russia-proposed resolution on measures to ensure transparency and build up confidence in space activities.” [35]

As with questions of war and peace, the United Nations is used by the US and its allies solely to punish weaker nations and if the UN would ever begin to function as it was designed to – including attempting to prevent the militarization of space – it will be bypassed and rendered powerless by a NATO-led “Alliance of Democratic States.”

As recently as a few days ago Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, on the sidelines of the foreign ministers meeting of the Organization of the Islamic Conference in Damascus, Syria, “express[ed] his country’s worries over giving NATO an international mission where it will be able to interfere anywhere in the world without permission from the Security Council, affirming that this is very negative and can undermine the basis of international law and the UN Charter.” [36]

NATO No Alternative To United Nations

Conceived during the waning days of the world’s most destructive and deadly war and born two months after the only use to date of nuclear weapons, the United Nation’s still bears its birth marks. 74 years later the five chief victors of World War II remain the only permanent members of the Security Council and alone have veto power. Three of them are founding members of NATO and all five are nuclear powers, hardly representative of the world community.

Not a single nation in Africa, South (indeed all of Latin) America and Oceania have such status.

Also, the 192-member General Assembly has largely been shunted aside in favor of the five permanent and ten rotating members of the Security Council, not to mention events of major world importance being conducted by the secretary general and other officials behind the backs of even permanent members of the Security Council as with last September’s agreement with NATO.

The General Assembly represents humanity not only on a day-to-day basis but in a more substantive and legitimate manner than ten of its 192 members on the Security Council at any given time. It must play a larger role in all deliberations.

A revived, robust, empowered and democratized UN must shift focus from a disproportionate emphasis on negotiating trade, treaty and other agreements in service to world commerce and in ceding vast tracts of the earth to interested parties under suspicious circumstances, as with the oil-rich Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon and 2.2 million square kilometers of the resource-rich Antarctic Ocean to Australia recently, to what needs to be its main objective: Exerting all efforts to eliminate forever the scourge of war.

The record of the past thirteen years under the stewardship of Kofi Annan and Ban Ki-moon has been abysmal. Three major wars have been conducted by the United States and its NATO allies, the first against a founding member of the UN, Yugoslavia, while the organization made no meaningful efforts to prevent or halt them once started and has even legitimized them after the fact with assorted resolutions. Even UN resolutions following unauthorized wars are trampled on, as with the recognition by most NATO members of the illegal secession of Kosovo from Serbia last February, flagrantly contradicting UN Resolution 1244 which commits the UN to “Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other States of the region, as set out in the Helsinki Final Act….”

However, even with its manifold problems, the United Nations was intended to prevent the replication of the horrors of World War II which ended only two months before its creation. The world would hardly gain by having it further weakened, sidelined and in effect reduced to a hollow shell by an expanding military bloc that has already waged wars on two continents and set its sights on penetrating and dominating the entire world.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

WAR IS A RACKET


About the Author

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20070723.shtml

CHAPTER ONE

WAR IS A RACKET

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few – the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.

Again they are choosing sides. France and Russia met and agreed to stand side by side. Italy and Austria hurried to make a similar agreement. Poland and Germany cast sheep’s eyes at each other, forgetting for the nonce [one unique occasion], their dispute over the Polish Corridor.

The assassination of King Alexander of Jugoslavia [Yugoslavia] complicated matters. Jugoslavia and Hungary, long bitter enemies, were almost at each other’s throats. Italy was ready to jump in. But France was waiting. So was Czechoslovakia. All of them are looking ahead to war. Not the people – not those who fight and pay and die – only those who foment wars and remain safely at home to profit.

There are 40,000,000 men under arms in the world today, and our statesmen and diplomats have the temerity to say that war is not in the making.

Hell’s bells! Are these 40,000,000 men being trained to be dancers?

Not in Italy, to be sure. Premier Mussolini knows what they are being trained for. He, at least, is frank enough to speak out. Only the other day, Il Duce in “International Conciliation,” the publication of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said:

“And above all, Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace… War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet it.”

Undoubtedly Mussolini means exactly what he says. His well-trained army, his great fleet of planes, and even his navy are ready for war – anxious for it, apparently. His recent stand at the side of Hungary in the latter’s dispute with Jugoslavia showed that. And the hurried mobilization of his troops on the Austrian border after the assassination of Dollfuss showed it too. There are others in Europe too whose sabre rattling presages war, sooner or later.

Herr Hitler, with his rearming Germany and his constant demands for more and more arms, is an equal if not greater menace to peace. France only recently increased the term of military service for its youth from a year to eighteen months.

Yes, all over, nations are camping in their arms. The mad dogs of Europe are on the loose. In the Orient the maneuvering is more adroit. Back in 1904, when Russia and Japan fought, we kicked out our old friends the Russians and backed Japan. Then our very generous international bankers were financing Japan. Now the trend is to poison us against the Japanese. What does the “open door” policy to China mean to us? Our trade with China is about $90,000,000 a year. Or the Philippine Islands? We have spent about $600,000,000 in the Philippines in thirty-five years and we (our bankers and industrialists and speculators) have private investments there of less than $200,000,000.

Then, to save that China trade of about $90,000,000, or to protect these private investments of less than $200,000,000 in the Philippines, we would be all stirred up to hate Japan and go to war – a war that might well cost us tens of billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of lives of Americans, and many more hundreds of thousands of physically maimed and mentally unbalanced men.

Of course, for this loss, there would be a compensating profit – fortunes would be made. Millions and billions of dollars would be piled up. By a few. Munitions makers. Bankers. Ship builders. Manufacturers. Meat packers. Speculators. They would fare well.

Yes, they are getting ready for another war. Why shouldn’t they? It pays high dividends.

But what does it profit the men who are killed? What does it profit their mothers and sisters, their wives and their sweethearts? What does it profit their children?

What does it profit anyone except the very few to whom war means huge profits?

Yes, and what does it profit the nation?

Take our own case. Until 1898 we didn’t own a bit of territory outside the mainland of North America. At that time our national debt was a little more than $1,000,000,000. Then we became “internationally minded.” We forgot, or shunted aside, the advice of the Father of our country. We forgot George Washington’s warning about “entangling alliances.” We went to war. We acquired outside territory. At the end of the World War period, as a direct result of our fiddling in international affairs, our national debt had jumped to over $25,000,000,000. Our total favorable trade balance during the twenty-five-year period was about $24,000,000,000. Therefore, on a purely bookkeeping basis, we ran a little behind year for year, and that foreign trade might well have been ours without the wars.

It would have been far cheaper (not to say safer) for the average American who pays the bills to stay out of foreign entanglements. For a very few this racket, like bootlegging and other underworld rackets, brings fancy profits, but the cost of operations is always transferred to the people – who do not profit.

CHAPTER TWO

WHO MAKES THE PROFITS?

The World War, rather our brief participation in it, has cost the United States some $52,000,000,000. Figure it out. That means $400 to every American man, woman, and child. And we haven’t paid the debt yet. We are paying it, our children will pay it, and our children’s children probably still will be paying the cost of that war.

The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and sometimes twelve percent. But war-time profits – ah! that is another matter – twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent – the sky is the limit. All that traffic will bear. Uncle Sam has the money. Let’s get it.

Of course, it isn’t put that crudely in war time. It is dressed into speeches about patriotism, love of country, and “we must all put our shoulders to the wheel,” but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket – and are safely pocketed. Let’s just take a few examples:

Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people – didn’t one of them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? Or something? How did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation. Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a year. It wasn’t much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let’s look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year profit we find! Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent.

Take one of our little steel companies that patriotically shunted aside the making of rails and girders and bridges to manufacture war materials. Well, their 1910-1914 yearly earnings averaged $6,000,000. Then came the war. And, like loyal citizens, Bethlehem Steel promptly turned to munitions making. Did their profits jump – or did they let Uncle Sam in for a bargain? Well, their 1914-1918 average was $49,000,000 a year!

Or, let’s take United States Steel. The normal earnings during the five-year period prior to the war were $105,000,000 a year. Not bad. Then along came the war and up went the profits. The average yearly profit for the period 1914-1918 was $240,000,000. Not bad.

There you have some of the steel and powder earnings. Let’s look at something else. A little copper, perhaps. That always does well in war times.

Anaconda, for instance. Average yearly earnings during the pre-war years 1910-1914 of $10,000,000. During the war years 1914-1918 profits leaped to $34,000,000 per year.

Or Utah Copper. Average of $5,000,000 per year during the 1910-1914 period. Jumped to an average of $21,000,000 yearly profits for the war period.

Let’s group these five, with three smaller companies. The total yearly average profits of the pre-war period 1910-1914 were $137,480,000. Then along came the war. The average yearly profits for this group skyrocketed to $408,300,000.

A little increase in profits of approximately 200 per cent.

Does war pay? It paid them. But they aren’t the only ones. There are still others. Let’s take leather.

For the three-year period before the war the total profits of Central Leather Company were $3,500,000. That was approximately $1,167,000 a year. Well, in 1916 Central Leather returned a profit of $15,000,000, a small increase of 1,100 per cent. That’s all. The General Chemical Company averaged a profit for the three years before the war of a little over $800,000 a year. Came the war, and the profits jumped to $12,000,000. a leap of 1,400 per cent.

International Nickel Company – and you can’t have a war without nickel – showed an increase in profits from a mere average of $4,000,000 a year to $73,000,000 yearly. Not bad? An increase of more than 1,700 per cent.

American Sugar Refining Company averaged $2,000,000 a year for the three years before the war. In 1916 a profit of $6,000,000 was recorded.

Listen to Senate Document No. 259. The Sixty-Fifth Congress, reporting on corporate earnings and government revenues. Considering the profits of 122 meat packers, 153 cotton manufacturers, 299 garment makers, 49 steel plants, and 340 coal producers during the war. Profits under 25 per cent were exceptional. For instance the coal companies made between 100 per cent and 7,856 per cent on their capital stock during the war. The Chicago packers doubled and tripled their earnings.

And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never become public – even before a Senate investigatory body.

But here’s how some of the other patriotic industrialists and speculators chiseled their way into war profits.

Take the shoe people. They like war. It brings business with abnormal profits. They made huge profits on sales abroad to our allies. Perhaps, like the munitions manufacturers and armament makers, they also sold to the enemy. For a dollar is a dollar whether it comes from Germany or from France. But they did well by Uncle Sam too. For instance, they sold Uncle Sam 35,000,000 pairs of hobnailed service shoes. There were 4,000,000 soldiers. Eight pairs, and more, to a soldier. My regiment during the war had only one pair to a soldier. Some of these shoes probably are still in existence. They were good shoes. But when the war was over Uncle Sam has a matter of 25,000,000 pairs left over. Bought – and paid for. Profits recorded and pocketed.

There was still lots of leather left. So the leather people sold your Uncle Sam hundreds of thousands of McClellan saddles for the cavalry. But there wasn’t any American cavalry overseas! Somebody had to get rid of this leather, however. Somebody had to make a profit in it – so we had a lot of McClellan saddles. And we probably have those yet.

Also somebody had a lot of mosquito netting. They sold your Uncle Sam 20,000,000 mosquito nets for the use of the soldiers overseas. I suppose the boys were expected to put it over them as they tried to sleep in muddy trenches – one hand scratching cooties on their backs and the other making passes at scurrying rats. Well, not one of these mosquito nets ever got to France!

Anyhow, these thoughtful manufacturers wanted to make sure that no soldier would be without his mosquito net, so 40,000,000 additional yards of mosquito netting were sold to Uncle Sam.

There were pretty good profits in mosquito netting in those days, even if there were no mosquitoes in France. I suppose, if the war had lasted just a little longer, the enterprising mosquito netting manufacturers would have sold your Uncle Sam a couple of consignments of mosquitoes to plant in France so that more mosquito netting would be in order.

Airplane and engine manufacturers felt they, too, should get their just profits out of this war. Why not? Everybody else was getting theirs. So $1,000,000,000 – count them if you live long enough – was spent by Uncle Sam in building airplane engines that never left the ground! Not one plane, or motor, out of the billion dollars worth ordered, ever got into a battle in France. Just the same the manufacturers made their little profit of 30, 100, or perhaps 300 per cent.

Undershirts for soldiers cost 14� [cents] to make and uncle Sam paid 30� to 40� each for them – a nice little profit for the undershirt manufacturer. And the stocking manufacturer and the uniform manufacturers and the cap manufacturers and the steel helmet manufacturers – all got theirs.

Why, when the war was over some 4,000,000 sets of equipment – knapsacks and the things that go to fill them – crammed warehouses on this side. Now they are being scrapped because the regulations have changed the contents. But the manufacturers collected their wartime profits on them – and they will do it all over again the next time.

There were lots of brilliant ideas for profit making during the war.

One very versatile patriot sold Uncle Sam twelve dozen 48-inch wrenches. Oh, they were very nice wrenches. The only trouble was that there was only one nut ever made that was large enough for these wrenches. That is the one that holds the turbines at Niagara Falls. Well, after Uncle Sam had bought them and the manufacturer had pocketed the profit, the wrenches were put on freight cars and shunted all around the United States in an effort to find a use for them. When the Armistice was signed it was indeed a sad blow to the wrench manufacturer. He was just about to make some nuts to fit the wrenches. Then he planned to sell these, too, to your Uncle Sam.

Still another had the brilliant idea that colonels shouldn’t ride in automobiles, nor should they even ride on horseback. One has probably seen a picture of Andy Jackson riding in a buckboard. Well, some 6,000 buckboards were sold to Uncle Sam for the use of colonels! Not one of them was used. But the buckboard manufacturer got his war profit.

The shipbuilders felt they should come in on some of it, too. They built a lot of ships that made a lot of profit. More than $3,000,000,000 worth. Some of the ships were all right. But $635,000,000 worth of them were made of wood and wouldn’t float! The seams opened up – and they sank. We paid for them, though. And somebody pocketed the profits.

It has been estimated by statisticians and economists and researchers that the war cost your Uncle Sam $52,000,000,000. Of this sum, $39,000,000,000 was expended in the actual war itself. This expenditure yielded $16,000,000,000 in profits. That is how the 21,000 billionaires and millionaires got that way. This $16,000,000,000 profits is not to be sneezed at. It is quite a tidy sum. And it went to a very few.

The Senate (Nye) committee probe of the munitions industry and its wartime profits, despite its sensational disclosures, hardly has scratched the surface.

Even so, it has had some effect. The State Department has been studying “for some time” methods of keeping out of war. The War Department suddenly decides it has a wonderful plan to spring. The Administration names a committee – with the War and Navy Departments ably represented under the chairmanship of a Wall Street speculator – to limit profits in war time. To what extent isn’t suggested. Hmmm. Possibly the profits of 300 and 600 and 1,600 per cent of those who turned blood into gold in the World War would be limited to some smaller figure.

Apparently, however, the plan does not call for any limitation of losses – that is, the losses of those who fight the war. As far as I have been able to ascertain there is nothing in the scheme to limit a soldier to the loss of but one eye, or one arm, or to limit his wounds to one or two or three. Or to limit the loss of life.

There is nothing in this scheme, apparently, that says not more than 12 per cent of a regiment shall be wounded in battle, or that not more than 7 per cent in a division shall be killed.

Of course, the committee cannot be bothered with such trifling matters.

CHAPTER THREE

WHO PAYS THE BILLS?

Who provides the profits – these nice little profits of 20, 100, 300, 1,500 and 1,800 per cent? We all pay them – in taxation. We paid the bankers their profits when we bought Liberty Bonds at $100.00 and sold them back at $84 or $86 to the bankers. These bankers collected $100 plus. It was a simple manipulation. The bankers control the security marts. It was easy for them to depress the price of these bonds. Then all of us – the people – got frightened and sold the bonds at $84 or $86. The bankers bought them. Then these same bankers stimulated a boom and government bonds went to par – and above. Then the bankers collected their profits.

But the soldier pays the biggest part of the bill.

If you don’t believe this, visit the American cemeteries on the battlefields abroad. Or visit any of the veteran’s hospitals in the United States. On a tour of the country, in the midst of which I am at the time of this writing, I have visited eighteen government hospitals for veterans. In them are a total of about 50,000 destroyed men – men who were the pick of the nation eighteen years ago. The very able chief surgeon at the government hospital; at Milwaukee, where there are 3,800 of the living dead, told me that mortality among veterans is three times as great as among those who stayed at home.

Boys with a normal viewpoint were taken out of the fields and offices and factories and classrooms and put into the ranks. There they were remolded; they were made over; they were made to “about face”; to regard murder as the order of the day. They were put shoulder to shoulder and, through mass psychology, they were entirely changed. We used them for a couple of years and trained them to think nothing at all of killing or of being killed.

Then, suddenly, we discharged them and told them to make another “about face” ! This time they had to do their own readjustment, sans [without] mass psychology, sans officers’ aid and advice and sans nation-wide propaganda. We didn’t need them any more. So we scattered them about without any “three-minute” or “Liberty Loan” speeches or parades. Many, too many, of these fine young boys are eventually destroyed, mentally, because they could not make that final “about face” alone.

In the government hospital in Marion, Indiana, 1,800 of these boys are in pens! Five hundred of them in a barracks with steel bars and wires all around outside the buildings and on the porches. These already have been mentally destroyed. These boys don’t even look like human beings. Oh, the looks on their faces! Physically, they are in good shape; mentally, they are gone.

There are thousands and thousands of these cases, and more and more are coming in all the time. The tremendous excitement of the war, the sudden cutting off of that excitement – the young boys couldn’t stand it.

That’s a part of the bill. So much for the dead – they have paid their part of the war profits. So much for the mentally and physically wounded – they are paying now their share of the war profits. But the others paid, too – they paid with heartbreaks when they tore themselves away from their firesides and their families to don the uniform of Uncle Sam – on which a profit had been made. They paid another part in the training camps where they were regimented and drilled while others took their jobs and their places in the lives of their communities. The paid for it in the trenches where they shot and were shot; where they were hungry for days at a time; where they slept in the mud and the cold and in the rain – with the moans and shrieks of the dying for a horrible lullaby.

But don’t forget – the soldier paid part of the dollars and cents bill too.

Up to and including the Spanish-American War, we had a prize system, and soldiers and sailors fought for money. During the Civil War they were paid bonuses, in many instances, before they went into service. The government, or states, paid as high as $1,200 for an enlistment. In the Spanish-American War they gave prize money. When we captured any vessels, the soldiers all got their share – at least, they were supposed to. Then it was found that we could reduce the cost of wars by taking all the prize money and keeping it, but conscripting [drafting] the soldier anyway. Then soldiers couldn’t bargain for their labor, Everyone else could bargain, but the soldier couldn’t.

Napoleon once said,

“All men are enamored of decorations…they positively hunger for them.”

So by developing the Napoleonic system – the medal business – the government learned it could get soldiers for less money, because the boys liked to be decorated. Until the Civil War there were no medals. Then the Congressional Medal of Honor was handed out. It made enlistments easier. After the Civil War no new medals were issued until the Spanish-American War.

In the World War, we used propaganda to make the boys accept conscription. They were made to feel ashamed if they didn’t join the army.

So vicious was this war propaganda that even God was brought into it. With few exceptions our clergymen joined in the clamor to kill, kill, kill. To kill the Germans. God is on our side…it is His will that the Germans be killed.

And in Germany, the good pastors called upon the Germans to kill the allies…to please the same God. That was a part of the general propaganda, built up to make people war conscious and murder conscious.

Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. This was the “war to end all wars.” This was the “war to make the world safe for democracy.” No one mentioned to them, as they marched away, that their going and their dying would mean huge war profits. No one told these American soldiers that they might be shot down by bullets made by their own brothers here. No one told them that the ships on which they were going to cross might be torpedoed by submarines built with United States patents. They were just told it was to be a “glorious adventure.”

Thus, having stuffed patriotism down their throats, it was decided to make them help pay for the war, too. So, we gave them the large salary of $30 a month.

All they had to do for this munificent sum was to leave their dear ones behind, give up their jobs, lie in swampy trenches, eat canned willy (when they could get it) and kill and kill and kill…and be killed.

But wait!

Half of that wage (just a little more than a riveter in a shipyard or a laborer in a munitions factory safe at home made in a day) was promptly taken from him to support his dependents, so that they would not become a charge upon his community. Then we made him pay what amounted to accident insurance – something the employer pays for in an enlightened state – and that cost him $6 a month. He had less than $9 a month left.

Then, the most crowning insolence of all – he was virtually blackjacked into paying for his own ammunition, clothing, and food by being made to buy Liberty Bonds. Most soldiers got no money at all on pay days.

We made them buy Liberty Bonds at $100 and then we bought them back – when they came back from the war and couldn’t find work – at $84 and $86. And the soldiers bought about $2,000,000,000 worth of these bonds!

Yes, the soldier pays the greater part of the bill. His family pays too. They pay it in the same heart-break that he does. As he suffers, they suffer. At nights, as he lay in the trenches and watched shrapnel burst about him, they lay home in their beds and tossed sleeplessly – his father, his mother, his wife, his sisters, his brothers, his sons, and his daughters.

When he returned home minus an eye, or minus a leg or with his mind broken, they suffered too – as much as and even sometimes more than he. Yes, and they, too, contributed their dollars to the profits of the munitions makers and bankers and shipbuilders and the manufacturers and the speculators made. They, too, bought Liberty Bonds and contributed to the profit of the bankers after the Armistice in the hocus-pocus of manipulated Liberty Bond prices.

And even now the families of the wounded men and of the mentally broken and those who never were able to readjust themselves are still suffering and still paying.

CHAPTER FOUR

HOW TO SMASH THIS RACKET!

WELL, it’s a racket, all right.

A few profit – and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can’t end it by disarmament conferences. You can’t eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva. Well-meaning but impractical groups can’t wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war.

The only way to smash this racket is to conscript capital and industry and labor before the nations manhood can be conscripted. One month before the Government can conscript the young men of the nation – it must conscript capital and industry and labor. Let the officers and the directors and the high-powered executives of our armament factories and our munitions makers and our shipbuilders and our airplane builders and the manufacturers of all the other things that provide profit in war time as well as the bankers and the speculators, be conscripted – to get $30 a month, the same wage as the lads in the trenches get.

Let the workers in these plants get the same wages – all the workers, all presidents, all executives, all directors, all managers, all bankers –

yes, and all generals and all admirals and all officers and all politicians and all government office holders – everyone in the nation be restricted to a total monthly income not to exceed that paid to the soldier in the trenches!

Let all these kings and tycoons and masters of business and all those workers in industry and all our senators and governors and majors pay half of their monthly $30 wage to their families and pay war risk insurance and buy Liberty Bonds.

Why shouldn’t they?

They aren’t running any risk of being killed or of having their bodies mangled or their minds shattered. They aren’t sleeping in muddy trenches. They aren’t hungry. The soldiers are!

Give capital and industry and labor thirty days to think it over and you will find, by that time, there will be no war. That will smash the war racket – that and nothing else.

Maybe I am a little too optimistic. Capital still has some say. So capital won’t permit the taking of the profit out of war until the people – those who do the suffering and still pay the price – make up their minds that those they elect to office shall do their bidding, and not that of the profiteers.

Another step necessary in this fight to smash the war racket is the limited plebiscite to determine whether a war should be declared. A plebiscite not of all the voters but merely of those who would be called upon to do the fighting and dying. There wouldn’t be very much sense in having a 76-year-old president of a munitions factory or the flat-footed head of an international banking firm or the cross-eyed manager of a uniform manufacturing plant – all of whom see visions of tremendous profits in the event of war – voting on whether the nation should go to war or not. They never would be called upon to shoulder arms – to sleep in a trench and to be shot. Only those who would be called upon to risk their lives for their country should have the privilege of voting to determine whether the nation should go to war.

There is ample precedent for restricting the voting to those affected. Many of our states have restrictions on those permitted to vote. In most, it is necessary to be able to read and write before you may vote. In some, you must own property. It would be a simple matter each year for the men coming of military age to register in their communities as they did in the draft during the World War and be examined physically. Those who could pass and who would therefore be called upon to bear arms in the event of war would be eligible to vote in a limited plebiscite. They should be the ones to have the power to decide – and not a Congress few of whose members are within the age limit and fewer still of whom are in physical condition to bear arms. Only those who must suffer should have the right to vote.

A third step in this business of smashing the war racket is to make certain that our military forces are truly forces for defense only.

At each session of Congress the question of further naval appropriations comes up. The swivel-chair admirals of Washington (and there are always a lot of them) are very adroit lobbyists. And they are smart. They don’t shout that “We need a lot of battleships to war on this nation or that nation.” Oh no. First of all, they let it be known that America is menaced by a great naval power. Almost any day, these admirals will tell you, the great fleet of this supposed enemy will strike suddenly and annihilate 125,000,000 people. Just like that. Then they begin to cry for a larger navy. For what? To fight the enemy? Oh my, no. Oh, no. For defense purposes only.

Then, incidentally, they announce maneuvers in the Pacific. For defense. Uh, huh.

The Pacific is a great big ocean. We have a tremendous coastline on the Pacific. Will the maneuvers be off the coast, two or three hundred miles? Oh, no. The maneuvers will be two thousand, yes, perhaps even thirty-five hundred miles, off the coast.

The Japanese, a proud people, of course will be pleased beyond expression to see the united States fleet so close to Nippon’s shores. Even as pleased as would be the residents of California were they to dimly discern through the morning mist, the Japanese fleet playing at war games off Los Angeles.

The ships of our navy, it can be seen, should be specifically limited, by law, to within 200 miles of our coastline. Had that been the law in 1898 the Maine would never have gone to Havana Harbor. She never would have been blown up. There would have been no war with Spain with its attendant loss of life. Two hundred miles is ample, in the opinion of experts, for defense purposes. Our nation cannot start an offensive war if its ships can’t go further than 200 miles from the coastline. Planes might be permitted to go as far as 500 miles from the coast for purposes of reconnaissance. And the army should never leave the territorial limits of our nation.

To summarize: Three steps must be taken to smash the war racket.

We must take the profit out of war.

We must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not there should be war.

We must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.

CHAPTER FIVE

TO HELL WITH WAR!

I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war.

Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had “kept us out of war” and on the implied promise that he would “keep us out of war.” Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.

In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die.

Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?

Money.

An allied commission, it may be recalled, came over shortly before the war declaration and called on the President. The President summoned a group of advisers. The head of the commission spoke. Stripped of its diplomatic language, this is what he told the President and his group:

“There is no use kidding ourselves any longer. The cause of the allies is lost. We now owe you (American bankers, American munitions makers, American manufacturers, American speculators, American exporters) five or six billion dollars.

If we lose (and without the help of the United States we must lose) we, England, France and Italy, cannot pay back this money…and Germany won’t.

So…”

Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations were concerned, and had the press been invited to be present at that conference, or had radio been available to broadcast the proceedings, America never would have entered the World War. But this conference, like all war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off to war they were told it was a “war to make the world safe for democracy” and a “war to end all wars.”

Well, eighteen years after, the world has less of democracy than it had then. Besides, what business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our problem is to preserve our own democracy.

And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was really the war to end all wars.

Yes, we have had disarmament conferences and limitations of arms conferences. They don’t mean a thing. One has just failed; the results of another have been nullified. We send our professional soldiers and our sailors and our politicians and our diplomats to these conferences. And what happens?

The professional soldiers and sailors don’t want to disarm. No admiral wants to be without a ship. No general wants to be without a command. Both mean men without jobs. They are not for disarmament. They cannot be for limitations of arms. And at all these conferences, lurking in the background but all-powerful, just the same, are the sinister agents of those who profit by war. They see to it that these conferences do not disarm or seriously limit armaments.

The chief aim of any power at any of these conferences has not been to achieve disarmament to prevent war but rather to get more armament for itself and less for any potential foe.

There is only one way to disarm with any semblance of practicability. That is for all nations to get together and scrap every ship, every gun, every rifle, every tank, every war plane. Even this, if it were possible, would not be enough.

The next war, according to experts, will be fought not with battleships, not by artillery, not with rifles and not with machine guns. It will be fought with deadly chemicals and gases.

Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its foes wholesale. Yes, ships will continue to be built, for the shipbuilders must make their profits. And guns still will be manufactured and powder and rifles will be made, for the munitions makers must make their huge profits. And the soldiers, of course, must wear uniforms, for the manufacturer must make their war profits too.

But victory or defeat will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists.

If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of building greater prosperity for all peoples. By putting them to this useful job, we can all make more money out of peace than we can out of war – even the munitions makers.

So…I say,

TO HELL WITH WAR!





Thursday, May 21, 2009

Lies, Torture and Videotapes


Lies, Torture and Videotapes

by Tom Heneghan
International Intelligence Expert


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_CvbECLZy9Mk/SZm_tGa80yI/AAAAAAAAAL8/qTpgyqjgdV4/s320/Obama+-+Bush+%2B+Cheney+on+the+docket+GUILTY.jpg


UNITED STATES of America - It can now be reported that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is sitting on "smoking gun" evidence proving that the former BushFRAUD Administration ordered the torturing of countless Iraqi Intelligence Officers, who actually lived in the United States during the post 9/11 period, this includes Jose Padilla, known FBI informant and Oklahoma bombing suspect aka John Doe #2.

These Iraqi Intelligence Officers, some of them FBI informants, were taken to Guantanamo Bay and tortured in an attempt to coerce false confessions:


1. That Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was linked to 9/11

2. That Saddam was in possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), and

3. That Saddam was undertaking a nuclear program.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/12/06/ciadestroyedv_mn.jpghttp://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/abc_cia_tapes_090302_mn.jpg

Note: The videotapes of the tortures and interrogation tapes were criminally destroyed by the CIA in a clear Obstruction of Justice.

http://piratenews.org/bush-wanted4treason360x448.gif

Note: All of these BushFRAUD lies would eventually be exposed as such, but not before former BushFRAUD Secretary of State Colin Powell used the coerced testimony of an Iraq Intelligence Officer as predicate in front of the United Nations in an attempt to force the world body to authorize BushFRAUD's TREASONOUS war in Iraq.

Reference: The illegal War in Iraq has cost the American Taxpayers 9.7 TRILLION dollars.

Related BushFRAUD rendition and torture [enhancements added]:

Mystery surrounds prison death of terrorist whose testimony was key to Iraq invasion

Islamist dies in Tripoli shortly after human rights group visit
From Fred Bridgland in Libya
May 19, 2009

THE ISLAMIST terrorist who was the key source of the false intelligence used to trigger the US and UK 2003 military invasion of Iraq has been found dead in a Libyan prison cell.

Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi allegedly commited suicide by hanging in the prison where he was being held in the Libyan capital, Tripoli. His death followed a visit by a team from Human Rights Watch, one of the world's leading independent organisations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights.

The al-Libi affair opens a window on an extraordinarily close espionage link that existed between the government of the former US president, George Bush, and the authoritarian Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

Al-Libi was the unnamed source that Bush, his former secretary of state, Colin Powell, and other administration officials relied upon prior to the Iraq invasion to assert that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was helping a terrorist organisation run by al-Qaeda.

Al-Libi was known to Powell and Bush by the codename "Curveball".

Powell's speech to the United Nations Security Council on February 5, 2003 was largely based on al-Libi's coerced testimony - which was extracted from him in Egyptian torture chambers - even though many US intelligence officials questioned it at the time and later dismissed it completely. In his address, aimed at drumming up support for the invasion, Powell said he could "trace the story of a senior terrorist operative telling how Iraq provided training in these chemical and biological weapons to al-Qaeda".

He added: "Fortunately, this operative is now detained." Powell did not identify "Curveball" by name, but CIA officials - and a Senate Intelligence Committee report - later confirmed he was referring to al-Libi.

The Bush administration argued that the invasion of Iraq was necessary because the country was concealing weapons of mass destruction from international inspectors and could have shared those weapons with terrorists. No such stockpiles were found after the invasion.

Colin Powell's chief of staff at the time of the Security Council address, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, said he has since discovered that Bush's vice-president, Dick Cheney, ordered the Egyptian torturers to step up their techniques on al-Libi to obtain "a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qaeda".

Wilkerson, writing in online political journal The Washington Note, went on: "The vice-president's office ordered them the Egyptians to continue the enhanced methods. The detainee al-Libi had not revealed any al-Qaeda-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, revealed' such contacts."

Libyan-born al-Libi, 45 when he died last week, was a member of the anti-Gaddafi Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and the head of the al-Qaeda-linked Khaldan training camp in eastern Afghanistan from 1995 to 2000. He was detained in Pakistan in November 2001 and sent to a US detention centre in Afghanistan before being transferred by the CIA to the USS Bataan, an assault aircraft carrier stationed in the Arabian Ocean, and then to Egypt in early 2002 under the Bush administration's "extraordinary rendition" programme.

Under what has been described as "US torture by proxy", Human Rights Watch (HRW), quoting a declassified CIA cable, said al-Libi's Egyptian interrogators demanded information from the Libyan about al-Qaeda's connections with Iraq. The CIA document said the object of the interrogation was something "about which al-Libi said he knew nothing and had difficulty even coming up with a story".

Al-Libi's inquisitors subjected him to a mock burial in a coffin less than 20 inches high for 17 hours, according to the CIA cable. When he was let out, al-Libi was given a "last opportunity" to "tell the truth. Still his answers did not satisfy the Egyptian team. He was knocked to the ground and punched for 15 minutes."

It was some time afterwards that al-Libi "confessed" that Iraq had trained al-Qaeda fighters on chemical and biological weaponry - information taken up by the Bush administration to justify the Iraq invasion.

A bipartisan report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found in September 2006 that al-Libi had "lied about the link to avoid torture". The committee also found that although al-Libi had close contacts with al-Qaeda, he was not a member of the fundamentalist Islamic network.

After extracting the false confession from al-Libi, the Egyptians handed him to the CIA. The date of the transfer is unknown, as is the location where he was detained, although there is speculation it was Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Some time in early 2006 the Americans delivered al-Libi to Gaddafi.

Commenting on al-Libi's death in his cell shortly after he was visited by two HRW staffers on April 27, the campaign group's Middle East director, Sarah Leah Whitson, said it meant "the world will never hear his account of the brutal torture he experienced".

She added: "So now it is up to Libya and the United States to reveal the full story of what they know, including its impact on al-Libi's mental health."

Stacy Sullivan, a counter-terrorism adviser for HRW, said of al-Libi: "He's a fairly significant figure in the counter-terrorism world, and his testimony I would say provided the linchpin for the invasion of Iraq."

Sullivan said HRW personnel were "stunned" to discover al-Libi in Tripoli's Abu Salim prison during their fact-finding mission to Libya. Washington has never confirmed what happened to him, she said. When prison officials pointed out al-Libi to the research team, he refused to be interviewed by them. "Where were you when I was being tortured in American jails?" he said, according to Sullivan. She added: "He got really angry and walked away."

Human rights organisations and Islamic groups have questioned whether al-Libi's death was suicide.

Yasser al-Sirri, an Egyptian who runs the Islamic Observation Centre in London, said al-Libi was a "true Muslim, and Islam prohibits committing suicide".

Clive Stafford Smith of Justice, a group of British human rights lawyers, said: "We are told that al-Libi committed suicide in his Libyan prison. If this is true it would be because of his torture and abuse. If false, it may reflect a desire to silence one of the greatest embarrassments to the Bush administration."

Justice investigator Clara Gutteridge added: "He was tortured into making false statements that were relied upon to start the Iraq war, and when that became too embarrassing he was disappeared' to a rights-abusing country."

Hafed Al-Ghwell, a Libya expert and director of communications at the Dubai campus of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, scoffed at the notion that people in Libyan jails "simply commit suicide".

He said: "This is a regime with a long history of killing people in jail and then claiming it was suicide. My guess is Libya has seen the winds of change in America and wanted to bury this man before international organisations start demanding access to him."

Tom Malinowski, the head of HRW's Washington office, said that al-Libi was "Exhibit A in the narrative that tortured confessions contributed to the massive intelligence failure that preceded the Iraq war".

The al-Libi case sheds light on the extraordinary level of co-operation that existed between the Bush team and the Gaddafi regime.

Gaddafi helped the US pursue al-Qaeda's network in North Africa by extraditing radicals to neighbouring pro-Western states.

http://www.sundayherald.com/international/shinternational/display.var.2508623.0.0.php

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/jane%20harman%20terror%20conf.jpg

Israeli Mossad agent and TRAITOR
Jane Harman, D-CA

P.S. All of this BushFRAUD criminal TREASON dovetails to the ongoing espionage inquiry directed against Israeli Mossad agent Hillary Rodenhurst Clinton stooge Jane Harman, D-CA.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/04v49OH1E2cHG/340x.jpghttp://www.politicalfriendster.com/images/6495.jpg
Israeli Mossad espionage agents
Jane Harman (Reuters) and Uzi Arad

We can now divulge, folks, that Harman is actually caught on tape not only obstructing justice but in soliciting a campaign contribution from Uzi Arad in return for Harman's work to obstruct and stop the Israeli espionage case against her fellow Israeli Mossad agents, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman.

http://attendingtheworld.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/israeliespionage.jpg

http://www.newsfollowup.com/id/images_7/rosen_weissman_2.jpghttp://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0dZH4RaeaOcC9/610x.jpg
ESPIONAGE Against the American People
Israeli Mossad agents
Steven Rosen, Keith Weissman, Jane Harman, D-CA

How dare you, you conspiratorial tyrants
and kings and notable queens!

It was none other than the former head of the North American Israeli Mossad, Rahm Emanuel, that then organized the fundraiser for Harman, which was held in Hollywood, California with the assistance of KHAZARIAN Jew and Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate bagman and Hollywood mogul Steven Spielberg.

http://www.forward.com/workspace/assets/images/articles/emanuel-120508.jpghttp://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/capitolalertlatest/StevenSpielberg.jpghttp://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/images/63/harman2.jpg
Rahm Emanuel, Steven Spielberg, Jane Harman, D-CA

We can also now divulge that Harman was aware in February of 2003 that the BushFRAUD torture program was none other than an attempt to Obstruct Justice and coerce false testimony to cover up the truth about 9/11 and enable false evidence that would lead American into an illegal War in Iraq based on a lie!

http://www.pattonboggs.com/files/Professional/96ea6d2c-0a8f-4cac-9155-620a5fe0dbc4/Presentation/Photo/BLuskin.jpghttp://photos.upi.com/topics-Eric-Holder/3be6c540f1afca92575bd7f64e752647/Eric-Holder_4.jpg
Robert Luskin (L), Bill Clinton and Eric Holder

left pic: Joel Rennich UPI

At this hour, Harman is actually using former President Bill Clinton aka daddy Bush's little bitch, and her current attorney Robert Luskin, to blackmail and threaten U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder who has no choice but to proceed with an indictment against Israeli Mossad agent Jane Harman, D-CA.

Note: Harman's attorney, Robert Luskin, is the same attorney that represented Israeli Mossad agent Monica Lewinsky and former BushFRAUD Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove.


P.P.S. We can also report that the BushFRAUD Administration used rendition flights to take the alleged terrorists, 9/11 and illegal Iraq War whistleblowers, to Libya and Syria.

Related March 10, 2008 intelligence briefing on rendition flights:

Canadian national Maher Arar, who was cleared of terrorist charges by the Canadian Government, was the individual that actually emailed the 9/11 evidence to Lt. Vreeland's computer.

http://media.canada.com/22892dfb-fb17-4433-9bc6-5bb0f74689ad/canadaarar.jpg
Canadian Maher Arar, a French Intelligence Agent

Chris Wattie/Reuters

FACT: MAHER ARAR WAS ACTUALLY A DEEP COVER FRENCH INTELLIGENCE AGENT WHO, SOON AFTER 9/11, FLEW TO NEW YORK CITY TO SHARE HIS EVIDENCE WITH THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND BOTH NEW YORK SENATORS CHUCK SCHUMER AND HILLARY CLINTON.

MAHER ARAR WAS ABRUPTLY ILLEGALLY ARRESTED AT NEW YORK CITY'S JFK AIRPORT AND CHARGED WITH BEING A TERRORIST.

Maher Arar's evidence was seized by New York state officials and handed over to then Deputy Attorney General, MOSSAD agent and 9/11 co-conspirator and Bush-Crime Family Syndicate fixer, dual ISRAELI-U.S. citizen TRAITOR Michael Chertoff.

Maher Arar was eventually flown to Syria on the noted Bushfraud rendition flights on an aircraft owned by none other than Bush-Clinton Crime Family 9/11 linked TERRORIST Viktor Bout.
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=147509065&blogId=365536199

http://www.onelasvegas.com/wireless/assets/maps/North_Africa_and_the_Middle_East_map.gif

Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad received MILLIONS of dollars in BRIBES in return for allowing these alleged terrorists aka whistleblowers to be taken out of the United States and then tortured in known terrorist nations.

The alleged terrorists aka whistleblowers continue to be tortured by private mercenaries, some of them Israeli Mossad agents, tied to the British-owned Blackwater Corporation.

http://blogs.reuters.com/global/files/2008/09/gaddafi.jpghttp://melchettmike.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bashar-assad.jpg

BRIBED

Libyan Muammar Gaddafi (L), Syrian President Bashar al-Assad

We can also now reveal that the bagman involved in the bribery of both Libyan Gaddafi and Syrian al-Assad, in reference to the aforementioned rendition flights to allow torture in attempts to procure false confessions, is none other than former CIA Director and known Bush Crime Family Syndicate bagman Porter Goss.
http://www.yaledailynews.com/img/2004/09/27/9_27_2004_5920.jpg Reference: The funds Goss used to bribe Gaddafi and al-Assad aka the rendition flights, the torture and the black prisons, were funds tied to none other than the Federal Reserve Bank of New York aka Stephen Friedman and the Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scheme. photo AFP

Note: We can also divulge that new evidence has surfaced linking the Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scheme to a secret SEC trading platform.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is currently under investigation for money laundering to Pakistan involving the theft of U.S. Taxpayers' Treasury funds aka secret offshore Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate accounts.

Item: It is interesting today that U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner finally proposed setting up a "bad" bank to house the noted toxic derivatives.

The implementation of this "bad" bank had been originally proposed early on in the Obama Administration.

Question: Could it be that with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York under investigation that Geithner decided it was time to Obstruct Justice and finally take the toxic assets out of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Question: Could it be the fundraiser staged for Israeli Mossad agent and TRAITOR Jane Harman, D-CA, came from the same Federal Reserve Bank of New York-Bernard Madoff-Steven Spielberg Hollywood money laundry?


Stay tuned. More details will be forthcoming in our future intelligence briefings.

We are focusing on the Central Bank of Iraq.

P.P.P.S. Do not be fooled by the Nancy Pelosi diversion, folks. As much of a traitor and an incompetent that Pelosi is [threatened Congress with MARTIAL LAW in September of 2008 aka their support of the first BushFRAUD "bail out"], the corporate fascist, extortion-friendly media elite would rather discuss an irrelevant statement Pelosi made in regards to CIA credibility than the mounting criminal evidence aka BushFRAUD's TREASONOUS rendition flights and torture chambers, along with the escalating Israeli espionage scandal, which is engulfing Washington, D.C.

At this hour, we can also divulge that Pelosi is being blackmailed by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina in regards to the Clinton rendition flights aka the kidnapping of Ambassador Leo Wanta from Switzerland in 1993 when Wanta, along with former FBI Director William Sessions, General Vernon Walter, French President Francois Mitterrand, FBI informant Vince Foster and then Vice President, now year 2000 duly elected, natural born President Albert Gore Jr., tried to have Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate bagman, fugitive Marc Rich arrested, when Rich was in between Switzerland and France on his way to Monte Carlo.

http://zapruder.nl/images/uploads/Leo_Wanta.jpg
AMERICAN PATRIOT
Ambassador Leo Wanta

The other illegal activity involving the kidnapping of Ambassador Leo Wanta in early 1997, is when Ambassador Wanta, on the orders of daddy Bush's little bitch, Bill Clinton, and his sociopath loser wife, lesbian in-the-closet Hillary Rodenhurst Clinton, along with former Republican Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, ordered Wanta kidnapped from his temporary residence in Wisconsin to a holding facility aka gulag-type prison in Sayre, Oklahoma.

Former Clinton era Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr who, at the time of his appointment represented the Wisconsin division of the Children's Defense Fund, which was tied directly to Hillary Clinton.

Starr was also the attorny for Ambassador Wanta but abrutly resigned as Wanta's attorney when he was appointed Independent Counsel. Starr's conflict of interest was glaring. We can see now why he covered up Vince Foster's murder and resigned as Wanta's attorney since Ambassador Wanta could have been a witness in implicating Hillary Clinton in the murder of Foster.

Now you see, folks, why Wanta was kidnapped by the Clintons with the acquiescence of Kenneth Starr at put in the Sayre, Oklahoma gulag.

Not only were the Clintons misusing the Wanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocol funds, but they also wished to silence Ambassador Wanta considering Wanta's knowledge of massive criminal misconduct by then Clinton Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr involving Starr's cover up of the murder of Wanta's partner in the Marc Rich arrest attempt, former Clinton White House aide Vincent W. Foster.


Final note: Stay tuned for our future intelligence briefings, which will include an update on the theft of former Vice President, now year 2000 duly elected President Albert Gore Jr.'s daughter's personal files and social security number from the U.S. National Archives.

Do not believe any computer glitch spin, folks. The Clintons were notified of the missing files but not Gore; and it was the Bush Administration that was in power during this crime.

http://stewwebb.com/2000_%20presidential_election_stolen_5_states.GIF http://www.georgewalkerbush.net/grandtheft2000.gif

One of Gore's daughters, in December of 2008, met with a NASA space agency official who gave her the "smoking gun" evidence of the satellite programs that were used to electronically steal West Virginia, Missouri, Florida, New Hampshire and Gore's home state of Tennessee in the year 2000 presidential coup d'état.

Gore's daughter received copies of the NASA electronic computer program coded "Gator" for Florida and "Rocky Top" for Tennessee.

Note: It was Washington Post criminal journalist and CIA asset David Ignatius that actually tipped off Karl Rove and the Bush White House about Gore's daughter meeting with the NASA space agency official in Florida and actually placed Gore's daughter's life in jeopardy.

We will have more on Ignatius' role in the year 2000 presidential election coup and the threats against Al Gore and his daughters in the next intelligence briefing.

http://z.about.com/d/uspolitics/1/0/t/D/74408174.jpghttp://i354.photobucket.com/albums/r438/lechatsavant/Rahm%20Emanuel/ohai.jpg

CONSPIRATORIAL TRAITORS

Patrick Fitzgerald and Rahm Emanuel

We will also bring you more news on TRAITOR and cover up artist Patrick Fitzgerald, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, who is currently trying to frame former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich in an attempt to protect Obama White House Chief of Staff, Israeli Mossad agent Rahm Emanuel.


Fitzgerald is currently covering up Rahm Emanuel's role in procuring school grants for an educational institution called The Chicago Academy, which fronts as an Israeli Mossad espionage outpost.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thenewswire/archive/2007/07/02/MorningJoealmost.JPG

In closing, folks, here is a personal message to Joe Scarborough of MSNBC:

Quit lying and defending BushFRAUD's complicity in his PRE 9/11 TREASON and his illegal war in Iraq.

I know your involvement in the year 2000 presidential election coup, Scarborough, and that you are a propaganda instrument for the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate.

By the way, Scarborough, you might want to respond to Colin Powell's aide, Lawrence Wilkerson's charge alleging that Colin Powell is convinced that BushFRAUD supplied him with bogus evidence that took us to an illegal war in Iraq based on a lie.

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/images/IsTorture.gif

Why Bush's 'Enhanced Interrogation' Program Failed
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/enhanced-interrogation-failed2.pdf

When Japanese did it to Americans
in WWII it WAS torture

http://www.theknightlynews.com/storage/2007-11-05-thirdtorturepic.jpg.jpeg
Soldiers in Vietnam used waterboarding UPI

http://www.thewe.cc/thewe_/images_5/___/torture/waterboard_painting.jpe
The Cambodian Khmer Rouge regime

used waterboarding TORTURE

Waterboarding Historically Controversial

In 1947, the U.S. Called It a War Crime; in 1968, It Reportedly Caused an Investigation

By Walter Pincus

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 5, 2006

...Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian...

"Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) told his colleagues last Thursday during the debate on military commissions legislation. "We punished people with 15 years of hard labor when waterboarding was used against Americans in World War II," he said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005.html

Remember, Scoobie Dooo, when you make it this personal, it could easily get physical.

http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/001/Graph/Jesse_Ventura_revolution.jpg

"You give me a water board, Dick cheney, and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders" -Jesse Ventura
By the way, congratulations to Jesse Ventura for talking about his plans for waterboarding the TRAITOR Dick Cheney and the entire Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate for their HIGH Treason against the American People.

http://images.usatoday.com/news/gallery/wreax3/bushes.jpg0804_scarboroough_333x410.jpg Scarborough campaign with Bush 8/04 image by qpmwoof
Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate (L)
Joe Scarborough supporting War Criminal BushFRAUD

http://newsbusters.org/static/2007/08/2006-07-23-CMS-Ignatius.jpghttp://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2009/01/woodward_01.jpg

In fact, I intend to contact Ventura and tell him that we need to organize a waterboarding party and have Scarborough, the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate, all of their treasonous associates, as well as the Washington Post and their enabler journalists David Ignatius and Bob Woodward as guests of honor.
...

Thursday, May 14, 2009

U.S. Federal Reserve now tied to Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scheme


U.S. Federal Reserve now tied to Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scheme



http://lh4.ggpht.com/_k_AummjdWTA/SOWGIwcPMII/AAAAAAAAAP0/86boGsKMpA4/s400/FederalReserve2.JPG http://images.publicradio.org/content/2009/02/06/20090206_madoff_33.jpg
CONSPIRATORIAL PONZI SCHEME ARTISTS
Federal Reserve and Israeli Mossad agent Bernard Madoff


UNITED STATES of America - It can now be reported that former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Stephen Friedman, received thirty-seven (37) criminal referrals concerning the involvement of former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, J.P. Morgan Associates, the London-based office of AIG (American International Group), Robert Rubin's Citibank and the Israel Discount Bank in New York City, reference their involvement in the Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scheme,

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a9/BankleumiS.jpg/250px-BankleumiS.jpg

which included illegal wire transfers to the Israeli Bank Leumi and onto secret CIA proprietary accounts in Pakistan.

FILE - In this March 29, 2004 file photo, Stephen Friedman, ...

Stephen Friedman

AP Photo/Carlos Osorio

What is significant about Friedman's activity is that he did not report any of these criminal referrals to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Friedman's activities make him guilty of criminal conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and Misprision of Felonies in order to cover up on behalf of the conspiratorial Federal Reserve and the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate.

Note: Guess who recommended that Bernard Madoff be appointed head of the NASDAQ electronic stock exchange. None other than, that is right, Stephen Friedman!


And, of course, if gets worse!

http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/celeb/top_100/steven_spielberg.jpg Instead of reporting the criminal referrals to the SEC, Friedman actually tipped off various investors in the Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scheme, including known Hollywood mogul and Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate bagman, Steven Spielberg.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/video/news/2008/12/15/news.chernoff.121508.cnnmoney.216x164.jpg

Up to $18 BILLION was withdrawn from various Bernard Madoff accounts and forwarded to Israel for safekeeping on behalf of Madoff and his preferred KHAZARIAN, ZIONIST Jew clientele.

Madoff's preferred clientele also included major media types who have now parked their funds in the Cayman Islands.

How dare you, you conspiratorial tyrants
and kings and notable queens!


http://www.virginialawreview.org/inbrief/2007/06/18/sec_cox.jpg
CONSPIRATORS

Christopher Cox, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
and George W.
BushFRAUD
http://cdn.wn.com/o25/ph//2009/03/04/6ecf3a31a2efa01cc7897adeb079f69c-grande.jpg
CONSPIRATORS
BushFRAUD and Stephen Friedman (2nd center)
Eric Draper/White House

P.S. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department are covering up the existence of memos, which show that current SEC Chairman (appointed by BushFRAUD) Christopher Cox was in direct communication with Stephen Friedman at the time Friedman was sitting on the Madoff criminal referrals and doing nothing.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/greeninc/rahm.jpg http://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/nm_greg_craig_090409_ssh.jpg
Obama listens to his White House Chief of Staff
Israeli Mossad agent Rahm Emanuel
AP
Obama embraces his WH legal counsel "Skull and Bones" Greg Craig
Alex Wong/Getty

Clearly foreign born alleged President Obama, along with his Chief of Staff, Israeli Mossad agent Rahm Emanuel, and his "Skull and Bones" legal counsel Greg Craig, have become complete enablers of the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate and their looting of the U.S. Treasury and destruction of the American Republic.

Note: It is important to remember, folks, that the media saturation coverage of torture-gate is nothing more than a well-planned political Hollywood-type psyop involving Obama, former Vice pResident Dick Cheney (actually operating together) and the corporate fascist media elite to cover up and not report REAL substantive news like the material we are bringing you in this intelligence briefing.

http://justgetthere.us/blog/uploads/domestic_spying.jpg

Note: The corporate fascist media is desperate to cover up the new "smoking gun" evidence proving the BushFRAUD Administration authorized illegal NSA spying aka Stellar Wind against the American People well in advance of 9/11.

http://www.tomflocco.com/fsimage/OdigoComverse.gif This spying, which began in February of 2001, was partially outsourced to Israeli owned companies, Odigo and Comverse.


http://www.finalcall.com/artman/uploads/fbi_gr3.jpg http://a3.vox.com/6a00cdf3a9bf0ecb8f0110162ece5b860c-320pi
http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070503/070503_palfrey_vsmall.rp350x350.jpg http://vegasblog.latimes.com/vegas/images/heidi_fleiss_iq4mn9kn.jpg
Escort service Madams Deborah Jeane Palfrey (L), Heidi Fleiss
left pic Stefan Zaklin / EPA file, right pic Sam Mircovich/Reuters

P.P.S. We can now divulge that former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was framed with the cooperation of the compromised FBI, along with rogue Israeli Mossad operatives, who were working parallel with not only the noted Madam Palfrey's Washington, D.C. escort service, but elements tied to the former Hollywood, California Madam and escort service owner, Heidi Fleiss.

http://vote08.freedomblogging.com/files/2008/02/thompson.jpg http://www.tantor.com/AuthorImage/Ignatius_D.jpg
Fred Thompson (R), David Ignatius

Spitzer, who had uncovered the link between the Federal Reserve and the Madoff Ponzi Scheme, was set up with the assistance of former Republican Senator from Tennessee, homosexual in-the-closet Fred Thompson, and current Washington Post journalist, CIA asset David Ignatius.


Both Thompson and Ignatius were in possession of the entire list of clientele at both Madam Palfrey's and Heidi Fleiss' escort services.

They then leaked Spitzer's name to the criminally compromised FBI and to none other than the Federal Reserve Bank of New York Chairman Steven Friedman who then went about the frame up of Spitzer as to prevent him from pursuing a criminal investigation of the entire Federal Reserve itself.


Reference: Homosexual in-the-closet Fred Thompson, along with Washington Post journalist David Ignatius, Washington Post editor Bob Woodward and Clinton era Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, operated together to protect the criminal activities of the Bush-Clinton-Mena, Arkansas-AmeriChina Global Management Group Ltd-Iran/Contra arms and narcotics trafficking and money laundry.

The aforementioned individuals, along with former First Lady and former New York U.S. Senator and current Secretary of State, loser and lesbian in-the-closet Hillary Rodenhurst Clinton, also tried and failed in an unsuccessful attempt to frame then Vice President, now year 2000 duly elected President Albert Gore Jr. for making a phone call using the wrong phone.

They wanted to frame Al Gore so as to protect the crimes of the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate, pave the way for George W. BushFRAUD and loser Hillary Rodenhurst Clinton, which would have been a monarchial takeover of the United States.


Final note: As we close this intelligence briefing, the criminal role of the corporate, extortion-friendly, fascist U.S. media can not be underestimated in the cover up of the criminal activities that have taken place in the United States over the last twenty (20) years or more.

The NSA has a 13-second delay mechanism on ALL U.S. networks.


Tonight, folks, we are going to single out the Washington Post.

http://newsbusters.org/static/2008/03/2008-03-18-NBC-NN-Capehart.jpg http://newsbusters.org/static/2008/07/2008-07-02MSNBCRFTWHRobinson.jpg
http://images.chron.com/blogs/beltwayconfidential/wpcfmikeallen.jpg

It specializes in hiring homosexual in-the-closet type journalist aka Jonathan Capehart (upper left), Eugene Robinson (upper right) and Mike Allen (center).

Now, folks, we are not gay bashers. But it is important to remember that one of the reasons the corporate media has failed to report any significant criminal acts by the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate against the American People is not only because they are financially compromised but they hire closet gay media types who can be manipulated and blackmailed based on their sexual practices.

These gay media types, who dominate both the New York and Hollywood electronic press, engage mainly in gossip and stories leaked to them directly by the criminal occupation government.

Note: The hiring practices of the Washington Post, which are controlled by both Woodward and Ignatius, favor hiring either radical feminist lesbians in-the-closet or African-American closet homosexuals.

They have all covered up for the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate for years.


The are frequent guests on MSNBC's Joe in the Morning.

In closing, here is a special message to Ignatius:
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/images/a/6186.jpg Like, Woodward, we are not interested in buying any of your stupid books that are actually written by fellow Washington Post journalist Walter Pincus; you have enabled the Bush-Clinton Crime Family Syndicate's destruction of the United States for years.

http://www.georgewalkerbush.net/grandtheft2000.gif

We will soon divulge your role in the overthrow and theft of the year 2000 presidential election from then Vice President now duly elected President Albert Gore Jr.

Both Ignatius and Woodward enabled nation-wrecker, homosexual in-the-closet, AWOL, cocaine snorting, war criminal George W. Bushfraud's rise to power.


They must be brought to justice with due prejudice!

...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v641/H-44/Heroes/DefendersoftheConstitutionUSArmy.jpg
DEFENDERS OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION


We announce to the criminal government and its criminal corporate media enablers: YOU ARE TOO CORRUPT TO CONTINUE!

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Neo-Nazis in Synagogues


Neo-Nazis in Synagogues....Moses was a drug addict and imagined it all, according to Israeli researcher. Which means there is no religious basis for the State of Israel, now or ever....


Seldom have I felt as sick as I do today, seldom as frustrated and
seldom as grief-stricken.

Why would Jews (okay, let us not get entangled in the semantic
differentiations between “ALL” Jews and “SOME” Jews) allow the language
of Nazis in their holiest of places?

Human memories are so convenient and short!

All-too recently, people in Europe were condemning Jews and Judaism;
Jews are not humans, Jews and Judaism will destroy the world they would
say; Judaism and Jews are evil and must be eradicated, just like TB
Bacillii, said Der Fuhrer.

Events followed events, language against Jews became tougher and tougher
until language itself was just not enough; a “Final solution” had to be
found for the scourge of Jews amongst us.

Persecution…
Destroyed lives and businesses…
Detentions…
Demonization…
Concentration camps…
Extermination camps.

When added to the literally hundreds of years of persecutions,
expulsions and pogroms, this “Final Solution” had such a deforming
effect on the collective Jewish psyche that many Jews are to be found
looking for enemies even when there are none and then reacting to those
imaginary, existential threats with the vigor of facing a real
danger...with grievous results for the imagined “enemy”.

I understand all this, I understand why so many Jews must feel almost on
the verge of hysteria (fanned by so many self-promoting agents and
agencies), but I fail to understand WHY they must give in to such a
widespread hostility against Muslims that today. It seems as if so MANY
Jews are jockeying to step in the shoes of Herr Hitler and create Islam
and Muslims as the ones to persecute.

When will these persecutions cease? When Muslims are exterminated as
Jews were? Are over two MILLION Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, not
enough? Must all of the so-called “Judeo-Christian” world also be
cleansed of Muslims before Jews start to feel comfortable or will other
countries be targeted next because Israel must also feel comfortable?
How many more Muslims must be sacrificed to make Jews feel safe enough
that they do not promote hate-Islam propaganda?

Muslims are accused of much violence as if mindless violence were a
Muslim monopoly. Muslims are also accused of having secret propaganda
leaflets against Jews in their Mosques; Hate, say our Judeo-Christian
brothers, is taught in 80% of all Mosques in America. Statements and
numbers generated from thin air, yet most effective because there is no
way of disproving such accusations.

I live in the Seattle area and I have had the privilege of attending
Friday prayers at at least twenty different Mosques in the area. I have
met with and spoken closely with uncountable Muslims in the area and we
have often discussed Israel, Palestine, human rights in America etc.,
but some things I have NEVER heard or experienced.

I have NEVER heard any Muslim say Jews must be destroyed. I have NEVER
heard any Muslim say Israel must be destroyed and Jews shoved into the
sea. I have NEVER heard any Muslim say Jews must be kicked out of the
US and Europe because they pose a deep threat. Never!

The great tragedy today is that so many Jewish organizations, groups and
even congregations are single-mindedly pursuing the persecution of
Muslims by actively and energetically helping to spread hate and fear of
Islam and Muslims...very successfully at that.

Compounding this tragedy is yet another tragedy in which other,
non-participating Jewish organizations, groups and congregations, remain
steadfastly silent as this hate and fear is spread out all over this
country. Almost as if they are afraid that by speaking out, they might
undermine the state of Israel and the existence of Jews.

Obsession, an extremely disingenuous but dangerous film; full of
fantasies and inaccuracies about Muslims, Islam and Arabs, was
produced...to silence. 48-60 MILLION copies of Obsession were
distributed all over the US...to silence.

Fitna was produced by Geert Wilders, full of fantasies and inaccuracies
about Islam and Muslims...to silence.

Hate groups like the Israeli Security Solutions International (SSI)
spread their venom under the guise of “security” from Florida, while
others like the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) spread their hate and fear
of Islam even as they “train” law enforcement agencies in “tolerance” of
minorities...to silence

Now to the cause of my consternation and utter dismay.

Geert Wilders is in the US and among the places where he is lionized his
words are greeted with thunderous applause, is a Synagogue in Florida.
Geert Wilders is clearly seen and heard to say that Islam is not a
religion and should not be afforded protection; he says that Muslims
must be kicked out of Europe and America and he continues through a
litany of hate-producing statements and is seen to be interrupted by
much applause and given a standing ovation at the end.

In Stoughton, Mass, another Synagogue is seen to be hosting Wilders and
his film Fitna, to wild enthusiasm. This Synagogue at least gave the de
rigueur disclaimer that Wilders does not represent the views of the
invitees (then why have him over?!!!), courtesy of the Middle East Forum
Law Project and the Republican Jewish Coalition.

It would appear that Rabbis in Israel were calling Rabbis in the US to
get them to have Geert Wilders make his presentation at American
Synagogues. Even the Stoughton Police department got credit for making
this presentation a reality...I am certain the Police supported Wilders
largely because of the hard work and fear-mongering by SSI. Geert
Wilders, this blond Aryan who would make Nazis proud, was called a hero
and embraced by this Rabbi before speaking.

Some Wilders’ quotes:

We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe...a
clear and present danger.
I have warned against the dangers of the Quran and the dangers of
Islam…
My mission is to warn people of the Islamization of Western societies…
And if there is one country, one country in the world that is most
dear to me and faces the threat of destruction of (by) the power of
Islam, it is Israel...the only country in the Middle East that shares
the values of our Western society…
The war against Israel...is war against the West…

From Jewish groups and congregations around America?

Silence.

I would like my friends and readers to ponder this; what exactly would
be happening in America if some hate-monger created a vile film against
Jews, full of falsehoods and then was accorded a heroes welcome all
across the US as he showed his film to enthusiastic Muslim crowds and
warned against the dangers of Judaism and Jews, to the world, calling
for the destruction of Judaism and expulsion of Jews?

Indeed.

Vilification and condemnation of such a person and all the Muslim
congregations who would welcome him, would be extremely well-deserved
and justified. I am willing to bet the MANY if not most Muslim
congregations, would openly condemn such a man and congregations who
host him.

I guarantee you I would be among the MOST who would openly and loudly
condemn them.

In despair

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Link to H1N1 reverse genetic engineering and murder of Harvard virologist Dr. Don Wiley


Link to H1N1 reverse genetic engineering and murder of Harvard virologist Dr. Don Wiley

More evidence emerges that H1N1 was engineered in "Jurassic Park" bio-labs

Informed sources have revealed to WMR that the H1N1 virus, which the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned could become a global pandemic, was reverse engineered from genetic material obtained from the remains of victims of the deadly 1918 "Spanish flu" influenza pandemic that killed 50 million people worldwide.

WMR has obtained information from biological researchers that the 1918 Spanish flu genetic sequences were "manipulated" in order to effect transmission capability. The current H1N1 virus, called "swine flu," is reportedly a combination of two forms of human flu, two forms of swine flu (North American and Eurasian), and avian or bird flu. There are now reports of species hopping from humans to pigs in Canada.

The scientific name for the current H1N1 virus that was manipulated is "Influenza A virus (strain A/Brevig Mission/1/1918 H1N1)." It is called Brevig Mission because, as WMR previously reported, U.S. Army biological warfare specialists recovered the genetic material from the fairly intact corpse of an Inuit woman who died from the 1981 flu in Brevig Mission, Alaska. WMR has learned that work on manipulation of the Brevig Mission flu strain began in 1997.

Two bio-safety laboratories have been associated with the genetic reverse engineering of not only A-H1N1, the current "swine flu" strain, but also the deadly Ebola virus. They are the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Canada. The Associated Press reported on September 20, 2007, that the Madison laboratory was cited for safety violations: "University of Wisconsin-Madison research on the deadly Ebola virus was conducted for a year in a less-secure laboratory than required, until the National Institutes of Health alerted the school to the problem. The deadly virus itself was never present in the laboratory, said Jan Klein, UW-Madison biological safety officer. Instead, DNA copies of the virus were being studied to better understand one of the world's most dangerous pathogens."

The report also stated that the Madison research facility was involved with combining "materials": "Klein said no one was ever at risk, though an infectious virus could have been produced if the research material had been combined with other components. But that was not part of any planned experiment and would not be done by accident,' she said."

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) reportedly shut down the Ebola research at Madison but it was reportedly moved to a Level 4 Bio-Safety Laboratory at the National Microbiology Laboratory at the Canadian Science Center for Human and Animal Health in Winnipeg, Manitoba. In 2007, macaque monkeys were infected with the 1981 flu virus at the Canadian laboratory by some of the same researc