Monday, November 30, 2009

MSM Still Silent on ClimateGate Crime Against Humanity

"MSM Still Silent on ClimateGate

The ClimateGate scandal broke more than a week ago, and as I survey the MSM (i.e. "elite media", "establishment media", "state-controlled media", "dinosaur media" ... take your pick), the top news stories seem to be Tiger Woods' accident and nasty gossip surrounding him, the media whore couple that crashed the Obamas' Thanksgiving dinner, Sarah Palin drawing crowds (much to the dismay of Libs), the requisite collection of dreadful murder-on-Thanksgiving stories, Black Friday reports, and the "gee, we missed Osama bin Laden back in 2001 in Tora Bora." (Why the hell is that news? We know that already. Talk about re-runs!) These stories are all distractions.

But, where are the reports on ClimateGate?!? Why the hell is the press sitting on this?!? I thought the press loved a good scandal! Could it be that our in-bed-with-Obama-and-the-Left media are going to have to eat major crow?

The scandal is breaking in other parts of the world, but here in the U.S. you only hear about it via the "non-news", such as FoxNews, bloggers, and Glenn Beck. Our press is ignoring what foreign news agencies are reporting, such as this....



by Michael Rivero

Climategate: The Mother of All Deceptions

The recent exposures of fraud coming from the Hadley Climate Research Unit, then followed by similar exposures at New Zealand's NWIA, Australia's climate center, and NOAA have only confirmed the doubts arising from the obviously NON-scientific methods employed by the Anthropogenic Global Warming supporters, hereinafter called the "Global Warming Cult". I call them a cult because of the abandonment of scientific method by many of the acolytes, together with a recent British Court decision that declared belief in Global Warming was accorded the status of a religion.

Human Caused Global Warming is not being researched; it be being promoted. Al Gore and his fellow investors have spent over a hundred million dollars in creating a crisis of human-caused global warming out of (quite literally) thin air. They are not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They expect to reap billions in profits from the trading of Carbon Credits, a "license to pollute" available for a price and subject to brokerage fees. One of the people Al Gore relied on to create this scheme was Ken Lay, late of ENRON, aka the Crooked "E".

Coincident with the desire to reap huge profits from the general population of the world is the agenda to promote a global government. Currently, the push for a global government rests on three pillars, Global Warming is one of them, leading to a surrendering of national sovereignty scheduled to occur at the Copenhagen Conference December 7th, 2009. The other two pillars exploited to create the "need" for a global government are a global swine-flu pandemic, requiring a global health organization, and a global financial crisis, requiring a global bank. The political power behind this push for global government is immense; enough to win Al Gore an Academy Award and a Nobel Peace Prize for his film, "An Inconvenient Truth", despite a court ruling pointing out the numerous provable lies and distortions in it.

To any real objective observer, the methods employed by the Cult are not those of science and research but of salesmanship and propaganda. Scare tactics are well in evidence. To anyone of an age enough to recall previous scare campaigns, the hue and cry for Anthropogenic Global Warming is reminiscent of "Killer Bees" and Y2K scares of yesteryear.

To put it bluntly, Anthropogenic Global Warming is a load of government-sponsored bovine excrement. Its purpose is to trick you out of money and obedience. And despite the shrill cries of those who insist that government would never conceive or let along execute such a monstrous fraud upon the people, the fact is that Anthropogenic Global Warming has a very long pedigree of deception behind it.....


What is Global Warming?

Let's get something straight; the climate is supposed to change. In 4 1/2 billion years, there has never been a time when the Earth's climate remained exactly the same. Careful study of the geological and paleontological record shows that the climate is always changing; that the Earth is always getting warmer or colder in long hundred thousand year cycles.

At present the earth is far colder than the Cretaceous but far warmer than the ice ages. Given that the Earth has only recently come out of the Little Ice Age, it stands to reason we should be getting warmer. It is this idea that the Earth can or should be locked into a particular configuration that is artificial and unnatural. And who was to decide what the ideal temperature of earth should be? What is ideal for people living at the equator is hardly ideal for people living in the polar regions.

Global warming cultists like to talk about the balance of nature. This is a very romantic term, and sounds worthy of preservation. But there is no balance of nature. Nature is change. Nature is chaos. Nature is one life form going extinct while another evolves into being. Nature has never been in balance; it is in fact careening through time colliding with the landscape.

Is there really a crisis? Would it really be a bad thing if the Earth were getting warmer?

Warmer temperatures mean longer growing seasons. Longer growing seasons mean more food. And at a time when much of the world's population are going hungry, more food is a good thing.

Is carbon dioxide really such a bad thing? Carbon dioxide occurs naturally. The major sources are volcanoes and respiration from animal life on Earth. As carbon dioxide increases plant life which uses carbon dioxide for photosynthesis will grow more abundantly. Again, producing more food. There are even companies which will install carbon dioxide in enhancement systems for commercial greenhouses because it has been proven that increased carbon dioxide stimulates plant growth and larger crops.

Is carbon dioxide a greenhouse gas? Yes, it is. But it is not the only one. Water vapor is by far the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Methane is also a greenhouse gas, more potent than carbon dioxide. But you cannot tax water vapor, and methane is produced by termites and deep-sea microbes, which are far too intelligent life forms to submit to carbon taxes, so the global warming cultists have settled on carbon dioxide as the villain because a portion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can be traced to human activity.

How much atmospheric carbon dioxide comes from human activity? Not including respiration, human contribution to atmospheric carbon dioxide is .28% of the total atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Now this may not seem like very much, and indeed it isn't. With volcanoes producing far more carbon dioxide than humans, one wonders what all the fuss is about regarding our cars and industry. But the global warming cult has a handy explanation. The global warming cult likes to claim that natural sources of carbon dioxide are already balanced out by natural sinks for carbon dioxide. Volcanoes are offset by treaties. The carbon dioxide emitted by sea life is absorbed by seaweed. By claiming that there is no natural counterpart to human caused carbon dioxide the global warming cult tries to claim that .28% of atmospheric carbon dioxide contributed by human activity is upsetting the balance of nature. But as we pointed out before, there is no balance of nature. It is a romantic notion, but simply not reality.

The Global Warming Fraud

So how do we know we are dealing with a fraud? As noted above, climate change is something that is supposed to happen. The world is always getting warmer or colder. The promotion of a change in the climate as a threat to humankind requiring the paying of taxes and submission to authority is a manufactured construct.

How do we know an agenda is involved? Simple. If the global warming alarmists were really only interested in the welfare of the Earth, one would expect them to be delirious with joy that the threat of anthropogenic global warming doesn't really exist after all. But quite to the contrary, those whose paychecks are dependent on the global warming industry are in a total panic to reassure us that, yes, there is a real danger, and it is all our fault!

Another reason we know Anthropocentric Global Warming is a hoax is that Scientific Method is supposed to allow for others to double-check the work leading to the theory. In other words, starting with the same data and applying the same methods, I should get the same results. But in the case of Anthropocentric Global Warming, this is impossible. The CRU, in response to Freedom of Information Requests for the raw data on which they based their dire predictions of doom, first stalled, then admitted they had destroyed the raw data! We mere mortals are expected to simply take their word their conclusions are accurate. I have to wonder with all the tens of millions of dollars in funding CRU enjoyed, why they could not purchase an extra hard drive to save that raw data!

In ancient times rulers ruled by what ever lie would convince the people that they needed to be ruled. One very common dodge was rule by divine right. I am your ruler because God said so. But as mankind has evolved and become more sophisticated, and understands that the idea of God is more a metaphor than reality, rulers intent on using deception to rule their people have had to come up with more convincing myths. Obey me and I will save you from the Communists. Obey me and I'll save you from the terrorists. Obey me and I will save you from global warming. And so forth...

So the push to sell global government on the basis of human caused global warming is just another variation on the theme of I am the ruler because the gods hath decreed it so.

Maybe it's time for humans to evolve past this latest deception.

As for the actual evidence calling into question the claims of human caused global warming, we can start with the very small percentage of atmospheric carbon dioxide actually created by human industry. The attempt by the global warming cult to claim that natural carbon dioxide is not a problem because nature balances it out, but human caused carbon dioxide is a threat, betrays the agenda of of taking something that occurs naturally and focusing the blame for it onto humans in order to guilt them out of money and obedience.

We have previously documented that temperature sensors used to generate the data that supports the claim of human caused global warming have been cited in the outflow of building air conditioners and in one notable instance right next to a trash incinerator. Clearly given that these are all sources of heat, the readings from these temperature sensors cannot be used to assume that we are measuring the temperature of anything other than air-conditioning outflow and the incineration of trash.

It has been documented and ruled in a British court of law that Al Gore's film and inconvenient truth contained numerous factual errors. In one notable case, a film sequence showing the destruction of the polar caps, turned out to be a fake; a computer-generated sequence from the science-fiction movie the "Day after tomorrow".

Much of the sensationalist media coverage of the issue of human-caused global warming has been exposed as a fraud. A story which claimed Polar Bears were drowning because of global warming was exposed as a fraud in which pictures of summer melt were presented as mid-winter scenes, along with the ludicrous claim that polar bears could not swim to shore to save their own lives.

Then there was the recent video-taped admission by the head of Greenpeace that the claim that Green, and would lose its ice in 20 years was merely a propaganda hoax!

The list of problems supposedly caused by human-caused global warming, from Acne to Prostitution, is endless, with more nonsense being added every day!

The major problem that the global warming cultists have faced is that the Earth has actually been cooling for almost 10 years now. The global warming cultists attempted to rebrand by avoiding the term global warming and saying their agenda was to deal with climate change. Not just any climate change of course but sudden climate change, again the fault of humans, again requiring taxes and obedience to a global authority to solve. But rebranding as the climate change cult did not secure the fact that the predictions for a warming globe were simply not panning out. It was at this point that institutions dependent on funding to study human caused global warming began to adjust their data in order to, as CRU put it, "conceal the decline". Otherwise, trust in the climate scientist was going to be undermined by the fact that they had obviously misguessed which way the temperatures of earth were going predicting that it was going out when in fact it was demonstrably going down.

In the end, the most obvious evidence that the global warming cultists got it wrong, is to look out your doors and windows this winter. Snow has come early to much of the Northern Hemisphere this winter. Ski resorts have opened early, and it looks to be a very hard winter. The same global warming cultists who would point to temperature extremes 10 years ago as proof of their claims, now insist that early snows and frosts and ice should not be construed as evidence of global cooling. Clearly there is a bias at work here.

What is Really at Stake Here?

As I mentioned in the previous section, politicians seek to gain wealth and power and authority by taking something that occurs naturally, transforming it and promoting it as a crisis, and then selling the population a solution in exchange for higher taxes and increased authority over their lives.

Al Gore and his investors have created a crisis called human caused global warming. They have created a product, literally out of thin air, called the carbon credit. This is essentially a license to pollute. And as experience in Europe has already shown, polluters will simply by the license, and pass the cost on to consumers. The pollution will continue, has continued; the only real change is that goods and services cost more than they did before.

These so-called carbon credits will be bought from those who have too many, and resold to those who need more. This will require a brokerage, of which the only one currently in existence is owned by Al Gore and his investors, who stand to make billions of dollars from the trading of carbon credits. This is not unlike the manner in which Enron made billions of dollars off of the people of California by trading imbalances and electricity. It is not a coincidence that Enron's Ken Lay assisted Al Gore in setting up the structure for the trading of carbon credits. Al Gore is doing with carbon dioxide to the world what Ken lay did to California with electricity.

There is a huge amount of money at stake on convincing the people of the world that the Earth is getting warmer, that it is all their fault, and atonement lies with submitting to new taxation.

Those people still supporting AGW (anthropogenic global warming) are dependent on funding to support their current positions. That funding is in turn dependent in the continuation of faith that AGW (anthropogenic global warming) is correct. After all, when Galileo proved that the Earth Orbited the Sun, funding for continued research into epicycles vanished abruptly, along with tenures and the value of every degree issued in the field of Epicycles.

The same applies here. With precious rare exception, every academic whose degree and funding is based on AGW is looking at a stark unemployment picture. In their minds, they are not fighting for scientific truth; they are fighting for their livelihood, and the proof is very simple. If their primary concern was really the long term welfare of planet Earth, one would think the Global Warming Cult would be delighted to find out there really is no danger after all. But, as is clearly evident, the goal is to support the orthodoxy even against the revelation that their core scientific foundation is based on a fraud.

Quite a few people, including President Obama, are financially invested in the Global Carbon Credit scheme, in which licenses are issued to pollute, with the surplus units bought and sold through brokerages. Al Gore and his fellow investors have already spent $150 million to "sell" anthropogenic global warming. They will not walk away from that investment easily.

Beyond the researchers whose degrees and funding are dependent on the continuation of a perceived public threat, the media outlets and government officials who signed onto this campaign are now realizing that they have wagered their entire credibility on AGW (anthropogenic global warming) at a time when their credibility was already strained from Saddam's "nookular" bombs, the economy, 9-11, etc. etc. etc. Climategate could well be the final nail in the coffin of the public's trust of media and government.

Just one example, Paul Hudson, BBC weatherman who in October was sent Climategate emails has been gagged by the BBC.

Over and above the financial incentive, there is another agenda at work. There has been a push forward for the emergence of a global government for many years now. The plan to sell this new global oligarchy to the people the world rests on three pillars. The first pillar is human caused global warming, requiring submission to a global environmental authority. The second pillar was the global swine flu pandemic, requiring submission to a global health authority. The third pillar was the global financial crisis, requiring submission to a global banking authority. All three pillars are in serious trouble. If the pillar of human caused global warming collapses, no doubt it will pull the other two down with it.

Clearly there's a tremendous amount of political and financial power behind the selling of anthropogenic global warming to the people of the world. It is this political power which was able to provide Al Gore with an Academy award for his documentary film and inconvenient truth even though that film has already been exposed as containing multiple factual errors. It was this same political power which obtained for Al Gore a Nobel peace prize again for his documentary film and again awarded even though the deceptions had been exposed in a British court of law.

So much money and political power has been invested in the myth of human caused global warming that if human caused global warming becomes exposed to the general population as a lie and a hoax, many well-known institutions of government and media will likely collapse from the scandal. The establishment is literally fighting for its life. And we should expect them to take any and all desperation measures to prolong and preserve their power and prestige and privilege.

This is a Street Brawl for Truth and Freedom

It is clear that government, the media, corporatized science, have quite literally bet the farm on selling the illusion of human caused global warming as justification for global taxes and global government. In order to bring about global government simultaneous with creating the illusion of a need they have to destroy the credibility of the regional governments and we have seen a great deal of this lately. Now the oligarchs face an awkward choice. They have set the stage for a collapse of the national governments in the global government they wish to install in its place may be collapsing right along with the myth of global government.

Various governments and the media are so heavily invested in selling the illusion of human caused dglobal warming, that if that hoax is exposed, if the public becomes aware of the monstrous fraud involved, those institutions of government and media could very well be destroyed and by their own hands.

Already we are seeing the organizers and perpetrators of this fraud trying to limit the damage from this exposure in several ways. The media is already hard at work attempting to dump the blame and scandal solely on the climate scientists, who after all were only doing what they were paid to do. This is not to say the scientists are not guilty. Quite the contrary, they deserve to be pilloried publicly and humiliated for their betrayal of the public trust. To say that their careers should be ended is an understatement. But in our haste to punish the scientists who assisted in the lies to the world, we must not forget that the scientists were working for somebody; for politicians such as Al Gore, for an agenda called global government, and for those who wanted to get rich by selling a fictitious product called carbon credit.

Yet another tactic being employed to limit the damage from climate gate, is to insist that even though the scientist responsible for the climate warming data have been exposed as holsters that the validity of the data itself must remain above question above reproach. This of course is nonsense. If you hire a contractor to build a home, and discover afterwards that the contractor has a history of using substandard materials and sloppy workmanship, do you continue to believe the home he has built you is solid and durable and safe? Of course not. And yet the global warming cultists are demanding exactly this kind of naïveté from the public at large.

The latest spin is that if one questions the dogma of Anthropocentric Global Warming, then one must be in favor of destroying the Earth. There is no middle ground. Another common propaganda tactic is to accuse those who question the veracity of the Global Warming Cultists is to accuse them of receiving paychecks from oil companies. When one points out that the proponents of Anthropocentric Global Warming are being paid for their work, one gets a "hurrumph" of indignation. It's apparently acceptable for their side of the argument to be well-funded, because in their eyes they are the "good guys." Finally, there is the much-ballyhooed "Precautionary Principle" which states that one should never take any action that might cause harm even if that potential harm cannot be demonstrated or proven. In theory such a prohibition should extend to any actions undertaken in support of the Precautionary Principle itself, but such suggestions get the usual "Hurrumph" of indignation. The cultists are really good at that.

So is climate gate a fraud? Is climate gate a scientific scandal? No. Climate gate is first and foremost a political scandal. More than that it is a global political scandal that involves governments, media, institutionalize science, the banks, universities, indeed a vast cross-section of our ruling classes. It is more than a scandal; climate gate is a crime against humanity. And this is not an exaggeration. The goal of climategate was to extract money from every human being on planet Earth in exchange for a nonexistent salvation from a nonexistent threat. The goal of climate gate was to trick every human being on planet Earth into accepting the yoke of a global oligarchy with no more legitimate claim to power than those who ruled by divine right.

We are at a watershed moment. We may well see a transition to a new and better political structure for the entire world. But it will not be the one that has been designed for us. If nothing else, the ability for government and media to lie to the population of the world on such a vast scale is forever destroyed. Climategate will relegate all of the official stories of the governments of the United States and Great Britain and indeed every government that took part in the human caused global warming hoax to the same level of credibility as Ramses carvings showing his victory over the Hittites. It will be seen as an historic joke by future generations.

But we are not there yet. The forces that have enslaved us with deception and fraud and hoax are desperate to hang onto their power and authority. They are busy coming up with new hoaxes and frauds to scare us back into obedience. And the media well aware that they cannot report on the lies of climate gate without reporting their own complicity are working hand in glove with government to reassert their ability to control what you think and when you think it.

So, what we, the free people of planet Earth, need to do in the coming weeks is become the new mainstream media. The TV networks and other corporate media have been handed their marching orders to resell the illusion of human caused climate change in any way shape or form that will convince you to accept new taxes and the loss of your freedoms. The only way the rest of the world is going to find out about climate gate is if you tell them. Because the TV and news magazines won't. If it's mentioned at all, it will be to trivialize and dismiss it and assure the world it really doesn't matter. BBC is still reporting climate gate as just another computer crime. This is like reporting Watergate as just another burglary!

We have collected together a vast body of evidence calling into question the legitimacy of the claims of human caused global warming. We have collected together a vast body of evidence proving fraud and deception on the part of the global warming cult. Please forward this information to everybody you know. Time is of the essence. Barack Obama as already indicated that he will not be swayed by the exposure of the fraud in the CRU/NWIA data, and fully intends to go to Copenhagen to sign away our national sovereignty as "penance" for our contribution to global warming.

Other observers have commented that the moment president Obama signs that Copenhagen Treaty his credibility as president of the United States will be destroyed. For him to sign away sovereignty of our nation on the basis of a known lie should enrage all Americans and make it clear that the federal government is not working in the interests of the American people any more, but in service to this emerging globalist socialistic empire. Remember; global government is what Hitler wanted. Global Government is what Napoleon wanted. Global Government is what Alexander the Great wanted. Global Government is what the Roman Caesars wanted.

Climategate may well prove to be the final fight in the war between those who would rule us with lies and those who wish to live with truth. Climategate makes it clear that yes, there really are massive conspiracies between government and the media to mislead the general public. You cannot pretend they don't exist; one is right there before you staked out naked on the ground, exposed for all to marvel at! I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide how many other such deceptions form what we think we know of the world and of history.

There are two paths into the future. Along one lies freedom and truth and prosperity for the people. Along the other lies a socialist dictatorship, born in deception, unable and unwilling to tolerate dissent, and dedicated to robbing the poor to give to the rich.

You need to decide which future you wish to live in.

And you need to decide what you will do about it.


Federal Reserve - Enemy of America

"Federal Reserve - Enemy of America

No other topic is more important and explains better the demise of America, than the saga of the Federal Reserve. To any objective citizen the conclusion is self evident. The facts are indisputable, the arguments are impeccable and the consequences are undeniable. So why will the public avoid facing the ultimate crisis of national survival?

If you are one of the very few who has never been presented with the evidence, the task to educate yourself has just become easy.
Thomas D. Schauf, CPA has the devoted much time and energy to this subject. In "The Federal Reserve History" he gives the background on the private company that most Americans erroneously, still think is part of the central government. For the crowd that refuses to read or consider such accounts as valid and true, they need to review the original provisions in the Federal Reserve Act, of December 23, 1913.

The essence of this fraud has been summarized in the classic - Billions for the Bankers, Debt for the People by
Sheldon Emery.

But even after all this evidence, the public still refuses to face the trepidation - that they are living within a controlled economic system that is ruled by elites, while the masses pay all the bills.

The breadth of how confused the public has become and the extent of the disinformation about the cure for this treachery against the nation, is seen in the final inference by William Greider in his book,
Secrets of the Temple.

"He offered to the unsuspecting public a scathing expose of the Federal Reserve System. His history was excellent, but his conclusion was treacherous. After having proven that the Fed was conceived as a weapon of the banking elite against the common man and having shown throughout his book that this is exactly the function it has always served, his conclusion was, not to abolish the Fed or even to make serious changes to it."

If people crave comfort in denial and solace in the company of weak willed citizens, America is surely doomed. There can be no intelligent debate about the merits of the Federal Reserve. It is a pure FRAUD. Fractional reserve banking is criminal. Public indebtedness, as a requirement for currency creation is the supreme Treason.

The last vestige of the Republic was lost when the Federal Reserve was enacted. If you don't understand why the battle over Alexander Hamilton's plan for the first central bank, was so important, you will never be able to comprehend that this struggle goes to the very nature of our country. Andrew Jackson is an America hero because he opposed a
fiat currency of an all powerful central government. But the depths of deceit even extends into the corridors of that government, for public tribute must be paid to the private owners of the Fed. How could any honest American defend this system?

At the core of the enforcement process that protects the entire Federal Reserve swindle are the legal tender laws. From the Federal Reserve Bank of
Cleveland site:

"Legal tender laws require that residents of a country accept payment in that country’s currency even if the contract stipulates payment be made in another country’s currency, gold, bales of hay, or whatever."

.... the Federal courts require adherence that federal reserve notes must be accepted as payment for all debts and transactions, public and private. Without the compulsion of court protection the Federal Reserve would fall like a house of cards.

So why does the America public continue to wear the chains of serfdom so willingly? The answer is obvious. The citizens of this great land don't deserve to be called Americans! They have become hollow tools of the insidious propaganda that tells them that your own property is really not yours. They have accepted their status as slaves to a money racket that destroys their lives and relegates them to a hopeless future. But their greatest sin is that they embrace the mythology in this satanic religion of an unconstitutional money monopoly.

In the name of a contrived "war on terror" the populace is flocking to relinquish their natural rights. But even in times of peril, are we suppose to ignore the biggest domestic Ponzi scheme? This one dwarfs the Social Security scam in both scope and depth.

It is easy to appreciate why the greed for money and the lust for power devised this corrupt deception on the American public. What is difficult to understand is why the people are so timid to demand the replacement of a monetary system that keeps them in perpetual bondage?

Thomas Jefferson was concise in his early warning to the American nation, "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

So tell me, is the Federal Reserve a friend or foe of America?


Obama Worked For the CIA

Which means he still does. Once they got you they got you for life.

"Obama Never Considered Diplomacy In Afghanistan

Even as polls show a majority of Americans want U.S. forces out of Afghanistan and that Americans do not believe the war is worth fighting, President Obama---a former editor at the CIA front Business International Corporation in 1983-84---embraces a position in line with the long-held CIA view the U.S. must control the Middle East's energy resources.

It was the CIA that overthrew Iran in 1953 after Tehran nationalized its oil production, depriving British Petroleum of its lucrative swindle. Afghanistan is valued today for the oil and gas pipelines the U.S. wants built there, no matter what other reasons Obama gives.

As reported on 24 September 2009 at

"WMR has obtained additional details on Business International Corporation (BIC), the CIA front company where President Obama spent a year working after graduating from Columbia University in 1983.

BIC used journalists as non-official cover (NOC) agents around the world. The firm published weekly and fortnightly newsletters for business executives, including Business International, Business Europe, Business Latin America, and Business Asia.

On February 24, 2009, WMR reported: “For one year, Obama worked as a researcher in BIC’s financial services division where he wrote for two BIC publications, Financing Foreign Operations and Business International Money Report, a weekly newsletter.

“An informed source has told WMR that Obama’s tuition debt at Columbia was paid off by BIC. "

As reported on 24 August, 2009 at:

"The eye-opener here concerns Obama's first job out of college. In his autobiography, "Dreams from My Fathers", Barack Obama writes of taking a job after graduating from Columbia University in 1983. He describes his employer as

A consulting house to multinational corporations" in New York City, and his functions as a "research assistant" and "financial writer"

In fact he was recruited by Business International Corporation that was continuously being accused of as a CIA front company. Wikipedia, an independent source, supports this:

"The company has been identified as cover organization for the Central Intelligence Agency, e.g. see Lobster Magazine, and issue 14 in 1987. According to a lengthy article in the New York Times in 1977, the co-founder of the company told the newspaper that "Eldridge Haynes [the other founder] had provided cover for four CIA employees in various countries between 1955 and 1960"

"Oddly Obama's book doesn't mention the name of his employer. However, a New York Times story of 2007 identifies the company as Business International Corporation. In his book, he doesn't mention his employer's name nor does he say when he worked there, or why he left."

Politicians clearly understand, or deny to their personal peril, that there is an analogy between "getting in with the CIA" and the old Roach Motel commercials: once they get in, they cannot get out.

That Obama is a CIA asset is certainly not surprising, given his meteoric rise to pop-star politician status, and how any potential negatives were immediately erased from his campaign with the efficiency of a kick-ass tsunami.

But this status does not augur well for We the People. In spite of his brilliantly polished (and probably ghost-written) populist rhetoric, this man is absolutely no friend of the American working person.

His choices, in terms of carefully chosen positions he held professionally were engineered to make him appear to be a true friend and advocate, while masking the absolute and complete opposite.

From the banking industry bailouts to the alleged "healthcare reform" legislation (which will massively skyrocket profits for the insurance industry), to decisions about wars which profit the companies providing war materials and troops, President Obama, ultimately and sadly, is committed to taking as much money as humanly possible from taxpayers, and stuffing it into the coffers of the people he truly represents: the wealthiest of the wealthy, both here and abroad."

Pilots Say 9/11 Pentagon Plane Hijacking Impossible



( - Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled "FLT DECK DOOR", cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08:50:54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, "...all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers..."[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3]

Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.


Saturday, November 28, 2009

JFK and the Unspeakable

"JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters"

by Edward Curtin

Despite a treasure-trove of new information having emerged over the last forty-six years, there are many people who still think who killed President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and why are unanswerable questions. There are others who cling to the Lee Harvey Oswald “lone-nut” explanation proffered by the Warren Commission. Both groups agree, however, that whatever the truth, it has no contemporary relevance but is old-hat, history, stuff for conspiracy-obsessed people with nothing better to do. The general thinking is that the assassination occurred almost a half-century ago, so let’s move on.

Nothing could be further from the truth, as James Douglass shows in his extraordinary book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters (Orbis Books, 2008). It is clearly one of the best books ever written on the Kennedy assassination and deserves a vast readership. It is bound to roil the waters of complacency that have submerged the truth of this key event in modern American history.

It’s not often that the intersection of history and contemporary events pose such a startling and chilling lesson as does the contemplation of the murder of JFK on November 22, 1963 juxtaposed with the situations faced by President Obama today. So far, at least, Obama’s behavior has mirrored Johnson’s, not Kennedy’s, as he has escalated the war in Afghanistan by 34,000. One can’t but help think that the thought of JFK’s fate might not be far from his mind as he contemplates his next move in Afghanistan.

Douglass presents a very compelling argument that Kennedy was killed by “unspeakable” (the Trappist monk Thomas Merton’s term) forces within the U.S. national security state because of his conversion from a cold warrior into a man of peace. He argues, using a wealth of newly uncovered information, that JFK had become a major threat to the burgeoning military-industrial complex and had to be eliminated through a conspiracy planned by the CIA – “the CIA’s fingerprints are all over the crime and the events leading up to it” – not by a crazed individual, the Mafia, or disgruntled anti-Castro Cubans, though some of these may have been used in the execution of the plot.

Why and by whom? These are the key questions. If it can be shown that Kennedy did, in fact, turn emphatically away from war as a solution to political conflict; did, in fact, as he was being urged by his military and intelligence advisers to up the ante and use violence, rejected such advice and turned toward peaceful solutions, then, a motive for his elimination is established. If, furthermore, it can be clearly shown that Oswald was a dupe in a deadly game and that forces within the military/intelligence apparatus were involved with him from start to finish, then the crime is solved, not by fingering an individual who may have given the order for the murder or pulled the trigger, but by showing that the coordination of the assassination had to involve U.S. intelligence agencies, most notably the CIA. Douglass does both, providing highly detailed and intricately linked evidence based on his own research and a vast array of the best scholarship.

We are then faced with the contemporary relevance, and since we know that every president since JFK has refused to confront the growth of the national security state and its call for violence, one can logically assume a message was sent and heeded. In this regard, it is not incidental that former twenty-seven-year CIA analyst Raymond McGovern, in a recent interview, warned of the “two CIAs,” one the analytic arm providing straight scoop to presidents, the other the covert action arm which operates according to its own rules. “Let me leave you with this thought,” he told his interviewer, “and that is that I think Panetta (current CIA Director), and to a degree Obama, are afraid – I never thought I’d hear myself saying this – I think they are afraid of the CIA.” He then recommended Douglass’ book, “It’s very well-researched and his conclusion is very alarming.”

Let’s look at the history marshaled by Douglass to support his thesis.

First, Kennedy, who took office in January 1961 as somewhat of a Cold Warrior, was quickly set up by the CIA to take the blame for the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in April 1961. The CIA and generals wanted to oust Castro, and in pursuit of that goal, trained a force of Cuban exiles to invade Cuba. Kennedy refused to go along and the invasion was roundly defeated. The CIA, military, and Cuban exiles bitterly blamed Kennedy. But it was all a sham.

Though Douglass doesn’t mention it, and few Americans know it, classified documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the Soviets had learned of the date of the invasion more than a week in advance, had informed Castro, but – and here is a startling fact that should make people’s hair stand on end – never told the President. The CIA knew the invasion was doomed before the fact but went ahead with it anyway. Why? So they could and did afterwards blame JFK for the failure.

This treachery set the stage for events to come. For his part, sensing but not knowing the full extent of the set-up, Kennedy fired CIA Director Allen Dulles (as in a bad joke, later to be named to the Warren Commission) and his assistant General Charles Cabell (whose brother Earle Cabell, to make a bad joke absurd, was the mayor of Dallas on the day Kennedy was killed) and said he wanted “to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” Not the sentiments to endear him to a secretive government within a government whose power was growing exponentially.

The stage was now set for events to follow as JFK, in opposition to nearly all his advisers, consistently opposed the use of force in U.S. foreign policy.

In 1961, despite the Joint Chief’s demand to put troops into Laos, Kennedy bluntly insisted otherwise as he ordered Averell Harriman, his representative at the Geneva Conference, “Did you understand? I want a negotiated settlement in Laos. I don’t want to put troops in.”

Also in 1961, he refused to concede to the insistence of his top generals to give them permission to use nuclear weapons in Berlin and Southeast Asia. Walking out of a meeting with top military advisors, Kennedy threw his hands in the air and said, “These people are crazy.”

He refused to bomb and invade Cuba as the military wished during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Afterwards he told his friend John Kenneth Galbraith that “I never had the slightest intention of doing so.”

Then in June 1963 he gave an incredible speech at American University in which he called for the total abolishment of nuclear weapons, the end of the Cold War and the “Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war,” and movement toward “general and complete disarmament.”

A few months later he signed a Limited Test Ban Treaty with Nikita Khrushchev.

In October 1963 he signed National Security Action Memorandum 263 calling for the withdrawal of 1,000 U. S. military troops from Vietnam by the end of the year and a total withdrawal by the end of 1965.

All this he did while secretly engaging in negotiations with Khrushchev via the KGB, Norman Cousins, and Pope John XXIII, and with Castro through various intermediaries, one of whom was French Journalist Jean Daniel. In an interview with Daniel on October 24, 1963 Kennedy said, “I approved the proclamation Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will go even further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we will have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries. That is perfectly clear.” Such sentiments were anathema, shall we say treasonous, to the CIA and top generals.

These clear refusals to go to war and his decision to engage in private, back-channel communications with Cold War enemies marked Kennedy as an enemy of the national security state. They were on a collision course. As Douglass and others have pointed out, every move Kennedy made was anti-war. This, Douglass argues, was because JFK, a war hero, had been deeply affected by the horror of war and was severely shaken by how close the world had come to destruction during the Cuban missile crisis. Throughout his life he had been touched by death and had come to appreciate the fragility of life. Once in the Presidency, Kennedy underwent a deep metanoia, a spiritual transformation, from Cold Warrior to peace maker. He came to see the generals who advised him as devoid of the tragic sense of life and as hell-bent on war. And he was well aware that his growing resistance to war had put him on a dangerous collision course with those generals and the CIA. On numerous occasions he spoke of the possibility of a military coup d’état against him. On the night before his trip to Dallas, he told his wife, “But, Jackie, if somebody wants to shoot me from a window with a rifle, nobody can stop it, so why worry about it.” And we know that nobody did try to stop it because they had planned it.

But who killed him?

Douglass presents a formidable amount of evidence, some old and some new, against the CIA and covert action agencies within the national security state, and does so in such a logical and persuasive way that any fair-minded reader cannot help but be taken aback; stunned, really. And he links this evidence directly to JFK’s actions on behalf of peace.

He knows, however, that to truly convince he must break a “conspiracy of silence that would envelop our government, our media, our academic institutions, and virtually our entire society from November 22, 1963, to the present.” This “unspeakable,” this hypnotic “collective denial of the obvious,” is sustained by a mass-media whose repeated message is that the truth about such significant events is beyond our grasp, that we will have to drink the waters of uncertainty forever. As for those who don’t, they are relegated to the status of conspiracy nuts.

Fear and uncertainty block a true appraisal of the assassination – that plus the thought that it no longer matters.

It matters. For we know that no president since JFK has dared to buck the military-intelligence-industrial complex. We know a Pax Americana has spread its tentacles across the globe with U.S. military in over 130 countries on 750-plus bases. We know that the amount of blood and money spent on wars and war preparations has risen astronomically.

There is a great deal we know and even more that we don’t want to know, or at the very least, investigate.

If Lee Harvey Oswald was connected to the intelligence community, the FBI and the CIA, then we can logically conclude that he was not “a lone-nut” assassin. Douglass marshals a wealth of evidence to show how from the very start Oswald was moved around the globe like a pawn in a game, and when the game was done, the pawn was eliminated in the Dallas police headquarters.

As he begins to trace Oswald’s path, Douglass asks this question: “Why was Lee Harvey Oswald so tolerated and supported by the government he betrayed?”

After serving as a U.S. Marine at the CIA’s U-2 spy plane operating base in Japan with a Crypto clearance (higher than top secret but a fact suppressed by the Warren Commission), Oswald left the Marines and defected to the Soviet Union. After denouncing the U.S., working at a Soviet factory in Minsk, and taking a Russian wife – during which time Gary Powers’ U-2 spy plane is shot down over the Soviet Union – he returned to the U.S. with a loan from the American Embassy in Moscow, only to be met at the dock in Hoboken, New Jersey by a man, Spas T. Raikin, a prominent anti-communist with extensive intelligence connections, recommended by the State Department.

He passed through immigration with no trouble, was not prosecuted, moved to Fort Worth, Texas where, at the suggestion of the Dallas CIA Domestic Contacts Service chief, he was met and befriended by George de Mohrenschildt, an anti-communist Russian, who was a CIA asset. De Mohrenschildt got him a job four days later at a graphic arts company that worked on maps for the U.S. Army Map Service related to U-2 spy missions over Cuba.

Oswald was then shepherded around the Dallas area by de Mohrenschildt who, in 1977, on the day he revealed he had contacted Oswald for the CIA and was to meet with the House Select Committee on Assasinations’ Gaeton Fonzi, allegedly committed suicide.

Oswald then moved to New Orleans in April 1963 where got a job at the Reilly Coffee Company owned by CIA-affiliated William Reilly. The Reilly Coffee Company was located in close vicinity to the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and Office of Naval Intelligence offices and a stone’s throw from the office of Guy Bannister, a former FBI agent, who worked as a covert action coordinator for the intelligence services, supplying and training anti-Castro paramilitaries meant to ensnare Kennedy. Oswald then went to work with Bannister and the CIA paramilitaries.

During this time up until the assassination Oswald was on the FBI payroll, receiving $200 per month. This startling fact was covered up by the Warren Commission even though it was stated by the Commission’s own general counsel J. Lee Rankin at a closed-door meeting on January 27, 1964. The meeting had been declared “top secret” and its content only uncovered ten years later after a lengthy legal battle by researcher Harold Weisberg. Douglass claims Oswald “seems to have been working with both the CIA and FBI,” as a provocateur for the former and an informant for the latter. Jim and Elsie Wilcott, who worked at the CIA Tokyo Station from 1960 to 1964, in a 1978 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, said, “It was common knowledge in the Tokyo CIA station that Oswald worked for the agency.”

When Oswald moved to New Orleans in April 1963, de Mohrenschildt exited the picture, having asked the CIA for and been indirectly given a $285,000 contract to do a geological survey for Haitian dictator “Papa Doc” Duvalier, which he never did, but for which he was paid. Ruth and Michael Paine then entered the picture on cue. Douglass illuminatingly traces in their intelligence connections. Ruth later was the Warren Commission’s chief witness. She had been introduced to Oswald by de Mohrenschildt. In September 1963 Ruth Paine drove from her sister’s house in Virginia to New Orleans to pick up Marina Oswald and bring her to her house in Dallas to live with her. Thirty years after the assassination a document was declassified showing Paine’s sister Sylvia worked for the CIA. Her father traveled throughout Latin America on an Agency for International Development (notorious for CIA front activities) contract and filed reports that went to the CIA. Her husband Michael’s step-father, Arthur Young, was the inventor of the Bell helicopter and Michael’s job there gave him a security clearance. Her mother was related to the Forbes family of Boston and her lifelong friend, Mary Bancroft, worked as a WW II spy with Allen Dulles and was his mistress. Afterwards, Dulles questioned the Paines in front of the Warren Commission, studiously avoiding any revealing questions. Back in Dallas, Ruth Paine conveniently got Oswald a job in the Texas Book Depository where he began work on October 16, 1963.

From late September until November 22, various Oswalds are later reported to have simultaneously been seen from Dallas to Mexico City. Two Oswalds were arrested in the Texas Theatre, the real one taken out the front door and an impostor out the back. As Douglas says, “There were more Oswalds providing evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald than the Warren Report could use or even explain.” Even J. Edgar Hoover knew that Oswald impostors were used, as he told LBJ concerning Oswald’s alleged visit to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. He later called this CIA ploy, “the false story re Oswald’s trip to Mexico…their (CIA’s) double-dealing,” something that he couldn’t forget. It was apparent that a very intricate and deadly game was being played out at high levels in the shadows.

We know Oswald was blamed for the President’s murder. But if one fairly follows the trail of the crime it becomes blatantly obvious that government forces were at work. Douglass adds layer upon layer of evidence to show how this had to be so. Oswald, the mafia, anti-Castro Cubans could not have withdrawn most of the security that day. Sheriff Bill Decker withdrew all police protection. The Secret Service withdrew the police motorcycle escorts from beside the president’s car where they had been the day before in Houston; took agents off the back of the car where they were normally stationed to obstruct gunfire. They approved the fateful, dogleg turn (on a dry run on November 18) where the car came almost to a halt, a clear security violation. The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded this, not some conspiracy nut.

Who could have squelched the testimony of all the doctors and medical personnel who claimed the president had been shot from the front in his neck and head, testimony contradicting the official story? Who could have prosecuted and imprisoned Abraham Bolden, the first African-American Secret Service agent personally brought on to the White House detail by JFK, who warned that he feared the president was going to be assassinated? (Douglass interviewed Bolden seven times and his evidence on the aborted plot to kill JFK in Chicago on November 2 – a story little known but extraordinary in its implications – is riveting.) The list of all the people who turned up dead, the evidence and events manipulated, the inquiry squelched, distorted, and twisted in an ex post facto cover-up – clearly point to forces within the government, not rogue actors without institutional support.

The evidence for a conspiracy organized at the deepest levels of the intelligence apparatus is overwhelming. James Douglass presents it in such depth and so logically that only one hardened to the truth would not be deeply moved and affected by his book.

He says it best: “The extent to which our national security state was systematically marshaled for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy remains incomprehensible to us. When we live in a system, we absorb and think in a system. We lack the independence needed to judge the system around us. Yet the evidence we have seen points toward our national security state, the systemic bubble in which we all live, as the source of Kennedy’s murder and immediate cover-up.”

Speaking to his friends Dave Powers and Ken O’Donnell about those who planned the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, JFK said, “They couldn’t believe that a new president like me wouldn’t panic and try to save his own face. Well, they had me figured all wrong.”

Let’s hope for another president like that, but one that meets a different end.

This article originally appeared on


Friday, November 27, 2009

Taking On the World

"Judaica battles with everyone

There is a battle between Judaica and, well a lot of other ideologies.

.It is currently Islam, in the past it has been the Soviets and the Nazis.

.It seems to be a battle between Jewish private capitalism and any alternatives.

.The Soviets were brought down relatively peacefully, and the Nazis not.

.Now Islam is being shown no mercy.

.We observe the banksters, with bailouts and bonuses, yet this usury is also ever present in our daily lives. As much as the bonuses are diverted towards overseas mercenary activities they are also used to corrupt local power in our own societies.

What is required to combat the rule of the few over so many others?

Some sacrifice.

.Islam will forbid the female to display herself as a sex object. It will also forbid alcohol, homosexuality and speculative usury.

.These are the freedoms of Judaic power.

.Of course there are good Jews and corrupt Muslims, we are all humans, but the racial cloak dished out by Jewish superiors has only just become apparent as Israel’s apartheid becomes well known. Yet it is the operative force.

.Most Jews don’t even realize it, they think, on their ladder in the pyramid of corruption they are self serving while passing on a cut to their superiors. Instead of realizing they are just pawns in a greater picture, one that is keeping a secret society in charge by sewing mayhem in every direction.

.Just as the local police know where the local prostitutes are based. So the big wigs know all the counterfeiters and money jugglers. The big wigs are always God fearing and God loving. And what better way to prove God is great, than to prove man is corrupt?

.But something unintentional has spawned. A Gestapo like Israeli has grown out of the faith. A ruthless soul, ingrained with racial superiority. Ready to steal your ID, impersonate you in a crime, spike you, and really any other disgusting act possible.

.Here we are in the 11th hour of the Jewish empire. Private ownership has been raised to a near spiritual status. Corporations have more money and power than Governments. Private armies are now a norm. Everything is sold to us with the promise of a pretty woman. Not only does Islam forbid the use of pictures of people in advertising, but it is also forbidden in Judaism. “Thou shalt make no engraven images of humans”

.Then again, this Jewish empire really has nothing to do with Judaism. The captive lustre of Jewish pride, is just a cloak of false pride, it is used to pursue criminality. A few Jews observed this some years ago, now the whole world is clocking on to it.

.Some centuries before, the renaissance beckoned from Islamic chronicles of the ancients, emancipation started, then came democracy and not only was religious might overturned but also monarchies. This trend towards people power seems historically inevitable. But Zionism is now holding it up, it is preoccupied with waging war crimes.

.A cult of Jewish power emerged on the earth, based on mercantilism, which recognised the advantage of globalisation. Where each individual was free to pursue greed.

.We are left with enemies defined by those who preach fraternity.

--more w/PHOTOS--"

Do You Even Know Who the Enemy Is, Obama?

I'll spell it out for you: "Al-CIA-Duh"

"Before Obama Escalates the Afghan War, He Must Tell Us Who We Are Fighting

By: Peter Chamberlin

Who is “al Qaida,” that we must continue killing and destroying entire nations to eliminate them? The world has too much riding on this war to abide Obama blindly continuing it without a valid mission. Defining an “exit plan” is not the same thing as defining the mission. He cannot be allowed to simply launch yet another escalation without a clear mission, while shrugging-off questions about “al Qaida.” The world must know who the enemy is, before the cycle of destruction is amplified in another blind rage without a reason.

“Al Qaida,” the base, in Arabic, is not the great threatening beast that has been used to frighten the little children. “Al Q” is a group of a few hundred Arab terrorists, gathered together by America and Saudi Arabia in a network that was overseen by Osama bin Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan. The CIA network recruited anti-Soviet fighters from all over the world, to serve agency interests. They were never under bin Laden’s command. American propagandists have created the illusion of a terrorist army of thousands of fighters, by lumping together bin Laden’s small group with the massive intelligence network that brought them all to Afghanistan, under the single rubric of “al Qaida.”

The original Arab-Afghan fighters loyal to bin Laden have all but been eliminated from the region, with the last remaining hold-outs scattered throughout the region. If there is no “al Qaida” in Afghanistan, then who or what are we after, other than the Taliban? The network itself? Are we completing the destruction of Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to eliminate our own network? If we fight against our own network, then why is an escalation needed? Wouldn’t it be far easier and cheaper to simply defund it, turn off the switch in Langley, Virginia to the terrorist production line?

Or is the switch to the terrorist production line really in the Pentagon? Since the military is the only beneficiary of another escalation into Afghanistan it is logical to assume that they are behind the whole endeavor. The war is not about Afghanistan or Pakistan, but about maintaining another huge military presence there. Pakistan is the jumping-off point to all the planned missions for Central America and securing the pipeline routes anticipated for the region. See the following admission from a military operative in the know, as obtained by author Jeremy Scahill:

The military intelligence source said that the Blackwater/JSOC Karachi operation is referred to as “Qatar cubed,” in reference to the US forward operating base in Qatar that served as the hub for the planning and implementation of the US invasion of Iraq. “This is supposed to be the brave new world,” he says. “This is the Jamestown of the new millennium and it’s meant to be a lily pad. You can jump off to Uzbekistan, you can jump back over the border, you can jump sideways, you can jump northwest. It’s strategically located so that they can get their people wherever they have to without having to wrangle with the military chain of command in Afghanistan, which is convoluted. They don’t have to deal with that because they’re operating under a classified mandate.”

The world is in flames because Bush and Cheney chose to light it all up. Nineteen men with razor blades attacked us and they decided that waging war upon the entire world was the best way to pay them back and imitate justice. Obama is carrying the whole sick operation forward, because he is a coward—he is deathly afraid of the prospects of challenging the powerful Zionist war lobby that made him what he is today.

Who are we fighting, Obama? Do you even know who the enemy is?


The Ugly Truth

"More Jewish Control of the Mainstream Media in America We Are Told Does Not Exist

A news piece appearing in the New York Times for 11/23/2009 entitled “Experts Say Iran Uses the Death Penalty as a Way to Intimidate Opponents” can be chalked up as yet one more instance of Jewish control of Western media the world is told “does not exist“.

Clearly, as the title indicates, it is a piece designed to paint Iran–the next scheduled victim of Jewish ritual mass murder-as a backwards, theocratic, blood-thirsty state that resorts to murdering political opponents of a tyrannical regime who just want to be ‘free’. It talks of “judicially sanctioned” killings done to “intimidate” the political opposition and to “quell pockets of ethnic unrest around the nation“. It goes on to point out in worried tones that “the trend” towards executions were a response to the “political tumult” following the June presidential election and that this month a “fifth person” connected to the protests was sentenced to death.

“Judicially sanctioned killings” designed to “intimidate” political opposition? Hmmmmm, now where have we heard about this before about a million, billion times?????

Oh yeah, that’s right IN ISRAEL, EVERY DAY FOR THE LAST 60 YEARS.

Mind you, 5 people “sentenced to death”, not executed yet. If we compare the 5 people “sentenced” to death vs. the 1400 KILLED by Israel in her most recent exercise in Jewish ritual murder known as Operation Cast Lead, that works out to a ratio of 280 to 1.

For better perspective, let’s just go down the list here of a few newspaper headlines appearing in the wake of Israel’s attack on Gaza recently–

“Chabad rabbi: Jews should kill Arab men, women and children during war”

“Eliyahu advocates carpet bombing Gaza”

“’Everyone is your enemy,’ Israeli soldiers in Gaza told”

“Gaza: ‘I watched an Israeli soldier shoot dead my two little girls’“

“Gaza family says Israeli troops killed children waving white headscarves”

“Gaza war crime claims gather pace as more troops speak out”

“IDF in Gaza: Killing civilians, vandalism, and lax rules of engagement”

“IDF soldiers ordered to shoot at Gaza rescuers”

“’IDF troops used 11-year-old boy as human shield in Gaza’“

“Israel accused of executing parents in front of children in Gaza”

“Israel admits using white phosphorous in attacks on Gaza”

“Israel defends killing of Gaza doctor’s daughters”

“Israeli Army T-Shirts Mock Gaza Killings”

“Israeli army used flechettes against Gaza civilians”

“Israeli minister warns of Palestinian ‘holocaust’“

“Israeli Vice Premier Eyes Destruction of Gaza Villages”

“Lawyers–‘Israel Used Uranium in Gaza genocide‘”

“Gazans say Israeli troops forced them into battle zones”

“Long term soil devastation in Gaza due to use of white phosphorus and depleted uranium”

“Pots of urine, feces on the walls – how IDF troops vandalized Gaza homes”

“Rabbi told Israeli troops ‘to show no mercy’ in Gaza”

“IDF probing racist graffiti left by soldiers in Gaza”

“Israeli army targeted civilians, rules UN report”

“Israel committed ‘war crimes’ in Gaza: UN probe chief”

“Uzi Arad, Netanyahu’s National Security Advisor–‘We want to relieve ourselves of the burden of the Palestinian populations – not territories’”

My memory isn’t what it used to be, but I don’t remember any headlines like these appearing in the New York Times during Israel’s recent feeding frenzy in Gaza, do you gentle gentile reader? Keep in mind as well that this is just GAZA, and only a smattering of the news stories out there dealing with Israel and her recent murderous rampage.

Other goodies appearing in this article include–“Some prisoners have said they were tortured, raped and sodomized by prison authorities…”

You mean like Abu Ghraib, where we have the photos to prove it?

The Jewish-owned New York Times then goes further in its demonizing of Iran (as a preparatory step to decimating it a’ la Iraq) with “In recent years, Iran has had the highest rate of executions of any nation except China. That reputation was solidified under President Ahmadinejad, who has presided over a quadrupling in executions, to 346 in 2008 from 86 in 2005, the year he took office, according to Amnesty International.”

346 people killed in a year, roughly one per day. What did they do? Were they convicted of capital crimes, such as murder, rape, or dealing drugs? The paper does not say.

Now consider that on average Israel kills roughly 2 Palestinians a day, almost always civilians. A third of these murders are children who generally are killed execution-style, either with a bullet to the head or to the torso. Over the last 5 years, 4,000 Palestinian civilians have been killed, and of these documented state-sanctioned executions, only a handful have been prosecuted and usually on charges of “improper use of a weapon” or something totally unrelated to the historically-documented business of Jews murdering people as a result of their status as Gentiles.

Indeed, like a witch’s spell, the poison of Jewish propaganda is whispered into the ears of Americans on a minute by minute basis–sometimes loudly and sometimes quietly–from virtually every piece of news appearing in America’s dailies. And yet, are the American people aware of how they are being used as tools for evil purposes?

Perish the thought. This article, appearing in “the freest country in the world”, America, will be used by pro-Israel warmongers–Jewish or not–in adding one more reason to the list as to why America should expend even more of her precious money and blood in fighting the Jewish state’s wars for her.


Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Thanking the Troops

"Dying for a Lie

by Laurence M. Vance

"A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it." ~ Oscar Wilde

All Americans know that Memorial Day is a federal holiday. Most Americans know that it commemorates U. S. soldiers who died in military service for their country. Many Americans believe that U. S. soldiers died defending our freedoms. Few Americans believe that they died for a lie.

Memorial Day was first observed in honor of Union soldiers who died during the War to Prevent Southern Independence. It was initially called Decoration Day because the tombs of the dead soldiers were decorated. Originally celebrated in select localities (to this day several cities claim to be the birthplace of Memorial Day, although the federal government recognizes Waterloo, NY, as the official birthplace), the holiday was first widely observed on May 30, 1868, because of an earlier proclamation by General John Logan of the Grand Army of the Republic, an organization of Union veterans:

The 30th of May, 1868, is designated for the purpose of strewing with flowers, or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country during the late rebellion, and whose bodies now lie in almost every city, village, and hamlet churchyard in the land. In this observance no form of ceremony is prescribed, but posts and comrades will in their own way arrange such fitting services and testimonials of respect as circumstances may permit.

New York, in 1873, was the first state to officially recognize the holiday. After World War I, the holiday was expanded to include U. S. soldiers who died in any war. Until this time, Southern states did not observe the holiday: they preferred to honor their Confederate dead on separate days. Although Congress in 1971 declared Memorial Day to be a national holiday celebrated on the last Monday in May, to this day some Southern states still maintain a day to honor their Confederate dead.

The focus this Memorial Day will be on those men and women who have died in the current Iraq war, although it is likely that only a small minority of Americans realize that 2,464 U.S. soldiers have died thus far. The 117,000 U.S. soldiers who died in that war to end all wars, World War I, are ancient history. Few can name even one of the 405,000 U.S. soldiers who died in that "good war," World War II, so that Eastern Europe could be turned over to the mass murderer Stalin. The 54,000 U.S. soldiers who died in what is called America’s forgotten war, the Korean War, are certainly long forgotten. The 58,000 U.S. soldiers who died in Vietnam so their names could be inscribed on a wall are remembered by very few.

They died in vain; they died for a lie.

This does not mean that they were not brave, heroic, well-meaning, or patriotic. They may have fought with the best of intentions; they may have sacrificed themselves for others; they may have been sincere in their belief that they were fighting for a good cause; but they died for a lie.

The first lie is that war is necessary. After commanding forces that firebombed Tokyo, which killed as many civilians as the atomic bomb dropped a few months later, General Curtis LeMay remarked: "We knew we were going to kill a lot of women and kids when we burned that town. Had to be done." But regardless of what happened beforehand, or what might have happened in the future, since when does slaughtering 100,000 people at one time ever have to be done? War should not be considered as an alternative; it is always the worst possible solution. As psychologist Alfred Adler has said: "War is not the continuation of politics with different means, it is the greatest mass-crime perpetrated on the community of man." War is not inevitable; it is never an absolute necessity. As Adler’s successor Lydia Sicher once said: "Wars are inevitable... as long as we believe that wars are inevitable. The moment we don’t believe it anymore it is not inevitable."

The second lie is that it is the people in a country that want war. Surprisingly, it was Ronald Reagan who recognized that "governments make wars, not people." It is up to the government to convince its citizens that the citizens of another country are "the enemy." After all, as one columnist remarked: "When people have friends and customers in other lands, they tend to take a dim view of their government dropping bombs on them." Governments abuse the concept of patriotism to convince the populace that "the enemy" should be bombed, maimed, and killed. Hermann Goering recognized that all a government has to do to get the people to support a war is to "denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." Real patriotism is not wanting to see the blood of your country’s soldiers shed in some desert or jungle halfway around the world fighting the enemy of the week, month, or year. Patriotism, as Charles de Gaulle explained, "is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first." It is the old men who make wars, and then send the young men to fight them; it is the members of Congress with no children in the military who agitate for war.

The third lie is that there are winners and losers in a war. No side ever really wins a war. As Jeannette Rankin, the only member of Congress to vote against U.S. entry into both World Wars, said: "You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake." Every side loses something in a war. English mystery writer, Agatha Christie, certainly showed more wisdom than most members of Congress when she said: "One is left with the horrible feeling now that war settles nothing; that to win a war is as disastrous as to lose one." The consequences of a war are never as expected. One reason, as recognized by Thomas Jefferson, is that "war is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses."

The fourth lie is that war can be good for a nation’s economy. This myth of war prosperity was exploded by Ludwig von Mises: "War prosperity is like the prosperity that an earthquake or a plague brings. The earthquake means good business for construction workers, and cholera improves the business of physicians, pharmacists, and undertakers; but no one has for that reason yet sought to celebrate earthquakes and cholera as stimulators of the productive forces in the general interest." More recently, Robert Higgs has called this "The Fallacy that Won’t Die." But didn’t unemployment fall during World War II? Of course it did. How could it not fall when the government conscripted 16 million men into the armed forces? But what about GDP during World War II? Naturally, it increased, but only because of the increased output of military goods and services. Tell the grieving parents of their only son, who never gave them any grandchildren, about how much greater their standard of living will now be because of the war that took their son.

The fifth lie is that the U.S. military defends our freedoms. The military is too busy policing the world to defend our freedoms. We have U.S. troops in 158 countries or territories of the world. How are the 69,395 U.S. troops in Germany defending our freedoms? How are the 35,307 U.S. troops in Japan defending our freedoms? How are the 32,744 U.S. troops in Korea defending our freedoms? How are the 12,258 U.S. troops in Italy defending our freedoms? How are the 11,093 U.S. troops in the United Kingdom defending our freedoms? How are the ______ U.S. troops in _______________ defending our freedoms? To appease his conservative base on the illegal immigration issue, President Bush recently called for the stationing of some National Guard troops along the border with Mexico. The National Guard units that have been deployed to Iraq should not be assigned to guard the Mexican border. They should be sent home to their jobs and their families, and only used for genuine emergencies on U.S. soil. Stationing U.S. soldiers along the Mexican border would be defending our freedoms a thousand times more than putting them along any German or Italian border.

Contrary to these lies, the truth about war, in the words of Major General Smedley Butler, is that "war is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious." Ambrose Bierce once made a callous statement about war that nevertheless comes to pass whenever the United States intervenes in another country: "War is God’s way of teaching Americans geography."

The aphorism that truth is the first casualty of war has often been spoken but rarely learned from. This is because, as Charles Lindbergh said: "In a time of war, truth is always replaced by propaganda." This war in particular was started and maintained by more government lies than perhaps any other war in our history.

What were our objectives in this war? Finding weapons of mass destruction? Finding chemical and biological weapons? Removing Saddam Hussein? Imposing democracy to Iraq? Bringing stability to the Middle East? Forcing Iraq to comply with UN resolutions? Protecting the nation of Israel? Dismantling Al Qaeda? Freeing Muslim women from oppression? Enforcing the no-fly zone imposed on Iraq after the first Persian Gulf War?

If one stated objective was found to be a lie another could quickly be offered in its place. The number and scope of these objectives shows that there were no legitimate obtainable objectives. So why did we invade and occupy Iraq? I call your attention to two documents. Just two. Both of these documents are readily available online.

The first document is called Uncovering the Rationales for the War on Iraq: The Words of the Bush Administration, Congress, and the Media from September 12, 2001 to October 11, 2002. It was written by Devon M. Largio in 2004 as a thesis for a bachelor’s degree in political science at the University of Illinois. It is a total of 212 pages. Print it out and read it in its entirety. If you don’t have time to read it right now then at least read her executive summary. Largio documents twenty-seven rationales given for the war by the Bush administration, war hawks in Congress, and the media between the September 11th attacks and the October 2002 congressional resolution to use force in Iraq. It was "the Bush administration, and the President himself" that "established the majority of the rationales for the war and all of those rationales that make up the most prominent reasons for war." The result of this investigation shows that Bush is a bigger liar than Clinton ever was, and, even worse, his lies are more deadly.

The second document is called Iraq on the Record: The Bush Administration’s Public Statements on Iraq. It was prepared for Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform – Minority Staff, Special Investigations Division. It is dated March 16, 2004. It is a total of 36 pages. Print it out and read it in its entirety. An executive summary appears on pages i–iv. The report is "a comprehensive examination of the statements made by the five Administration officials most responsible for providing public information and shaping public opinion on Iraq: President George Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice." Here is the report’s conclusion:

Because of the gravity of the subject and the President’s unique access to classified information, members of Congress and the public expect the President and his senior officials to take special care to be balanced and accurate in describing national security threats. It does not appear, however, that President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice met this standard in the case of Iraq. To the contrary, these five officials repeatedly made misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq. In 125 separate appearances, they made 11 misleading statements about the urgency of Iraq’s threat, 81 misleading statements about Iraq’s nuclear activities, 84 misleading statements about Iraq’s chemical and biological capabilities, and 61 misleading statements about Iraq’s relationship with al Qaeda.

Every U.S. soldier who died in Iraq died for a lie. They may have died for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, the U.S. global empire, the U.S. government, the military-industrial complex, or Halliburton, but none of them died for the American people or our freedoms.

If they died for a lie, then the liars should be held accountable. But don’t look for Congress to do anything. How can we expect a Congress that continues to fund this war to hold the Bush administration accountable for its lies? Every member of Congress that continues to vote to fund this war is complicit in these lies. How many more dead American soldiers and billions of dollars will it take before Congress finally says enough is enough? How many American soldiers not currently in Iraq who are enjoying this Memorial Day holiday will be sent to Iraq to die for a lie before the next observance of Memorial Day?