Last night, President Obama made it clear he intends to push hard for a government-run Health Control system. His plans, if enacted, will result over time in either a complete government takeover of Health Care, or the total destruction of any meaningful private system.
Now is the time for us to raise our voices and insist Congress vote “NO” to this government power grab.
Make no mistake, the Obama plan will cause the price of insurance to skyrocket even further by increasing payouts and other costs of doing business, putting many more Americans in the position of having to drop their coverage.
One plan currently being considered in the Senate would impose a $3,800 fineon families who refuse to get health insurance. Health insurance will no longer be a free choice in our country. President Obama has long advocated a universal, single-payer system, and that is the ultimate goal of enacting this so-called “reform” package.
In regards to his deficit-neutral promise, the Congressional Budget Office has already statedthat HR 3200 will add over $200 billion to the deficit over the next ten years, and Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are already trillions of dollars in the red.
Are we really expected to believe that yet another government program on top of all these will save money?
And, hidden throughout the over 1000 pages that make up this bill are even more “goodies” for the allies of Big Government, such as a massive payoff to Big Labor, who will reap millions of new forced union dues and wield unprecedented power over government and “private” health care as reportedin The Wall Street Journal.
President Obama has repeatedly stated that we cannot deal with the rising cost of health care by maintaining the status quo. I wholeheartedly agree.
We must acknowledge that the root cause of the health care crisis in this country is government interference. Of course, many in the insurance industry have taken full advantage of their lobbying power and monopolies, but they have been able to do this because of the government.
It is government that prohibits individuals from being able to shop across state lines for insurance.
It is government that imposes thousands of mandates on insurance providers.
It is government that created HMOs in the 1970s.
It is government that has skewed the marketto prop up third party payers.
Simply put, the problems with health care in America are TOO MUCH government interference already. The solution is to lessen government control – NOT give them more power!
The Council for Affordable Health Insurance has identified a total of 2,133 mandated benefits and providers currently required by state legislatures, mandates they estimate increase the cost of basic coverage from around 20% to as high as possibly 50%. Read their report here.
If the president thinks we can pay for his plan through saving billions of dollars by eliminating waste and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid, then why don’t we clean out those systems now and return that money through tax cuts to the American taxpayer, providing them extra funds to buy insurance if they want it?
Both major parties believe the answer to our health care crisis is through government intervention. They only differ in the degree of that intervention.
It’s time to choose freedom.
Americans should be free to shop across state lines for health insurance, to easily go outside the country for cheaper medications, and to buy health insurance without being taxed on it.
Congress should give Americans control over their health care by giving them control over their health care dollar via tax credits and deductions similar to those outlined in Congressman Ron Paul’s Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act (HR 1495).
And Congress should protect privacy rights by allowing patients and physicians to opt-out of any government-mandated or funded system of electronic health care records, and by repealing the federal law creating an “unique patient identifier” by adopting the policies contained in Congressman Ron Paul’s Protect Patients and Physicians Privacy Act (HR 2630).
Tell Congress todaythat you oppose cementing the status quo of government care. Urge your representative and senators to oppose HR 3200 and all other bills that would take control over your health care out of your hands. Clickhereto sign our petition.
President Obama ran on a platform of hope and change, but his policies have proved to be not only more of the same, but a fresh stamp of approval on the ways things have been done for the last thirty years.
Real reform starts with freedom, and real hope for America means upholding its founding principle of self-determination.
In Liberty,
John Tate
President
P.S. A complete government takeover of health care has been defeated before, but the odds have never been as stacked against us as they are now. If you are able, please consider contributingto C4L today to help us promote true health care reform and defend the principles that made this nation great from further desecration.
Baucus Health Care Draft to Fine Reluctant Gun Owners up to $3,800
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 http://www.gunowners.org
Thursday, September 10, 2009
By now, members of Gun Owners of America should have received pre-written postcards opposing the anti-gun health care bills that are floating around on Capitol Hill.
Please send in those postcards — as it’s very important for legislative offices to see mounds of gun owners’ mail being dumped on their desks!
Now that Congress is back in session — and the President has given his televised push on health care — it is time for us to redouble our efforts.
To review the bidding:
Every major health care bill being considered in Congress would require many (if not most) Americans to be covered by insurance policies written by the Obama administration — so-called ObamaCare.
Among other things, ObamaCare will almost certainly require, by regulation, that all gun-related medical data be fed into a federal health database — pursuant to a $20 billion program Obama insisted be included in the $787 billion stimulus bill.
So, as a gun owner who doesn’t want this data to be trolled by the BATFE from a federal database, you might say:
* “I’m not going to buy an ObamaCare policy.”
or
* “I’m going to buy the type of insurance that I want to buy.”
Well, anti-gun Democrat Max Baucus (D-MT) has a question for you: “How would you like to pay a $3,800 a yearfine?”
That’s right. In a legislative draft released this week, Baucus would fine you up to $3,800 for not buying preciselythe insurance policy which Barack Obama orders you to buy.
So, what’s going to be required under ObamaCare? And how much is it going to cost?
Baucus isn’t going to tell you that until after the bill is passed. We do know that, under the Baucus draft, a lower middle income family could be forced to pay up to 13% of its income to buy an ObamaCare policy. And, presumably, a middle income family would be required to spend much, much more.
Take into consideration that the Baucus draft — with its $3,800 per year fines and its ObamaCare -related gun databases — is the so-called “conservative” bill. This is the one that they’re trying to get Republicans to sign onto because it’s so “conservative.” The final Pelosi-written conference report will be much, much worse.
Incidentally, Obama opposed forcing Americans to purchase government-approved insurance during the campaign, but guess what? He lied.
ACTION:
1. Write your Senators. Ask them to oppose the anti-gun Baucus draft, with its requirement that Americans purchase an Obama-approved insurance policy or pay a $3,800 annual fine. This legislative draft has not yet been publicly released; however, several news agencies have reported on its key features — and these reviews are widely available on the Internet.
2. Distribute this email far and wide. There are people that you know who should be involved in the fight against socialized health care who are just sitting on the sidelines. Please forward this email to them and get them involved in the fight!
—– Pre-written letter —–
Dear Senator:
Please oppose the open-ended anti-gun mandates contained in the Baucus health draft. Among other things, Baucus-mandated policies, which would have to be approved by the Obama administration, will almost certainly require, by regulation, that all gun-related medical data be fed into a federal health database — pursuant to a $20 billion program Obama insisted be included in the $787 billion stimulus bill.
So, what if a gun owner insists on buying the type of insurance he wants to buy? Sen. Baucus would fine him up to $3,800 a year.
That’s right. In a recently released draft, Baucus would fine gun owners up to $3,800 for not buyingpreciselythe insurance policy which Barack Obama orders them to buy. So, what’s going to be required by this Baucus-mandated policy? And how much is it going to cost?
Baucus isn’t going to tell us that until after the bill is passed. We do know that, under the Baucus draft, a lower middle income family could be forced to pay up to 13% of its income to buy an ObamaCare policy. And, presumably, a middle income family would be required to spend much, much more.
Incidentally, Obama opposed forcing Americans to purchase government-approved insurance during the campaign.
In short, please oppose the anti-gun, anti-freedom Baucus “compromise” and please let me know exactly where you stand on this issue.
WASHINGTON — One year after the near collapse of the global financial system, this much is clear: The financial world as we knew it is over, and something new is rising from its ashes.
Historians will look to September 2008 as a watershed for the U.S. economy.
On Sept. 7 , the government seized mortgage titans Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac . Eight days later, investment bank Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, sparking a global financial panic that threatened to topple blue-chip financial institutions around the world. In the several months that followed, governments from Washington to Beijing responded with unprecedented intervention into financial markets and across their economies, seeking to stop the wreckage and stem the damage.
One year later, the easy-money system that financed the boom era from the 1980s until a year ago is smashed. Once-ravenous U.S. consumers are saving money and paying down debt. Banks are building reserves and hoarding cash. And governments are fashioning a new global financial order.
Congress and the Obama administration have lost faith in self-regulated markets. Together, they’re writing the most sweeping new regulations over finance since the Great Depression. And in this ever-more-connected global economy, Washington is working with its partners through the G-20 group of nations to develop worldwide rules to govern finance.
“Our objective is to design an economic framework where we’re going to have a more balanced pattern of growth globally, less reliant on a buildup of unsustainable borrowing . . . and not just here, but around the world,” said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner .
The first faint signs that the U.S. economy may be clawing its way back from the worst recession since the Great Depression are only now starting to appear, a year after the panic began. Similar indications are sprouting in Europe , China and Japan .
Still, economists concur that a quarter-century of economic growth fueled by cheap credit is over. Many analysts also think that an extended period of slow job growth and suppressed wage growth will keep consumers — and the businesses that sell to them — in the dumps for years.
“Those things are likely to be subpar for a long period of time,” said Martin Regalia, the chief economist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce . “I think it means that we probably see potential rates of growth that are in the 2-2.5 (percent) range, or maybe . . . 1.8-1.9 (percent).” A growth rate of 3 percent to 3.5 percent is considered average.
The unemployment rate rose to 9.7 percent in August and is expected to peak above 10 percent in the months ahead. It’s already there in at least 15 states. Regalia thinks that it could be five years before the U.S. economy generates enough jobs to overcome those lost and to employ the new workers entering the labor force.
All this is likely to keep consumers on the sidelines.
“I think this financial panic and Great Recession is an inflection point for the financial system and the economy,” said Mark Zandi , the chief economist for forecaster Moody’s Economy.com. “It means much less risk-taking, at least for a number of years to come — a decade or two. That will be evident in less credit and more costly credit. If you are a household or a business, it will cost you more, and it will be more difficult to get that credit.”
The numbers bear him out. The Fed’s most recent release of credit data showed that consumer credit decreased at an annual rate of 5.2 percent from April to June, after falling by a 3.6 percent annual rate from January to March. Revolving lines of credit, which include credit cards, fell by an annualized 8.9 percent in the first quarter, followed by an 8.2 percent drop in the second quarter.
That’s a sea change. For much of the past two decades, strong U.S. growth has come largely through expanding credit. The global economy fed off this trend.
China became a manufacturing hub by selling attractively priced exports to U.S. consumers who were living beyond their means. China’s Asian neighbors sent it components for final assembly; Africa and Latin Americasold China their raw materials. All fed off U.S. consumers’ bottomless appetite for more, bought on credit.
“That’s over. Consumers can do their part — spend at a rate consistent with their income growth, but not much beyond that,” Zandi said.
If U.S. consumers no longer drive the global economy, then consumers in big emerging economies such as China and Brazil will have to take up some of the slack. Trade among nations will take on greater importance.
In the emerging “new normal,” U.S. companies will have to be more competitive. They must sell into big developing markets; yet as the recent Cash for Clunkers effort underscored, the competitive hurdles are high: Foreign-owned automakers, led by Toyota , reaped the most benefit from the U.S. tax breaks for new car purchases, not GM and Chrysler .
Need a loan? Tough luck: Many U.S. banks are in no condition to lend. Around 416 banks are now on a “problem list” and at risk of insolvency. Regulators already have shuttered 81 banks and thrifts this year.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. reported on Aug. 27 that rising loan losses are depleting bank capital. The ratio of bank reserves to bad loans was 63.5 percent from April to June, the lowest it’s been since the savings-and-loan crisis in 1991.
For all that, the U.S. economy does seem to be rising off its sickbed. The latest manufacturing data for August point to a return to growth, and home sales are rising. Indeed, there are many encouraging signs emerging in the global economy.
It’s all growth from a low starting point, however, and many economists think that there’ll be a lower baseline for U.S. and global growth if the new financial order means less risk-taking by lenders and less indebtedness by companies and consumers.
That seems evident now in the U.S. personal savings rate. It fell steadily from 9.59 percent in the 1970s to 2.68 percent in the easy-money era from 2000 to 2008; from 2005 to 2007, it averaged 1.83 percent.
Today, that trend is in reverse. From April to June, Americans’ personal savings rate was 5 percent, and it could go higher if the unemployment rate keeps rising. Almost 15 million Americans are unemployed — and countless others are underemployed or uncertain about their job security, so they’re spending less and saving more.
A few years ago, banks fell all over themselves to offer cheap home equity loans and lines of consumer credit. No more. Even billions in government bailout dollars to spur lending haven’t changed that.
“The strategy that was stated at the beginning of the year — which is that you would sustain the banking system in order that it would resume lending — hasn’t worked, and it isn’t going to work,” said James K. Galbraith , an economist at the University of Texas at Austin .
Over the course of 2008, the nation’s five largest banks reduced their consumer loans by 79 percent, real estate loans by 66 percent and commercial loans by 19 percent, according to FDIC data. A wide range of credit measures, including recent FDIC data, show that lending remains depressed.
Why? The foundation of U.S. credit expansion for the past 20 years is in ruin. Since the 1980s, banks haven’t kept loans on their balance sheets; instead, they sold them into a secondary market, where they were pooled for sale to investors as securities. The process, called securitization, fueled a rapid expansion of credit to consumers and businesses. By passing their loans on to investors, banks were freed to lend more.
Today, securitization is all but dead. Investors have little appetite for risky securities. Few buyers want a security based on pools of mortgages, car loans, student loans and the like.
“The basis of revival of the system along the line of what previously existed doesn’t exist. The foundation that was supposed to be there for the revival (of the economy) . . . got washed away,” Galbraith said.
Unless and until securitization rebounds, it will be hard for banks to resume robust lending because they’re stuck with loans on their books.
“We’ve just been scared,” said Robert C. Pozen , the chairman of Boston -based MFS Investment Management . He thinks that the freeze in securitization reflects a lack of trust in Wall Street and its products and remains a huge obstacle to the resumption of lending that’s vital to an economic recovery.
Enter the Federal Reserve. It now props up the secondary market for pooled loans that are vital to the functioning of the U.S. financial system. The Fed is lending money to investors who’re willing to buy the safest pools of loans, called asset-backed securities.
Through Sept. 3 , the Fed had funded purchases of $817.6 billion in mortgage-backed securities. These securities were pooled mostly by mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae , Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae . In recent months, the Fed also has moved aggressively to lend for purchase of pools of other consumer-based loans.
Today, there’s little private-sector demand for new loan-based securities; government is virtually the only game in town. That’s why on Aug. 17 , the Fed announced that it would extend its program to finance the purchase of pools of loans until mid-2010. That suggests there’s still a long way to go before a functioning securitization market — the backbone of consumer lending — returns to a semblance of normalcy.
Part I: Evidence Linking Autism Rise in Children to Vaccinations
by F. William Engdahl
The WHO and US Government CDC are escalating a public psychological conditioning to create hysteria and panic among an uninformed public about an alleged “virus” H1N1 Influenza A, aka Swine Flu, whose alleged effects to date appear comparable with a common cold. Before people line up in the streets demanding their vaccinations for their children and themselves, it would be wise to remember, to paraphrase a 1992 campaign statement of Bill Clinton to George H.W. Bush: “It’s the vaccination, Stupid!”
By countless scientific accounts, far more dangerous to human health than any reported incidences of Swine Flu are the dangers of severe health issues including paralysis, brain damage and even death arising from what is added to vaccines by virtually every major vaccine maker. Almost without exception, all commercial vaccines today contain various substances known as adjuvants designed to make the vaccine “work.” These adjuvants are the source of horrendous and sometimes deadly damage.
It has been speculated for some time that there might be a link in the alarming rise in cases of autism among tiny infants and children and massive multiple vaccinations today given routinely to infants and children from the first hours of birth. There is clear and shocking evidence of the link between the two. If you do not have a strong constitution, you are advised not to read further.
A new study shows a direct link between standard childhood vaccination series, MMR, and autism-like symptoms in monkeys. The principal scientist involved in the study, Dr. Laura Hewitson of the University of Pittsburgh, presented the alarming conclusions as an abstract pending publication at the International Meeting for Autism Research. It has been presented at scientific conferences in both London and Seattle, USA.
The study compared vaccinated macaque monkeys with non-vaccinated macaques. No major flaws in the study have been revealed by any attending scientist. The vaccines included the popular MMR series. The study found a marked increase in “gastrointestinal tissue gene expression” and “inflammation issues” with those monkeys which received vaccinations. They are a common symptom of children with regressive autism.
The study also found marked behavior changes and development differences in those monkeys given the vaccines versus those who were not. “Compared with unexposed animals, significant neuro-developmental deficits were evident for exposed animals in survival reflexes, tests of color discrimination and reversal, and learning sets,” the study`s authors reported. “Differences in behaviors were observed between exposed and unexposed animals and within the exposed group before and after MMR vaccination.”
US Government-mandated research approved by Congress was to begin this year, but the funds were rescinded in early January. Claiming “conflict of interest” because of ongoing court cases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a long-time supporter of infant vaccinations, withdrew the research plans.
The most shocking of all is the recent and now common medical practice, reinforced by an aggressive pharmaceutical industry, of giving multiple vaccines, often virtually within hours of birth, to infants despite the fact that no study including all of the vaccine series commonly given to children in the US and UK, about 30 in all, has been conducted until now. The practice of newborn multiple vaccinations has become widespread in Germany and other EU countries over the past decade. Significantly there have surfaced reports of dramatically increased instances of autism in newborn and infants in various German hospitals over the past decade, precisely the period multiple vaccinations of newborn and infants has become routine.
US Government coverup
Tragically, the US Government agency theoretically entrusted with guarding public health, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as with the case of health dangers of GMO foods, as well with the dramatic evidence of the link between autism and adjuvants used in typical vaccines, is accepting the argument of big and politically powerful Pharmaceutical companies.
The Food and Drug Administration considers vaccines safe but, just as with GMO, they have done no studies into the effects of multiple vaccinations as given in the common childhood series which started in the 1990s in the USA and spread to the UK and now across the EU.
According to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., son of the late Attorney General and an attorney active in campaigning to expose mercury (Thimerosal) and other toxicity dangers in vaccines, recently stated, “as autism is a behavioral affliction rather than a precisely defined biological injury — epidemiological studies are critical to establishing its causation. But the greatest source of epidemiological data is the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) — the government maintained medical records of hundreds of thousands of vaccinated children — which Health and Human Services Department has gone to great lengths to keep out of the hands of plaintiffs’ attorneys and independent scientists…The raw data collected in the VSD would undoubtedly provide the epidemiological evidence needed to understand the relationship between vaccines and autism. The absence of such studies makes it easy for judges to say to plaintiffs they have not met their burden of proving causation.”
Autism was virtually unknown in the United States until 1943 when it was diagnosed and identified eleven months after Thimerosal, a mercury-based vaccine “adjuvant” was first added to baby vaccines along with various aluminium compounds in the United States. Thimerosal is often used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines despite massive evidence of its severe effects as a potent neurotoxin. Following independent studies, Russia, Japan, Austria, Denmark, Sweden and Britain have banned Thimersol from childrens’ vaccines. Germany to date has no such ban. The toxin was developed in 1930 by Eli Lilly. Tragically in 1991, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary the US Government’s Center for Disease Control (CDC), the same agency fuelling the current hysteria over the non-proven H1N1 Swine Flu virus danger, recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-containing vaccines in some cases within 24 hours of birth for Hepatitis B and two months for diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.
Before 1989 US pre-school children received eleven vaccinations—polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, measles-mumps-rubella (MMR). By 1999, because of the various CDC recommendations, the number of vaccinations was twenty two before first grade of school. Parallel with this explosive rise in vaccinations of the very young in the United States, according to Kennedy, the rate of autism among children. The state ofIowa reported a 700% increase in autism in children beginning in the 1990’s and along with California has banned mercury in vaccines. Despite evidence, however the US FDA continues to allow drug makers to include Thimerosal in numerous over-the-counter non-prescription medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. The US Government ships vaccines preserved with Thimerosal to numerous developing countries as well, where some are reporting sudden explosion of autism rates as well. In China, where autism was unknown before introduction of Thimerosal by US drug makers in 1999, press reports indicate there are almost two million autistic children.
Instances of autism in the US exploded as some 40 million children were injected during the 1990’s with Thimersol-based vaccines, giving them unprecedented accumulations of mercury poison. The level of ethylmercury in a vaccine routinely given then to children of two months age was 99 times greater than the US Government’s daily limit for exposure. As with the current WHO pandemic declaration around H1N1 Swine Flu, the CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee is filled with scientists with close ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Sam Katz, chairman of the committee was a paid consultant to most companies producing the vaccines he “recommended.”
The aluminium danger remains
While vaccines available in the US today exist with no Thimerosal (50% mercury), virtually all vaccines still contain aluminum, which has been linked to impaired neurological development in children. Aluminum has not replaced thimerosal as a vaccine preservative; it has always been used in vaccines.
In the recent past, most US chioldren got exposed to both thimerosal and aluminum simultaneously with the hepatitis B, Hib, DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) and pneumococcal vaccines. Combining mercury with aluminum increases the likelihood that the mercury will damage human tissue.
According to a recent report by Michael Wagnitz, an American chemist, “Currently eight childhood vaccines that contain aluminum ranging from 125 to 850 micrograms (mcg). These vaccines are administered 17 times in the first 18 months of life, an almost six-fold increase compared to the vaccine schedule of the 1980s.”
Wagnitz adds, “According to the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, based on IV feeding solutions, a child should not exceed a maximum daily dose of 5 mcg of aluminum per kilogram of weight per day. That means if a child weighs 11 pounds, the child should not exceed 25 mcg in a day. This level was determined to be the maximum safety limit based on a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine titled “Aluminum Neurotoxicity in Preterm Infants Receiving Intravenous Feeding Solutions.”
The hepatitis B vaccine, administered at birth, contains 250 mcg.
In a 1996 policy statement, “Aluminum Toxicity in Infants and Children,” the American Academy of Pediatrics states, “Aluminum can cause neurological harm. People with kidney disease who build up bloodstream levels of aluminum greater than 100 mcg per liter are at risk of toxicity. The toxic threshold of aluminum in the bloodstream may be lower than 100 mcg per liter.” What level of aluminium toxicity is contained in vaccines routinely given German, French and other children n the EU is not known. It might be time for a public demand for such information to be disclosed, and before governments launch mass vaccination campaigns for untested vaccines against a non-proven H1N1 Swine Flu threat.
Sept. 4 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama returns to Washington next week in search of one thing that can revive his health-care overhaul: a sense of crisis.
Facing polls showing a drop in his approval, diminished support from independents, factions within his Democratic Party and a united Republican opposition, Obama must recapture the sense of urgency that led to passage of the economic rescue package in February, analysts said.
“At the moment, except for the people without insurance, we’re not in a health-care crisis,” said Stephen Wayne, a professor of government at Georgetown University in Washington. “You do need a crisis to generate movement in Congress and to help build a consensus.”
Obama speaks to labor leaders on Sept. 7 and to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 9 as he attempts to rebuild support for his top domestic priority, one that affects 17 percent of the economy. Lawmakers, trying to extend coverage to millions of uninsured Americans and rein in costs, are considering mandates on employers to provide coverage, new rules for insurers, and creating a government program to compete with private insurers such as Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc.
Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said the administration made unprecedented health-care progress in eight months.
‘Not There Yet’
“We gave Congress a charge, we gave them broad outlines, which is the reason we are farther along than any of the five presidents that have tried,” Emanuel said in an interview yesterday. “We’re not there yet, and this speech is intended to finish the job.”
Presidential speeches historically do little to move public opinion significantly, saidGeorge Edwards, author of “The Strategic President: Persuasion and Opportunity in Presidential Leadership.”
“This is almost like a Hail Mary, because they know that they’re substantially behind and the trajectory is negative for them,” Edwards said.
Unlike the financial crisis he inherited, the health-care debate is of Obama’s making and places a different burden on him, Edwards said.
“The best thing in presidential leadership is to recognize and exploit opportunities,” said Edwards. “The White House overestimated the nature of the opportunity.”
Stimulus Debate
Obama’s economic stimulus was debated as the Dow Jones Industrial Averagedropped 18 percent from Nov. 4, 2008, to Feb. 13, when Congress approved the legislation. Unemployment had risen to more than 7 percent.
On the stimulus, Obama was able to say “that unless we do X right now, and X is pretty painful and pretty expensive, there is a serious danger in the next few weeks that the entire financial system will come crashing down,” said Bill Galston, a former official in President Bill Clinton’s administration, now a Brookings Institution scholar in Washington.
Emanuel remarked at the time that a crisis was a terrible thing to waste, and Obama pushed for health-care overhaul and energy legislation along with financial and auto bailouts.
He has framed health-care legislation as part of his long- term strategy to improve the economy. Republicans focused on the potential impact on patients. Throughout the summer and in town halls, Republican opponents said Obama wanted a government takeover of the system and creation of panels to decide end-of- life issues.
Democratic Critics
Within the Democratic Party, critics say Obama hasn’t pushed universal health care and others say the overhaul would balloon the federal deficit.
Obama “has said about this issue continually, if it was easy it would have been done by now,” said White House Communications Director Anita Dunn.
Obama’s difficulty on health care is compounded by broader economic worries. While 36 percent of Americans say the economy is getting better, only 10 percent see improvements in their households, according to a CBS poll at the end of August.
“People are not convinced the president’s strategy has helped their family during the economic downturn,” said Robert Blendon, a health-policy pollster at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. “That has forced them to be more skeptical towards the president’s health-care proposals.”
Less than a fifth of Americans say a health-care overhaul will help them personally, compared to 31 percent who think the government’s efforts will hurt, and 46 percent who say it will have no effect, the CBS poll showed.
‘Not a Crisis’
“There is a problem in our health-care system today, and we need reform; it’s not a crisis,” said Ed Gillespie, White House counselor to President George W. Bush. “It’s just people saying this is way too much, way too fast, we don’t know where this money is going and we don’t know where it’s coming from.”
The CBS survey of 1,097 Americans Aug. 27-31 found Obama’s approval fell 12 percentage points from a high of 68 percent in April to 56 percent; the error margin is 3 percentage points.
A survey of 4,518 likely voters by Zogby International Aug. 28-31 put Obama’s approval rating at a record-low 42 percent; it also showed he’s well liked.
“He’s got to get control of his presidency,” said John Zogby, president of Zogby International. “There’s a way out of this. Some of it is going to have to be his personality and his ability to frame messages, which is still good.”
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Actor and television star Charlie Sheen has publicly requested a meeting with President Barack Obama to urge him to reopen the official investigation into 9/11 in light of the fact that the majority of the 9/11 Commission members have now publicly gone on record to express their conviction that the government agreed to lie about the official story.
Sheen’s request takes the form of a letter to the President in the context of a fictional meeting between the two entitled “20 Minutes With The President,” published exclusively on radio talk show host Alex Jones’ Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com websites.
The letter cites evidence, backed up by a substantial online bibliography, that proves the official story behind 9/11 is a fraud and that this conclusion was also reached by the majority of the 9/11 Commission members, a fact that mandates President Obama to reopen the investigation into the terrorist attacks.
Sheen expresses his hope that President Obama will follow through on his promises of change, accountability and government transparency by using his executive powers to re-examine 9/11, adding that he voted for Obama with the understanding that he would follow a different course to the Bush administration.
However, as Sheen highlights in his letter, the course of Obama’s first year in office clearly indicates that he will do nothing to reverse policies crafted by the Bush regime, and in fact has sought to exceed outrages of the previous administration in areas such as warrantless wiretapping, rendition, detention without trial, and wars in the Middle East – all of which arrived as a consequence of 9/11.
Sheen’s letter is a public declaration demanding the truth behind 9/11 as America approaches its eighth anniversary since the tragic events of that day. His questions are shared by a majority of victims’ family members, according to Bill Doyle, the representative of the largest 9/11 families group.
The letter focuses around the fact that no less than 60 per cent of the 9/11 commissioners have now publicly stated that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11 and that the Pentagon was engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.
Sheen also presents a plethora of other evidence to illustrate how the official story is a fraud, including the revelations of whistle blowers like FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, who recently broke a Federal gag order to expose how Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda were working for the U.S. government right up until the day of 9/11.
The issues highlighted by Sheen do not represent idle speculation or conspiracy fodder, they are documented facts that have been deliberately ignored by strawman 9/11 truth hit pieces that are now doing the rounds again as the anniversary approaches, particularly last months’ 9/11: Science and Conspiracy which was aired by the National Geographic Channel and wasted little time in portraying people who have doubts about the official 9/11 story as extremist cranks, while failing to acknowledge that the majority of the members of the 9/11 Commission have publicly expressed similar concerns.
Charlie Sheen is once again using his prominent public platform in an attempt to expand a national debate about the disturbing unanswered questions behind 9/11, having first spoken out on the issue in March 2006. After he first went public, Sheen was asked to do more and now he is doing more as he feels there is a chance to get more traction behind a new investigation with a new President in the White House.
Sheen is directly appealing to Barack Obama to read his letter and to look into the lies surrounding 9/11 for himself.
Regardless of whether or not President Obama agrees to meet with him, Sheen is confident that his letter will serve as a catalyst from which questions surrounding 9/11 and other false flag events will be brought to national attention.
This is a call to action and a declaration of war on the lies of 9/11 that have formed the foundation of the endless wars abroad and the police state at home as the Republic falls. Sheen is demanding that truth activists and those who simply care about the future of the country stand up beside him and speak truth to power.
Sheen is now urging grass roots political organizations and individuals across the country, such as the town hall protesters and We Are Change groups, to go to press conferences and other public events and demand answers about the truth behind 9/11. As much awareness as possible around the issue of false flag terrorism needs to be generated in order to prevent tragedies like 9/11 from happening again. Sheen emphasizes in his letter that we cannot let 9/11 become ancient history, try and forget about it or just move on, because if a nation forgets its history then it is doomed to repeat it.
We cannot allow governments to continue to advance their political agendas by exploiting forged pretexts, argues Sheen, and the fact that big budget hit pieces against 9/11 truth are still being rolled out proves that the establishment is upset that the population is waking up to false flag terror.
Sheen will appear live on The Alex Jones Show on Wednesday and Friday to discuss the content of his “20 Minutes With The President” piece and how he plans to move forward with this exciting new initiative. You can listen free here or subscribe to prison planet.tv to watch live streaming video.
Just when you thought the news about the Obama administration couldn’t get any worse, gun owners find themselves needing to rally the troops once again.
This time it’s the proposed “Regulatory Czar” who will be coming to a vote this week in the U.S. Senate.
His name is Cass Sunstein, and he holds some of the kookiest views you will ever hear.
For starters, Sunstein believes in regulating hunting out of existence. He told a Harvard audience in 2007 that “we ought to ban hunting.” And in The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer(2002), he said:
I think we should go further … the law should impose further regulation on hunting, scientific experiments, entertainment, and (above all) farming to ensure against unnecessary animal suffering. It is easy to imagine a set of initiatives that would do a great deal here, and indeed European nations have moved in just this direction. There are many possibilities. (Italics are his emphasis.)
If that’s all Sunstein believed, he would be dangerous and extreme, but not necessarily kooky. Unfortunately, when you look at WHY he wants to restrict hunting, this is where he goes beyond extreme.
In Sunstein’s world, animals should have just as many rights as people … and they should be able to sue humans in court!
“We could even grant animals a right to bring suit without insisting that animals are persons, or that they are not property,” Sunstein said on page 11 of Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions(2004).
Well, that’s a relief … he is at least willing to concede that animals are not persons! But he would still have animals suing humans, apparently, with more enlightened humans representing the cuddly critters.
Imagine returning from a successful hunting trip … only to find out that you’ve been subpoenaed for killing your prize. Who knows, maybe Sunstein would have the family of the dead animal serving as witnesses in court!
By the way, if you’re wondering what he thinks about the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, you won’t be surprised to know that Sunstein is a huge supporter of gun control.
In Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America(2005), Sunstein says:
Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine…. [O]n the Constitution’s text, fundamentalists [that is, gun rights supporters] should not be so confident in their enthusiasm for invalidating gun control legislation.
Hmm, what part of “shall not be infringed” does Sunstein not understand?
Imagine the power that Sunstein could have as the Regulatory Czar — the nickname for the person heading the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the White House.
As the Regulatory Czar, he could bring about changes in the regulations that affect hunting, gun control and farming. In short, he could make your life hell.
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) objected to his nomination several weeks ago, preventing him from being unanimously confirmed.
That means that the Senate will now need to garner 60 votes to confirm this radical, kooky choice to the OIRA.
No doubt, many of the people our President wants to associate with are radical kooks. First, there was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright … then there was the self-avowed communist (Van Jones) who was nominated for the Green Jobs Czar … now, there’s an extreme animal rights activist who wants to take away our guns and get Bambi to sue us in court.
It’s time to take a STRONG STAND against this radical administration.
I urge you to vote AGAINST Cass Sunstein as the head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, as I am very concerned about the impact this “Regulatory Czar” would have upon firearms and hunting.
Sunstein told a Harvard audience in 2007 that “we ought to ban hunting.” If that were all Sunstein believed, he would be dangerous and extreme, but not necessarily kooky. Unfortunately, in Sunstein’s world, animals should have just as many rights as people … and they should be able to sue humans in court!
Moreover, he is a firm supporter of gun control. In Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America(2005), Sunstein says that, “Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine.”
I wouldn’t be surprised if Sunstein is part of the small minority — 11% of Americans, according to a Zogby/O’Leary poll in August — who opposes licensed concealed carry.
I hope you will understand that Cass Sunstein’s views are WAY OUT OF THE MAINSTREAM of American thought and that you should vote NO on this radical, kooky nomination.
Sincerely,
(Your Name)
***************
****************
*******************
Once Again… To Send All You Gun Control People Hurdling Back To Reality… Cause God Knows You Chose Not To Live In It:
“This is why a lot of us amazingly handsome and astute humans have been trying to tell people WHY global warming is a huge production of a hoax. It’s to bleed you suckers more dry with taxes you’d throw yourself in front of a bus to pay because you think your carbon ass-print is gonna make the world explode.”
“Just because Brad Pitt doesn’t have the brain capacity to understand that he is selling you something straight from the minds of some of the most evil people who pollute this land and his babies daddy Al Gore seems like a harmless shark-headed human in his natural habitat doesn’t mean they are right. Smarten up butter-cups and stop listening to semi-retarded celebrities. I’m broke and I can’t afford any more taxes on the account of lazy-azz brains.”
(Yes, WE DO need to take better care of the Earth but apocalypse, no, check out the factual science and the natural cooling & heating trends of this earth-thing where you live).
The top climate science advisor to the German government has proposed that everyone on the planet should have a personal CO2 budget and be forced to pay a tax if they exceed it, adding that westerners have already exceeded their allocations and should pay climate reparations to poorer countries.
This is not just another tax being rammed through using the phony pretext of global warming, it’s the entrée for complete government tracking and control over your personal life. This is the “inventory” that Nancy Pelosi called for during her visit to China in May.
On May 28, the Associated Press reported that Pelosi told a Chinese student that in order to cut back on CO2 emissions, “Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory.”
German climate scientist Joachim Schellnhuber is pushing for the same thing – the nanny state on steroids.
How will a personal CO2 budget be enforced? Every plane ticket you buy, every time you fill up at the station, every mile of every journey you make will be fed into a centralized government database, creating a leviathan matrix system to catalogue every aspect of your personal behavior. Exceed your personal carbon budget and you’ll be hit with a hefty fine, with the majority of the proceeds no doubt going straight to the huge international banking interests that own the carbon trading market, mainly N M Rothschild & Sons, as well as people like Maurice Strong and Al Gore.
“Schellnhuber is proposing the creation of a CO2 budget for every person on the planet, regardless whether they live in Berlin or Beijing,” reports Der Spiegel, a “breathtaking” idea according to Czech physicist Dr. Lubos Motl, who said Schellnhuber’s proposal helped him “to understand how crazy political movements such as the Nazis or communists could have so easily taken over a nation that is as sensible as Germany.”
Schellnhuber goes further, claiming that westerners have already exceeded their CO2 allocations and will need to pay climate reparations to poorer countries amounting to no less than $142 billion dollars a year, every year.
“Humankind has to limit itself to emit only fixed amount of carbon into the atmosphere until 2050. […] Because the industrialized nations have already exceeded their quotas if you take into account past emissions. […] With the current output you see that Germany, the US and other industrialized nations have either already used up their permissible quota, or will do so within the next few years. […] The industrialized nations are facing CO2 insolvency. This means that they have to notch up their efforts to reduce climate change, otherwise they will use up the CO2 budget actually designated to poorer countries and future generations,” he told Der Spiegel.
The proposal mirrors similar measures called for by MP’s in Britain, which would force every adult to use a “carbon ration card’ when they pay for petrol, airline tickets or household energy.”
The next step has also already been floated. Should you become a serial carbon offender, no doubt your thermostat will be forcibly turned down by the government via remote control. Sound too far fetched? According to a January 2008 New York Times report, “State regulators are likely to have the emergency power to control individual thermostats, sending temperatures up or down through a radio-controlled device that will be required in new or substantially modified houses and buildings to manage electricity shortages.”
“It was the most humiliating thing that has ever happened to me, ever.”
“That is what this is all about. The TSA flight screening insanity, cops drawing your blood, not being able to take family photos in front of Washington D.C. landmarks, etc. It’s getting in your mind that YOU are the potential threat. It’s sick… really sick psychological warfare being committed by the same people who are creating this false terrorist threat. All in the guise of you and your kids safety. They’ve broke you down this far without a stink. Whats next… Forced Vaccinations? DUI anal probing? It’s totally fucking cool. It’s the new thing. You’ll learn to love it!”
-Fred Face 9/6/09
LAWRENCEBURG, Ind. — An Indiana man has filed a lawsuit claiming that police forcibly withdrew blood and urine from his body during a drunken driving arrest, WLWT-TV reported.According to the suit, police arrested Jamie Lockard, 53, on suspicion of drunken driving in March.A Breathalyzer test showed he was under the legal limit, but Officer Brian Miller doubted the findings. Lockard and his attorney claim in the suit that police took him to Dearborn County Hospital and forced him to submit to a urine and blood test.Police said they obtained a warrant, but Lockard’s attorney said his client was shackled to a gurney and had a catheter inserted against his will.”It has to be executed reasonably,” said attorney Doug Garner. “No one would say this is reasonable behavior. It’s reprehensible that anyone could think that this is appropriate.”The blood test showed that Lockard’s blood-alcohol level did not exceed Indiana’s legal limit, police said.Garner said the police officer did not apologize, but instead charged Lockard with obstruction of justice.”He took it too far. He thought he could do whatever to me,” Lockard said.The suit names the Lawrenceburg police department and Dearborn County Hospital, in addition to Miller and Dr. Ronald Cheek.”I would hate for this to happen to someone else,” Lockard said. “It was the most humiliating thing that has ever happened to me, ever.”
WASHINGTON – The White House environmental adviser under fire for inflammatory statements made before he joined the administration resigned after what he called a “vicious smear campaign against me.”
Van Jones “understood that he was going to get in the way” of President Barack Obama’s agenda, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Sunday.
The resignation was disclosed without advance notice by the White House in a dead-of-the-night e-mail on a holiday weekend. It came as Obama is working to regain his footing in the contentious health care debate.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
Jones, who specialized in environmentally friendly “green jobs” with the White House Council on Environmental Quality, was linked to efforts suggesting a government role in the Sept. 11 attacks and to derogatory comments about Republicans.
Gibbs said Obama did not endorse Van Jones’ comments but thanked him for his service.
“What Van Jones decided was that the agenda of this president was bigger than any one individual,” Gibbs said on ABC’s “This Week.
Sept. 11 comments
Recent news reports cited a derogatory comment Jones made in the past about Republicans, and separately, of Jones’s name appearing on a petition connected to the events surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks. That 2004 petition had asked for congressional hearings and other investigations into whether high-level government officials had allowed the attacks to occur.
“On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me,” Jones said in his resignation statement. “They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide.”
Howard Dean, former head of the Democratic National Committee, told “Fox News Sunday” that he thought Jones “was brought down” and that his resignation was “a loss to the country.”
Jones said he has been “inundated with calls from across the political spectrum urging me to stay and fight.” But he said he could not in good conscience ask his colleagues to spend time and energy defending or explaining his past.
Jones said in an earlier statement that he did not agree with the petition’s stand on the Sept. 11 attacks and that “it certainly does not reflect my views, now or ever.”
As for his other comments he made before joining Obama’s team, Jones said, “If I have offended anyone with statements I made in the past, I apologize.”
Despite his apologies, Republicans demanded Jones quit.
‘Extremist views’
Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana said in a statement, “His extremist views and coarse rhetoric have no place in this administration or the public debate.” Missouri Sen. Christopher “Kit” Bond said Congress should investigate Jones’s fitness for the job.
Fox News Channel host Glenn Beck repeatedly denounced Jones after a group the adviser co-founded, ColorofChange.org, led an advertising boycott against Beck’s show to protest his claim that Obama is a racist.
The president of Beck’s media organization, Christopher J. Balfe, said the commentator had begun focusing on Jones’ “radical beliefs” on July 16, before the group started taking on Beck.
But James Rucker, the organization’s executive director, has said Jones had nothing to do with ColorofChange.org now and didn’t even know about the campaign before it started.
Jones, well-known in the environmental movement, was a civil-rights activist in California before shifting his attention to environmental and energy issues. He is known for laying out a broad vision of a green economy. Conservatives have harshly criticized him for having left-wing political views.
Nancy Sutley, who heads the White House environmental council, said Jones “had been a strong voice for creating jobs that improve energy efficiency and utilize renewable resources.’
Mostly because a) it’s a lot of fun, and b) it concerns one of my favorite topics, the always lively Internet Anonymity vs. Privacy vs. Personal Responsibility debate. Besides, how often does an IT blogger get to write about catty supermodels, skanky or otherwise?
Today I’m hitting that topic again, but from the opposite direction.
Despite what some tenacious commenters may have thought, I was not defending the right of the now-not-so-anonymous blogger (better known as 29-year-oldRosemary Port) to anonymously defame. Otherwise, the Internet would be one big slanderfest (or, at least, more of a slanderfest than it already is). There needs to be some disincentive for completely juvenile behavior.
But today brings news of a case where anonymity on the Net absolutely needs to be protected. It too involves a court subpoena ordering Google to turn over private information; in this case, the names of the owners oftcijournal@gmail.com, the e-mail address for The TCI Journal, a muckracking news site based in the Turks & Caicos Islands.
Apparently, people in T&C don’t spend all their time listening to Jimmy Buffet, eating conch, and drinking mojitos out of hollowed-out pineapples with little umbrellas stuck in them. They also spend time exposing people who allegedly bribe government officials.
Attorneys for one of the alleged bribers, developer Dr. Cem Kinay, are now suing The TCI Journal in California in what some are calling a case of “libel tourism.” (Not to be confused with a defamation vacation.) In other words, the developer in T&C chose to sue in a California court because U.S. courts make it easier to demand a company’s records.
Here, nobody is calling anyone a skank. The TCI Journal mostly appears to have been reporting on an inquiry into government corruption and reprinting letters from readers about the topic. Lawyers for the developer wanted the site to redact any mentions of the developer in its reports, which to its credit The TCI Journal declined to do.
… culminated in a dramatic UK governance takeover of the Islands on August 14. A trail of evidence dug up by the TCI Journal, a UK commission of inquiry, and others, showed that foreign property developers were giving millions in secret loans and payments to senior Islander politicians, including an alleged $500,000 cash payment to the Island’s now former Premier, Michael Misick.
A litigious bunch, these developers also sued the commission and the T&C government to force it to redact the final commission report, blacking out their names. Not to worry, though: Wikileaks got a copy of theunredacted 266-page document and posted it online. The official redacted report is published at tci-inquiry.org. (If you’ve got time, scroll through the unredacted one — it’s a juicy read.)
Attorneys for the big developer have gone after the site’s Web host and domain registrar, managing to take the site offline for a few days. Now they’re attempting to wrest the owner’s information from Google.
According to Marshall Kirkpatrick at Read Write Web, Google sent the Journal a letter warning that unless TCI sends Google a letter asking them to quash the subpoena, they have no choice but to roll over on TCI.
TCI is not the New York Times by any stretch. It’s a tiny volunteer-run organization with cojones the size of coconuts. So in addition to reporting on government corruption, it’s been publishing all the nastygrams it’s received from Kinay’s legal team — which, of course,they also want redacted from the site.
Wait, it gets better. Someone calling him or herself “TCI Controversies” started the TCI Citizen blog at Blogger.com shortly after the unredacted report appeared. The blog’s sole purpose seems to be trashing The TCI Journal. Of course, it’s anonymous.
Someone (probably the same person, judging by the writing style) has also been planting anti-TCI Journal stories on sites like AllVoices, which will publish contributed articles from anyone without any human intervention.
Now I wonder if TCI Journal will sue Google to get the names of the folks behind that defamatory blog. Bet you 20 coconuts the authors have a more-than-casual relationship with those developers.
Attempts at suppressing negative press are hardly unheard of in this country — corporations try to do it all the time (Steve Jobs, your iPhone is buzzing). Few of them pursue it so aggressively, though, or try to stomp out the sources of bad news. Whether The TCI Journal survives probably depends on whether they can afford to pay attorneys to protect them.
So this is why anonymity is important: Not so people can make nasty comments about anyone else just because they feel like it, but to help the little guys who are trying to serve the public and don’t have the resources to protect themselves against corporate or government attacks. If Google can’t or won’t do it, someone else needs to.
Should the right to anonymity be protected? If so, how? E-mail me: robert_cringely@infoworld.com. (Hopefully, cringe@infoworld.com will be working again soon.)
“This is about the only thing keeping me interested in living on a planet with a lot of strange, silly, and weak minded people. Well plus good music & art and all the normal creatively free-thinking people, too. Ahh, who am I kidding, I love it here… I just wish I could snap more people out of their slumbers and stick some stiff upright spines in their backs, so, we can all begin the path to a more independent, (i.e. less government), understanding, intellectual, and compassionate way of conducting our way in our worlds very, very beautiful patchwork.”
Is driving while under the influence of THC, one of marijuana’s active ingredients, actually dangerous? One prominent California DUI attorney believes it is not nearly as dangerous as driving drunk and has issued a challenge to laws that punish marijuana users who get behind the wheel.
San Diego defense attorney Lawrence Taylor, considered “The Dean of DUI Attorneys,” according to a release by his firm, is apparently arguing that DUI laws are unfair because they do not allow consideration for the varying degrees of inebriation caused by drugs of abuse.
Drivers convicted of marijuana intoxication are usually sentenced only after authorities have taken a blood sample. However that blood sample, he notes, only measures the body’s metabolism of marijuana’s compounds, not the actual level of impairment.
Evidence of marijuana use can remain in the human body for weeks or or longer, as it has been shown to latch on to fat cells, causing some inactive users to fail drug tests after a period of weight loss. For drivers accused of operating a vehicle while stoned, the presence of blood test results showing recent marijuana consumption can become a tricky legal hurdle.
In an advisory circulated through PRNewswire, Taylor cites two recent federal studies which concluded driving stoned is less dangerous than driving drunk, particular for more experienced marijuana users.
“In one [study], the U.S. Department of Transportation conducted DUI research with a fully interactive simulator on the effects of alcohol and marijuana, alone and in combination, on driver-controlled behavior and performance,” Taylor’s release said.
That study noted, “alcohol was found to have a consistent and significant impairment effect, while marijuana had only an occasional effect,” according to the National Transportation Library. “Also, there was little evident of interaction between alcohol and marijuana. Accidents and speeding tickets reliably increased under alcohol, but no marijuana or combined alcohol and marijuana influence was noted. The alcohol impairment effects on steering and speed control behavior and performance were consistent with the increased accident and ticket rate.”
On his blog, Taylor wrote in April: “A more recent report entitled “Marijuana and Actual Performance”, DOT-HS-808-078, noted that ‘THC is not a profoundly impairing drug….It apparently affects controlled information processing in a variety of laboratory tests, but not to the extent which is beyond the individual’s ability to control when he is motivated and permitted to do so in driving’.”
He added that the researcher concluded it is apparently “not possible to conclude anything about a driver’s impairment on the basis of his/her plasma concentrations of THC and THC-COOH determined in a single sample.”
Taylor, who authored the book “Drunk Driving Defense,” also said recently that DUI laws discriminate against women, as current means of measuring sobriety put females over the legal limit, even when they’ve consumed less alcohol than a man of similar weight and height.
For that claim he cited a study by the Journal of Analytical Toxicology, which found that “women have significantly lower partition ratios than men,” his release noted. “[The] lower the ratio, the higher the reading — even though the true blood alcohol level does not vary.”
Which means, “the breathalyzer will show an average man accused of drunk driving to be innocent — but a woman with the same blood alcohol level to be guilty,” Taylor said.
Can vaccinations actually fuel pandemics? According to a study released August 26, 2009 by the British Medical Journal, more than half of Hong Kong’s healthcare workers surveyed said they would refuse the H1N1 shot, which is not yet available, because they are afraid of side effects and doubt how safe and effective it will be.
More importantly, the study suggested the trend would be repeated worldwide.
“The truth is that vaccines aren’t effective, generally carry dangerous side effects, and in many cases actually fuel the spread of pandemics,” said Dr. Leonard Horowitz, a Harvard Universitytrained medical researcher who also holds a Master’s Degree in Public Health. “The fact is that most healthcare workers know this, and they don’t trust that any swine flu vaccine will do anything but cause more problems and potential harm to the patients they care for.”
In Dr. Horowitz’s view, vaccines do more harm than good, and are little more than a way for the pharmaceutical companies to profit from epidemics and side effects.
“In April, 2009, the swine flu scare placed the world at high alert thanks to gads of suspicious publicity,” Dr. Horowitz said. “Anglo-American officials and Reuters News Service first claimed this was a rapidly spreading combination of the world’s scariest flu’s – swine, avian and Spanish flu viruses. They were all said to be rolled up in this never-before-seen Mexican pathogen.”
The scare, however, seemed to have less substance than volume, as the thousands of U.S. deaths that were predicted never happened, Dr. Horowitz added.
The corporate media is ignoring S. 2028, the flu pandemic bill that was unanimously passed by the Massachusetts Senate. The draconian bill was covered extensively by the alternative news sites, but not a word from the New York Times or the Washington Post.
S. 2028 will be used as a template for legislation in other states. The bill imposes a virtual police state and martial law on Massachusetts at the behest of the governor in the event of a flu pandemic this autumn. It gives the state health commissioner, law enforcement, and medical personnel wide authority to mobilize forces, vaccinate the population, enter private property with no warrants, and even quarantine people against their will in violation of the Constitution. The bill allows the state to enter property without a search warrant and destroy the property without a court order. It would force in-state health care providers to assist in the performance of vaccination.
Law enforcement authorities are authorized to “arrest without warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated an order for isolation or quarantine and shall use reasonable diligence to enforce such order. Any person who knowingly violates an order for isolation or quarantine shall be punished by imprisonment of not more than 30 days and may be subject to a civil fine of not more than $1,000 per day that the violation continues.”
Other states are in the process of implementing legal actions in response to the H1N1 virus hyped by the government and the corporate media. Florida has distributed blank quarantine order forms, including a voluntary home quarantine agreement, a quarantine to residence order, a quarantine to residence order (non-compliance), a quarantine to facility order, quarantine detention order, quarantine of facility order, building quarantine closure order and area quarantine closure order. North Carolina released a draft isolation order that would provide for imprisonment for up to two years and pretrial detention without bail for any citizen who fails to comply with an isolation order. Washington has granted authority to local health officers to issue emergency detention orders forcing citizens to be immediately and involuntarily isolated or quarantined for up to 10 days.
A form released by the state of Iowa for voluntary home confinement, home quarantine and home isolation recently made the rounds on the internet. “Rumors started swirling after a quarantine form was found by someone on the internet,” KIMT 3 reported. “Health leaders in Iowa are reassuring people that there are no H1N1 related quarantines being ordered.” The form calls quarantine of all individuals suspected of coming in contact with the virus.
S.2028 is now in Massachusetts House Ways and Means Committee. The Liberty Preservation Association of Massachusetts has vowed to kill the legislation before it can reach the House (see MassLPA video above). The organization plans to lobby lawmakers at the capital on Beacon Hill on September 9 and convince them not to vote for and pass the bill.
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.
Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.
But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.
As a result the scheme is causing a “national crisis” in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.
“Forecasting death is an inexact science,”they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death “without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.
“As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients.”
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.
The scheme, called the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), was designed to reduce patient suffering in their final hours.
Developed by Marie Curie, the cancer charity, in a Liverpool hospice it was initially developed for cancer patients but now includes other life threatening conditions.
It was recommended as a model by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), the Government’s health scrutiny body, in 2004.
It has been gradually adopted nationwide and more than 300 hospitals, 130 hospices and 560 care homes in England currently use the system.
Under the guidelines the decision to diagnose that a patient is close to death is made by the entire medical team treating them, including a senior doctor.
They look for signs that a patient is approaching their final hours, which can include if patients have lost consciousness or whether they are having difficulty swallowing medication.
However, doctors warn that these signs can point to other medical problems.
Patients can become semi-conscious and confused as a side effect of pain-killing drugs such as morphine if they are also dehydrated, for instance.
When a decision has been made to place a patient on the pathway doctors are then recommended to consider removing medication or invasive procedures, such as intravenous drips, which are no longer of benefit.
If a patient is judged to still be able to eat or drink food and water will still be offered to them, as this is considered nursing care rather than medical intervention.
Dr Hargreaves said that this depended, however, on constant assessment of a patient’s condition.
He added that some patients were being “wrongly” put on the pathway, which created a “self-fulfilling prophecy” that they would die.
He said: “I have been practising palliative medicine for more than 20 years and I am getting more concerned about this “death pathway” that is coming in.
“It is supposed to let people die with dignity but it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
“Patients who are allowed to become dehydrated and then become confused can be wrongly put on this pathway.”
He added: “What they are trying to do is stop people being overtreated as they are dying.
“It is a very laudable idea. But the concern is that it is tick box medicine that stops people thinking.”
He said that he had personally taken patients off the pathway who went on to live for “significant” amounts of time and warned that many doctors were not checking the progress of patients enough to notice improvement in their condition.
Prof Millard said that it was “worrying” that patients were being “terminally” sedated, using syringe drivers, which continually empty their contents into a patient over the course of 24 hours.
In 2007-08 16.5 per cent of deaths in Britain came about after continuous deep sedation, according to researchers at the Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, twice as many as in Belgium and the Netherlands.
“If they are sedated it is much harder to see that a patient is getting better,” Prof Millard said.
Katherine Murphy, director of the Patients Association, said: “Even the tiniest things that happen towards the end of a patient’s life can have a huge and lasting affect on patients and their families feelings about their care.
“Guidelines like the LCP can be very helpful but healthcare professionals always need to keep in mind the individual needs of patients.
“There is no one size fits all approach.”
A spokesman for Marie Curie said: “The letter highlights some complex issues related to care of the dying.
“The Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient was developed in response to a societal need to transfer best practice of care of the dying from the hospice to other care settings.
“The LCP is not the answer to all the complex elements of this area of health care but we believe it is a step in the right direction.”
The pathway also includes advice on the spiritual care of the patient and their family both before and after the death.
It has also been used in 800 instances outside care homes, hospices and hospitals, including for people who have died in their own homes.
The letter has also been signed by Dr Anthony Cole, the chairman of the Medical Ethics Alliance, Dr David Hill, an anaesthetist, Dowager Lady Salisbury, chairman of the Choose Life campaign and Dr Elizabeth Negus a lecturer in English at Barking University.
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: “People coming to the end of their lives should have a right to high quality, compassionate and dignified care.
“The Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) is an established and recommended tool that provides clinicians with an evidence-based framework to help delivery of high quality care for people at the end of their lives.
“Many people receive excellent care at the end of their lives. We are investing £286 million over the two years to 2011 to support implementation of the End of Life Care Strategy to help improve end of life care for all adults, regardless of where they live.”
They’re not criminals. They’ve broken no laws. But an elderly Richardson couple claims the state is holding them against their will. Investigative reporter Becky Oliver explains.
Saturday, August 29, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
(NaturalNews) Vaccines are the quackery of modern medicine. Mass vaccination programs not only fail to protect the population from infectious disease, they actuallyaccelerate the spread of disease in many cases.
Many website have cropped up over the last few years to counter the pro-vaccine propaganda put out by drug companies (who profit from vaccines) and health regulators (who serve the drug companies). One of those sites iswww.VaccinationDebate.com , which lists the following historical facts about vaccines:
• In the USA in 1960, two virologists discovered that bothpolio vaccines were contaminated with the SV 40 virus which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell tissue cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. (Med Jnl of Australia 17/3/1973 p555)
• In 1871-2, England, with 98% of the population aged between 2 and 50 vaccinated against smallpox, it experienced its worst ever smallpox outbreak with 45,000 deaths. During the same period in Germany, with avaccination rate of 96%, there were over 125,000 deaths from smallpox. (http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/020…)
The Hadwen Documents
• In Germany, compulsory mass vaccination against diphtheria commenced in 1940 and by 1945 diphtheria cases were up from 40,000 to 250,000. (Don’t Get Stuck, Hannah Allen)
• In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organisation after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate. (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990)
• In 1977, Dr Jonas Salk who developed the first polio vaccine, testified along with other scientists, that mass inoculation against polio was the cause of most polio cases throughout the USA since 1961. (Science 4/4/77 “Abstracts” )
• In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children. (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)
• In the 1970’s a tuberculosis vaccine trial in India involving 260,000 people revealed that more cases of TB occurred in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. (The Lancet 12/1/80 p73)
• In 1978, a survey of 30 States in the US revealed that more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. (The People’s Doctor, Dr R Mendelsohn)
• In 1979, Sweden abandoned the whooping cough vaccine due to its ineffectiveness. Out of 5,140 cases in 1978, it was found that 84% had been vaccinated three times! (BMJ 283:696-697, 1981)
• In the USA, the cost of a single DPT shot had risen from 11 cents in 1982 to $11.40 in 1987. The manufacturers of the vaccine were putting aside $8 per shot to cover legal costs and damages they were paying out to parents of brain damaged children and children who died after vaccination. (The Vine, Issue 7, January 1994, Nambour, Qld)
If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.
Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.
There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it’s not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out.
While Democrats have become more supportive of the legislators, voters not affiliated with either major party have moved in the opposite direction. Today, 70% of those not affiliated with either major party would vote to replace all of the elected politicians in the House and Senate. That’s up from 62% last year.
Fifty-nine percent (59%) now believe that members of Congress are overpaid. That’s up 10 percentage points from last October. Just five percent (5%) think their Congress member is paid too little. Thirty percent (30%) think the pay is about right.
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans believe that when members of Congress meet with regulators and other government officials, they do so to help their friends and hurt their political opponents. Most believe that’s why politicians are able to solicit contributions from business leaders. Most, however, say it’s generally a good investment because political donors get more than their money’s worth. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American adults say political donors get more than their money back in terms of favors from members of Congress.
Despite these reviews, more than 90% of Congress routinely gets reelected every two years. It’s a shock when any incumbent loses. One explanation for this phenomenon frequently heard in Washington, D.C. is that “people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”
When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every election cycle. That was the experience they witnessed in state legislatures at the time (and most of the state legislatures offered just one-year terms). For well over 100 years after the Constitution was adopted, the turnover averaged in the 50% range as expected.
In the 20th century, turnover began to decline. As power and prestige flowed to Washington during the New Deal era, fewer and fewer members of Congress wanted to leave. In 1968, congressional turnover fell to single digits for the first time ever, and it has remained very low ever since.
On August 28, Media Matters posted a hit piece on Glenn Beck. In the article, Oliver Willis attempts to link the Fox News disinformation operative Beck to Alex Jones. “We’re used to Glenn Beck being ‘out there’, but today’s show was special,” writes Willis. “Beck’s hour (the second day in a row in which he didn’t say a thing about the passing of Sen. Kennedy) was all about the supposed secret army being built by President Obama. This secret army idea, not supported by any facts, though possibly written in invisible ink that Beck can interpret, is a pet cause of fringe radio host Alex Jones.”
In fact, during the election last year, Obama admitted his desire to create a national security force, what Mr. Willis calls a “secret army.” The U.S. “cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” and needs a “civilian national security force,” he said. Obama said his national security force needs to be as well funded — to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars — as the U.S. military. See the video clip below.
The idea did not disappear after the election. On March 12, during a speech at the National Defense University, Obama said the following: “America must also balance and integrate all elements of our national power. We cannot continue to push the burden on to our military alone, nor leave dormant any aspect of the full arsenal of American capability. And that’s why my administration is committed to renewing diplomacy as a tool of American power, and todeveloping our civilian national security capabilities.” (Emphasis added.)
It gets worse. In January, without any recognizable corporate media coverage, Rep. Bob Filner, a California Democrat, introduced H.R. 675. The bill would amend title 10 of the United States Code and extend to civilian employees of the Department of Defense the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. The bill was referred to the Armed Services Committee on January 26, 2009. At approximately the same time, the DoD issued a Defense Directive 1404.10 that establishes a “DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” and rescinds a prior Clinton era directive dealing with the emergency use of civilian personnel. The Obama administration describes the Civilian Expeditionary Workforce as follows:
Members of the DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce shall be organized, trained, cleared, equipped, and ready to deploy in support of combat operations by the military; contingencies; emergency operations; humanitarian missions; disaster relief; restoration of order; drug interdiction; and stability operations of the Department of Defense in accordance with DoDD 3000.05
In other words, Congress is busy proposing bills that would accomplish what Obama announced during his campaign speech in Colorado.
Mr. Willis and the Clintonite organized Media Matters are uncomfortable with the facts. Here is another one — the Obamas have organized a cadre for a civilian national security force since 1993. It’s called Public Allies and is modeled after the communist Saul Alinsky’s “people’s organizations.” It is under the watchful eye of Michelle Obama. It has received $75 million per year from private donors, including the Rockefellers and the Ford Foundation.
In the lead up to the election, budding activists in the Marxist tradition of Alinsky were sent to Camp Obama. “Obama is not like other candidates, and part of this training is learning to mimic the methods he used before he was an elected official — back when he was a community organizer in Chicago following the textbook of legendary agitator Saul Alinsky,” the Chicago Sun Times reported in September, 2007. Camp Obama was described as a “national program for social change,” no doubt of the sort envisioned by Alinksy, who once said: “From all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”
Incidentally, taking money from globalists and bankers is not a problem for Media Matters. In 2005, CNS News uncovered the fact David Brock, the former conservative turned liberal and Media Matters CEO, had taken money from the arch globalist George Soros. In addition, Media Matters receives money from Democracy Alliance. George Soros is a member of this “progressive” organization.
Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, wrote a book entitled “The Plan: Big Ideas for America.” In the book, Emanuel states: “It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, all Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.” (Emphasis added.)
Emanuel calls this a “new social contract,” that is to say an obligation imposed on the people by the government. “If you forget everything else you read in these pages, please remember this: The Plan starts with you. If your leaders aren’t challenging you to do your part, they aren’t doing theirs. We need a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us by establishing, for the first time, an ethic of universal citizen service,” writes Rahmbo. “Universal citizen service will bring Americans of every background together to make America safer and more united in common purpose.”
It’s a “common purpose” envisioned by George Soros, the communist Alinksy, the Ford Foundation, and globalist “progressives.”
Mr. Willis declares there is nothing sinister about AmeriCorps, created under former president Clinton — a member in good standing with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group. Clinton’s administration was a virtual Who’s Who of CFR members and globalists, apparently a good thing for liberals like Mr. Willis.
Here’s what Willis and Media Matters didn’t tell you about AmeriCorps — the legislation initially called for “a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people.” It anticipated requiring “all individuals in the United States” to become indentured servants for the government – including elementary school students. A Washington Examinereditorial on March 26, 2009, stated:
The bill also summons up unsettling memories of World War II-era paramilitary groups by saying the new program should “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service,” while establishing “campuses” that serve as “operational headquarters,” complete with “superintendents” and “uniforms” for all participants. It allows for the elimination of all age restrictions in order to involve Americans at all stages of life. And it calls for creation of “a permanent cadre” in a “National Community Civilian Corps.”
In short, the people who wrote the bill had the same totalitarian mindset as Joe Stalin and Mao.
No mention of the original bill or the mindset of its authors in Mr. Willis’ hit piece against Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. He mentions the fact George W. Bush was all for AmeriCorps and even met with AmeriCorps volunteers for Earth Day. But then “progressives” and those mesmerized by the false right-left paradigm always insist there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans and between Obama and Bush — never mind virtually nothing has changed under Obama, not the twin occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, not the unconstitutional surveillance of the American people, not the torture camps and the murder of hundreds of people in Pakistan — and certainly not the bogus global war on terror (although Obama’s people decided to play asemantic game with the term).
Finally, the article posted on the Media Matters website is a transparent effort to link Alex Jones to the Fox News disinformation operative Glenn Beck and thus discredit him. As a slick disinfo operative, Beck is tasked with taking down the truth and patriot movements by agreeing with their basic arguments while coming off as a kook that can be easily criticized and lampooned by the so-called “liberal” media, thus inflicting damage on the patriot community.
Addendum
Regardless of the philosophy of the Marxist Saul Alinsky, Obama is not a communist, a fact underscored by the heavy presence of CFR and Bilderberg members in his administration.
Lawrence Summers, the Director of the White House’s National Economic Council, is a former Chief Economist at the World Bank and Deputy Secretary of the Treasury under his long-time political mentor Robert Rubin, the former Director and Senior Counselor of Citigroup and Chairmen of Goldman Sachs. Summers is a member of the CFR. Timothy Geithner, the current United States Secretary of the Treasury, was previously the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Geithner also worked for Kissinger and Associates. In 2002 he left the Treasury to join the Council on Foreign Relations as a Senior Fellow in the International Economics department and was director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund.
“The council has gained a virtual lock-hold on the U.S. government, regardless of which party is in office,” writes John McManus. “No other organization comes close to boasting the kind of clout that the CFR members have held: eight presidents of the U.S.; seven vice presidents; 17 secretaries of state; 20 secretaries of war/defense; 18 secretaries of the Treasury; 15 directors of the CIA. And on it has gone throughout the Cabinets, in seriatim — through Democrat and Republican administrations — with hundreds of deputy secretaries, assistant secretaries, etc.”
One of Obama’s professors at Columbia Universality and an ardent supporter of his campaign — and his early foreign policy adviser — was Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski cofounded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller, a director of numerous multinational corporations and “endowment funds” and a central figure in the Council on Foreign Relations.
“If the Council on Foreign Relations could be said to be a spawning ground for the concepts of one-world idealism, then the Trilateral Commission was the ‘task force’ assembled to assault the beachheads. Already the Commission had placed its members in the top posts the U.S. had to offer.” writes Patrick Wood.
Bankers and one-worlders are not communists in the traditional sense, although they have traditionally used that political ideology to consolidate and centralize power and influence.
“If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs,” wrote the late Gary Allen. “Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.”
Seventy years after The Grapes of Wrath, Chris McGreal recreates John Steinbeck’s famous fictional journey to reveal life in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression
Looking back on the past few weeks, Johnnie Levy can see how she was driven to the brink of death and didn’t care.
The sharpest economic downturn of her 63 years stripped Levy of her beloved job as a seamstress and unravelled her world until she found herself sitting in a church hall in the black end of Tulsa waiting to see a nurse with a syringe in one hand and a Bible in the other.
Tulsa has seen its share of poverty and desperation over the years. In the 1930s, it saw a tide of hundreds of thousands struggling west along Route 66 to escape economic collapse in the north and the notorious dustbowl of drought and wind across the Midwest. Whether they had lost their land or their jobs, that flow of desperate humanity – chronicled so devastatingly through the fictional Joad family in John Steinbeck‘s Grapes of Wrath – struggled hard to find enough to feed and clothe their children as they trekked towards an illusory dream of prosperity in distant California.
To travel the old road today – stumbling across crumbling ghost towns and half-abandoned communities, across the sprawling Native American desert reservations, through cities where people work all the hours they aren’t sleeping and still cannot afford to go to the doctor – is to encounter new despair, some of it still recognisable to the Joads.
The banks are once again evicting. Foreclosures plague the parts of northern Arizona and New Mexico traversed by the evicted 70 years ago.
But the monster – as Steinbeck described the financial system – has spawned modern beasts unknown to the Joads, such as the vast multinationals discarding American workers in favour of cheaper labour in Mexico and the health insurance companies that cut off the medical lifelines to the gravely ill.
“Insanity from my home state. I hope people up there make a serious opposition to this, (for my families sake), or we will be stepping into a new state of ultra-control and the next incremental step to a new dawn of totalitarianism in the United States.
I just hope people smarten up and that they do it fast. You are being plaid like little children by the military industrial complex controlled media. This theatre they are creating is insanity on a massive scale. Don’t become the person you don’t want to be. There is the strength in all of you.
The people in this country are being tested and I think the government is underestimating the burning backlash of a wrath the collective American family will rain on anyone who unnecessarily and seriously threatens the health of their loved ones.”
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate billproposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.
They’re not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.
The new version would allow the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.
“I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness,” said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. “It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.”
Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller’s aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.
A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president’s power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.
When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. “We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs–from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records,” Rockefeller said.
The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government’s role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is “not as prepared” as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.
Rockefeller’s revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a “cybersecurity workforce plan” from every federal agency, a “dashboard” pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a “comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy” in six months–even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.
The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. “As soon as you’re saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it’s going to be a really big issue,” he says.
Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to “direct the national response to the cyber threat” if necessary for “the national defense and security.” The White House is supposed to engage in “periodic mapping” of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies “shall share” requested information with the federal government. (“Cyber” is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)
“The language has changed but it doesn’t contain any real additional limits,” EFF’s Tien says. “It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)…The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There’s no provision for any administrative process or review. That’s where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it.”
Translation: If your company is deemed “critical,” a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
The Internet Security Alliance’s Clinton adds that his group is “supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective.”
“These are sick people in control and they are obsessed with population control. This is what your swine flu hype is about. Those vaccines are full of additive fillers to help you on your way with fun stuff like Cancer and Arthritis. Stop assuming everybody is good like you.”
“The regular seasonal flu kills thousands more every year than this little media contrived, ultra-hyped, Mexico & U.S. outbreak we just had. Time to step back and look at the bigger picture. Stand up for yourselves for once. You can accept the truth or be in love with your indoctrinated self-hatred, (global warming, cough… cough), and love of death.”
-Fred Face 8/28/09
Henry Kissinger, 1978:
“U.S. policy toward the third world should be one of depopulation”
It is my intention to give you clips from documents, many from the United Nations that prove there is a plan to depopulate this planet. I will also provide quotes from various people and organizations that further show this agenda is afoot. I pray the guidance of the Lord God Almighty will be with me in this pursuit to warn others of this dark plot against humanity.
Everything written in this paper is easily verifiable. It may take some time and effort, but I took great pains to make this paper as accurate as I possibly could.
The depopulation agenda is based on nature worship, or Gaia worship. In Genesis, God clearly told Adam and Eve, and then Noah and his family to go forth and multiply to fill the earth. Nowhere in the Bible does God rescind that clearly spoken commandment. Therefore man is attempting to supercede the command of the Lord God in heaven: The Creator! I ask you, who knows more about the state of the earth, the created, or the Creator?
The basis for the depopulation agenda is a standard all elitist’s hold dear. This standard is called:
The Hegelian Dialectic:
Problem – Reaction-Solution
Create the Problem Cause a Reaction Offer a Solution
You will see exactly how they have created the problem; caused a reaction so widespread it is really quite impressive how successful they have been; and offered a solution: A deadly solution.
I ask that you please make an attempt to distribute this paper everywhere you possibly can. The time grows short and so many are going to be caught unawares. By getting the word out, you may be able to prevent someone from needless pain and suffering.
Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, 1991:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill (this is absolute proof that man made global warming is a fabrication)…. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap of mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”
David Rockefeller: Memoirs 2002 Founder of the CFR:
“We wield over American political and economical institutions. 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 of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political structure, one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
David Rockefeller, Co-founder of the Trilateral Commission:
“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine & other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plans for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American Case Officer for the State Department’s Office of Population Affairs (OPA) (now the US State Dept. Office of Population Affairs, est. by Henry Kissinger in 1975): “There is a single theme behind all our work -we must reduce population levels,” said Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the State Department’s Office of Population Affairs (OPA). “Either they [governments] do it our way, through nice clean methods or they will get the kind of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran, or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it. “The professionals,” said Ferguson, “aren’t interested in lowering population for humanitarian reasons. That sounds nice. We look at resources and environmental constraints. We look at our strategic needs, and we say that this country must lower its population -or else we will have trouble.
“So steps are taken. El Salvador is an example where our failure to lower population by simple means has created the basis for a national security crisis. The government of El Salvador failed to use our programs to lower their population. Now they get a civil war because of it…. There will be dislocation and food shortages. They still have too many people there.” (1981)
Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood, funded by the Rockefellers) said in her proposed “The American Baby Code”, intended to become law:
“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
This is the woman (Margaret Sanger) whom Hillary Clinton publicly declared she looked up to, during the 2008 presidential debates.
Here is a short list of some advocates of eugenics; Alexander Graham Bell, George Bernard Shaw H. G. Wells, Sidney Webb, William Beveridge, John Maynard Keynes, Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Emile Zola, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Winston Churchill, Linus Pauling, Sidney Webb, Sir Francis Galton, Charles B. Davenport Futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard (who wanted to create a Dept. of Peace):
“Out of the full spectrum of human personality, one-fourth is electing to transcend…One-fourth is ready to so choose, given the example of one other…One-fourth is resistant to election. They are unattracted by life ever evolving. One-fourth is destructive. They are born angry with God…They are defective seeds…There have always been defective seeds. In the past they were permitted to die a ‘natural death’…we, the elders, have been patiently waiting until the very last moment before the quantum transformation, to take action to cut out this corrupted and corrupting element in the body of humanity. It is like watching a cancer grow…Now, as we approach the quantum shift from creature-human to co-creative human—the human who is an inheritor of god-like powers—the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from the social body. We have no choice, dearly beloveds. Fortunately you, dearly beloveds, are not responsible for this act. We are. We are in charge of God’s selection process for planet Earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death. We come to bring death to those who are unable to know God…the riders of the pale horse are about to pass among you. Grim reapers, they will separate the wheat from the chaff. This is the most painful period in the history of humanity…”
Alexander Haig is quoted referring to the US State Department Office of Population Affairs, which was established by Henry Kissinger in 1975. The title has since been changed to The Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental and Scientific Affairs:
“Accordingly, the Bureau of Oceans, International Environmental and Scientific Affairs has consistently blocked industrialization policies in the Third World, denying developing nation’s access to nuclear energy technology–the policies that would enable countries to sustain a growing population. According to State Department sources, and Ferguson himself, Alexander Haig is a “firm believer” in population control.
Although the above stated quotes should be sufficient to prove that the elitists in power have definite intent to depopulate this planet to what they deem to be a sustainable level. Some will argue these are only opinions and are of no real consequence. I will now move on to providing bits of documentation showing this is a plan that has a worldwide scope of influence.
Most of these documents are at least 10 years old, some older. That however, does not take away from the seriousness of the content. Do not think them invalid due to their age. It takes time to foment plans on such a grand scale. But, if you are honest with yourself you can see glimpses of these things happening today.
I am going to cover some issues stemming from the UN Treaty on Biological Diversity (Agenda 21), which Bill Clinton signed into law in 1993 before it was sent to the U.S. Senate for ratification.
The United States of America is devolving into medical fascism and Massachusetts is leading the way with the passage of a new bill, the “Pandemic Response Bill” 2028, reportedly just passed by the MA state Senate and now awaiting approval in the House. This bill suspends virtually all Constitutional rights of Massachusetts citizens and forces anyone “suspected” of being infected to submit to interrogations, “decontaminations” and vaccines.
It’s also sets fines up to $1,000 per day for anyone who refuses to submit to quarantines, vaccinations, decontamination efforts or to follow any other verbal order by virtually any state-licensed law enforcement or medical personnel. You can read the text yourself here:
Here’s some of the language contained in the bill:
(Violation of 4th Amendment: Illegal search and seizure)
During either type of declared emergency, a local public health authority… may exercise authority… to require the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into and investigation of the premises; to close, direct, and compel the evacuation of, or to decontaminate or cause to be
decontaminated any building or facility; to destroy any material; to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons;
(Violation of 14th Amendment; illegal arrest without a warrant)
…an officer authorized to serve criminal process may arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated an order given to effectuate the purposes of this subsection and shall use reasonable diligence to enforce such order. [Gunpoint]
(Government price controls)
The attorney general, in consultation with the office of consumer affairs and business regulation, and upon the declaration by the governor that a supply emergency exists, shall take appropriate action to ensure that no person shall sell a product or service that is at a price that unreasonably exceeds the price charged before the emergency.
“Involuntary Transportation” (also known as kidnapping)
Law enforcement authorities, upon order of the commissioner or his agent or at the request of a local public health authority pursuant to such order, shall assist emergency medical technicians or other appropriate medical personnel in the involuntary transportation of such person to the tuberculosis treatment center.
$1,000 / day in fines
Any person who knowingly violates an order, as to which noncompliance poses a serious danger to public health as determined by the commissioner or the local public health authority, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 30 days or a fine of not more than one thousand dollars per day that the violation continues, or both.
Forced vaccinations
Furthermore, when the commissioner or a local public health authority within its jurisdiction determines that either or both of the following measures are necessary to prevent a serious danger to the public health the commissioner or local public health authority may exercise the following authority: (1) to vaccinate or provide precautionary prophylaxis to individuals as protection against communicable disease…
Forced quarantine for those who refuse (illegal imprisonment without charge)
An individual who is unable or unwilling to submit to vaccination or treatment shall not be required to submit to such procedures but may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal poses a serious danger to public health or results in uncertainty whether he or she has been exposed to or is infected with a disease or condition that poses a serious danger to public health, as determined by the commissioner, or a local public health authority operating within its jurisdiction.
Arrest for refusal to be “decontaminated”
If an individual is unable or unwilling to submit to decontamination or procedures necessary for diagnosis, the decontamination or diagnosis procedures may proceed only pursuant to an order of the superior court… During the time necessary to obtain such court order, such individual may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal to submit to decontamination or diagnosis procedures poses a serious danger to public health or results in uncertainty whether he or she has been exposed to or is infected with a disease or condition that poses a serious danger to public health.
Interrogation
When the commissioner or a local public health authority within its jurisdiction reasonably believes that a person may have been exposed to a disease or condition that poses a threat to the public health, in addition to their authority under section 96 of chapter 111, the commissioner or the local public health authority may detain the person for as long as may be reasonably necessary for the commissioner or the local public health authority, to convey information to the person regarding the disease or condition and to obtain contact information… If a person detained under subsection (1) refuses to provide the information requested, the person may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal poses a serious danger to public health…
Journalist Wayne Madsen tells Russia today scientists involved in creating previous vaccinations are telling family and friends not to take the H1N1 vaccine. Madsen also warns that the government may make the vaccination mandatory.
One patient who had a colonoscopy at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Miami using equipment that was not properly sterilized has tested positive for HIV. Seven patients have confirmed cases of hepatitis C. No local patients were positive for hepatitis B.
The VA confirmed the number in a press release Friday but cautioned that there is no way to know if the veterans contracted the viruses from the VA equipment or in other ways.
All three viruses to which veterans might have been exposed are serious and contagious under some circumstances.
Hepatitis B is a liver disease that can range from mild, temporary illness to serious chronic conditions, and hepatitis C can lead to cirrhosis of the liver and liver cancer. HIV, or the Human Immunodeficiency Virus, can lead to AIDS.
Dan Shannon, a Broward veteran who had two colonoscopies at the Miami VA hospital, got a letter saying his tests were negative, but wasn’t entirely reassured.
”I’m going to go outside and get a second opinion from a private doctor, just as a precaution,” he said.
”Wow, that’s a bummer,” said Stuart McLees, Vietnam vet and commander of a Davie VFW post, who had six colonoscopies at the Miami VA after an operation for colon cancer. McLees also received a letter from the VA that his test was negative.
”I’m still a little shaky,” he said. “But I’ve been treated well at the VA hospital, so I really have no complaints.”
In its news release, the VA said that, of 3,341 Miami veterans who had colonoscopies with the improperly cleaned equipment, 3,184 have been notified, 2,038 have asked for testing, 1,880 were tested and 1,639 so far have been notified of their results.
VA officials in Washington and Miami did not immediately respond to calls for further comment. It isn’t known whether colonoscopies, which were suspended in Miami when the problem came to light, have resumed.
The VA announcement said: “Although the risk of cross-contamination and exposure to these infections is exceptionally low, our directive is to treat all veterans potentially affected, regardless of risk, and regardless of cause.”
The problem with the came to light in late March, after the Miami VA sent letters to more than 3,000 veterans who had received colonoscopies there between May 2004 and March 12, warning that improperly sanitized equipment might have exposed them to the three dangerous viruses. Miami VA hospital chief of staff Dr. John Vara later said a staffer apparently had been rinsing parts of the equipment instead of chemically sanitizing them between uses, as recommended by the manufacturer.
Similar problems took place at VA medical facilities in Murfreesboro, Tenn., where nearly 6,400 veterans were told they might have been infected, and in Augusta, Ga., with nearly 1,100 veterans.
At those facilities, the VA on Friday reported that in Murfreesboro, 6,387 were potentially exposed, five tested positive for hepatitis B, seven for hepatitis C and one for HIV. In Augusta, 1,069 were potentially exposed, one tested positive for hepatitis B, five for hepatitis C and one for HIV.
The problem was first detected in Murfreesboro in December. In March, the national VA directed all 153 VA medical facilities to do a formal ”step-up” inspection and retraining program about the equipment. That’s when the problem was discovered in Miami.
A team of doctors and administrators from the national VA has been at the Miami VA hospital since the last week of March poring over records, interviewing staffers, and trying to figure out how the Miami VA Medical Center, which won a ”Best in VA” award in 2007, could have made such a fundamental error as rinsing instead of disinfecting the equipment.
Dr. David Greenwald, a gastroenterologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York and a spokesman for the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, said that despite the apparent breach of protocol, people should not fear getting colonoscopies at civilian medical facilities.
”Colonoscopy is a very effective procedure for cancer screening,” he said. “It’s important to note that if the guidelines are followed, there should be no fear of infection.”
All civilian hospital and clinics — but not the VA centers and clinics — are inspected periodically by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, which also responds to patient complaints. Hospitals must report any ”adverse incidents” to the state agency.
Doctors and staffers at local hospitals also say procedures are in place to catch such problems immediately.
”We have such a culture of constant observation here that that kind of thing would not happen. It would be weeded out very quickly,” said Barbara Russell, spokeswoman for Baptist Hospital in Kendall.
Baptist, she said, has several overlapping standards and procedures to be sure safety rules are met, including a quality control protocol called Toyota Lean Thinking, devised by the automaker to control its manufacturing quality and adapted for use in business offices, hospitals and other institutions.
Make no mistake: there’s a strong, unrelenting push to destroy what remains of private health care in this country.
And now congressional leaders are attempting to overcome their scheme’s plunging approval numbers by manipulating Ted Kennedy’s death to create support for a “legacy” health care bill.
Our representatives and senators are eager to get back to Washington and away from the tremendous grassroots opposition to health control.
Which means it’s time for us to turn up the heat.
Click hereto get contact information to write, call, and fax Congress to express your outrage at their plans to finish taking over what remains of private health care. And be sure to signour “Stop the Government Health Care Scheme” petition.
Health control propagandists claim that we are defending the status quo of a “failed” private sector by opposing their latest scheme.
However, their bill cementsthe status quo in health care: continuing (and expanding) government intrusion.
Protectionist regulations have decimated competition in health insurance at the local level, and the vast, complex tax code has subsidizedemployer-provided high cost health care. The FDA, in the name of consumer protection, has restricted the supply of drugs from home and abroad. And individuals are barred from shopping across state lines for health insurance.
Watch this YouTubevideo to see a ER physician describe how the government obstructs the supply of health services.
Does any of that really sound like the free marketat work to you?
Government-manipulated health care is bankrupting this country. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are drowning in tens of trillions of dollars worth of unfunded liabilities and red ink, yet the response from Congress is to propose more 1,000+ page bills that will move our health care system perilously close to other nations’ statist care.
You know as well as I that this unfair plan is doomed to be a fiscal nightmare comparable to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and that Congress-created HMOs are notorious for denying care to control spiraling costs.
Our nation has seen enough big government schemes, especially in medicine. President Obama is right about one thing: it’s time to take action.
It’s time to let the free market work.
Click herefor contact information for the House and Senate in order to demand real reform. In addition to contacting your representative and senators, be sure to campaign hard for health freedom at your local townhall meeting.
Urge your representative to fight to allow individuals to shop across state lines for insurance, curb the authority of the FDA to prevent Americans from going outside the country for cheaper medications, and enable individuals to purchase their own health insurance without being taxed for doing so.
Tell Congress to give Americans control over their health care by giving them control over their health care dollar via tax credits and deductions similar to those outlined in Congressman Ron Paul’s Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act (HR 1495).
Ask your congressman to protect privacy rights by allowing patients and physicians to opt-out of any government-mandated or funded system of electronic health care records, and to repeal the federal law creating an “unique patient identifier” by adopting the policies contained in Congressman Ron Paul’s Protect Patients and Physicians Privacy Act (HR 2630).
In the meantime, we can push for reform of our respective state’s competition-destroying mandateson private insurers. These simple, common-sense reforms would immediately alleviate the costs of health care without adding to the exploding national debt.
And if you are able, please donateto Campaign for Liberty today so that we can educate Americans on a true free market health care system and defeat this latest health control scheme.
Don’t let the proponents of Obamacare sell you on the notion that we need the government to save us from the mess that government made. Click hereto demand that Congress support legitimate health care reform!
An anonymous blogger unmasked by Google last week following a court order has vowed to sue the internet giant for violating her privacy.
Rosemary Port, who operated a blog called “Skanks in NYC,” was outed last week after failing in her efforts to quash a subpoena served on Google, whose Blogger service hosted Skanks.
Port’s lawyer, Salvatore Strazzullo, now plans to sue Google for $15 million for breaching its “fiduciary duty to protect her expectation of anonymity.” He told the New York Daily News that he’s prepared to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court.
“Our Founding Fathers wrote ‘The Federalist Papers’ under pseudonyms,” Strazzullo told the Daily News. “Inherent in the First Amendment is the right to speak anonymously. Shouldn’t that right extend to the new public square of the Internet?”
Port, a 29-year-old student at New York’s Fashion Institute of Technology, launched Skanks last year. It published only five posts, all devoted to attacking model Liskula Cohen, a 37-year-old who has reportedly modeled for Australian Vogue, Georgio Armani and Versace. In the posts, Cohen was called a “psychotic, lying, whoring . . . skank” and an “old hag,” and was depicted as a desperate “fortysomething” who was past her prime.
Cohen then subpoenaed Google in an effort to unmask her critic’s identity with the aim of filing a defamation suit against the blog author once the identity was known. Google provided Port with notice of the subpoena, giving the blogger an opportunity to anonymously challenge the subpoena in court.
Cohen charged that the blog comments harmed her career and caused potential clients to question her suitability to represent their products. Port’s lawyer argued that the posts in question amounted to nothing more than vague insults on par with calling someone a “jerk.”
Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Joan Madden ruled that Cohen demonstrated sufficient claims for the defamation lawsuit, and ordered Google to comply with the subpoena. Madden said that the words, posted in conjunction with provocative photos of Cohen, implied that the model was “a sexually promiscuous woman,” belying that the comments were merely opinion or hyperbole.
Google complied with the order, but Port essentially asserts that Google should have defied the court to protect her First Amendment right to call Cohen a skank anonymously.
Port has blamed Cohen for any negative attention the blog might have brought her, telling the Daily News that until Cohen sued Google no one had seen the blog, and that by filing a public suit that brought attention to the matter, Cohen had “defamed herself.”
“Before her suit, there were probably two hits on my website: One from me looking at it, and one from her looking at it,” Port told the paper. “That was before it became a spectacle. I feel my right to privacy has been violated.”
The Daily News reports that the two women were acquainted through Manhattan’s fashion scene and had quarreled after Cohen badmouthed Port to her ex-boyfriend. Cohen told the paper that she has decided not to proceed with filing a $3 million defamation suit against Port and is satisfied that the blogger was identified.
Update: This post has been corrected to properly reflect the legislative history of the case and note that the discovery subpoena against Google was filed prior to a defamation suit being filed.
Authorities are preparing to seize children from schools, set up quarantines and morgues, conduct mass vaccinations, and deal with riots and unrest, according to an international swine flu summit recently held in Washington DC which was attended by distinguished scientists, industry leaders and top health officials from all over the globe.
A conference first discussed by this website three weeks ago has now taken place, with health authorities meeting at the end of last week to finalize response plans to a swine flu pandemic that has been all but guaranteed to occur this coming fall.
According to a PDF information leaflet released before the meeting, attendees were briefed on how to “conduct morgue operations,” manage an interruption in food supplies and “manage panic caused by sudden disruption of services & interruptions in essential goods & services”.
During a swine flu pandemic, their duties would also include dealing with civil disturbances, controlling and diffusing social unrest and public disorder, carrying out mass vaccination programs and enforcing quarantines, according to the conference documentation.
One of the most shocking modules of the conference deals with “School/University Pandemic Planning” and strongly implies that authorities will usurp parental rights over children in the event of a swine flu pandemic.
“Concurrent Breakout Session #10″ outlines plans to “train teachers to screen for symptoms & know what to do when students / teachers fall ill,” before then transporting ill students, which presumably means transporting them to quarantine zones with or without the consent of parents. The use of schools as “shelters” or quarantine centers is also mentioned.
As we have documented, authorities have been training to raid and remove children from schools during times of emergency for over a decade, mainly under the auspices of preparing for school shootings or during drug sweeps.
In October 2001, authorities swooped in to kidnap and remove 115 children from Heartland Christian Academy without a warrant. Children were forcibly loaded onto buses like criminals as they screamed for help in shocking scenes featured in Alex Jones’ Road To Tyranny documentary.
Earlier this month we reported on how a Maine high school was taken over by National Guard in a drill focused around riots during a mass vaccination program. In this scenario, the rioters were begging for the vaccine, but obviously the opposite is likely to be the case if a mandatory vaccination program is announced, if there are riots then they will consist of people refusing to take the shot.
A You Tube user posted the following video which covers some of the issues raised by the swine flu conference.
“Wow. People have really lost their fuckin minds. How that is hate speech is beyond me by a couple of light years. Man, the government loves to use the race card when it suits them. This is a total non-issue. There is zero debate about this. Bush-Fuck would be getting same treatment, (probably much worse), doing the same absolutely horrible job Obama is doing. The image of Obama as the Joker & the word fascism has nothing to do with race. Period. End of story. Go smoke a joint and fuckin relax people. ”
Get involved and fight back against phony charges of hate speech — make a poster and enter The Poster Revolution contest.
A local Texas newspaper has cited the now iconic “Jokerbama” image as an example of hate speech after a military veteran reported the presence of the posters on light poles in his local area to City Hall officials.
The Hays Free Press carried the headline Freedom… of hate speech?on its front page late last week next to the Infowars version of the Jokerbama image, with the word “fascism” underneath.
The article notes that the appearance of the posters has been spearheaded by Alex Jones’ competition, but only cites negative feedback from a few local residents who they say have been taking the posters down:
“This is appalling,” [local resident] Lutrick said. “I served in the military. That’s my commander in chief.”
The article also quotes a City of Kyle spokesperson:
“Jerry Hendrix declined to comment about the nature of the fliers hung in the public right-of-way, but said they violate the city’s sign ordinance. If caught, the individual could be fined up to $2,000.”
“Whoever is doing it needs to stop,” Hendrix said. “It creates additional work for our code enforcement officer.”
Despite this threat of a fine, the article also notes that there are “no actual restrictions prohibiting” the placement of the posters.
Meanwhile, ABC affiliate KBMT News reported on the appearance of the posters in Tyler, Texas, noting that “Tyler police took photos and collected some of the posters as evidence,” as if they are investigating a crime.
Watch Alex Jones’ breakdown of this story from yesterday’s syndicated Sunday show (begins 8 mins in):
The censorship of the image online also continues with Yahoo owned photograph website Flickr now closing down discussion forums on the image in addition to removing the image from their pages.
Firas Alkhateeb, the artist behind the picture has said he plans to file a counterclaim against Flickr censorship of his image.
CALL THE 10 SENATORS LISTED BELOW: Your PHONE CALLS to Kill Obamacare socialized medicine have been very effective and the tide is definitely turning our way! Talking points are 1) NO more socialism 2) NO government health co-ops 3) NO rationing 4) NO mandates 5) NO government bureaucrats making life and death health decisions 6) YES to keep private insurance. Tell them to KILL Obamacare before it kills you or family members with health care rationing. We just need to KEEP making PHONE CALLS!. Most of these are conservative Democrats in red states:
Sen. Jon Tester (MT) 202-224-2644
Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME) 202-224-5344
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (AR) 202-224-4843
Sen. Mark Pryor (AR) 202-224-2353
Sen. Kent Conrad (ND) 202-224-2043
Sen.Byron Dorgan (ND)202-224-2551
Sen. Ben Nelson (NE) 202-224-6551
Sen. Bill Nelson (FL) 202-224-5274
Sen. Mary Landrieu (LA) 202-224-5834
Sen. Max Baucus (MT) 202-224-2651
A spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s trade group, admitted in an article published Mondaythat as many as 50,000 industry employees are involved in an effort to fight back against aggressive healthcare reform.
The admission, published in the last sentence of a Wall Street Journalarticle, highlights the stakes of potential healthcare reform for the private health insurance industry. Insurers and investors alike are terrified at the prospect of a so-called “public option,” which would create a government-run health insurance program to compete with private insurers. Because the government plan wouldn’t have to earn a profit, the plan would be able to undercut the premiums of private firms, pressuring profit margins.
“The health-insurance industry is sending thousands of its employees to town-hall meetings and other forums during Congress’s August recess to try to counter a tide of criticism directed at the insurers and remain a player — and not an outsider — in the debate over the future of the health-care system,” the Journal’s Vanessa Fuhrmans and Avery Johnson wrote Monday.
Employees of the health insurers have also been given talking points that encourage them to keep a low profile and avoid taking “the bait” when the industry is criticized in public, the reporters say. The industry’s trade group drafted a “Town Hall Tips” memo that instructs employees to stay calm and not to yell at members of Congress.
The industry’s staff have also been encouraged to write their local representatives.
Health insurers are trying to reshape the debate over the public option by fighting back against charges that they’re enjoying record profits at consumers’ expense. Most private insurers enjoy a four to six percent profit margin, which is less than many other industries, but, all told, amounts to billions and billions of dollars.
Karen Ignagni, America’s Health Insurance Plans’ chief lobbyist, says that town hall meetings are a chance for employees “to strongly push back against charges that we have very high profits.”
“It’s very important that our men and women… calmly provide the facts and for members of Congress to hear what these people do every day,” Ignagni added.
Insurers have also been trying to convince the public that they’re well-intentioned. They’ve agreed to dispense with policies that prevent patients with pre-existing conditions from getting coverage and stop marking up policies based on gender. But they’ve agreed to this only on the condition that Congress mandate health insurance coverage for all Americans, which would add tens of millions of new customers to insurers’ pools.
“I have many “practicing” Jewish-American friends, (I lived in NYC & Brooklyn for almost 10 years), I have absolutely nothing against Jewish people, (Obviously!!)… it’s their sick & twisted government, (much like our own who help support this activity). Although, it would be nice to see more Israeli citizens protesting the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by the hand of their own government.”
WHEN thousands of protestors took to the streets in Iran following this year’s disputed presidential election, Twitter messages sent by activists let the world know about the brutal policing that followed. A few months earlier, campaigners in Moldova used Facebook to organise protests against the country’s communist government, and elsewhere too the internet is playing an increasing role in political dissent.
Now governments are trying to regain control. By reinforcing their efforts to monitor activity online, they hope to deprive dissenters of information and the ability to communicate.
The latest evidence of these clampdowns comes in a report on the Middle East and north Africa by the OpenNet Initiative (ONI), a collaboration of researchers based in the UK and North America. Among the restrictions it reports are clampdowns on Facebook in Syria and the use of hidden cameras in Saudi Arabia’s internet cafes.
Most of these actions are aimed at stifling political debate. “Political filtering is the common denominator,” says Helmi Noman of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society in Boston, who compiled the report. “It’s the main target.”
Noman asked volunteers to check whether roughly 2000 sites covering a range of subjects, including gambling, political news and humour, are accessible in various countries. He also examined government eavesdropping schemes and the actions of local law enforcers.
The survey showed that governments in the Middle East and north Africa routinely block sites that host discussions critical of their policies or that cover human rights issues. Opposition parties’ sites are also censored.
At times entire social networking services, including Twitter, are unavailable, and the same goes for the YouTube video-sharing site. Orkut, a social networking site, is offline in the United Arab Emirates. The BBC Persian site cannot be accessed from Iran. The governments’ task of blocking internet access is made easier because many countries in the region have only a handful of service providers.
Governments also keep tabs on who is using the internet and what they are viewing. In March, newspapers in Saudi Arabia reported that police had started visiting internet cafes to ensure that owners had installed cameras to monitor users, as the country’s law requires. In Jordan, cafe owners have to record their customers’ names and monitor the sites they visit.
Noman says that filtering and monitoring have become more widespread as the internet’s role in political activity has increased. “More activists are going online and more activists are being created online,” he says.
Monitoring has become more widespread as the internet’s role in political activity has increased
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — Nearly 1,500 rice farmers are suing the German conglomerate Bayer Cropscience and affiliated companies over a genetically engineered strain of rice.
The lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in Little Rock claims the farmers’ crops were corrupted by the rice that was produced by Bayer.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced in August 2006 that traces of an unapproved genetically engineered rice had been found in U.S. supplies of long-grain rice. The lawsuit says Bayer and Riceland Foods Inc. confirmed the traces in early 2006 but didn’t tell farmers, the government or the public until July or August.
A dollar amount being sought in damages is not given in the complaint.
A spokesman for Bayer said he had not seen the lawsuit and couldn’t comment.
Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.
Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate
Posted: August 20, 2009 08:15 PM
The American government — which we once called our government — has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called “economic royalists,” who choose our elected officials — indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.
This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment’s hesitation, they took our money — yours and mine — to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don’t care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as “useless eaters.”
But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?
“A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street.”
There it is. Right there. We are Main Street. We must, according to our president, share the blame. He went on to say: “And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis — the Great Depression — was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy.”
This is nonsense.
The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did — knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) — was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.
Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight — and we’ve all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.
Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.
Obama’s failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.
Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:
“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 of 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.”
Read Rockefeller’s words again. He actually admits to working against the “best interests of the United States.”
Need more? Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.” They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.
Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn’t enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.
The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here’s what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:
“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 the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father’s conquered.”
We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists’ attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays’ Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America’s farmers.Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks’ predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Perhaps it’s time to consider that option once again.
I’m calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.
Let’s set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn’t effective — if the politicians ignore us — we do it again. And again. And again.
The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It’s time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.
On Saturday, thousands of Americans opposed to Obamacare demonstrated outside the offices of Congress critters around the country. “The organizers who brought the Tax Day Tea Party to cities around the nation this spring recruited thousands of protesters Saturday afternoon to anti-health care reform rallies staged in front of at least 100 Congressional district offices,” the Washington Post reports.
Dubbed the National Recess Rally, the nationwide event was organized to counter stage-managed pro-Obamacare events. “People just want government to stay out of their health care,” Eric Odom, executive director of American Liberty Alliance, a Libertarian organization, told the Post. “It was very little about the cost and more about government intrusion.”
According to Fox News, the American Liberty Alliance, FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity worked with The Sam Adams Alliance to organize the events.
“Obviously the idea behind this was to have a unified day for those concerned about government-controlled health care to talk outside their representatives’ offices,” Paul Miller, spokesman for The Sam Adams Alliance, a Chicago-based political organization, told Fox.
Remarkably, the corporate media gave the event a modest amount of coverage, albeit often with a typical pro-Obama spin. The Mercury News, for instance, ran the following headline on an article covering the event: “White anger fueling health care debate.”
As increasing number of Americans protest the government take-over of health care, race-baiting and sensationalistic and biased headlines, news articles, and corporate media television coverage will no longer work.
The Obama administration is urging a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit weighing whether a sitting U.S. president may lawfully create a spying program to eavesdrop on Americans’ electronic communications without warrants or congressional authorization.
The nearly 5-year-old case, having a tortured procedural history, is the furthest along in challenging the Bush administration’s warrantless, Terror Surveillance Program adopted in the wake of the September 11 terror attacks.
Two former American lawyers for a now-defunct Saudi charity brought the case. They allege some of their 2004 telephone conversations to Saudi Arabia were siphoned to the National Security Agency without warrants. The allegations were based on classified documents the government accidentally mailed to the two former lawyers of an Oregon chapter of the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation.
After a mountain of paperwork, a trip to the appellate courts and countless hearings and motions, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker of San Francisco ruled in June that the lawyers must make their case without the documents, which both the Bush and Obama administrations claimed were a state secret.
“Plaintiffs rely on a string of sheer conjecture in an attempt to prove they were subject to the alleged TSP surveillance in 2004. But the fact that the president authorized the TSP, that the government has investigated terrorist financing by charitable organizations like the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation of Saudi Arabia and its worldwide branches, that plaintiff AHIF-Oregon had been designated as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, and, indeed, that this designation had been supported by ‘classified’ ‘intelligence’ information, does not establish that the government electronically surveilled the plaintiffs under the TSP or otherwise.”
It was the fourth time the government moved to dismiss the case.
Last month, meanwhile, counsel for the Al-Haramain lawyers cited a bevy of circumstantial evidence (.pdf) that they claimed demonstrated that the two charity lawyers — Wendell Belew and Asim Gafoor — were unlawfully spied upon.
The evidence included speeches by government officials discussing an investigation that concluded with the listing of Al-Haramain as a terror organization to the FBI’s public disclosure that it monitored Al-Haramain officials.
The legal issue centers on whether future presidents may adopt a so-called Terror Surveillance Program, which was President George W. Bush’s once-secret warrantless wiretapping program disclosed in 2005 by The New York Times. Bush said his war powers granted him the power to create the TSP program.
A hearing was set for September 23.
In July 2008, Bush signed legislation authorizing the type of surveillance at issue in this case – allowing the warrantless monitoring of Americans’ electronic communications if they are communicating overseas with somebody the government believes is linked to terrorism.
Then-Sen. Barrack Obama, now president, voted for that legislation, which also immunized the nation’s telecommunication companies from lawsuits charging them with being complicit with the Bush administration’s warrantless, wiretapping program. Those lawsuits — combined into one in San Francisco federal court — are on appeal.
A little known Texas law which goes into effect September 1, 2009 will dramatically change the way Texas law enforcement officers draw blood from suspected drunk drivers.
The way it stands now, a person involved in an accident will automatically have his or her blood drawn if they’re involved in an accident where there’s a death or serious bodily injury. However, Senate Bill 328, which passed in the last Texas legislative session, means that anyone involved in a crash, whether they’re suspected of drunk driving or not and where there’s bodily injury, severe or not, or has a child in their car, or previous D.W.I. convictions, will have blood drawn automatically within a matter of minutes.
“I was just sick and tired of Texas law that allowed the defendant to destroy the very evidence that we need to protect society,” said John Bradley, the Williamson County District Attorney.
Currently police officers in Texas have to get a search warrant to draw a person’s blood. Bradley says the process can take up to several hours.
Under S.B. 328 an officer doesn’t need a search warrant changing the blood drawing process from hours to a matter of minutes.
“Police officers are going to be saved a lot of time and energy and trouble in their D.W.I. investigations and be able to directly collect the most powerful evidence of intoxication which is the blood and the body of the drunk person,” added Bradley.
The Williamson County D.A. says he approached Senator Dan Gattis of Williamson County about authoring S.B. 328 after the December 2003 arrest of Gary Gibbs, a truck driver who was stopped in Georgetown because other drivers saw him weaving while he was driving an 18-wheeler truck.
Gibbs had seven prior D.W.I. convictions and on his 8th he was sentenced to life in prison.
Some in the community are now questioning the constitutionality of S.B. 328.
“I’m quite sure that this is going to wind up in courts,” said Jody Barton, an attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project.
“We’re going down this road of taking away more and more liberties and laws like this don’t really do anything to stop drunk driving all they really do is give the police more power to intrude upon people’s liberties,” adds Barton.
In Austin and in Williamson County staff members are being trained as pflebotomists to draw blood.
However Bradley told KVUE that there are some jurisdictions in Texas where police officers themselves are being trained to draw blood.
Obama’s health care plan will be:
written by a committee whose head says he doesn’t understand it,
passed by a Congress that hasn’t read it,
signed by a president who smokes,
funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes,
overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and
financed by a country that is nearly broke.
* FBI radio intercepts indicated that the two FBI agents were chasing a red pickup truck. The day after the shootout, the FBI director stated the FBI’s intent to find a red pickup truck. Red pickup trucks near the reservation were stopped for weeks in the attempt to locate it. However, Leonard did not drive a red pickup truck. At his trial, the FBI instead claimed they had been searching for the red and white van that Leonard was sometimes seen driving[6].
* Testimony from three witnesses placed Peltier, Robideau and Butler near the crime scene. Those three witnesses later recanted, alleging that the FBI, while extracting their testimony, had tied them to chairs, denied them their right to talk to their attorney, and otherwise coerced and threatened them [7][8].
* The jury, unlike the juries in similar prosecutions against AIM leaders at the time, were not allowed to hear about the other cases, where the FBI had been rebuked for tampering with both the evidence and witnesses[9].
* An FBI ballistics expert testimony during the trial asserted that a shell casing found near the dead agents’ bodies matched the gun tied to Peltier. However it was specified that an forensics test of the firing pin, which would have more definitively matched the gun to the casing, was not performed because the gun was damaged in a fire. Rather, a less definitive test was done which indicated that the extractor marks on the casing and gun match.
Years later, after an FOIA request, the FBI ballistics expert’s records were examined. His report stated that he had performed a ballistics test of the firing pin and concluded that this bullet casing from the scene of the crime did not come from the gun tied to Peltier. That evidence was withheld from the jury during the trial[10].
* Though the FBI’s investigation indicated that an AR-15 was used to kill the agents, several different AR-15s were in the area at the time of the shootout which could have caused the fatal injuries. Also, no other casings or evidence about them were offered by the prosecutor’s office, even though other bullets were fired at the crime scene[11][12].
* At the conclusion of Peltier’s trial, the prosecutor closed his argument saying, “We proved that he went down to the bodies and executed those two young men at point blank range.” However, at the appellate hearing, the government attorney conceded, “We had a murder. We had numerous shooters. We do not know who specifically fired what killing shots…We do not know who shot the agents[13].”
* The Pennsylvania Parole Commission, which presides over the prison Peltier was held at in Lewisburg, denied Peltier parole in 1993 based on their finding that he, “participated in the premeditated and cold blooded execution of those two officers.” However, the Parole Commission has since stated that it, “recognizes that the prosecution has conceded the lack of any direct evidence that [Peltier] personally participated in the executions of the two FBI agents.[14]”
“When are people gonna realize that they have different talking head shills for each party. She’s no better than Rush Pinball in my book. Just spreading more hate, disinformation(to a public who really has a tough time grasping anything), and government propaganda. She’s a laughable joke to me & a lot of other people in this country. The facade has fallen… sorry pentagon, parties over.”
“Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love…” Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 1958
“There comes a time when silence is betrayal…” Dr. King, 1967
I remember back in the good ol’ days of 2005 and 2006 when being against the wars was not only politically correct, but it was very popular. I remember receiving dozens of awards, uncountable accolades and even was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Those were the halcyon days of the anti-war movement before the Democrats took over the government (off of the backs of the anti-war movement) and it became anathema to be against the wars and I became unpopular on all sides. I guess at that point, I could have gone with the flow and pretended to support the violence so I could remain popular, but I think I have to fiercely hold on to my core values whether I am “liked” or not.
Killing is wrong no matter if it is state-sanction murder or otherwise. Period. Not too much more to say on that subject, except what I quote above from Dr. King.
However, while the so-called left is obsessed over supporting a very crappy Democratic health care plan, people in far away countries are being deprived of their health and very lives by the Obama Regime’s continuation of Bush’s ruinous foreign policy.
I was never dismayed when the so-called right attacked me and called me names for protesting Bush. However, something inside me gets a little sick when I hear people who claim to be peace activists supporting the Obama Administration’s foreign policy, a policy that is not like Bush’s in the fact that it’s much worse.
I have been called a “racist” from the so-called left. In these people’s opinion, I was totally justified in protesting Bush, but I am a racist for protesting the same policies under Obama. When I opposed Bush’s policies, I was called traitor, anti-American, anti-Semitic, and other names I cannot print. Name-calling is a great way to shut down critical thinking and discussion. And, not to mention, I think the murder of innocent life in the Iraq-Af-Pak regions is racist and morally corrupt.
There are many people in this country who oppose Obama because they’re racist, but I am not one of them. I oppose Obama’s policies because they are wrong…again, period!
One cannot obfuscate when innocent lives are being destroyed, here and abroad. We cannot allow “political reality” to get in the way of morality. Human sacrifice is not worth the political reality. Violence, killing, war and more war are NEVER the solution to any problem. Period.
If Obama has violent shadow forces around him pulling him in the direction of violence, which begets more violence and more resistance; then we, especially people in the peace or anti-war movements need to gather and organize to pull him in the direction towards peaceful conflict resolution and solutions that aren’t based on exploiting people’s fears, anxieties or ignorance.
I am going to Martha’s Vineyard because we have the moral high ground. The war supporters aren’t going to protest Obama’s wars. They are strangely silent over his foreign policy, unless they are praising it.
I am going to Martha’s Vineyard because someone has to speak for the babies of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan that do not deserve the horrible fate that has been handed to them by the US Military Industrial Complex. The voiceless need a voice, and even if I am called every name in the book by all sides, I will speak up for them.
I am going to Martha’s Vineyard because so many people have been blinded to the fact that the system has momentum that rolls on and over and around no matter who is the titular head of the system.
Let’s just pretend that elections are fair in this country and my candidate, Cynthia McKinney, won for president. If she wasn’t able to rein in the systemic violence, then I would be going wherever she vacationed to protest her policies, too. I guess at that point, I would not only be called “racist,” but I would be called a “self-hating female.”
In a recent conversation someone was trying to convince me that I should not be so stridently opposed to Obama’s policies and I responded that today 75 people were killed and 300 people were wounded in a bomb blast in Iraq and 26 mostly women and children were killed in a wedding party in Afghanistan this week and she said: “Oh, that wouldn’t be acceptable if it happened here.”
And that ‘s the problem: it’s not acceptable if it happens anywhere, to anybody, no matter who is President of the USA.
Not only is the death toll mounting for innocent civilians but also is once again climbing for our troops.
While the “festivities” are occurring on Martha’s Vineyard next week, there are families all over the world who will never again be able to fully feel festive. Ahhhh…. everyone should just stand down, relax and sip an Obamarita on the beach…Hope reigns once again in The Empire.
And, yes, we are going to Martha’s Vineyard to get attention. We vehemently want to call attention to all of the points I have made above.
Even though there is a small anti-war, peace movement in this country, there still is one and this movement has the moral high ground and punditry, personal attacks, glitzy marketing, or “political realities won’t drown us out.
Members of Dr. King’s own caucus tried to convince him not to publicly speak out against the Vietnam war, and that’s when he delivered his brilliant Beyond Vietnam speech at the Riverside Church in NYC exactly one year before he was assassinated. That speech was in response to the critics. Dr. King took the moral high ground when he said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
That time has now come, once again. By our silence we are betraying humanity.
Love the President or hate him, or anywhere in between, but we must speak out loudly and without any timidity against the institutional violence of the US Empire.
(KFYI News) Half of Congress is in recess, but debate continues over President Obama’s health care program concerning privacy.
Section 163 of the bill states that the government would be allowed real-time access to a person’s bank records – including direct access to bank accounts for electronic fund transfers.
Even-though the bill mentions privacy aspects, the fact remains that if approved, Obama’s health care plan will give the government permission at any time to your personal bank records.
Arizona Congressman John Shadegg says people have the right to be concerned.
“It’s pretty Orwellian, it certainly gets the government pretty darn deeply involved in private matters in our lives.”
On August 19, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann took the airwaves warning us of the danger posed to the nation by the Arizona man who brought an AR-15 to an Obamacare event. Olbermann attempted to link the man to the so-called militia movement by way of Ernest Hancock, the editor of the Freedom’s Phoenix website, a constitutional news portal established to provide information as an alternative “to the filters of a slavering collective mainstream media awaiting the approval of their government masters.”
Olbermann attempted to connect Hancock to the Arizona Viper Militia.
On July 1, 1996, the BATF arrested a dozen members of the so-called Viper Militia and accused the group of a nefarious plot. President Clinton congratulated the BATF and saluted “the enforcement officers who made the arrests in Arizona yesterday to avert a terrible terrorist attack. Their dedication and hard work over the last six months may have saved many lives.” AG Janet Reno chimed in with effusive praise and declared the agency had saved the nation from “a potentially dangerous situation.” Raymond Kelly of the Treasury Department said the government had put an end to an “armed and dangerous” militia group determined to stir up “civil unrest.”
The government said the Viper Militia had plotted to blow up federal buildings, including the Phoenix Police Department and the Arizona National Guard headquarters. In addition, they supposedly planned to attack a local television station. The BATF claimed to have confiscated 77 machine guns, hundreds of other firearms, tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition, booby traps, tons of ammonium nitrate — the fertilizer absurdly said to have been used in the Oklahoma City bombing — and explosives such as nitromethane and lead azide.
In December of 1996, Alan W. Bock, writing for Reason Magazine, did a reality check on the government story and subsequent corporate media propaganda. Since the arrests earlier in the year, “some details have come to light that suggest the Vipers were not quite as dangerous as the BATF would have us believe,” Bock wrote. In fact, there wasn’t a plot to blow up government buildings or attack television stations.
Furthermore, the “vast arsenal” kept shrinking. Seventy-seven machine guns dwindled to four, and the unstable lead azide was transformed into lead styphnate, then lead picrate, a less dangerous compound. The amount of ammonium nitrate was reduced to 500 pounds, plus 14 or 15 gallons of nitromethane, all of which is legal to possess. But we’ll have to take the BATF’s word for all of this, because agents rushed the seized explosives (alleged explosives?) to the desert and blew them up. Most of the guns turned out to be legal World War I and World War II surplus rifles–not surprising, since a couple of the men arrested were collectors and one had a federal firearms license.
In fact, the group in question didn’t consider itself a militia. It referred to itself as the Viper Team or Team Viper, not the Viper Militia. “This particular militia threat seems to have been conjured up mainly by the BATF,” notes Bock. It was a fabrication cooked up by a couple infiltrators inserted in the militia that was not a militia after a group of Boy Scouts encountered armed people in camouflage who were setting off explosions in the Tonto National Forest, about 60 miles northeast of Phoenix.
During court hearings in the trumped up case, BATF supervisor Steven Ott admitted under oath that one of these infiltrators had urged the other members to rob banks. According to Louis Sahagun of the Los Angeles Times, they all refused, Vin Suprynowicz wrote for the September, 1996, issue of Liberty Magazine.
The government is infamous for this particular sort of entrapment, as numerous news stories over the last couple years reveal. As Infowars reported earlier this week, radio talk show host and blogger Hal Turner was trained by the FBI to set-up and bust people in the patriot movement. COINTELPRO is alive and well in America.
Olbermann’s outlandish claim rests on the fact that five members of the Vipers eventually entered into a plea agreement on weapons charges. The supposed leader of the group, Gary Bauer, also pleaded guilty on weapons charges. “He just thought it would be in his best interests,” Bauer’s attorney told The Washington Post on December 20, 1996.
Six of the accused were released from jail “after promising to stay away from explosives and firearms and to not break any laws,” the Los Angeles Times reported on July 12, 1996. “Family members and friends promised they would act as responsible third parties to ensure that the released defendants remained at home wearing electronic monitoring devices and reported to the court daily.”
Olbermann didn’t bother to tell his audience the outcome of the Viper case. On March 20, 1997, the Los Angeles Times reported that members who were not members of the Viper Militia received “the most lenient prison terms possible under plea agreements with the government…. The sentences ranged from a year and a day in prison with a $1,500 fine to three concurrent 37-month terms and a $2,500 fine.”
The Times also reported that the convicted accused the government of exaggerating their “paramilitary activities” to look tough on domestic terrorism. Moreover, an agent with the BATF testified during the trial that no plot was imminent.
Olbermann and his guest Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center — a perennial “expert” on the corporate media propaganda circuit — only repeated the government’s absurd accusations and did not mention the fact that nobody in the case was convicted of terrorism or was there in fact a terrorist plot. It was a government fabrication.
But then the point is not accurate news reporting but rather the dissemination of lies and propaganda aimed at law-abiding Americans and at the very heart of the Constitution and the Second Amendment. Olbermann’s propaganda moment was intended to link “Chris” from Phoenix to Ernest Hancock and the mirage that is the Viper Militia.
It was also an effort to expand on the government narrative put forth in the Department of Homeland Security’s “rightwing extremism” report designed to demonize the growing patriot movement as homegrown terrorists and violent racists.
The vaccines are far more deadly than the swine flu. Mass vaccinations is a recipe for disaster Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and Prof. Joe Cummins
This report has been submitted to Sir Liam Donaldson, Chief Medical Officer of the UK, and to the US Food and Drugs Administration
A swine flu outbreak occurred in Mexico and the United States in April 2009 and spread rapidly around the world by human-to human transmission. The new type A H1N1 influenza virus is unlike any that had been previously isolated [1, 2], judging from the first data released in May.
It is a messy combination of sequences from bird, human and swine flu virus lineages from North America and Eurasia. A senior virologist based in Canberra, Australia, told the press he thought that the virus could have been created in a laboratory and released by accident [3]. Some analysts even suggest, without corroborating evidence, that it was made intentionally as a bioweapon [4], while others blame the intensive livestock industry and extensive trafficking of love animals over long distances, which provide plenty of opportunity for generating exotic recombinants [5].
But what worries the public most is the mass vaccination programmes governments are putting in place to combat the emerging pandemic, which could well be worse than the pandemic itself.
Watchdog opposes fast-track vaccine for school children
The US government is intending to vaccinate all children in September when school re-opens, and the country’s vaccine watchdog National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) has called on the Obama Administration and all state Governors to provide evidence that the move is [6] “necessary and safe”, demanding “strong mechanisms for vaccine safety screening, recording, monitoring, reporting and vaccine injury compensation.”
The US Departments of Health and Homeland Security had declared a national public health emergency in April soon after the swine flu outbreak. As a result, some schools were closed, people quarantined, and drug companies were given contracts worth $7billon to make vaccines that are being fast tracked by the Food and Drugs Administration [7]. That means they will only be tested for a few weeks on several hundred children and adult volunteers before being given to all school children this fall.
Furthermore, under federal legislation passed by Congress since 2001, an Emergency Use Authorization allows drug companies, health officials and anyone administering experimental vaccines to Americans during a declared public health emergency to be protected from liability if people get injured. US Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius has granted vaccine makers total legal immunity from any lawsuits that may result from any new swine flu vaccine. And some states may make the vaccination mandatory by law.
The NVIC is asking whether the states are prepared to obey vaccine safety provisions in the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which include: 1. Giving parents written information about vaccine benefits and risks before children are vaccinated; 2. Keeping a record of which vaccines the children get, including the manufacturer’s name and lot number; 3. Recording which vaccines were given in the child’s medical record; and 4. Recording serious health problems that develop after vaccination in the child’s medical record and immediately making a report to the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
NVIC also wants to know if the states are prepared to provide financial compensation to children injured by the swine flu vaccines, whether parents will be given “complete, truthful information about swine flu vaccine risks”, and have the right to say “no” to vaccination.
Co-founder and president of NVIC Barbara Loe Fisher said [6]: “Parents and legislators should be asking themselves right now: Why are children the first to get experimental swine flu vaccines? Are schools equipped to get signed informed consent from parents before vaccination, keep accurate vaccination records and screen out children biologically at high risk for suffering vaccine reactions? Will people giving these vaccines know how to monitor children afterwards and immediately record, report and treat serious health problems that develop? And will states have the financial resources to compensate children who are injured?”
WHO and mass vaccination fever
The mass vaccination order has come from the World Health Organization (WHO) [8]. In early July 2009, a group of vaccination experts concluded that the pandemic is unstoppable, and Marie-Paul Kieny, WHO director on vaccine research said all nations will need access to vaccines, and that a vaccine should be available as early as September.
Critics point out that the ‘vaccination experts’ are dominated by the vaccine makers standing to gain from the enormously lucrative vaccine and antiviral contracts awarded by governments. But the decisive argument against mass vaccinations is that flu shots simply don’t work and are dangerous [9].
Former climate change negotiator for Bill Clinton and Democratic Senator Senator Timothy Wirth admits that the cap and trade proposal is “out of control,” and makes no sense whatsoever.
Such a scornful rebuke from somebody who would normally be expected to vehemently support climate change legislation goes to show just how nightmarish the plans really are.
“Cap-and-trade legislation to limit U.S. carbon dioxide emissions has “gotten out of control” and needs to be scaled back in Congress, said former Democratic Senator Timothy Wirth,” reports Bloomberg News.
“The Republicans are right — it’s a cap-and-tax bill,” admitted Wirth during an interview.
Wirth is head of the UN Foundation, a Ted Turner-funded globalist body that has ties to dozens of behemoth corporations, banks, pharmaceutical companies and governments. Part of the foundation’s work is aimed at “reducing carbon emissions” to combat alleged man-made global warming.
For such a well-connected globalist to attack plans that would fundamentally advance the agenda for world government and a direct tax on CO2, the life-giving gas that humans exhale and plants breathe, really illustrates how bad cap and trade would be.
The fact that the establishment’s own middle managers are throwing a spanner in the works means that even they think the Obama administration is overreaching with its agenda to reduce living standards in the name of fighting the imaginary threat of man-made global warming.
The bill will also sink the economy and create a new great depression, effectively obliterating America’s first world status.
Included below are multiple links that portray exactly how far “cap and tax” goes, and illustrate exactly why even the establishment’s own insiders are wary of its scope.
The white flag is flying over Camp Obama, which makes a pleasant change from the red flag that, metaphorically speaking, has been flying there since January 20. Barack Obama’s plan for socialised health care on the Stalinist model across the United States is now in full retreat. Not only will it not play in Peoria, it will not play anywhere.
Politicians returning to Washington after scrubbing off the tar and feathers acquired at town-hall meetings are bringing with them a blast of reality that has been absent from Obama’s dreamland regime since his inauguration. For months Obama had been trumpeting the indispensable nature of his “public option” in a new health care system. Suddenly, it is no big deal. Kathleen Sebelius, the Health and Human Services Secretary, is now telling Americans that taxpayer-funded insurance was “not the essential element”.
So, President Pantywaist is in full retreat; but he is desperate for some face-saving measure to pretend he has achieved revolutionary reform. The Senate should not oblige. Obama has no interest in genuine health care reform: as a Senator he voted against all the moderate, achievable measures that were proposed. So far as he was concerned, the worse things got for 48 million uninsured Americans the better: it might persuade them to buy into his socialist scheme, the primary objective of which was not relief of suffering but expansion of Big Government.
Now that is in tatters. Politically, it is interesting to analyse why. Obama has no notion of cautious, consensual reform: he wants a Union of Soviet States of America and he wants it now. A realist would have taken up the existing reform proposals, perhaps radicalised them a little, and tried to take them forward. Above all, he would not have alienated the pro-life lobby by rolling abortion into the plan. But not Obama. He brings to the White House the abilities and experience of a Chicago community organiser. As Sarah Palin witheringly said: “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organiser’ except that you have actual responsibilities.”
President Pantywaist has been found out and it will get worse. The one glimmer of realism he displayed was when he recently told an audience in Montana that, with regard to health care, he was “not in favour of the British system”. Perhaps he had just seen the latest figures from the Office of National Statistics revealing that more than 30,000 people have died in England and Wales from hospital infections in just five years. Translated proportionately into American demographics, that would be 150,000 fatalities. Not the best advertisement for socialised health care.
There will be many more U-turns as reality overtakes Obama. His economic recovery plan, which cost nearly $1 trillion dollars and masked 9,000 pork barrels, has removed his halo for even quite gullible voters. This will be a one-term presidency.
The corporate media is freaking out over Americans exercising their right under the Second Amendment and open carry laws in Arizona and New Hampshire. It just drives them nuts citizens would show up at Obama events with legal weapons.
As Chris Matthews insinuated in his confrontational interview with William Kostric after the New Hampshire patriot showed up with a sidearm at an Obama event, these people want to assassinate the president. “Why did you bring a god damn gun at a Presidential event. I think those things make people wonder what you’re about,” asked an irate Matthews.
The corporate media went into overdrive in an attempt to portray Kostric as a right-wing extremist and a potential threat to the president. Joan Walsh, writing for Salon, attempted to connect Kostric to the birther movement and noted his connection to the “far-right group” We the People, while The New Yorktimes portrayed Kostric as “your average hard-core Ron Paul voter — male, smug and obsessed with the money supply.”
It drives the corporate media limo libs crazy when they see rustics with guns. Five alarm fire bells go off when they see the words of Thomas Jefferson on placards held by armed citizens.
Last night MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow had a former Secret Service agent on her show. People exercising their rights under the Constitution and state laws are “creating an atmosphere that could be dangerous to the president,” said Joseph Petro. “I would argue that the vitriolic political rhetoric we’re hearing from seemingly responsible people is stimulating a lot of these foolish stunts,” he said.
On August 17, the Associated Press added to the supposed outrage. “About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday.”
Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, told the AP the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend. “When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance,” Solop said. “It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication.”
It becomes “quite scary for many people” because a majority of Americans no longer understand the Constitution or its core principles. The Second Amendment was not designed to create “a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication,” but rather ensure it from a tyrannical government.
Paul Helmke, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said Obama’s propaganda events should be Constitution free zones. “To me, this is craziness,” he declared. “When you bring a loaded gun, particularly a loaded assault rifle, to any political event, but particularly to one where the president is appearing, you’re just making the situation dangerous for everyone.”
In other words, Americans exercising their constitutional rights are a danger to the president and society as a whole.
The corporate media, at the behest of our rulers, is desperate to characterize law-abiding Americans — Arizona, after all, has an open carry law allowing citizens to legally carry their weapons in public — as rightwing extremist lunatics who are a threat to the New World Order’s latest front man.
“Welcome to the disturbing new face of the radical right in America,” Paul Harris wrote for the Guardian last week. “Across the country, extremism is surging, inflamed by conservative talkshow hosts, encouraged by Republican leaders and propagating a series of wild conspiracy theories. Many fear it might end in tragedy…. Many experts believe that spark is no longer missing. Critics say that Republican politicians have let loose a wave of anger tied to the healthcare debate.”
The “experts” are from the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization that is “now become a threat to the freedoms and security of American citizens due to their repeated attacks on all First Amendment rights and their utter debasement of the political process,” writes William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration. “While in the past the SPLC has targeted “hate groups” or groups deemed racist and potentially violent, such as the KKK and Neo Nazi groups, the SPLC has recently used their reputation for righting these groups to go after moderate and mainstream Americans, journalists, and show hosts and anchors in an attempt to suppress free speech.”
The American people are waking up to the coercive and tyrannical power of government, Republican politicians notwithstanding. In order to portray millions of Americans as rightwing nut cases, the corporate media — taking its cues from the Department of Homeland Security and the SPLC — has kicked into overdrive to demonize patriotic Americans.
In the days ahead, we can expect more of this anti-Constitution extremist rhetoric from the lapdog corporate media.
Steve Watson Infowars.net
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
A new article in TIME magazine suggests that geo-engineering the planet may be the only way forward to prevent the climate “collapsing”.
Bryan Walsh’s article, entitled Can Geoengineering Help Slow Global Warming?suggests that through the use of fossil fuels we are “already geoengineers” and that “we might as well get good at it.”
“If we geoengineered the earth into a mess with our uncontrolled appetite for fossil fuels, maybe we have to geoengineer our way out of it” Walsh writes, citing a new paper by the think tank Copenhagen Consensus on Climate.
In the paper, co-author Lee Lane cites all the usual suggestions of how the planet could be cooled including space mirrors, seawater-mist and man-made volcanoes.
The most prominent form of geoengineering suggested in the paper, however, comes in the form of spraying sulfur into the air.
“One way to turn down the thermostat would be to spread sulfur particles into the atmosphere, either through artillery or with airplanes, thickening the air enough so that it would bounce some sunlight back …it would need to be done continuously, to keep up with the intensifying greenhouse effect.” the article explains.
As we previously highlighted when this issue last hit the headlines, the process described here is already being conducted by government-affiliated universities, government agencies, and on a mass scale through chemtrail spraying.
The study of past and ongoing upper atmosphere aerosol programs confirms that the government has been active in this field for years.
The topic of geoengineering came to the fore back in April when Obama’s science czar John Holdren commented in an AP interview that he was pushing for radical terra forming programs to be explored.
Holdren’s suggestions for planetary geoengineering exactly mirrored those in publications penned by the elite internationalist group The Council On Foreign Relations, who also called for the implementation of a global Carbon Tax in 1999.
The Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy then back pedaled 360 degrees on his own comments when the wider media picked up on them and turned them into major headlines.
Holdren’s interest in radical geoengineering programs should be of great concern to the American people and the rest of the world given that he has also advocated extreme population control techniques including forced abortions and mass sterilization all under the oversight of a “Planetary Regime”.
Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. If you don’t believe it you can read it for yourself in Holdren’s own book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977. Excerpts of the book can also be found in another of our previous articles on Holdren here.
Interestingly, Lee Lane, the author of the new geoengineering paper, is also a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a common hangout for neoconservatives such as John Bolton, David Frum, Irving Kristol, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and John Yoo.
The AEI is renowned for casting doubt on the theory of human caused global warming, and is heavily funded by energy companies, but it is also best known as a forum to engender business opportunities.
These tentative announcements and recycling of ideas to terra form the planet constitute a first step toward introducing the idea to the wider public.
One of the accepted truisms of scientific study is the fact that if scientists are proposing an idea, then those scientists with access to the bottomless pit of black-budget secret government funding are already doing it.
It is highly likely that sulfur spraying and chemtrails are merely one manifestation of “geo-engineering” that is taking place without proper debate, notification or any form of legality, and with a callous disregard for the potential dangers to both our health and our environment.
Doctors have been put on alert for a deadly disease linked to swine flu jabs.
The Health Protection Agency has told neurologists to look out for a rise in Guillain-Barr Syndrome – in which paralysis of the breathing muscles can cause death by suffocation – when vaccination starts in the next few weeks.
The link was made following a mass immunisation programme in the U.S., in which a swine flu jab was blamed for more deaths than the disease itself.
More than 40million Americans were vaccinated after an outbreak of swine flu at an army base in 1976.
The programme was abandoned after hundreds of cases of GBS were diagnosed and 25 died.
The flu, however, did not spread further than the base and claimed only one life.
In a letter to the Association of British Neurologists, Elizabeth Miller, head of immunisation at the HPA, said: ‘GBS has been identified as a condition needing enhanced surveillance when the swine flu vaccines are rolled out.’
The warning will add to concerns about the safety of the jab, which will be given to more than 13million Britons from October.
Professor Patrick Chinnery, of the Association of British Neurologists, said: ‘This is a belt-and-braces approach to safety and is not something people should be worried about as it’s a rare condition.’
Not since the rebellion in America was quashed in 1865 with the surrender of Robert E. Lee to Ulysses S. Grant has so much attention been paid to state sovereignty as is being paid today.
More than 35 states have passed or are considering state sovereignty amendments, according to the Tenth Amendment Center. Just before leaving office, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin signed a bill declaring that state’s sovereignty, joining Tennessee Gov. Phil Bresdesen in that regard.
States are finally becoming fed up with the increasingly dangerous non-Constitutional overreach of the Federal Government, and State Legislatures are working to stop it.
Unfortunately, many of today’s voting-age Americans have never even read the U.S. Constitution. Apparently, most civics classes in public schools today dwell on other things. So far too many people have no clue how far their government has overreached and taken away their liberty.
But here’s the truth: the Constitution gives the three branches of government certain enumerated powers. Those not enumerated are reserved to the states, and to the people.
The 10th Amendment describes it: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, or prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Yet despite that, since the Southern states were prohibited from removing themselves from an alliance that no longer worked in their favor—an alliance they entered into voluntarily—the U.S. government has grown increasingly more powerful. It could do so because the last remaining restraints on its power—the option that states had to leave the union—had been eliminated.
Here’s what has transpired since: During reconstruction the Republican Party centralized government, subsidized railroads, raised taxes on Southern property and businesses—then confiscated the property when taxes couldn’t be paid—and established an education system that taught a revisionist history of the run-up to and causes of the war (and the government-run education system continues this today). Congress also continued the first income tax—an unconstitutional act—that had been implemented by Pres. Abraham Lincoln.
In 1917 Congress established the Federal Reserve, a non-Constitutional entity with the power to control the U.S. money supply. In the 1930s, in response to The Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt pushed through New Deal provisions that further empowered the Federal Government while enriching certain constituencies. And now, in response to the global financial crisis, first President George W. Bush then President Barack Obama pushed through extra-constitutional spending bills. Obama then compounded the problems by nationalizing the financial and automobile markets; an action, again, that benefitted certain constituencies.
And now the Federal Government is proposing an even further overreach by attempting to enact legislation to cap carbon dioxide emissions and tax energy companies that exceed arbitrarily set limits of the element, and to restrict your access to adequate healthcare.
It seems from the mood of many in our country we may have reached a tipping point as a result of these latest actions. Radio talk shows are alive with voices proposing—demanding even—that America return to the Constitutional roots. Protests denouncing the growing government are increasing in frequency and support.
Unfortunately, many in America still don’t understand what all the hubbub is about. So, to help them understand, here are 10 talking points from the Tenth Amendment Center:
The People created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only. The Constitutional ratifying structure was created so it would be clear that it was the People, and not the States, that were doing the ratifying.
The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the Federal Government, and also that which is absolutely necessary to advancing those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution of the United States. The rest is to be handled by the State Governments, or locally, by the people themselves.
The Constitution does not include a congressional power to override state laws. It does not give the judicial branch unlimited jurisdiction over all matters. It does not provide Congress with the power to legislate over everything. This is verified by the simple fact that attempts to make these principles part of the Constitution were soundly rejected by its signers.
If the Congress had been intended to carry out anything they claim would promote the “general welfare,” what would be the point of listing its specific powers in Article I, Section 8, since these would’ve already been covered?
James Madison, during the Constitutional ratification process, drafted the “Virginia Plan” to give Congress general legislative authority and to empower the national judiciary to hear any case that might cause friction among the states, to give the congress a veto over state laws, to empower the national government to use the military against the states, and to eliminate the states’ accustomed role in selecting members of Congress. Each one of these proposals was soundly defeated. In fact, Madison made many more attempts to authorize a national veto over state laws, and these were repeatedly defeated as well.
The Tenth Amendment was adopted after the Constitutional ratification process to emphasize the fact that the states remained individual and unique sovereignties; that they were empowered in areas that the Constitution did not delegate to the Federal Government. With this in mind, any Federal attempt to legislate beyond the Constitutional limits of Congress’ authority is a(n) usurpation of state sovereignty—and unconstitutional.
Tragically, the Tenth Amendment has become almost a nullity at this point in our history, but there are a great many reasons to bring it to the forefront. Most importantly, though, we must keep in mind that the Founders envisioned a loose confederation of states—not a one-size-fits-all solution for everything that could arise. Why? The simple answer lies in the fact that they had just escaped the tyranny of a king who thought he knew best how to govern everything—including local colonies from across an ocean.
Governments and political leaders are best held accountable to the will of the people when government is local. Second, the people of a state know what is best for them; they do not need bureaucrats, potentially thousands of miles away, governing their lives. Think about it. If Hitler had ruled just Berlin and Stalin had ruled just Moscow, the whole world might be a different place today.
A constitution which does not provide strict limits is just the thing any government would be thrilled to have, for, as Lord Acton once said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
We agree with historian Kevin Gutzman, who has said that those who would give us a “living” Constitution are actually giving us a dead one, since such a thing is completely unable to protect us against the encroachments of government power.
If you want to first halt then reverse the tide of government overreach, pass these points around to your friends and send them to your state and U.S. representatives.
Aug. 13 (Bloomberg) — Monsanto Co., the world’s largest seed maker, plans to charge as much as 42 percent more for new genetically modified seeds next year than older offerings because they increase farmers’ output.
Roundup Ready 2 Yield soybeans will cost farmers an average of $74 an acre in 2010, and original Roundup Ready soybeans will cost $52 an acre, St. Louis-based Monsanto said today in presentations on its Web site. SmartStax corn seeds, developed with Dow Chemical Co., will cost $130 an acre, 17 percent more than the YieldGard triple-stack seeds they will replace.
“Our pricing has the flexibility built in to ensure the grower captures the greatest return from his seed investment, irrespective of market volatility,” Chief Executive Officer Hugh Grant said today in a statement.
Grant is introducing new modified seeds that boost yields as part of a plan to double gross profit from 2007 to 2012. The new soybeans, which resist Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, produce 7.4 percent more soybeans per acre than the older version. SmartStax kills insects in multiple ways, reducing the amount of conventional corn that must be planted to deter insecticide resistance.
“SmartStax pricing is higher than we initially expected,” Vincent Andrews, a New York-based analyst at Morgan Stanley, said today in a report.
Monsanto rose $1.57, or 1.9 percent, to $84.03 at 4:15 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares have gained 19 percent this year.
Acreage Forecasts
SmartStax corn seed will be planted on as many as 4 million acres in 2010, its first year on the market, with a potential for as many as 65 million acres in the U.S. eventually, the company said. The new seed boosts yields 5 percent to 10 percent compared with other products, partly by reducing the amount of land that must be planted with conventional corn to 5 percent from 20 percent, Monsanto said.
Pricing for SmartStax is at the high end of expectations, Laurence Alexander, a New York-based analyst at Jefferies & Co., said by telephone.
Roundup Ready 2 Yield soybean seeds were planted on 1.5 million acres this year and will be planted on as many as 8 million acres next year in the U.S. with a potential to one day reach 55 million acres, Monsanto said.
The company is pricing its seeds to share the benefit of increased yields with farmers, said Mark Gulley, a New York- based analyst at Soleil Securities. Prices include seed treatments designed to protect seedlings from pests and disease, Monsanto said.
“They are in essence splitting the value of the extra yield 50-50,” Gulley said by telephone.
Monsanto repeated its forecast for earnings in the fiscal year that ends this month at the low end of a range of $4.40 to $4.50 a share. The average estimate of 16 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg was for profit of $4.41 a share.
WMTW, a television station in Portland, Maine, owned by Hearst, has produced a slick propaganda piece as part of an emerging effort to stampede people into submitting to a toxic and cancer virus flu vaccine this autumn.
On Thursday, Paul Joseph Watson reported on a National Guard “riot scenario” exercise conducted at Oxford Hills Comprehensive High School in Paris, Maine. The school was chosen as a distribution site for the H1N1 flu vaccine by state officials. “The National Guardsmen will take on the roles of panicked citizens and military police and practice what they would do, such as using tear gas, in the case of a riot,” the Sun Journal reported on August 13.
Sgt. Skip Mowatt of the Paris Police Department told WMTW 8 desperate citizens — arriving without proper ID or living outside the designated area — may overwhelm local police and engage in violence in an effort to get their soft kill vaccination. In such a situation, the television station reports, the police in Paris would team up with the National Guard to baton, pepper spray, and tase rioters.
In late July, the Pentagon said it will establish regional teams of military personnel to assist civilian authorities in the event of a pandemic. The plan calls for all branches of the military to team up with FEMA. CNN reported on July 29 that the proposal is awaiting final approval from Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Northern Command’s Gen. Victor Renuart. The Pentagon, however, often announces plans after it has already moved to implement them. “Orders to deploy actual forces would be reviewed later, depending on how much of a health threat the flu poses this fall,” CNN reported.
“Much of the groundwork for the intervention of the military has already been established,” writesMichel Chossudovsky, who notes that “regional teams” have already been established under NORTHCOM, which has been involved in preparedness training and planning in the case of a flu pandemic. “The pandemic is being presented to public opinion as an issue of National Security, with a view to triggering the militarization of civilian institutions in blatant violation of the Posse Comitatus Act,” Chossudovsky noted in an earlier article (Martial Law and the Avian Flu Pandemic).
As Infowars reported on August 6 and investigative journalist Wayne Madsen confirmed on the Alex Jones Show earlier this week, an international conference on the coming flu pandemic will be held in Washington next week. Breakout sessions detailed in a brochure for the conference include discussions on mass fatality planning, business continuity planning, and COOP or Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government Planning. Additional sessions cover enforced quarantines, mass vaccinations, and how to “control and diffuse social unrest and public disorder.” In short, how best to implement martial law.
The WHO and CDC have played prominent roles in hyping the coming pandemic and propagandizing the public on its expected severity. On July 25, the Los Angeles Times reported the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expects the flu pandemic expected this autumn to kill hundreds of thousands. “The number of potential deaths is much higher than that usually seen in seasonal flu, which kills an estimated 36,000 Americans a year, and is even higher than the nation’s most recent pandemic.” The 1957 pandemic of Asian flu killed 70,000. The 1918 Spanish Flu claimed between 500,000 to 675,000 lives in the United States.
The U.S. government has bought 195 million doses of H1N1 swine flu vaccine for a possible autumn vaccination campaign, a U.S. federal official toldReuters on July 23. The U.S. Health and Human Services Department has also contracted for 120 million doses of adjuvant, a compound to stretch the number of doses of vaccine.
Micropaleontologist Dr. Viera Scheibnerand others have conducted research into the adverse effects of adjuvants in vaccines and concluded that the an oil-based adjuvant known as squalene is responsible for severe autoimmune diseases and contributed to the cascade of reactions called Gulf War syndrome. A U.S. Federal Judge ruled that there was good cause to believe squalene to be harmful, and he ordered the Pentagon to stop administering it in October 2004 (see Swine Flu Vaccination Poses Serious Threat to Your Health, June 17, 2009).
On July 24, Prison Planet reported that an experimental H1N1 vaccine will contain squalene. The experimental vaccine is to be tested on 12,000 children nationwide, according to the Oklahoman. The experimental vaccine will be dispensed to the public in the autumn.
On August 7, a German health expert warned that the swine flu vaccine developed by pharma giant Novartis will contain cancer viruses. The nutrient solution for the vaccine consists of cancerous cells from animals and “we do not know if there could be an allergic reaction,” Wolfgang Wodarg told Bild. “But more importantly, some people fear that the risk of cancer could be increased by injecting the cells,” Bild reported.
A censored WGBH public television (Boston) documentary — produced public health expert Dr. Leonard Horowitz — contains an interview with leading vaccine expert, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, who explains how Merck vaccines have spread AIDS, leukemia and other deadly plagues worldwide. The documentary provides evidence that Merck vaccines have long contained cancer viruses (including SV40 or Simian vacuolating virus 40).
If we are to believe the Hearst affiliate WMTW — and Hearst is the progenitor of yellow journalism — people will be rioting this autumn or early winter in order to injected with a deadly vaccine that demolishes the immune system and causes cancer.
The reporters and news staff at WMTW may not know it, but they are foisting slick propaganda on a largely unwitting public. The coming H1N1 vaccine is an engineered eugenics weapon. The promised flu pandemic will likely not be on the scale ominously predicted by the CDC and WHO, although it may be large enough to stampede people into lining up for their soft kill vaccination.
A Google News search this morning returns no mention of the Guillain-Barré Syndrome link to the experimental H1N1 vaccine in the U.S. media.
The story has made the rounds in the British press. “The Health Protection Agency (HPA) has asked doctors to check for increases in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) once the national vaccination programme begins,” the Telegraphreports. “According to the Mail on Sunday, two letters were posted together to neurologists advising them of the concerns. The first, dated July 29, was written by Professor Elizabeth Miller, head of the HPA’s Immunization Department.”
The Times Online, Sky News, and the Daily Mail also ran stories on the warning. Alternative news sites in the United States reported on the link but the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other corporate media sources are silent as of this morning.
28,000 people in the U.S. will participate in a government trial of the experimental H1N1 vaccine. “Volunteers will be checked closely for any side effects. They’ll also be monitored for Guillain-Barre syndrome, which was reported in people who received a swine flu vaccine 33 years ago. It’s a rare syndrome usually triggered by a viral infection, and no one knows for sure if the vaccine is also a trigger,” KPBS reported on August 10.
Adult volunteers for the clinical trials will be recruited at 8 separate sites including Emory University in Atlanta, the University of Maryland School of Medicine in Baltimore, Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Cincinnati, Group Health Cooperative in Seattle, the University Iowa in Iowa City, and St. Louis University,Deborah Shlian reported for the Examiner on July 28.
The initial tests will be of vaccines made by Sanofi-Pasteur, a European company, and CLS Biotherapies, an Australian company that has supplied seasonal flu shots in the U.S. for years. Novartis is also conducting separate trials for FDA licensing.
Many progressives are getting all bent out of shape over the “brown shirt” rabble organized by health industry PR firms to disrupt the so-called “town meetings” being organized all over the country by Democratic members of Congress.
What they are conveniently forgetting is that these are not really “town meetings” at all, at least in the sense of the town meetings I grew up with, and started out covering as a young journalist in Connecticut–that is, meetings called and run democratically, with leaders elected from the floor, open to all residents of a community.
These “town meetings” are really nothing but propaganda sessions run by members of Congress who are trying to burnish their fraudulent credentials as public servants, and trying to perpetrate a huge fraud of a health care bill that purports to be a progressive “reform” of the US health care system, but that actually further entrenches the control of that system by the
The only proper approach to the wretched health care legislation currently working its way through Congress at this point is to kill it and start over. At these “town meeting” staged events, Obama and the Democrats need to hear, in no uncertain terms, that we don’t want no stinkin’ ObamaCare. We want Medicare for all.
Dave Lindorff is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist. His latest book is “The Case for Impeachment” (St. Martin’s Press, 2006 and now available in paperback). He can be reached at dlindorff@mindspring.com
By MARIA CHENG, AP Medical Writer – Fri Aug 14, 9:36 am ET
LONDON – Polio, the dreaded paralyzing disease stamped out in the industrialized world, is spreading inNigeria. And health officials say in some cases, it’s caused by the vaccine used to fight it.
In July, the World Health Organization issued a warning that this vaccine-spread virus might extend beyond Africa. So far, 124 Nigerian children have been paralyzed this year — about twice those afflicted in 2008.
The polio problem is just the latest challenge to global health authorities trying to convince wary citizens that vaccines can save them from dreaded disease. For years, myths have abounded about vaccines — that they were the Western world’s plan to sterilize Africans or give them AIDS. The sad polio reality fuels misguided fears and underscores the challenges authorities face using a flawed vaccine.
Nigeria and most other poor nations use an oral polio vaccine because it’s cheaper, easier, and protects entire communities.
But it is made from a live polio virus — albeit weakened — which carries a small risk of causing polio for every million or so doses given. In even rarer instances, the virus in the vaccine can mutate into a deadlier version that ignites new outbreaks.
The vaccine used in the United States and other Western nations is given in shots, which use a killed virus that cannot cause polio.
So when WHO officials discovered a polio outbreak in Nigeria was sparked by the polio vaccine itself, they assumed it would be easier to stop than a natural “wild” virus.
They were wrong.
In 2007, health experts reported that amid Nigeria’s ongoing outbreak of wild polio viruses, 69 children had also been paralyzed in a new outbreak caused by the mutation of a vaccine’s virus.
Back then, WHO said the vaccine-linked outbreak would be swiftly overcome — yet two years later, cases continue to mount. They have since identified polio cases linked to the vaccine dating back as far as 2005.
It is a worrying development for officials who hope to end polio epidemics in India and Africa by the end of this year, after missing several earlier deadlines. “It’s very disturbing,” said Dr. Bruce Aylward, who heads the polio department at the World Health Organization.
This year, the number of polio cases caused by the vaccine has doubled: 124 children have so far been paralyzed, compared to 62 in 2008, out of about 42 million children vaccinated. For every case of paralysis, there are hundreds of other children who don’t develop symptoms, but pass on the disease.
When Nigerian leaders suspended polio vaccination in 2003, believing the vaccine would sterilize their children and infect them with HIV, Nigeria exported polio to nearly two dozen countries worldwide, making it as far away as Indonesia.
Nigeria resumed vaccinations in 2004 after tests showed the vaccine was not contaminated with estrogen, anti-fertility agents or HIV.
Experts have long believed epidemics unleashed by a vaccine’s mutated virus wouldn’t last since the vaccine only contains a weakened virus strain — but that assumption is coming under pressure. Some experts now say that once viruses from vaccines start circulating they can become just as dangerous as wild viruses.
“The only difference is that this virus was originally in a vaccine vial,” said Olen Kew, a virologist at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The oral polio vaccine used in Nigeria and elsewhere contains a mild version of the live virus. Children who have been vaccinated pass the virus into the water supply through urine or feces. Other children who then play in or drink that water pick up the vaccine’s virus, which gives them some protection against polio.
But in rare instances, as the virus passes through unimmunized children, it can mutate into a strain dangerous enough to ignite new outbreaks, particularly if immunization rates in the rest of the population are low.
Kew said genetic analysis proves mutated viruses from the vaccine have caused at least seven separate outbreaks in Nigeria.
Though Nigeria’s coverage rates have improved, up to 15 percent of children in the north still haven’t been vaccinated against polio. To eradicate the disease, officials need to reach about 95 percent of the population.
Nigeria’s vaccine-linked outbreak underlines the need to stop using the oral polio vaccine as soon as possible, since it can create the very epidemics it was designed to stop, experts say. WHO is researching other vaccines that might work better, but none is on the horizon.
Until a better vaccine is ready, WHO and U.S. CDC officials say the oral vaccine is the best available tool to eradicate polio and that when inoculation rates are nearly 100 percent it works fine.
“Nigeria is almost a case study in what happens when you don’t follow the recommendations,” Kew said.
Since WHO and partners began their attempt to rid the world of polio in 1988, officials have slashed the disease’s incidence by more than 99 percent.
But numerous deadlines have been missed and the number of cases has been at a virtual standstill since 2000. Critics have also wondered whether it is time to give up, and donors may be sick of continuing to fund a program with no clear endgame.
“Eradication is a gamble,” said Scott Barrett, an economist at Columbia University who has studied polio policies. “It’s all or nothing … and there is a very real risk this whole thing may fall apart.”
Aside from Nigeria, polio persists in a handful of other countries, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Chad, Angola and Sudan.
Aylward agreed the Nigeria situation was another unwelcome hurdle, but was confident eradication was possible. “We still have a shot,” he said. “We’re throwing everything at it including the kitchen sink.”
While asking questions with the CDC Pentagon representative, We Are Change Colorado was able to get a video confirmation that States will be deciding on the issue of mandatory vaccinations, not the Federal government.
We Are Change Colorado attended a CDC meeting held in Denver, Colorado to advise on a vaccination program. They educated everyone at the event on vaccinations and the reality of what we are faced with right now, the Military representative from the pentagon who was there was so frustrated with our objections and questions he left before the meeting was even done.
Also, We Are Change Colorado is launching a website dedicated to Vaccination Awareness called VaccinationEducation.com where free downloadable fliers and information will be made available as well as videos and so fourth. The website is in development now and will be up soon. It will offer DVDs as well for actions and begin a Vaccine truth day similar to the 11th of the month actions. Vaccine Awareness has never been more important. We are also considering starting a Pledge similar to Oathkeepers to have nurses and doctors pledge that in a mass forced vaccination program implemented, if ever, they will not give it if the person refuses.
David Rothkopf, managing director of Kissinger and Associates and CFR member, has published an op-ed in the globalist propaganda periodical Foreign Policy.
“America has been suffering an outbreak of especially virulent and acute stupidity recently,” writes Rothkopf. “It has been particularly manifest at town hall meetings devoted to ‘discussions’ of health care reform in which incensed Republicans scream at the top of their lungs about provisions that are not actually in any of the legislation under consideration — for example the so-called ‘death panels’ that would have bureaucrats deciding when to pull the plug on ‘grandma’ (as President Obama characterized it yesterday).”
It is not clear if Rothkopf has read the legislation. Under Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled “Advance Care Planning Consultation,” practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” in other words the government will be in the business of recommending euthanasia in order to “bend the curve” on health care costs, as Charles Lanenoted in The Washington Post.
Of course, the folks Mr. Rothkopf works for are all for eugenics and moving billions of useless eaters off this mortal coil. It was Rothkopf’s boss, Henry Kissinger, who wrote that “depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World.” Kissinger’s boss and patron, David Rockefeller, is from a family that has long advocated and supported removing millions of little people from the planet.
“Rockefeller influence in American eugenics can be traced to the beginnings of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories. John D. Rockefeller, along with Averell Harriman gave $11 million to create the facility in the early 1900’s,” writes Daniel Taylor. “Rockefeller influence also spread overseas to Germany, where the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry, and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Eugenics, Anthropology and Human Heredity resided. Much of the money used to run these facilities came from Rockefeller. These weren’t just average scientific institutes; the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes would become the center for Nazi eugenics programs.”
“The world has a cancer, and that cancer is man.” declared Merton Lambert, former spokesman for the Rockefeller foundation. Lambert, of course, was not talking aboutall men. He was talking about the little folks the elite have nothing but contempt for.
Rothkopf’s latest diatribe provides ample evidence of this seething contempt. He calls patriotic Americans worried about Obama’s totalitarian health care — including the death panels Rothkopf insists will not exist, contrary to the language of the legislation — as idiots and morons. He also betrays another characteristic of the elite — overriding contempt for Christianity and religion. “Religious idiots,” he writes, “demand and are actually accorded respect for ideas that are so preposterous that they wouldn’t make it into the cosmology of Sponge Bob Square Pants.”
Rothkopf does not understand what “the idiots have to complain about” since this “country has done more for them than perhaps any other single segment of our society.” For instance, exporting millions of jobs to foreign slave labor gulags, stealing trillions of dollars from the “idiots” and giving it to the criminal banksters, polluting the food supply with GMO and soft kill weapons, installing a military police state and high-tech surveillance grid, and torching the very fabric of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The “idiots” should stay home and allow Rothkopf’s New World Order turn the planet into a third world cesspool.
Rothkopf also underscores the elite’s hatred of humanity and love of nature denude of pesky useless eaters. “Last week, I spent a couple days — after a beautiful trip of whitewater rafting in Colorado and hiking through the amazing Utah desert — in the idiot capital of America: Las Vegas, Nevada,” he writes. “This past weekend, despite the recession, Las Vegas was choked with people mouth-breathing their way from all-you-can-eat buffets to one opportunity after another to fritter away their kids college funds.”
In conclusion, Rothkopf hits one out of the ballpark as he proudly reveals the misanthropic psychosis of the elite: “Powerful people in America have come to depend on our idiots precisely because they know that when it comes to stupidity, they will never let us down.”
In Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making, Rothkopf sketches out the end game of the elite — a plan to completely dominate the planet, destroy national governments and constitutions, and impose a global corporate totalitarian government. The global elite “have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the elite’s global operations,” writes Laura Miller in a review of Rothkopf’s book. For more on Rothkopf’s beliefs, see Paul Joseph Watson’s Elitist Blueprint For World Government Revealed.
David Rothkopf is a new breed of globalist. He does not try to hide his contempt for the larger part of humanity. In a way, we should be thankful for his casual venom and also be thankful that Foreign Policy — originally created by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, established by the eugenicists at the Carnegie Institution — considers it worthy of print and the light of day.
In an effort to chill freedom of speech and intimidate people from exercising their first amendment rights, the establishment media is claiming that posting flyers in public places represents vandalism and is a criminal offense, despite the fact that such practice has been commonplace in America for hundreds of years.
A WFTV news report about the Infowars Obama Joker poster contest does its best to manufacture artificial outrage that President Obama, whose entire agenda is being ferociously opposed at town hall events across the country, and whose popular approval is sinking in polls, has been “disrespected” by the posters despite the fact that satirical lampooning of political figures is an integral part of American history.
The two separate video reports put out by WFTV concentrate on one instance where the posters were placed in an inappropriate place, a post office mailbox, while ignoring the hundreds of other perfectly legal and legitimate locationswhere the posters have been put up, and indeed the tone of the entire piece suggests that it is illegal and an act of “vandalism” to put up flyers at all.
In that case, the millions of flyers plastered up on light poles, telephone poles, trees and other public areas across the country each year must also represent an act of vandalism. Want your neighbors to help you find a lost cat by putting up a flyer? You’re a vandal. Want to advertise a garage sale? You’re a criminal, according to the definition of “vandalism” concocted by WFTV.
The media only seized upon this story when they could flag up the fact that a few posters were placed on a mailbox, while ignoring the hundreds of other locations where they could be seen for the last week. This clearly represents agenda-driven bias and calculated editorial spin aimed at demonizing people who dare question Obama’s saintly image – which is a proven manufactured hoax because as all the polls show, his actual approval ratings are sinking even faster than those of Bush.
Of course, this has nothing to do with concerns about “vandalism” and everything to do with the establishment trying to protect the fast diminishing God-like image of the anointed one – Barack Hussein Obama. This is about chilling free speech and intimidating people against exercising their first amendment right to simply put up a flyer espousing their political opinion.
According to the definition implied by the establishment media, placing all of these signs is a criminal offense.
As our contest rules clearly state, “Obama Joker posters should be posted in public commons where other fliers, public announcements, handbills, etc., are posted. Please do not post on federal or private property as this will be considered vandalism and will be counterproductive and diminish the message of the Obama Joker poster.”
Posting flyers on telephone and light poles is not a criminal offense, it’s called the first amendment.
The corporate media has also attempted to claim that the posters are racist, despite the fact that Obama is being depicted as a fictional character from the Batman comic book, just as George W. Bush was characterized as the joker before him.
There were no cries of racism when Bush was satirized as the Joker nor when he was characterized as a blood-sucking vampire and nor should there have been – this has nothing to do with racism, it’s about freedom of speech.
When George W. Bush was depicted as a blood-sucking vampire and the Joker, there were no cries of racism.
The establishment plays the race card over and over again to divide the people, distract them from government corruption and get us at each other’s throats. They are the real racists because they are promulgating racism and exploiting it for their own ends.
Residents of Clermont and WFTV may not realize it, but political satire and parody have a long history dating back well before the author Jonathan Swift wrote his A Modest Proposal in 1729. Political cartoons were instrumental in the American Revolutionary War. Scathing political cartoons appeared in Ben Franklin’s newspaper The Pennsylvania Gazette and the Massachusetts Centinel. In the 1870s, cartoonist Thomas Nast published a series of illustrations lampooning the Tammany Ring, the Democratic Party political machine that played a major role in controlling New York City politics.
The Obama as Joker meme fits in that esteemed tradition — and may be considered “subvertisement” of a popular Hollywood movie as well — but then history is lost on a dumbed-down public all too ready to fawn and grovel at the feet of political leaders who betray them at every turn.
Indeed, the point is to “deeply offend” the sensibilities and get people to think about what Obama stands for and the people he represents.
Our rulers were shrewd when they selected Obama to be president — they understood the politically correct mechanism at work in American society, an ethic inculcated over the last three decades. It will now be considered a racist crime to criticize and parody Barack Obama. How long before this criticism and disagreement becomes a punishable crime?
The establishment media and the Southern Poverty Law Center are again floating the talking point that militia groups and worried gun owners are growing in the United States and that this could portend a violent act of domestic terror, despite the fact that every major domestic terror attack in the 1990’s was carried out by the federal government itself, from Ruby Ridge, to Waco, to the Oklahoma City bombing.
“Militia groups with gripes against the government are regrouping across the country and could grow rapidly, according to an organization that tracks such trends,” reports the Associated Press. “The stress of a poor economy and a liberal administration led by a black president are among the causes for the recent rise, the report from the Southern Poverty Law Center says. Conspiracy theories about a secret Mexican plan to reclaim the Southwest are also growing amid the public debate about illegal immigration.”
The article cites people who own guns and implies that they are domestic terrorists or cop killers in the vein of Richard Poplawski, the Pittsburgh man who gunned down three officers during a domestic dispute earlier this year.
The report cites a Homeland Security “threat projection” which states “White supremacists and militias are more violent and thus more likely to conduct mass-casualty attacks on the scale of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.”
Of course, the irony behind all this is the fact that all the major acts of violence in connection with the militia movement during the 1990’s were committed by the government and federal agents.
It was an FBI sniper that killed Randy Weaver’s son and also his wife as she was holding their 10-month-old baby while running for cover during the Ruby Ridge standoff in 1992.
It was the BATF that burned the Branch Davidian ranch to the ground, killing seventy-six people including more than 20 children and two pregnant women, during the Waco massacre in 1993.
And it was high level FBI officials that groomed Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh in the run up to the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building in 1995.
McVeigh’s accomplice Terry Nichols’ revelation that McVeigh was being steered by a high-level FBI official are supported by a plethora of evidence that proves McVeigh did not act alone and that authorities had prior warnings and were complicit in the bombing.
The Deseret Morning News named the FBI agent at Larry Potts, but that information was later sealed by the court.
The affidavit was filed in a lawsuit brought by attorney Jesse Trentadue, whose brother Kenneth was tortured and beaten to death in an Oklahoma City federal prison in 1995. Authorities claimed Trentadue had committed suicide but he was being held in a suicide proof cell at the time and autopsy photos of his body showed he had been shocked with a stun gun, bruised, burned, sliced and then hung.
Jesse Trentadue has amassed evidence that his brother was mistaken for one of Timothy McVeigh’s alleged bombing accomplices and in attempting to get him to talk, federal agents went too far and then tried to instigate a cover-up of the murder.
During the process of his lawsuit,Trentadue was able to receive documentswith names blacked out that show the FBI’s OKC bombing informants were conducting armed robberies with Timothy McVeigh in order to fund the construction of the fertilizer bomb used in the attack on the federal building.
“One of the foreign informants was actually the explosives instructor who taught him how to make the bomb,” said Trentadue, confirming that Nichols told him the criminal activities were part of a process of creating a ledger or a storyboard to which the government’s version of events could later be pinned to.
The documents also show that McVeigh called Elohim City two days before the bombing asking for help. Four months before the bombing, an FBI informant told his superiors of the attack plan and said that the Alfred P. Murrah building had been scouted.
Just like 9/11, the official story of the Oklahoma City Bombing, that McVeigh alone carried out the attack using a fertilizer truck bomb, is contradicted by a plethora of eyewitness account as well as physical and circumstantial evidence.
– In early April 1995 a Ryder truck identical to the one used in the bombing was filmed by a pilot during an overflight of of an area near Camp Gruber-Braggs, Oklahoma. A June 17th, 1997 Washington Post article authenticates the photos as being exactly what they appear to be, photos of a Ryder truck in a clandestine base at Camp Gruber-Braggs. Why were the military in possession of a Ryder truck housed in a remote clandestine army base days before the Alfred P. Murrah bombing?
– In a 1993 letter to his sister, McVeigh claimed that he was approached by military intelligence and had joined an “elite squad of government paid assassins.” McVeigh often contradicted himself and changed his story on a whim to fit in with the latest government version of events. Is the Camp Grafton footage evidence of McVeigh’s enrollment in such a clandestine program?
– Multiple reports of Arabs at the scene assisting McVeigh were ignored and surveillance tapes were withheld under national security. The likely reason for this was the fact that Bush senior and Clinton were responsible for bringing in nearly 1,000 Iraqi soldiers captured by U.S. forces during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, some of whom were involved in the bombing.
– The FBI claimed McVeigh scouted the Alfred P. Murrah building weeks before the bombing and yet on the morning of the attack he stopped at a local gas station to ask directions, lending credibility to the new claims that he was being controlled by other conspirators and that the target of the bombing had been changed.
– Original reports of two explosions and several failed devices being defused by bomb squads were buried by the establishment as the official explanation that McVeigh acted alone was pushed. Scientific analysis conducted by General Benton K. Partin revealed core columns were blown out from within the building and the extensive damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building was completely inconsistent with the explanation of a single and relatively weak fertilizer truck bomb.
– Many eyewitnesses reported that bomb squads in full reaction gear were seen around the building immediately before the blast. Police officer Terence Yeakey, who helped save dozens of victims, was one such witness. Yeakey compiled extensive files on his observations but was later found with his throat and wrists slashed having also been shot in the head after he had told friends he was being followed by authorities.
– Several individuals received prior warning that the bombing was about to take place. Bruce Shaw, who rushed to the Murrah building to find his wife who was employed there with the Federal Credit Union, testified that an ATF agent told him that ATF staff had been warned on their pagers not to come to work that day.
– The aftermath of the bombing led to the passage of the Omnibus Crime Bill and the demonization of the ‘Patriot Movement’, which was spreading like wildfire as opposition to federal government abuse grew following the events at Ruby Ridge and Waco. The consequences of the Oklahoma City Bombing effectively dismantled the Patriot Movement before the turn of the century.
This is the true history of “domestic terrorism” and the militia movement. In every instance, the terrorism has been carried out by the government and the militia movement or the patriot movement have either been the victims or the patsies. This is key should the Obama administration attempt to stage another false flag and blame it on patriots in an attempt to neutralize the groundswell of grass roots outrage currently spreading like wildfire across the country in response to the march of big government and the loss of liberties.
Steve Watson Infowars.net
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
A freedom of information act request has revealed that the Department of Homeland Security’s now infamous “rightwing extremism” report, released in April, was not based on any reliable supporting evidence whatsoever.
According to the DHS, the report was compiled based purely on around 50 internet articles, the credibility of which is severely questionable.
The revelation comes from the groupAmericans for Limited Government (ALG), which bills itself as an “independent, nonpartisan political movement that fights for hardworking taxpayers against the special interests that continually push for big government nationwide.”
The document, entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment (PDF link) characterized concerns about the economy, unemployment, the loss of U.S. sovereignty and the move towards global government as “rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet” which itself is defined as a potential tool for terrorists to network, build bombs, and send encrypted messages to each other.
It also listed those opposed to abortion or immigration as potential extremists, and cited groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority as potential sources of hate crime.
ALG asked for all data, studies, reports and documents that had led the DHS to these conclusions.
The shocking response from the DHS indicates that it undertook no statistical analysis at all, failed to conduct any interviews with the groups it went on to demonize and complied the report based purely on a scattering of web posts from some extremely dubious sources.
“We expected to receive back some hard-core analysis, some data analysis, looking at crime statistics and current trends that would back up conclusions in the report,” said Nathan Mehrens, a news contributor to Americans for Limited Government and a former Labor Department official.
“Instead what we got was a list of URLs to various Web sites, all kinds of news stories across the board,” Mehrens told FOX News.
Amongst the 50 or so links provided by the DHS are news articles from the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times and USA Today, along with a smattering of other media sources. These represent subjects including rising gun sales, the activity of minority white supremacist groups and speculation that economic woes will fuel more hate groups.
More noteworthy is the fact that the DHS also cites substantial material from both the Anti Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
How disgusting it is then that when it was leaked, these two politicized and establishment funded groups that masquerade as “civil rights” organisations, immediately pounced on the DHS report and used it to justify their materials and agendas.
In the months that followed, they also returned to the report again and again to tie it in with incidents such as the tragic shooting at the Holocaust museum in Washington DC.
It is no coincidence that the SPLC was also cited as a research source in the equally inflammatoryMissouri Information Analysis Center report, which characterized Ron Paul supporters as extremists.
The news also comes in the wake of another sustained effort on behalf of the establishment media and the Southern Poverty Law Center to float the talking point that militia groups and worried gun owners are growing in the United States and that this could portend a violent act of domestic terror.
Perhaps the most damning aspect of the revealed sources for the DHS “rightwinger” report, however, comes in the shape of 11 links to a website called “WhatDoesItMean”, which is a well known source of disinformation among the blogging community.
The site acts as a dumping ground for legitimate news articles, but mixes them in with pure conjecture, unverified stories and plain lies on subjects as far reaching as extra-terrestrial aliens and imminent armageddon.
For the DHS to cite this website far more than any other in order to substantiate its accusations against veterans and other so called “rightwing extremists” is an absolute joke.
This pathetic list of links represents nothing more than a couple of hours of idle internet surfing and Google searches on behalf of the DHS. They have simply thrown together a series of barely related web posts in a ridiculous attempt to provide proof for their outrageous accusations where there is none.
A tenth grader could have complied a more compelling source list.
Here then we have proof definitive that this behemoth agency that was supposedly created to protect the United States from the ruthless terrorists hell bent on its destruction, spends its afternoons surfing the web, compiling useless lists of links in order to paint up everyday American citizens as extremist racist killers.
Read Through The ENTIRE Obama Care Bill!
The Truth Or The Fight 