Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Bolton: Gaza Conflict Could Lead To U.S. Attack On Iran

Top Neo-Con exploits crisis to push for new war

Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Top Neo-Con John Bolton told Fox News yesterday that the conflict in Gaza could lead to a U.S. attack on Iran as the former U.S. ambassador to the UN exploited the crisis to propagandize for a new war.

“So while our focus obviously is on Gaza right now, this could turn out to be a much larger conflict,” said Bolton, adding that “we’re looking at potentially a multi-front war here.”

“I don’t think there’s anything at this point standing between Iran and nuclear weapons other than the possibility of the use of military force possibly by the United States, possibly by Israel,” added the former ambassador, suggesting that a strike on Iran’s facilities by Israel alone would be risky but could push Iran back by three or four years.

Bolton’s ceaseless fearmongering about Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon contradicts the U.S. intelligence community’s own National Intelligence Estimate, which concluded that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and was highly unlikely to develop a nuclear weapon this decade.

Bolton’s implication that other Arab states would support an attack on Iran to prevent them from obtaining nuclear weapons, and in his own words “pop champagne corks,” is a ludicrous claim. Bolton is actually trying to suggest that Arabs celebrate when the U.S. attacks the Middle East. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan alone have stoked anti-US sentiment across the Middle East and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, far from being viewed as a dangerous tyrant, is seen as more of a “hero” across the Middle East, according to a 2007 L.A. Times investigative report.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Western Governments support Gaza slaughter

Robert Fisk: Leaders lie, civilians die, and lessons of history are ignored

Monday, 29 December 2008

We've got so used to the carnage of the Middle East that we don't care any more – providing we don't offend the Israelis. It's not clear how many of the Gaza dead are civilians, but the response of the Bush administration, not to mention the pusillanimous reaction of Gordon Brown, reaffirm for Arabs what they have known for decades: however they struggle against their antagonists, the West will take Israel's side. As usual, the bloodbath was the fault of the Arabs – who, as we all know, only understand force.

Ever since 1948, we've been hearing this balderdash from the Israelis – just as Arab nationalists and then Arab Islamists have been peddling their own lies: that the Zionist "death wagon" will be overthrown, that all Jerusalem will be "liberated". And always Mr Bush Snr or Mr Clinton or Mr Bush Jnr or Mr Blair or Mr Brown have called upon both sides to exercise "restraint" – as if the Palestinians and the Israelis both have F-18s and Merkava tanks and field artillery. Hamas's home-made rockets have killed just 20 Israelis in eight years, but a day-long blitz by Israeli aircraft that kills almost 300 Palestinians is just par for the course.

The blood-splattering has its own routine. Yes, Hamas provoked Israel's anger, just as Israel provoked Hamas's anger, which was provoked by Israel, which was provoked by Hamas, which ... See what I mean? Hamas fires rockets at Israel, Israel bombs Hamas, Hamas fires more rockets and Israel bombs again and ... Got it? ...

...By last night, the exchange rate stood at 296 Palestinians dead for one dead Israeli. Back in 2006, it was 10 Lebanese dead for one Israeli dead. This weekend was the most inflationary exchange rate in a single day since – the 1973 Middle East War? The 1967 Six Day War? The 1956 Suez War? The 1948 Independence/Nakba War? It's obscene, a gruesome game – which Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, unconsciously admitted when he spoke this weekend to Fox TV. "Our intention is to totally change the rules of the game," Barak said.

Exactly. Only the "rules" of the game don't change. This is a further slippage on the Arab-Israeli exchanges, a percentage slide more awesome than Wall Street's crashing shares, though of not much interest in the US which – let us remember – made the F-18s and the Hellfire missiles which the Bush administration pleads with Israel to use sparingly (and US pay for!)...

..Not a whimper from Tony Blair, the peace envoy to the Middle East who's never been to Gaza in his current incarnation. Not a bloody word.

We hear the usual Israeli line. General Yaakov Amidror, the former head of the Israeli army's "research and assessment division" announced that "no country in the world would allow its citizens to be made the target of rocket attacks without taking vigorous steps to defend them". Quite so. But when the IRA were firing mortars over the border into Northern Ireland, when their guerrillas were crossing from the Republic to attack police stations and Protestants, did Britain unleash the RAF on the Irish Republic? Did the RAF bomb churches and tankers and police stations and zap 300 civilians to teach the Irish a lesson? No, it did not. Because the world would have seen it as criminal behaviour. We didn't want to lower ourselves to the IRA's level...

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Monday, December 29, 2008

New President, same old policies!

Obama’s silence on Israeli airstrikes disappoints many

By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: President–elect Barack Obama blew the first opportunity that had come his way to show that unlike his predecessors, he was going to adopt a more even-handed approach to the Palestine question by choosing to keep quiet after savage Israeli airstrikes across Gaza.
Obama who was expected by people in Arab and Muslim countries to turn his back on earlier American administrations that have supported Israel, right or wrong, could only have caused widespread disappointment among those who were hopeful that he would be different. If his first reaction to the Israeli outrage is any indication, it is clear that he is going to be as enthusiastic in his support of Israel as his predecessors.

While, as could have been predicted, the Bush White House held Hamas responsible for having forced Israel’s hand, Obama, who spoke for eight minutes on Saturday to Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, could not bring himself to say even one word about the savage Israeli attacks which continued on the second day, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Palestinian civilians. All an Obama spokesman was prepared to say was, “He (Obama) will continue to closely monitor these and other global events.” Bracketing the Israeli assaults with “other global events” is intended to suggest that the Israeli airstrikes were yet another of “global events’ that called for no more notice than the president-elect had already taken of them...



In the last few days , US-supplied Israeli F-16 warplanes and Apache helicopters dropped over 100 bombs on dozens of locations in the Israeli-occupied Gaza Strip with at least 300 dead (including at least 20 children and 9 women) and about 700 wounded persons (including at least 130 children and 28 women) .

The Gaza health system is in a state of collapse and cannot provide an adequate response to the growing needs. The closure imposed by Israel on all Gaza crossings, including the total closure of Ere Crossing since last Friday, prevents the evacuation of patients and wounded persons and deepens the human tragedy occurring in the Gaza Strip.

This is an international scandal, if not a crime against humanity, and we must not remain neutral in this ongoing moral crisis.

Do remember that Palestine is an illegally occupied country, as is Iraq, and that Israel is exercising the same atrocities on Palestinians that we have inflicted for years on the innocent civilians of Iraq.

Picture a million palestinian refugees trapped within the illegal concentration camp that Palestine has become and being slowly starved and humiliated every day by the Israelis ~ like The United States is doing in illegally occupied Iraq and the Germans did with the Jews in Poland during WW II...

Allen L Roland


(Remember, those who call for 'democracy' everywhere - Hamas won a fair Election, but because it wasn't the result Israel  and USA wanted, it has been ignored by the West!)

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Sunday, December 28, 2008



Smiling is infectious; you catch it like the flu,
When someone smiled at me today, I started smiling too.
I passed around the corner and someone saw my grin
When he smiled I realized I'd passed it on to him.
I thought about that smile then I realized its worth,
A single smile, just like mine could travel round the earth.
So, if you feel a smile begin, don't leave it undetected
Let's start an epidemic quick, and get the world infected!
Keep the smile going by sending this on to a friend.
Everyone needs a smile!!!



(David Icke Newsletter, December 28th 2008)

Sunday, December 21, 2008

The Global Warming Scam

The David Icke Newsletter, December 21st 2008



Since he won the presidential election, Barack Obama has been disappointing many of his followers by naming major insiders from Wall Street and elsewhere to form his new government of 'change'.

But this week, or so I read, he broke with his slavish support for the established order by announcing, according to one headline, a 'Green Dream Team'. This 'dream' took the form of physicist Dr. Steven Chu, 'Obama's' pick for Energy Secretary, and Carol Browner, yet another pass-me-down from the Bill Clinton presidency, who is to be the 'Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change', a position that has seen her ludicrously named 'climate tsarina'.

Add to that the strong speculation that Obama's Science Advisor is going to be named over this weekend as another global warming fanatic, John P. Holdren, the Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and director of the Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program at the School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

One man connects them all - Al Gore. Yes, they are all associates and supporters of the High Priest of the global warming religious cult and, in Holdren's case, he has been described as Gore's 'svengali'.

Gore, the former vice-president in the deeply corrupt Clinton regime, has been selling the lie about climate change for years now. He has become the face of global warming after his 2006 Paramount film, An Inconvenient Truth. It became the third most successful documentary in American box office history and predictably won the Oscar for best documentary feature because the manipulators made sure it did.

Gore's book, also called An Inconvenient Truth, reached number one in the New York Times'bestseller list and he, again predictably, won the Nobel Peace Prize for his tissue of lies and exaggeration. He shared the prize with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, the organisation through which the global warming scam has been imposed upon the world.

The Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia from Punjab University, a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet, highlighted the manipulation of both the Peace Prize and the IPCC propaganda when he said:

'The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn't listen to others. It doesn't have open minds ... I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.'

The whole thing is a problem-reaction-solution to create an alleged global problem that can be met with a global solution that will change society and justify more control and taxation.

The scam is based on the myth that temperature is increased significantly, and to potentially catastrophic levels, by human-created carbon dioxide emissions when, in truth, the temperature changes are caused by increases or decreases in solar activity, known as sunspots, and other natural phenomena.

We have been on a rising trend of solar activity which pushed up average temperatures, but this has now fallen and so have temperatures. When the sunspots increase again in the next cycle temperatures will rise again before falling as the cycle comes to an end. So it has always been...

Copyright David Icke, 2008. All Rights Reserved.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Kissinger & the New World Order

Kissinger Calls For New International System Out Of World Crises
Says global necessities should foster an "age of compatible interests"

Steve Watson  Friday, Dec 19, 2008

Bilderberg luminary Henry Kissinger has repeated his routine call for a new international political order, stating that global crises should be seen as an opportunity to move toward a borderless world where national interests are outweighed by global necessities.

Speaking with Charlie Rose earlier this week, Kissinger cited the chaos being wrought across the globe by the financial crisis and the spread of terrorism as an opportunity to bolster a new global order.

"I think that when the new administration assess the position in which it finds itself it will see a huge crisis and terrible problems, but I can see that it could see a glimmer in which it could construct an international system out of it." Kissinger said, referring to the transition between the Bush and Obama administrations.

The former National Security advisor and Secretary of State compared the current world climate to the period immediately following the second world war, which led to the creation and empowerment of global bodies such as the UN and NATO.

"If you look back to the end of the second world war, many people now think that the period between the end of 1945 and 1950 was in many ways the most creative period or one of the most creative periods of foreign policy, but it started with chaos and fear of Russian invasion of Europe and governments that were very weak." Kissinger stated.

"The new administration is really coming into office at a strange period in this sense," he continued. "It looks like a period of horrendous crisis all over the world. And we ourselves are in a severe crisis financially, but at the end of it our relative position in the world is actually stronger than it has been in the sense that Russia, China, India all have strong reasons to contribute to a quiet international environment because of the preoccupation they must have with their domestic affairs."

"They do not wish and have good reasons not to wish for an international atmosphere of crisis. So Paradoxically, this moment of crisis is also one of great opportunity." Kissinger commented.


nterviewer Charlie Rose, who has previously listened to Kissinger's calls for a new world order, recognized the direction the conversation was taking and urged Kissinger to elaborate:

"When you talk about a new structure, I'm not sure, you've used the term new world order, what is it? Is it simply a world order that is defined by new interest and new mutuality of interest?" Rose asked.

"That's certainly how you have to start. I know the view that you start by converting the whole world to our political philosophy. I don't think that can be done in one or two terms of an administration. That is an historic process that has its own rhythm." Kissinger replied.

"There are so many elements in this world at the moment that can only be dealt with on a global basis, and that's unique," Kissinger continued. "Proliferation, energy, environment, All of these issues necessitate a global approach, so you don't have to invent an international order. So every country has to mitigate its pure national interests by the global necessities, or define it's national interests by global necessities But it cannot push its own technically selfish interests only by throwing its own weight around." he stated.

Kissinger also related that he has been struck by how much the move toward a new global order has been enhanced by the recent crises.

"The jihadist crisis is bringing it home to everybody, that international affairs cannot be conducted entirely by drawing borders and defining international politics by who crosses what borders with organized military force." he said.

"This has now been reinforced by the financial crisis, which totally unexpectedly has spread around the world. It limits the resources that each country has for a foreign policy geared to an assertion of its own pure interests."

Kissinger claimed that the key players in international politics, India, China, Russia, America, Europe, should recognize they have parallel concerns and work together to forge what he termed an "age of compatible interests".

"I'm not saying that leaders will be up to all the opportunities that I may perceive but I think they can start moving in that direction and I'm actually fairly hopeful that we will be moving in that direction." Kissinger said.


Barack Obama: The Naked Emperor

By David Icke

I am writing this in the last days of 2008 as I watch with dismay as vast numbers of people across the world, including many who should know better, have been duped by the mind-game called Operation Obama.

Even people with some understanding of the conspiracy have said things like: 'Well, at least he's not Bush' and 'Well, at least it's great to see such a new spirit of hope'. No, he's not Bush - he's potentially far more dangerous; and what is the use of a spirit of 'hope' if it's based on a lie? In fact, what use is 'hope' at all?


Click here for full article


Technorati Tags: ,,

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Prominent neoconservative: 4,000 Americans 'had to die'

Prominent neoconservative: 4,000 Americans 'had to die'

David Edwards and Diane Sweet
Wednesday December 17, 2008

Four thousand American troops "had to die" in Iraq, even if the United States knew Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, a prominent neoconservative said in a shocking interview on MSNBC Tuesday evening.
Vice President Dick Cheney told ABC News earlier this week that the U.S. would have invaded Iraq regardless of whether or not they had weapons of mass destruction.
Adding fire to Cheney's surprising comments Tuesday was prominent neoconservative and former Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank Gaffney, who told MSNBC's Chris Matthews during Tuesday's 'Hardball' that the United States had to invade Iraq whether or not its intelligence was sound.
Asked about why the United States should have invaded Iraq even if they knew there were no WMDs, Gaffney said, "The real reason was we thought he constituted a mortal threat."
"You believe a mortal threat to the United States," Matthews responded, incredulous. "Where do you get this from? What kind of -- where do you get these words from?"
"My position is that it's regrettable that any Americans died. And it is regrettable that they had to die, but I believe they did have to die," said Gaffney. "The threat we did know about is the chemical capability Saddam Hussein used against his own people.... The danger was that inaction could have resulted in the death of many more Americans than 4,000."
Matthews revisited the decision to invade Iraq on "Hardball," with guests neocon Frank Gaffney, and Mother Jones' David Corn during a discussion of weapons of mass destruction and Cheney's admission that the United States would have invaded Iraq regardless of the presence of WMD.
Gaffney is the founder and president of the think tank Center for Security Policy, as well as a contributor, contributing editor, and columnist for a number of publications, including the Washington Times, National Review Online and WorldNetDaily.
"Was there anything Saddam Hussein could have done to stop that war?" Matthews asked Gaffney, and when Gaffney attempted to justify the case for war based on the first Gulf War, and not the presence of weapons of mass destruction.
"Why the long inspections debate if they didn't matter?" Matthews asked. "If they didn't matter, why did we have inspections?"
Cheney's "admitting that they didn't have to have stockpiles for him to believe the war was justified," he added. "That's what's astounding."
This video is from MSNBC's Hardball, broadcast Dec. 16, 2008.

Technorati Tags: ,,

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Desperate Double Speak: Global Cooling Is Part Of Global Warming

Desperate Double Speak: Global Cooling Is Part Of Global Warming

Corporate media engages in mental gymnastics to hide the true driver of natural climate change through eons of geological history - the sun.

Paul Joseph Watson & Steve Watson
Prison  Tuesday, December 16, 2008

An Associated Press article has stunned some readers by suggesting that an ongoing global cooling trend is actually indicative of how quickly the planet is succumbing to man-made global warming.

The bizarre statement appeared in a panic-inducing article that emphasizes man-made warming fears and highlights how president elect Obama must tackle them with new laws including a carbon tax “cap-and-trade” system.

“Mother Nature, of course, is oblivious to the federal government’s machinations.” writes Seth Borenstein.

“Ironically, 2008 is on pace to be a slightly cooler year in a steadily rising temperature trend line. Experts say it’s thanks to a La Nina weather variation. While skeptics are already using it as evidence of some kind of cooling trend, it actually illustrates how fast the world is warming.”

The article goes on to state:

“Since Clinton’s inauguration, summer Arctic sea ice has lost the equivalent of Alaska, California and Texas. The 10 hottest years on record have occurred since Clinton’s second inauguration. Global warming is accelerating. Time is close to running out, and Obama knows it.”

Chief global warming propagandists the World Wildlife Fund released a report earlier this year claiming that Arctic ice was shrinking at an alarming rate, leading to forecasts that the “North Pole may be ice-free for first time this summer”.

Such predictions were debunked after it emerged that Arctic ice had actually expanded 30 per cent, an area the size of Germany, a fact conveniently overlooked by the WWF.

Meanwhile temperatures have hit record lows in Denver and Montana as the Northeast United States experiences some of the worst snow and ice storms for a generation.

2008 is the coldest year of the decade and record low temperatures have hit areas all over America.

This has little to do with a “weather variation” and everything to do with the fact that the chief climate driver throughout eons of natural climate change - the sun - has exhibited a record barren spell of sunspots, which is causing the global cooling we are now witnessing all over the world. Conversely, throughout the 1990’s and in the early years of this decade, during which global warming reached its peak, the sun was more active than it had been at anytime in the previous 1,000 years.

The most recent period during which solar activity massively decreased was between 1645 and 1715, known as the Maunder Minimum, which also coincided with the geological period known as the Little Ice Age, when temperatures plummeted all over the world and the Thames in London was frozen solid.

The fact that the corporate media has openly abandoned any pretense of balance and fully thrown its weight behind the religious fervor of global warming - an orthodoxy that refuses to allow anyone to question its supreme and absolute dogma - again highlights how desperate the climate change PR assault has become in the face of over 650 scientists signing their namesto a US Senate Minority report that challenges the contention of the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change that there is a scientific “consensus” on the causes of global warming.

Now that the real catalyst behind climate change, the sun, has dealt a blow to the global warming propagandists by daring to produce less sunspots, the climate change lobby will now merely claim that global cooling is a part of global warming, and that we must still lower our living standards and pay carbon taxes, while all the real environmental problems are ignored or actively made worse by the same power brokers demanding that we make sacrifices in the name of fighting a non-existent threat.



May 5, 2008  BY DENNIS T. AVERY

CHURCHVILLE VA—Now it’s not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a “cool” La Nina year—but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.

For the past century at least, global temperatures have tended to mirror the 20-to 30-year warmings and coolings of the north-central Pacific Ocean. We don’t know just why, but the pattern of the last century is clear: the earth warmed from about 1915 to1940, while the PDO was also warming (1925 to 46). The earth cooled from 1940 to 1975, while the PDO was cooling (1946 to 1977). The strong global warming from 1976 to 1998 was accompanied by a strong and almost-constant warming of the north-central Pacific. Ancient tree rings in Baja California and Mexico show there have been 11 such PDO shifts since 1650, averaging 23 years on length...

...The PDO seems to be driven by the huge Aleutian Low in the Arctic—but we don’t know what controls the Aleutian Low. Nonetheless, 22.5-year “double sunspot cycles” have been identified in South African rainfall, Indian monsoons, Australian droughts, and rains in the United States’ far southwest as well. These cycles argue that the sun, not CO2, controls the earth’s temperatures.

Dr. Henrik Svensmark’s recent experiments at the Danish Space Research Institute seem to show that the earth’s temperatures are importantly affected by the low, wet clouds that deflect more or less solar heat back into space. The number of such clouds is affected, in turn, by more or fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth. The number of earthbound cosmic rays depends on the extent of the giant magnetic wind thrown out by the sun.

All of this defies the “consensus” that human-emitted carbon dioxide has been responsible for our global warming. But the evidence for man-made warming has never been as strong as its Green advocates maintained. The earth’s warming from 1915 to 1940 was just about as strong as the “scary” 1975 to 1998 warming in both scope and duration—and occurred too early to be blamed on human-emitted CO2. The cooling from 1940 to 1975 defied the Greenhouse Theory, occurring during the first big surge of man-made greenhouse emissions. Most recently, the climate has stubbornly refused to warm since 1998, even though human CO2 emissions have continued to rise strongly.

The Jason satellite is an updated and more-accurate version of the Poseidon satellite that has been monitoring the oceans since 1992, picking up ocean wind speeds, wave heights, and sea level changes. Jason is run by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a French team.

How many years of declining world temperature would it take now—in the wake of the ten-year non-warming since 1998—to break up Al Gore’s “climate change consensus”?

Monday, December 15, 2008

Iraq: Easy to destroy, harder to rebuild!

Official History Spotlights Iraq Rebuilding Blunders


Published: December 13, 2008 New York Times

BAGHDAD — An unpublished 513-page federal history of the American-led reconstruction of Iraq depicts an effort crippled before the invasion by Pentagon planners who were hostile to the idea of rebuilding a foreign country, and then molded into a $100 billion failure by bureaucratic turf wars, spiraling violence and ignorance of the basic elements of Iraqi society and infrastructure...

Technorati Tags:

Thursday, December 11, 2008

New World Order

New Order of Barbarians

Unfortunately for the people of the world everything is going according to the New World Order Plan. But what is this New World Order Plan? In a nutshell the Plan is this. The Dark Agenda of the secret planners of the New World Order is to reduce the world's population to a "sustainable" level "in perpetual balance with nature" by a ruthless Population Control Agenda via Population and Reproduction Control. A Mass Culling of the People via Planned Parenthood, toxic adulteration of water and food supplies, release of weaponised man-made viruses, man-made pandemics, mass vaccination campaigns and a planned Third World War. Then, the Dark Agenda will impose upon the drastically reduced world population a global feudal-fascist state with a World Government, World Religion, World Army, World Central Bank, World Currency and a micro-chipped population. In short, to kill 90% of the world's population and to control all aspects of the human condition and thus rule everyone, everywhere from the cradle to the grave.

New Order of Barbarians is the transcript of three tapes of reminiscences made by Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, of a speech given on March 20, 1969 by Dr Richard Day, an insider of the "Order," recorded by Randy Engel in 1988. Dr Dunegan claims he attended a medical meeting on March 20, 1969 where Dr Richard Day (who died in 1989 but at the time was Professor of Paediatrics at Mount Sinai Medical School in New York and was previously the Medical Director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America) give "off the record" remarks during an addressed at the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society to a meeting of students and health professionals, who were destined to be leaders in medicine and health care...

Technorati Tags: ,

US President?

                             DAILY DIGEST
               WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 10, 2008

You probably believe that Barack Obama is the “President Elect.”  He has been calling himself that since the popular election on November 4.  But in fact, he is NOT the President Elect.  Just winning the popular vote by the public does not make you the President Elect.  He has to wait until the Electoral College meets and elects him as the next president.  And that does not occur, according to the US Constitution until the first Monday after the first Tuesday in December.  Which in 2008 falls on December 15, about a week from now.  Until then, since Obama already resigned from his Senate seat, he is merely citizen Obama.  So what is he doing going around appointing Cabinet members and approving laws to bail out the auto industry, he doesn't have the power to do that.  It is all a sham or hoax to fool you.  He is NOT going to be the next president. What?
The news media is lying to you.  When was the last time a future president has won the popular vote, but then failed in the Electoral College contest?  Years ago, maybe back in 1850 something?  NO.  It was the very last two elections.  That is the current media Big Lie.   In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote with a slim margin and proclaimed himself the President Elect.  But after much legal maneuvering and counting hanging chads in Florida – Bush was elected.
The Democrats claimed the election was stolen, but they had ignored the Electoral College – they were ignoring the existence of the US Constitution.  Again in 2004 John Kerry won the popular vote and proclaimed himself the President Elect, but the Electoral College voted for Bush in his second term.  So just proclaiming yourself the “President Elect” does not make it so.  Thus in the last two presidential elections, thats two out of two – one hundred percent of the time, the winner of the popular vote was not elected President.  So what are “President Elect” Obama's chances of ever becoming President?...

Technorati Tags: ,

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

NWO drive for World Government now in mainstream press - Financial Times

And now for a world government

By Gideon Rachman  Published: December 8 2008

I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.

A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.

So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it might.

First, it is increasingly clear that the most difficult issues facing national governments are international in nature: there is global warming, a global financial crisis and a “global war on terror”.

(All carefully orchestrated!)

Second, it could be done. The transport and communications revolutions have shrunk the world so that, as Geoffrey Blainey, an eminent Australian historian, has written: “For the first time in human history, world government of some sort is now possible.” Mr Blainey foresees an attempt to form a world government at some point in the next two centuries, which is an unusually long time horizon for the average newspaper column.

But – the third point – a change in the political atmosphere suggests that “global governance” could come much sooner than that. The financial crisis and climate change are pushing national governments towards global solutions, even in countries such as China and the US that are traditionally fierce guardians of national sovereignty.

Barack Obama, America’s president-in-waiting, does not share the Bush administration’s disdain for international agreements and treaties. In his book, The Audacity of Hope, he argued that: “When the world’s sole superpower willingly restrains its power and abides by internationally agreed-upon standards of conduct, it sends a message that these are rules worth following.” The importance that Mr Obama attaches to the UN is shown by the fact that he has appointed Susan Rice, one of his closest aides, as America’s ambassador to the UN, and given her a seat in the cabinet...

Monday, December 08, 2008

Who needs steel?

Even Henry Ford was shut down

No less an industrial and financial titan than Henry Ford demonstrated that the plant hemp could be transformed into a lightweight material stronger than steel.
The perfect material for car bodies.
Who needs steel?
Maybe the guys who owned all the iron ore and coal fields (the Rockefeller syndicate) needed steel which is why for decades this simple technological possibility has been denied to us.


Technorati Tags: ,

Thursday, December 04, 2008

UK DNA Database - setback for Police State

DNA database 'breach of rights'

Two British men should not have had their DNA and fingerprints retained by police, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled.

The men's information was held by South Yorkshire Police, although neither was convicted of any offence.

The judgement could have major implications on how DNA records are stored in the UK's national database.

The judges said keeping the information "could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society".

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she was "disappointed" by the European Court of Human Rights' decision.

The database may now have to be scaled back following the unanimous judgement by 17 senior judges from across Europe.

Under present laws, the DNA profiles of everyone arrested for a recordable offence in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are kept on the database, regardless of whether they are charged or convicted.


The details of about 4.5m people are held and one in five of them does not have a current criminal record.

Both men were awarded £36,400 (42,000 Euros) in costs, less the money already paid in legal aid.

The court found that the police's actions were in violation of Article 8 - the right to respect for private and family life - of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It also said it was "struck by the blanket and indiscriminate nature of the power of retention in England and Wales".

The judges ruled the retention of the men's DNA "failed to strike a fair balance between the competing public and private interests," and that the UK government "had overstepped any acceptable margin of appreciation in this regard".

The court also ruled "the retention in question constituted a disproportionate interference with the applicants' right to respect for private life and could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society".

'Privacy protection'

The home secretary said: "DNA and fingerprinting is vital to the fight against crime, providing the police with more than 3,500 matches a month.

"The government mounted a robust defence before the court and I strongly believe DNA and fingerprints play an invaluable role in fighting crime and bringing people to justice.

"The existing law will remain in place while we carefully consider the judgement."

Solicitor Peter Mahy, who represented the men, said that the decision will have far-reaching implications.

"It will be very interesting to see how the UK government respond.

"The government should now start destroying the DNA records of those people who are currently on the DNA database and who are innocent of any crime."

Human rights group Liberty said it welcomed the court's decision.

Director Shami Chakrabarti said: "This is one of the most strongly worded judgements that Liberty has ever seen from the Court of Human Rights.

"That court has used human rights principles and common sense to deliver the privacy protection of innocent people that the British government has shamefully failed to deliver."

'Invasion of privacy'

Phil Booth, of the NO2ID group, which campaigns against identity cards, said: "'This is a victory for liberty and privacy.

"Though these judgements are always complicated and slow in coming, it is a vindication of what privacy campaigners have said all along.

"The principle that we need to follow is simple - when charges are dropped suspect samples are destroyed. No charge, no DNA."

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics reports on the ethical questions raised by recent advances in biological and medical research.

Its director, Hugh Whittall, said: "We agree wholeheartedly with this ruling. The DNA of innocent people should not be kept by police.

"People feel it is an invasion of their privacy, and there is no evidence that removing from the DNA database people who have not been charged or convicted will lead to serious crimes going undetected.

"The government now has an obligation to bring its own policies into line."

Rights breach claim

One of the men who sought the ruling in Strasbourg, Michael Marper, 45, was arrested in 2001.

He was charged with harassing his partner but the case was later dropped. He had no previous convictions.

The other man - a teenager identified as "S" - was arrested and charged with attempted robbery but later acquitted.

In both cases the police refused to destroy fingerprints and DNA samples taken when the men were taken in to custody.

The men went to the European Court of Human Rights after their cases were thrown out by the House of Lords.

They argued that retaining their DNA profiles is discriminatory and breaches their right to a private life.

The government claims the DNA profile from people who are not convicted may sometimes be linked to later offences, so storing the details on the database is a proportionate response to tackling crime.

Scotland already destroys DNA samples taken during criminal investigations from people who are not charged or who are later acquitted of alleged offences.

The Home Office has already set up a "contingency planning group" to look into the potential implications arising from a ruling in favour of the men.

Technorati Tags: ,,