Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Organic food no healthier, government commissioned "study" finds

Drink your fluoride, get shot up with mercury, and eat your pesticides. It's all good in the hood, baby! The British government is actually more rogue, more criminal, than our own. Like ours, every word they utter is a lie, including "and" and "the". I can't stress this enough, and I will continue to: everything they do revolves around eugenics. They do not want you to avoid their pesticides, steroids, hormones, and chemical additive-laden GMO and processed foods that weaken and destroy our immune system, alter our bodies' chemistry, and give us cancer. You will be sick, placid, fat and stupid, and you will like it!

    LONDON (Reuters) - Organic food has no nutritional or health benefits over ordinary food, according to a major study published Wednesday.

    Researchers from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine said consumers were paying higher prices for organic food because of its perceived health benefits, creating a global organic market worth an estimated $48 billion in 2007.

    A systematic review of 162 scientific papers published in the scientific literature over the last 50 years, however, found there was no significant difference.

    "A small number of differences in nutrient content were found to exist between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs, but these are unlikely to be of any public health relevance," said Alan Dangour, one of the report's authors.

    "Our review indicates that there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority."

    The results of research, which was commissioned by the British government's Food Standards Agency, were published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Government continues preparations for Fall mandatory vaccinations, will deploy military to "assist"

The government is now moving swiftly to put the mechanism in place for an unprecedented mandatory vaccination program, likely beginning in October. According to CNN, Defense Department officials have announced a plan, awaiting final authorization from Secretary Robert Gates, to deploy the military inside the United States to "assist civilian authorities in the event of a significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus." Last week, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services signed a document providing legal immunity against vaccine makers, likely in anticipation of a mandatory vaccination program that will almost certainly result in widespread illness, injuries, and deaths, while at the same time the FDA, which is now telling us the powerful neurotoxin mercury is not only safe but beneficial to us, is encouraging companies who stockpile Tamiflu and Relenza, which would be completely useless against H1N1 anyway, to hold onto their stockpiles even if the expiration date has passed. It was then revealed that 12,000 children will be used as swine flu vaccine guinea pigs for a vaccine they know is not safe, as the government preps public schools to be used as mass vaccination clinics. All this over a relatively benign virus that, to date, has killed less than 20 people in the U.S. and less than 200 worldwide. The situation is clearly out of control.

Meanwhile, the CDC said it was "strengthening recommendations" - which is Orwellian doublespeak for preparing coercive tactics, like putting a gun to your head - that all children receive the seasonal flu vaccine, in addition to the H1N1 swine flu vaccine they will likely be given - a double dose of death. Keep in mind that resisting this forced, WHO-mandated vaccine carries stiff penalties, including jail time and a $250,000 fine. Resistance to this coming pogrom must begin now before the infrastructure is prepared and implemented, because once the military becomes involved, there could be widespread bloodshed and civil rights abuses if we only get around to resisting ex post facto. Contact your representatives, contact the White House, and tell them you are not their property, and you are willing to defend yourself and your children from this violation by any and all means at your disposal; violently, if necessary.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Two Wings of the Same Bird of Prey

There is a common misconception among the opiated masses that people like me who despise government are somehow unpatriotic; traitorous even. Leaving aside the myriad handicaps our detractors suffer from, most notably, blind statism, reveling in ignorance, completely uninformed opinions, a childhood spent in State indoctrination camps (not really an excuse, since I myself am a product of public education, but I digress), not to mention partial chemical lobotamies due to years of fluoride intake, mercury-contaminated vaccines, and harmful chemical additives in our food, allow me to humor them and explain the difference between our government, and THE government.

Our government passed away in 1913. During that year, the Federal Reserve was spawned, effectively turning over control of our government to a private banking cartel. And by "private", I mean PRIVATE; the Federal Reserve is about as "federal" as Federal Express.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty, once said that if he had control of a nation's money supply, it wouldn't matter to him who made its laws. Let's examine that statement briefly. Imagine you had a massive printing press, the only one in the whole country, with which you could print an infinite amount of money. Imagine the possibilities. You could buy off the media. You could buy off the politicians. And you could buy the military. You could literally purchase the entire country, and buy off anyone who opposed you, or, if they could not be bought off, you could use your controlled media to spread disinformation, or, you could have them murdered and use your controlled media and Congress to neatly and quietly cover it up. See the JFK assassination. Well the Fed has this printing press, and your media, your political process, and your military - the most powerful in the history of the world - are now bought and paid for by this private, criminal banking cartel.

So, this shadow government is really in control of our country. Whether you casted your vote for McCain or Obama, you were voting for one of two candidates who were put there by the power elite because they knew either candidate would advance their agenda. Once in office, no matter what their campaign rhetoric, they will advance the globalist agenda, and Kennedy's brutal murder serves as an example of what will happen to them if they decide to actually be president. A pillar of Obama's campaign was that a McCain presidency would represent a third Bush term, but who can objectively look at Obama's presidency and say Obama is any better than Bush? Obama's presidency has been at least as bad as Bush; most of us know he's far worse. In fact, the Democratic and Republican parties are really two wings of the same bird of prey, and the globalists set "Left" and "Right" against each other, so that while we're at each other's throats we fail to realize who's really in control. It's text book divide and conquer.

Now, this private bankster oligarchy isn't made up of Americans. Many of them are American by birth, but they are, at heart, globalists; they don't recognize national sovereignty or the need for nation states. When you hear about a New World Order or a One World Government, this is what I speak of. So in closing, it is a fallacy to dismiss those who believe "our" government carried out 9-11 as unpatriotic, since it wasn't our government that was responsible. Our government didn't kill 3,000 of its own people, the global power elite that passes for our government killed 3,000 Americans. Apply this to everything that goes on today, and no amount of evil becomes "unspeakable", and notions that we are lied to, enslaved by debt, robbed, and killed by the government cease to be controversial or even unpatriotic. The only patriotic notion is to desire to shed the yoke of the elite's slavery, eliminite their hold on our government, and return this country to true liberty and prosperity.

Monday, July 27, 2009

The Bush familiy: a gang of criminals and traitors

May the day soon come when it would be redundant to describe the Bush family as criminals. Like the name Rockefeller, Rothschild, or Roosevelt, may their name one day be synonymous with evil.

In 1932, an attempted fascist coup, thwarted by decorated American hero Smedley Butler, was implemented by, among others, Prescott Bush, father and grandfather of 41 and 43, respectively, and known Nazi money launderer and collaborator. This is of course why you've likely never heard of this coup.

And if you don't know, now you know.

Watch mercury kill the brain: vaccines and neurodegeneration

This video is absolutely frightening. While watching, keep in mind that the criminal FDA now claims mercury is beneficial to pregnant women and infants. First they dumb you down and suck the life out of you so you can't resist, then they wipe you out.

Money From Iraqi Jobs Program Siphoned to Insurgents

Just like Vietnam, the "war on terror" is not meant to be won, it is meant to be prolonged, so the maximum amount of money can be stolen from us and given to the banking oligarchs on who's behalf we fight this war and who finance this war. IT IS A RACKET, like all our wars since the inception of the Fed in 1913. Yes, even WWII. Christ, if you don't know by now that FDR willfully provoked the Japanese into attacking us, and knew the exact date and time and location of the impending attack weeks before the attack, you need to fire up your search engine and do some reading.

    USA Today -

    The top U.S. aid agency has suspended a $644 million Iraq jobs program after two outside reviews raised concerns about misspending, including an inspector general’s audit that found evidence of phantom jobs and money siphoned to insurgents.
    The audit included a letter from an unnamed U.S. official working with a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Baghdad asserting that "millions of dollars from these projects were fraudulently going to insurgents, as well as to corrupt community leaders and (program) representatives."

You see, there hasn't been enough money stolen by the banksters, so progress must be impeded. Money that could help the Iraqis stabilize their country must be diverted to the destructive elements still found within the country, so the conflict can be prolonged. There will be no withdrawal, and peace and prosperity will continue to elude the Iraqi people, and they will continue to suffer and die.

Accusations of racism as a political weapon

Conservatives and libertarians have known for a long time that the race card was an effective way to discredit them and destroy their reputations and cancel out otherwise valid points about social trends and policies. This has gone on for years, yet somehow the American people haven't gotten wise to this scam. What is it about us that still causes us, as a nation, to take seriously a propaganda machine that we've known for many years is corporate and state controlled, so that we are still made to fear criticizing immigration policies for fear of being called racist, Democrats are able to intimidate Republicans against attacking their (truly and documented) racist and sexist Hispanic Supreme Court nominee. A conservative business owner is ousted from a North Carolina mall, possibly due to a letter to the editor of the Charlotte Observer describing the business as promoting “ideas such as racism, sexism and even slavery.” Merchandise found at the kiosk include bumper stickers that called for Obama's impeachment and baby bibs that say “My parents chose life. Thanks Mom and Dad!” I can see where the writer of this letter was coming from. We all know that an impeachment of Obama would lead to a return to slavery and Jim Crowe laws.

You see, in America, only racism could be behind your desire to see your own country's sovereignty protected and defended against a literal invasion of illegal aliens, mostly through our southern border who happen to be mostly of Hispanic origin. Unfortunately for us, the Northern border is of a country populated by mostly white people who live in a relatively prosperous society who have no need to illegally slip into our country looking for work. We know that our objection is not to the Mexican people who are destitute due almost entirely to the war on drugs and their own government's massive corruption, but to our own government stuffed with globalists who don't recognize national sovereignty and don't really even consider themselves "Americans". It is racist and sexist to criticize a woman who is openly racist and sexist, and we cannot oppose such a person occupying a seat on the highest court in the land. In America, impeaching a clearly criminal president, who is probably not even constitutionally qualified to be president in the first place, would rewind the history of this country 200 years. Surely if you're reading this, it all sounds absurd, but sadly these views are still taken seriously. Otherwise they would cease to have their desired effects.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

3,000 Low-temp records set in July

Paging're a fraud and we all know it. Your pseudo-science is nothing but a sham to steal our money and clamp down on how we live our lives. Get on a treadmill and worry about yourself you narcissistic control freak.

Accuweather -

It's not just the surface land temps -- Blog reader Tim points out "Water temps at Frying Pan Shoals (off Cape Fear) fell to 78 degrees a few days ago; NDBC historical data shows this occurs only 0.3% of the time in July!" Here's a look at the weekly departure from normal sea-surface temperatures:

This is not the case away from the Carolina coast; most of the Atlantic that we would be concerned with for Hurricane season is normal or slightly above normal - there are other factors keeping that activity down.

ORIGINAL ENTRY: Here are some stats and maps regarding the unusually cold July that is happening over a large portion of the U.S., especially the Northeast quadrant (yes, it's been unusually hot in the SW, see below). Note: Since I am on vacation at the end of the month, I will not be able to update these but will be running news articles about how cool July was in these areas, come the first week in August.

First, some stats. 1,044 daily record low temperatures have been broken this month nationwide according to NCDC -- count record "low highs" and the number increases to 2,925, surely to pass 3,000 before the end of the month. Some thoughts on the 'low highs" below.*

graph of low lows and low highs for July

The period of July 17-20 was the worst, with over 1,600 stations breaking records. It's worth noting that these stats include all records across the nation. Of the record lows, through July 20th (thanks to William Schmitz @ SERCC, check out their Twitter Feed), this was the regional breakdown:

Nationwide: 966
Southeast (AL/GA/FL/NC/SC/VA): 248
Northeast (MD/DE/PA/NJ/NY/CT/RI/MA/NH/VT/ME): 193

Next, a map of the Departure from Average temperatures so far in July (yes, we have one week left). Yes, that's a "-10.0" in Pennsylvania - double digit deficits over a month are rare indeed. Note that there are no positive numbers.

Even if you zoom out to the U.S. you'll see the majority of stations are reporting departures below normal thus far -- only Arizona, New Mexico and Texas have all stations reporting above normal.

The lowest temperatures of the month are also impressive, with 50s in every state and 40s in most, some 30s. Normally temperatures are peaking in July.

And finally I'll repeat this map which shows the lack of 85-degree days in the Northeast through July 20th. Note that the Northern Plains are not immune from the chilly weather either; Mark Vogan says that Minneapolis hasn't failed to hit 90 in the last 15 years. (Mark has some other good stats too).

*I was especially impressed by the latter stat and I think it speaks more to the cool summer people have been experiencing - more people are out and about during the peak of the day then they are early in the morning, so they see that the temperatures in the middle of the afternoon are much lower than they should be this time of year. For perception, this may be even more important than morning lows.

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Obama proposes "pre--crime" prolonged detentions

Rachel Maddow is an asshat about 75% of the time, but she's dead-on here, and when the liberals are ripping Obama on constitutional issues, you know things have soured for him.

"One of the most radical proposals for defying the constitution that we have ever heard made to the American people." And do not be fooled: these proposals are not meant for radical Islamic jihadists overseas, they're for YOU.

Friday, July 24, 2009

Obama Puts Monsanto Lobbyist In Charge Of Food Safety

Alexis Baden-Mayer, Esq.
Organic Consumers Association
Friday, July 24, 2009

Genetically modified foods are not safe. The only reason they’re in our food supply is because government bureaucrats with ties to industry suppressed or manipulated scientific research and deprived consumers of the information they need to make informed choices about whether or not to eat genetically modified foods.

Now, the Obama Administration is putting two notorious biotech bullies in charge of food safety! Former Monsanto lobbyist Michael Taylor has been appointed as a senior adviser to the Food and Drug Administration Commissioner on food safety. And, rBGH-using dairy farmer and Pennsylvania Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolff is rumored to be President Obama’s choice for Under-Secretary of Agriculture for Food Safety. Wolfe spearheaded anti-consumer legislation in Pennsylvania that would have taken away the rights of consumers to know whether their milk and dairy products were contaminated with Monsanto’s (now Eli Lilly’s) genetically engineered Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH).

Please click here to send a message to President Obama, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (oversees FDA) demanding Michael Taylor’s resignation, and letting them know that you oppose Dennis Wolff’s appointment.

About Michael Taylor

Michael Taylor is a lawyer who has spent the last few decades moving through the revolving door between the employ of GMO-seed giant Monsanto and the FDA and USDA. Taylor is widely credited with ushering Monsanto’s recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) through the FDA regulatory process and into the milk supply — unlabeled. A Government Accounting Office (GAO) investigated whether Taylor had a conflict of interest and or had engaged in ethical misconduct in the approval of rBGH. The report’s conclusion that there was no wrongdoing conflicted with the 30 pages of evidence that Vermont Congressman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) described as proof that “the FDA allowed corporate influence to run rampant in its approval” of the drug.

Taylor is also responsible for the FDA’s decision to treat genetically modified organisms as “substantially equivalent” to natural foods and therefore not require any safety studies. The “substantially equivalent” rule allowed the FDA to ignore evidence that genetically engineered foods, including soy, are in fact very different from natural foods and pose specific health risks.

In November 2008, Tom Philpott reported that Taylor was among President-Elect Obama’s “team members” looking at energy and natural resources agencies, including USDA. In March 2009, President Obama announced the creation of a White House Food Safety Working Group to improve and coordinate the government’s approach to the nationwide food safety crisis. Agri-Pulse reported that Taylor was “the leading candidate to staff the White House [food safety] working group.” While anti-GMO activists, including the Organic Consumers Association, protested — OCA members sent 13,435 letters to USDA Sec. Tom Vilsack, who co-chairs the Food Safety Working Group with HHS Sec. Sebelius — Taylor laid low. He was nowhere to be found at the White House Food Safety Working Group’s May 13th Listening Session. But, the rumor proved true. On July 7, 2009, the FDA announced that Taylor had joined the agency as senior adviser to the commissioner.

As Philpott describes in a July 8th article, Taylor’s food safety agenda is to “shift much more of the burden for funding food-safety operations to the state and local level” and to promote HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) systems where the points in a process that pose the most risk are identified and “fixed” with remedies like ammonia washes and irradiation. Taylor’s approach — putting a few bandaids on an industrialized food system gone wrong — is in direct conflict with organic practices and is likely to unduly burden small producers.

Taylor has long been hostile to real food safety. While working as a lobbyist, Taylor authored more than a dozen articles critical of the Delaney Clause, a 1958 federal law prohibiting the introduction of known carcinogens into processed foods, which had long been opposed by Monsanto and other chemical and pesticide companies. When Taylor rejoined the federal government, he continued advocating that Delaney should be overturned. This was finally done when President Clinton signed the so-called Food Quality Protection Act on the eve of the 1996 elections.

Taylor is featured in the documentary, The World According to Monsanto, which you can watch on OCA’s Millions Against Monsanto page.

About Dennis Wolff

Dennis Wolff is the Secretary of Agriculture for the State of Pennsylvania. Wolff also is a dairy farmer and owns Pen-Col Farms, a 600-acre dairy cattle operation. Wolff has championed agribusiness interests as Pennsylvania’s Secretary of Agriculture, including banning local dairies from marketing their products as free of Monsanto’s rBGH. Wolff is a member of the Agriculture Technical Advisory Committee to the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO has been largely credited with forcing so-called “free trade” on farmers and consumers around the globe, undermining national sovereignty and food safety. Finally, Wolff was a strong proponent of the “ACRE” initiative (Agriculture, Communities and Rural Environment), which gives the Pennsylvania state attorney general’s office the authority to sue municipalities over local farm ordinances deemed to exceed state law, depriving communities the right to ban toxic sewage sludge, factory farms, and GMOs.

Aside from having absolutely no experience in meat inspection, the chief food safety responsibility of the USDA, Dennis Wolff should be rejected for any post within the Obama Administration for the hostile position he has taken, as Pennsylvania’s Agriculture Secretary, against consumers’ right to know what is in our food. According to the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, Wolff:

* Tried to ban all labeling of dairy products that didn’t use genetically engineered growth hormone (rBGH or rBST). This was an outright violation of freedom of speech of the dairy processors and the farmers who supplied them.

* Said that consumers were “concerned or confused” about the labeling and said his department received “many calls” about it. Yet when a New York Times reporter asked him about this, Wolff couldn’t provide any surveys showing consumers were confused and could not come up with the name of ONE CONSUMER who had complained.

* Held one meeting of the so-called Food Labeling Advisory Committee and said they recommended the labeling ban. Yet the committee never voted on anything and never made any recommendations specific to dairy. Moreover, the group most affected by the rules and most opposed to them, the PA Association of Milk Dealers, was never even invited to the meeting.

12,000 U.S. Children To Be Swine Flu Vaccine Guinea Pigs

We are just being bombarded with news regarding this ridiculous swine flu, and each item is worse than the next. I need to duct tape my eyeballs inside my head.

    Prison Planet -

    Kids to receive untested shots which include ingredient linked to Gulf War Syndrome

    12,000 U.S. Children To Be Swine Flu Vaccine Guinea Pigs 240709top

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Friday, July 24, 2009

    Around 12,000 U.S. children will be used as guinea pigs for an experimental swine flu vaccine known to contain the dangerous ingredient squalene, which has been directly linked with cases of Gulf War Syndrome and a host of other debilitating diseases.

    According to a report in the Oklahoman, 12,000 children nationwide will partake in “fast-tracked studies” to test the side-effects of the untested swine flu vaccine in trials set to begin next month.

    “The trials will test the vaccine’s effectiveness and whether or not it has negative side effects in patients,” states the report.

    Since less than 100 children in the U.S. die from regular seasonal flu each year, a reasonable estimate would be that around 100 children will die from swine flu over the course of the next year.

    So in effect, the authorities will vaccinate millions of children in order to try and prevent 100 deaths. If the mass vaccination program mirrors the previous swine flu outbreak of 1976 then the vaccine is likely to kill more people than the actual virus.

    Furthermore, since the swine flu vaccine includes squalene, a dangerous adjuvant that contributed to Gulf War Syndrome cases, there’s little doubt that it will lead to debilitating lifelong diseases far more deadly than the swine flu virus itself for thousands of children if a mass vaccination campaign is conducted.

    According to Meryl Nass, M.D., “A novel feature of the two H1N1 vaccines being developed by companies Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline is the addition of squalene-containing adjuvants to boost immunogenicity and dramatically reduce the amount of viral antigen needed. This translates to much faster production of desired vaccine quantities.”

    “Research shows that squalene is the experimental anthrax vaccine ingredient that caused devastating autoimmune diseases and deaths for many Gulf War veterans from the US, UK, and Australia, yet it continues in use today and for new vaccines development in labs,” writes Stephen Lendman.

Please read it all!

Microwave weapon will rain pain from the sky

They're not making these for Islamic jihadists. They're making them for "terrorists" - aka YOU.

    New Scientist -

    THE Pentagon's enthusiasm for non-lethal crowd-control weapons appears to have stepped up a gear with its decision to develop a microwave pain-infliction system that can be fired from an aircraft.

    The device is an extension of its controversial Active Denial System, which uses microwaves to heat the surface of the skin, creating a painful sensation without burning that strongly motivates the target to flee. The ADS was unveiled in 2001, but it has not been deployed owing to legal issues and safety fears.

    Nevertheless, the Pentagon's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) in Quantico, Virginia, has now called for it to be upgraded. The US air force, whose radar technology the ADS is based on, is increasing its annual funding of the system from $2 million to $10 million.

    The transmitting antenna on the current system is 2 metres across, produces a single beam of similar width and is steered mechanically, making it cumbersome. At the heart of the new weapon will be a compact airborne antenna, which will be steered electronically and be capable of generating multiple beams, each of which can be aimed while on the move.

    The new antenna will be steered electronically and is capable of generating multiple heat beams

    The ADS has been dogged by controversy. J├╝rgen Altmann, a physicist at Dortmund University in Germany, showed that the microwave beams can cause serious burns at levels not far above those required to repel people. This was verified when a US airman was hospitalised with second-degree burns during testing in April 2007.

    The airborne version will not make it any less contentious. "Independent of the mode of production, with this size of antenna the beam will show variations of intensity with distance - not just a simple decrease - up to about 500 metres," says Altmann. Shooting it on the move with any accuracy will be difficult, he adds.

    Dave Law, head of the technology division of the JNLWD, says the new antenna will operate at the lowest possible effective power level and will have a sophisticated automated target-tracking system.

    In a recent cost-benefit analysis, the US Government Accountability Office rated the ADS worst out of eight non-lethal weapons currently in development.

They should call them the Joint Comedians of Staff

Daily Times Monitor -

LAHORE: US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen on Thursday said he believed the top leadership of Al Qaeda, including Osama Bin Laden, was in Pakistan.

Talking to Al Jazeera TV, Mullen said Al Qaeda was on top of the US list of priorities and threats around the world. When asked why the United States was not in FATA despite having the knowledge that Al Qaeda was present there, he said, “Because FATA is in Pakistan and Pakistan is a sovereign country and we don’t go into sovereign countries.”

I suppose it was only a matter of time...

...before a cop ass-raped someone with his taser.

(WARNING: Strong language in the audio)

Manuel Lora at LRC blog writes:

And you guessed it: “The Boise Police Department did an internal investigation, and both employees were disciplined; details on the discipline were not released. It is considered an internal personnel matter, said police spokeswoman Lynn Hightower.”

Now imagine if an equally evil but non-bureaucrat person had done this to a cop (or to anyone else). Would there be a quiet, internal investigation? I don’t think so.

More here and here.

I’m not one for mob justice but…

Makers of swine flu vaccine can't be sued

Gosh, for whatever reason would vaccine makers need legal immunity against lawsuits from us lowly plebs? Be assured there will be injuries, vicious side effects, and deaths.

    Associated Press -

    ATLANTA — The last time the government embarked on a major vaccine campaign against a new swine flu, thousands of people filed claims contending they suffered side effects from the shots. This time, the government has already taken steps to prevent that.

    Vaccine makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits that result from any new swine flu vaccine, under a document signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, government health officials said Friday.

    Since the 1980s, the government has protected vaccine makers against lawsuits over the use of childhood vaccines. Instead, a federal court handles claims and decides who will be paid from a special fund.

All U.S. children should get seasonal flu shot: CDC

Can you spot the Orwellian doublespeak? "Strengthening recommendations", or, putting a gun to your head.

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - All U.S. children aged 6 months to 18 years should get a seasonal influenza vaccine every year, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Friday.

    The CDC's Dr. Anne Schuchat said the agency was strengthening recommendations for children to get the vaccination against seasonal influenza, especially with fears that the new H1N1 virus will be added to the already expected burden of seasonal flu.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Too Many (Other) People

THIS is eugenics. THIS is their agenda. And someone remind me again of how conservatives are the racists, while liberals are concerned for the well-being of minorities...I need my memory jogged on that one...

by William Norman Grigg

Recently by William Norman Grigg: Beware William Tell's Second Arrow

As a left-leaning Rutgers law professor in the early 1970s, Ruth Bader Ginsburg thought that the Roe v. Wade abortion decision was the product of "concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations we don’t want too many of," she recalled in a recent New York Times Magazine interview.

Her expectation was that the purported right to abortion created in Roe "was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them."

Ginsburg doesn’t specify which parts of the human population "we" should cull, or how the creation of an abortion "right" would necessarily be a prelude to creation of a system in which abortion would be required in some circumstances. She told the Times that the question was effectively rendered moot by the Supreme Court's Harris v. McRae decision, which upheld a ban on Medicaid funding of abortion. That decision, handed down in 1980, indicated that her "perception" of the issue "had been altogether wrong," Ginsburg concludes.

But this means that there was an interval of roughly seven years during which Ginsburg, a well-informed and influential academic, believed that America was creating a eugenicist system in which abortion would help reduce "undesirable" populations – however those populations would be defined. This was what Roe had wrought, Ginsburg believed for several years, and if she ever experienced misgivings about it, she managed to keep them private.

Another question worth examining is this: Where did Ginsburg – a rising star in academe long before being tapped to fill the Rosa Klebb seat on the Supreme Court – get the impression that American policy-making elites were discussing the use of welfare subsidies to bring about the attrition of "undesirable" populations?

If I may be permitted a modest venture in speculation, I’d suggest that Ginsburg, sometime in the 1960s or 1970s, became at least superficially acquainted with the writings of John Holdren or of like-minded people in the most militant branch of the population control movement.

In 1977, Mr. Holdren was a young academic who helped anti-natalist guru Paul Ehrlich and his wife Anne write an arrestingly horrible book entitled Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. Today, Holdren is Barack Obama’s "Science Czar," in which capacity he counsels the president regarding the role of science in public policy. This relationship has a certain Strangelovian undercurrent, given Holdren’s enthusiasm for eugenicist and totalitarian methods of population "management."

In a passage that reads eerily like the direct counterpoint to Ginsburg’s musings about the reduction of undesirable populations, Holdren and the Ehrlichs wrote:

"If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility – just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns…."

The book offers similarly casual endorsements of "involuntary" and "coercive" fertility control," including the mandatory implantation of a Norplant-style capsule that "might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births."

The authors endorse the creation of "a Planetary regime" in charge of regulating all human economic activity and interactions with the environment and the "power to enforce the agreed limits" on human population growth through whatever means might be necessary – including compelled abortion, involuntary individual sterilization, or even mass involuntary sterilization through the infiltration of sterilizing agents into public water supplies.

That last deranged suggestion appears in several of Paul Ehrlich’s other books, including his (if you will excuse the expression) seminal 1967 alarmist tract The Population Bomb.

As someone who shared a full authorial credit on the book, Holdren bears full responsibility for the content of Ecoscience. His militantly anti-natalist views are easily as repulsive as anything promoted by white supremacist groups, albeit all the more dangerous for being more inclusive in their misanthropy. His writings would have been uncovered in the routine vetting process following his nomination, but they never came up during his confirmation hearing.

What is genuinely unsettling, however, is this: The totalitarian prescriptions offered in Ecoscience were squarely in the mainstream of the Stygian sewer called the population control movement.

In 1967, sociologist, demographer, and population control heavyweight Kingsley Davis published an essay in Science magazine observing that "the social structure and economy must be changed before a deliberate reduction in the birthrate can be achieved" in the West. He urged governments to subsidize voluntary abortion and sterilization and restructure their tax systems to discourage both marriage and childbirth.

Davis’s recommendations apparently inspired Frederick Jaffe, Vice President of Planned Parenthood, when he composed a 1969 memorandum intended for use as a template for anti-natalist efforts.

Jaffe’s memorandum, a version of which was published in the October 1970 issue of Family Planning Perspectives, organized recommended social policies under four headings: "Social Constraints," "Economic Deterrents/Incentives," "Social Controls," and "Housing Policies."

Like Paul Ehrlich, Jaffe suggested the placement of "fertility control agents in [the] water supply"; this recommendation was filed, oddly enough, under "Social Constraints." "Social Controls," on the other hand, included such measures as "compulsory abortion of all out-of-wedlock pregnancies," "compulsory sterilization of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three," and the issuance of "stock certificate-type permits for children." (Nearly every radical population control system is built around the idea of a government-issued "permit" or "license" to have children.)

These totalitarian measures were widely and unabashedly promoted in the literature of the population control movement at precisely the time that the Roe decision was (if, once again, you’ll excuse the expression) gestating in the court system.

"How can we reduce reproduction?" wrote Garrett Hardin in a 1970 Science magazine article entitled "Parenthood: Right or Privilege?" "Persuasion must be tried first…. Mild coercion may soon be accepted – for example, tax rewards for reproductive non-proliferation. But in the long run, a purely voluntary system selects for its own failure: noncooperators out-breed cooperators. So what restraints shall we employ? A policeman under every bed? Jail sentences? Compulsory abortion? Infanticide?... Memories of Nazi Germany rise and obscure our vision."

Oh, those dreadful Nazis: If only they hadn’t given totalitarian eugenics such a bad name….

Hardin was one of many anti-natalist luminaries – the list included Kingsley Davis, Margaret Mead, Paul Ehrlich, and sundry Planned Parenthood leaders – who endorsed the 1971 manifesto The Case for Compulsory Birth Control by Edgar R. Chasteen. That book offered one-stop shopping for policy-makers seeking draconian population management methods.

Chasteen was emphatic on two points: First, ruling elites had to indoctrinate the public into accepting the idea that "parenthood [is] a privilege extended by society, rather than a right"; and second, that in the interests of public relations, supporters of that totalitarian perspective needed to settle on "a name other than compulsory birth control."

Essentially the same program was endorsed by Dr. Norman Myers, an adviser to the World Bank and various UN agencies, in his peculiar 1990 volume The Gaia Atlas of Future Worlds.

"Government population-control policies using strong economic and social incentives have been effective in China and Singapore," wrote Myers, who commended China in particular for using "strong social pressure" to control its population. Myers didn't to dwell on the fact that the Chinese government employs severe punishments – prison time, destruction of homes, retaliation against family members and co-workers – for women who have "unauthorized" children.

Myers suggested a variation on the same concept behind the "cap-and-trade" carbon credit system employing government-issued birth permits. Under his plan, couples would "be issued with a warrant entitling them to have a single child.... This warrant might even carry commercial value, allowing individuals to decide not to have children at all and to sell their entitlements to others wanting larger families."

Arguably the most astonishing variant on this approach was proposed in 1994, just prior to the UN's International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, Egypt.

In a book entitled Too Many People, Sir Roy Calne, a noted British physician, proposed a universal minimum childbearing age of 25, and a strict two-child quota. Those seeking the government-dispensed "privilege" of having children would have to pass a state-mandated parenting class and receive the appropriate "reproduction license." Those who violate those restrictions would lose their children and face Chinese-style economic sanctions and criminal punishments.

Calne also suggested the development of an engineered sterility pathogen – he called it the "O virus" – that could be administered to women world-wide as a vaccine.

These malignant proposals are not just flatulent thought-bubbles blown in languid speculation by fringe eccentrics in the academic realm: With the exception – as far as we know – of mass involuntary sterilization through covert chemical or biological warfare, every method of coercive population control described above has been implemented somewhere with the material aid of the United Nations and its affiliates, and the practical support of organizations such as Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes International.

Every argument on behalf of state-imposed population control rejects the concept of individual self-ownership and assumes that human lives – individually and in the aggregate – are a resource to be managed by society’s supervisors on behalf of the "common good." And, as Ruth Bader Ginsburg correctly intuited in 1973, the Roe vs. Wade decision was a triumph, albeit an incomplete one, for the cause of eugenicist population control.

Although it was swaddled in the language of individual empowerment, the Roe decision was a dramatic victory for collectivism: It enshrined, in what our rulers are pleased to call the "law," the assumption that a human individual is a "person" only when that status is conferred by the government.

While Harry Blackmun’s opinion in Roe pointedly avoided the question of when "personhood" begins, it emphatically made it clear that, for purposes of "law," that the term doesn’t apply to any human individual in his or her pre-natal stage of development. This, not the liberty to procure an abortion, is the real gravamen, or central legal finding, in the Roe decision: It put the government in charge of defining who is, and isn’t a person.

As judges like to say, the matter of reducing "undesirable" populations is reaching "ripeness" now. Barack Obama's administration is eagerly expanding the government-dependent population and preparing to impose centralized "universal" health care on our society. And while all of this is going on, John Holdren, unabashed advocate of totalitarian population control, is in a position to whisper unthinkable thoughts into Obama's ear.

July 20, 2009

William Norman Grigg [send him mail] publishes the Pro Libertate blog and hosts the Pro Libertate radio program.

Sunday, July 19, 2009

9-11: The Lie That Defines the Times

    It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

If the neo-cons, warhawks, statists, and other sheeple are going to implore us never to forget 9-11, it is therefore of utmost importance to explain to anyone willing to listen what really happened that day, which has led to two disastrous wars, in which more of our best and bravest have been killed than on 9-11, as well as the squandering of hundreds of billions of dollars in treasury, and finally turning us all into "terror suspects" as government intrusion invades every aspect of our lives in the name of "national security".

I'm not going to discuss theories; this is not a conspiracy "theory", like the moon landing being "staged". I'm going to talk about what is known; what can't be denied. If indeed the attacks of that day were a self-inflicted wound, if indeed it was a false flag black op perpetrated by like-minded criminal elements in the US government, then we must demand that all subsequent wars and Stalinist police state measures cease and desist immediately. And the available evidence proves this conclusively. The most important issue you must deal with is to remove from your mind the mental block that tells you our government could not, would not do something like this. Indeed, they can, indeed they would, and indeed they have, many times in the past. Nearly every war we've ever fought was based on false pretenses. I hate to be the one breaking this to you, but provoking the "enemy" into firing the first shot, or making it appear as if they had, is as American as apple pie. From the "Civil War" through both World Wars, Vietnam, and finally the so-called war on "terror".

After years of denial and Orwellian double-think that blinded me (and likely yourself) from the plainly obvious, I finally removed the aforementioned mental block and took a hard, open-minded, objective look at the evidence, most of which I'd never before troubled myself to look at, even though most of it is widely disseminated, mainstream news our government doesn't even deny. Perhaps they are relying on Hitler's axiom, the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it.

For me the earth-shatterer was the collapse of the Towers. It took me several years to figure out that it is physically impossible for both buildings to collapse into their own footprint at the rate of free-fall. To put it into perspective, according to Newton's law of gravity, a billiard ball dropped from the top of one of the towers would hit the ground in 9.2 seconds. It is irrefutable that the Towers both collapsed in 11 and 9 seconds, respectively. This is according to NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) and the 9-11 Commission Report and is corroborated by seismic measurements of the collapse. Now, take a moment to imagine the physics of a skyscraper. Hundreds of thousands of tons of steel and concrete structured to push upwards, supporting the weight of everything above it, resisting the pull of gravity - not to mention designed to withstand multiple jumbo jet collisions, as well as "storm of the century" hurricanes. Yet the top of the building - both of them - collapsed into the path of GREATEST resistance, as if there was nothing but air beneath it. Now, I know none of you are structural engineers, but I appeal to your common sense: is that possible? IT IS NOT. It is only possible if there were explosives moving the mass of the building below the collapse out of the way, allowing the cascading destruction to move downwards at free-fall speed.

During the collapse, explosive ejections can be seen up to 20 floors below the cascade, indicating demolition explosives going off. Large cross-sections of the buildings, some weighing several tons, were found lodged in buildings hundreds of yards away. If the building were merely collapsing on its own, how did such massive sections of steel get ejected several hundred yards away? And finally, after the collapse, the core columns can be seen cut at about a 45 degree angle which a demolition crew would have had to cut them to initiate such a collapse, and the molten steel can be seen around the edges of the cut. This cannot be a naturally occurring phenomenon.

Nor could the molten metal found in the basement areas of the towers, as well as building 7, which was found for up to five weeks after the collapse. Fire fighters described seeing the molten metal as if they were in a foundry, or like watching lava flow from a volcano. This is significant on several levels. First, we know that jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel - it burns at about 1500 degrees while steal melts at over 2000; satellite thermal imaging recorded temperatures upwards of 2600 degrees at least five days after the collapse. But even if jet fuel could melt steel, we know the jet fuel had already burned off, to the point where firefighters had actually reached the crash zone of the South tower before it collapsed - evidence, in the form of a tape recording of firefighters reporting they had reached the 78th floor sky lobby, which was where the plane impacted, has been deliberately withheld by the Department of Justice. And there could have been no jet fuel in the WTC7 collapse, and yet molten steel and incredibly hot temperatures were observed there as well. These phenomena can only be attributed to explosive thermite, which burns so hot it will cut through steel like a hot knife through butter, and thermite residues were found in the rubble of the collapse. This is why the wreckage was speedily and secretly carted away, with little regard to the remains of the victims it contained, to a landfill without even FEMA being allowed to examine any of it. Dump trucks carrying the wreckage were fitted with GPS devices, and one driver who took too long on his lunch break was fired on the spot. The evidence was very carefully and hastily carted away.

Building 7 contained several government offices, including the IRS, CIA, DoD, Security and Exchange Commission, and Secret Service, among others. It was not struck by a plane, but was only moderately damaged due to the collapse of the towers, with sporadic fires randomly dispersed on only a few floors. Yet the building collapsed, again, at the rate of free fall, again, into its own footprint, in a perfectly symmetrical fashion. In order for this to occur, all (approximately) 80 of the building's core columns would have had to fail simultaneously; the fires that did exist were found randomly throughout the building, and there were no more than 4 or 5 fires, total, in the whole building. It should be noted that several other buildings suffered catastrophic damage due to the collapse of the towers, yet none of them collapsed.

Adding to the obvious is Larry Silverstein, who owned buildings 1, 2, and 7 - coincidentally the only 3 buildings that "collapsed" - and who, weeks before the attack, took out multi-billion dollar insurance policies on the buildings. He later went on PBS and admitted that WTC7 was "pulled" by his own suggestion. To "pull" a building is to demolish it. I've actually had people tell me it was reasonable to demolish the building because of the damage the fires caused but it is lost on them how in only a few hours they wired a 47 story building to be demolished, in the middle of a terrorist attack, with multiple floors on fire. Again, using your own God-give common sense, how possible is all of this? It is not possible at all. Mainstream news video exists of firefighters and emergency responders warning news crews to get away from the building, or to keep an eye on it because it was going to come down. How could anyone know this, especially, again, regarding a building that suffered only moderate damage? They knew because this was a planned event. Just watch a video of the building collapse. As with the towers, explosive ejections can be seen running up both sides of the building, and then, in classic demolition fashion, the center of the building caves in, causing each side of the building to fall inward towards the center, so the surrounding buildings suffer minimal damage. Watch any footage of a controlled demolition and you will see the exact same thing.

In the case of the Pentagon and Shanksville, one need only to examine the "wreckage" to know something is amiss - amiss in that there was no wreckage. We are led to believe that two jumbo jets were completely obliterated by the jet fuel explosion - the first time in the history of air travel this has ever happened. It is, I suppose, remotely feasible that the passengers, luggage, and fuselage were destroyed, but not one of the four Rolls Royce engines, made of steel and titanium alloy, weighing six tons each, were recovered. Amazingly, even though these impacts and explosions managed to obliterate tempered steel and titanium, human remains were found and identified at the Pentagon site (belonging to those who were in the Pentagon when the plane crashed). We are left to wonder, if you were even aware of this fact before I tell you, why every security/surveillance camera that would've shown a 707 hitting the Pentagon - and there were several cameras that would've shown this - were confiscated by the FBI after the crash, and the limited footage from these videos released to the public do not show an airplane hitting the building. For some reason we are left to speculate - was it a 707? Was it a cruise missile? If it was indeed a passenger jet that crashed into the Pentagon, all the government has to do is release the videos. To this day, all requests have been denied. That is what's called a COVER-UP, pure and simple.

Which brings me to the planted evidence, because it is not entirely true to say that both planes and everything in them were obliterated. In Shanksville, several of the hijackers IDs, drivers licenses, and/or passports were found, mostly intact, at the site, as well as a red bandanna supposedly worn by one of them. It is ridiculous to say that the explosion destroyed the entire plane, including indestructible engines, yet these incriminating items were miraculously found at the scene. How convenient for them. Similar documents were found at the Pentagon, and, perhaps most miraculous of all, the passport of Satam Al Suqami, one of the hijackers, flew out of his pocket at the point of impact, survived the massive collision and jet fuel explosion that we are led to believe collapsed the entire 110-story skyscraper, and then survived the collapse, which annihilated the entire building and practically everything in it, and was found in near pristine condition in the rubble. But that's not even the real miracle: indeed what is really a miracle is that Al Suqami himself somehow managed to survive the crash, because once the government presented his passport as evidence of his presence as a hijacker on the plane, a man with an identical name and the same birth date came forward to tell us he was still alive. In fact at least seven of the 19 hijackers have been confirmed as alive and well by mainstream news sources. We have seen this evidence - I know I had seen it long before I accepted it - and now can only stand amazed at the mind's capacity for denying the patently obvious.

The chain of evidence - this mountain of damning facts that point incontrovertibly to a false flag black op, goes on and on, from the "put options" on American and United Airlines bought in massive numbers prior to the attack, to the numerous officials being told not to fly that day (the mayor of Los Angeles was told by none other than Condolisa Rice herself not to fly that day), to NORAD not responding to the attack which would've been their standard operating procedure, because they were running wargames depicting terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into buildings, including the WTC and the Pentagon, the exact same day (what a coincidence!), rendering our defenses completely impotent by design; to bin Laden, the world's most wanted "terrorist", spending two weeks in an American hospital in Dubai, being treated by an American doctor, and having been visited by the CIA while there, and not being arrested; the inconsistencies, the impossibilities, the absurdities, go on and on.

All of this evidence, and more, is brilliantly laid out in visual form in the documentary Loose Change. If I have been unable to fully convince you here, if I have at least stirred your curiosity, once you've watched this movie you will have cleansed yourself of all doubt: 9-11 was an inside job. We are under suspicion, under surveillance, having our liberties erased, bankrupting ourselves and annihilating our children's future, and worst of all, our best and brightest are fighting and dying, as well as slaughtering by the hundreds of thousands an "enemy" guilty of no crime except having brown skin and being from a strange culture in a far off land, because of a grotesque lie. The quicker this truth is spread, the more people accept it and come to grips with it, the sooner we can demand this madness be put at an end, and demand that this heinous leviathan our government has bloated itself into in the name of "national security" retract itself, that they must stop treating all of us as if we're potential terrorists, and stop throwing bin Laden (who is dead) at us every time they need a certain reaction out of us. It is a sad commentary on the fighting spirit and the will to resist of this nation that we have not revolted already.

Ask questions. Demand answers.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Rehabilitating The Beast

Some people believe we can still work within the system to bring about liberty. This is a testament to how far into slavery we've fallen, for we are unable to comprehend how much the State has robbed us of. Is the State just voluntarily going to abolish the Fed, the Military Industrial Complex, the income tax, the mountains upon mountains of tax codes and regulations, the individual and corporate welfare they depend upon? And will the people ever really want to abolish these fascist institutions - will they cave to government fear mongering about the havoc it would create were these institutions to be abolished?

The only way to bring about freedom is to destroy the system that has robbed us of our God-given natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, for all of the myriad layers of law, regulation, and bureaucracy only stand to prop up this house of cards. Abolish the Fed, abolish the income tax, and the State would indeed collapse, though the power elite would have you believe this is a bad thing. Why, don't you know how horrible this country was before the State incrementally assumed control of every facet of your lives?

I believe it is fruitless, albeit noble, to fight to abolish these institutions, which would indeed collapse the State, were it to succeed. But with the supply and value of money, the mainstream media, not to mention the majority of Congress, the courts, and the president, under their control, it is hard for me to believe that all of this saber rattling about auditing and abolishing the Fed is anything more than a lot of sound and fury, yet sadly signifying nothing. There are over four hundred congressmen in the House, and only one Ron Paul. How much longer must we suffer, how much are we going to allow them to rob us of, how heavy must our chains lay around our necks, before we realize the system is poisoned and beyond rehabilitation?

We have slowly relinquished nearly all of our liberties, and the Bill of Rights has incrementally been weakened to the point they're more like guidelines than rules, to quote a movie. We are robbed of our wealth by the defacing of our currency - 96% devaluation of the dollar since 1913, the year the Fed was spawned. We are robbed further through pervasive taxation and tolls. And still robbed further through fines and penalties for intrusions on liberty such as speed limits, seat belt and cell phone laws. Yes, the State reserves the right to kill you if you sufficiently resist paying a parking ticket. We are spied upon, harassed, and suspected - the real "suspects" of the terror threat, which our own government fabricated. It is nearly impossible to leave your own home without breaking some kind of law at some point in your daily activities. We are robbed of our best and brightest, sent off to fight wars in far off lands because of lies that serve only to benefit the Military Industrial Complex and the international banking elite who control and loan, at interest, the money needed to wage them. At this point, reforming the State would be analogous to trying to bleach clean a 96 year old bloodstain from of the fabric of this nation.

Jefferson asked, What country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?. I know not when the time to take arms against this grotesque leviathan will come, but I know it's only a matter of time. The power elite aren't going to just give us are freedoms back. History bears this out; they never have, they never will. We have always had to fight for them; we have always had to shed our blood, our sweat, our tears, and give our lives for them. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Monday, July 13, 2009

Is the Truth Too Painful For You?

Does it hurt you to know that FDR provoked the Japanese into attacking us, knew when and where the attack would take place - on the morning of 7 December, 1941 - and didn't alert his military because the vast, overwhelming majority of Americans wanted nothing to do with the war and he needed Pearl Harbor to shift public opinion?

Does the truth sting that the real reason the Iranians hate us, the reason why there exists today a government in Iran that is hostile to America and the west, is because a false flag black op terror campaign, known as Ajax, was initiated by the grandson of Teddy Roosevelt, Kermit, and the father of General Norman Schwartzkopff, in order to overthrow Iran's democratically elected leader, Mossadeq, and install a viciously oppressive dictator, the Shah, making America an accessory to his every act of cruelty for the next 26 years? They hate us because we're free? Really?

Is it a bitter pill to swallow that John F Kennedy was assassinated by your government because he wanted nothing to do with the war in Vietnam? Is it painful to know that 58,000 Americans lost their lives in Vietnam over a lie - the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which we know from the Johnson tapes LBJ and Macnamara knew was a staged event from the beginning, yet was exploited as an excuse to get into a war the government knew couldn't be won, and in fact had no interest in winning?

Can you stand to hear that the government considered initiating another black op terror campaign, called Northwoods, as a false flag excuse to invade Cuba? Or that Johnson allowed Israel to attempt to sink the USS Liberty as a pretext to invade the entire Middle East? "I want that godamn ship going to the bottom," Johnson said to the commander of the Sixth Fleet as he ordered them to provide no assistance to the beseiged warship.

In light of these uncomfortable truths, verifiable by simple Google searches turning up hits for government documents and mainstream news stories, does it really shock you to know that criminal elements in the US government perpetrated 9-11 as a false flag black op terror attack to justify invading Afghanistan and Iraq?

The truth often stings, but is it your patriotic duty to ignore it, and dismiss me as a hater of my country? Do not confuse patriotism with blind loyalty to the State. Ask questions, seek the truth, and do not be afraid to see what you see.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Gore: U.S. Climate Bill Will Help Bring About 'Global Governance'

Climate Depot Exclusive
Friday, July 10, 2009
By Marc Morano  –  Climate Depot

Former Vice President Al Gore declared that the Congressional climate bill will help bring about “global governance.”

“I bring you good news from the U.S., “Gore said on July 7, 2009 in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by UK Times. “Just two weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey climate bill,” Gore said, noting it was “very much a step in the right direction.” President Obama has pushed for the passage of the bill in the Senate and attended a G8 summit this week where he agreed to attempt to keep the Earth's temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees C.

Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming.

“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.” (Editor's Note: Gore makes the “global governance” comment at the 1min. 10 sec. mark in this UK Times video.)

Gore's call for “global governance” echoes former French President Jacques Chirac's call in 2000. On November 20, 2000, then French President Chirac said during a speech at The Hague that the UN's Kyoto Protocol represented "the first component of an authentic global governance."

“For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance,” Chirac explained. “From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace,” Chirac added.

The Truth About the Flu Shot

July 10, 2009

If the government mandates a series of flu shots this fall — so far they are only “recommending” the shots — you can expect to get a dose of thimerosal (mercury), formaldehyde, detergent, MF-59 (an oil-based adjuvant), and other toxins.

Incidentally, if you believe the government will not kidnap you at gunpoint and lock you in a concentration camp and possibly force you to take these toxins, check out Executive Order 13295 of April 4, 2003. It states that the government has the authority to establish “regulations providing for the apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of suspected communicable diseases,” including diseases at that time “not yet isolated or named.”

Of course, the government will decide if you have a deadly disease or not.

Obama Science Advisor Called For “Planetary Regime” To Enforce Totalitarian Population Control Measures

I try to tell people that most of the people in our government and the global power elite subscribe to a sickening psuedo-science known as eugenics and want to wipe out 80% of the global populationan which is why they put fluoride in our water and mercury in our vaccines and tell us it's good for us, and they look at me like I have two heads. THIS IS THE REAL DEAL. You are a target!

    Paul Joseph Watson Prison
    Saturday, July 11, 2009

    President Obama’s top science and technology advisor John P. Holdren co-authored a 1977 book in which he advocated the formation of a “planetary regime” that would use a “global police force” to enforce totalitarian measures of population control, including forced abortions, mass sterilization programs conducted via the food and water supply, as well as mandatory bodily implants that would prevent couples from having children.

    The concepts outlined in Holdren’s 1977 book Ecoscience, which he co-authored with close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich, were so shocking that a February 2009 Front Page Magazine story on the subject was largely dismissed as being outlandish because people couldn’t bring themselves to believe that it could be true.

    It was only when another Internet blog obtained the book and posted screenshots that the awful truth about what Holdren had actually committed to paper actually began to sink in.

    This issue is more prescient than ever because Holdren and his colleagues are now at the forefront of efforts to combat “climate change” through similarly insane programs focused around geoengineering the planet. As we reported in April, Holdren recently advocated “Large-scale geoengineering projects designed to cool the Earth,” such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” which many have pointed out is already occurring via chemtrails.

    Ecoscience discusses a number of ways in which the global population could be reduced to combat what the authors see as mankind’s greatest threat – overpopulation. In each case, the proposals are couched in sober academic rhetoric, but the horrifying foundation of what Holdren and his co-authors are advocating is clear. These proposals include;

    • Forcibly and unknowingly sterilizing the entire population by adding infertility drugs to the nation’s water and food supply.
    • Legalizing “compulsory abortions,” ie forced abortions carried out against the will of the pregnant women, as is common place in Communist China where women who have already had one child and refuse to abort the second are kidnapped off the street by the authorities before a procedure is carried out to forcibly abort the baby.
    • Babies who are born out of wedlock or to teenage mothers to be forcibly taken away from their mother by the government and put up for adoption. Another proposed measure would force single mothers to demonstrate to the government that they can care for the child, effectively introducing licensing to have children.
    • Implementing a system of “involuntary birth control,” where both men and women would be mandated to have an infertility device implanted into their body at puberty and only have it removed temporarily if they received permission from the government to have a baby.
    • Permanently sterilizing people who the authorities deem have already had too many children or who have contributed to “general social deterioration”.
    • Formally passing a law that criminalizes having more than two children, similar to the one child policy in Communist China.
    • This would all be overseen by a transnational and centralized “planetary regime” that would utilize a “global police force” to enforce the measures outlined above. The “planetary regime” would also have the power to determine population levels for every country in the world.

    The quotes from the book are included below. We also include comments by the author of the blog who provided the screenshots of the relevant passages. Screenshots of the relevant pages and the quotes in their full context are provided at the end of the excerpts. The quotes from the book appear as text indents and in bold. The quotes from the author of the blog are italicized.

Please continue reading...

Friday, July 10, 2009

They love it when a plan comes together

It is quite amazing that, while the government has not the forsight to predict disasters that can be exploited to their benefit, like the economic calamity they engineered and are using to the full benefit of the State, or 9-11, they are so very prescient when it benefits them.

For instance, just when the government began beating the war drums for expanding the war into Pakistan, because they feared a Taliban coup of the Pakistan government would put nuclear weapons in the hands of "terrorists", al-CIA-da comes out (not bin Laden, of couse - he's dead) and says, gee, if only we could get our hands on Pakistan's nukes, we would use them against America!

Now the government can kill two birds with one stone: pound on the war drums against North Korea, and provide another convenient excuse to clamp down on the internet. Someone, you see, has allegedly been attacking the State Department for 4 days now, and somehow we're just certain it's got to be Pyongyang. The proof? Ha! This is the US government. You don't need no stinking proof!

In fact the government has provided no proof Pyongyang is involved in these supposed attacks. The "proof" is that South Korean law makers said South Korean intelligence thinks North Korea or its sympathizers could be behind the attack, based on "circumstancial and technical" evidence. Considering the attacks originated from 86 IP addresses in 16 countries, just about anyone could be behind these attacks. Doesn't really matter.

What matters is, the global power elite haven't had enough war, because, of course, nothing makes them more money than war. And at the same time, with the mainstream media fully under their control, nothing poses a greater threat to their world order than the free dissemination of uncensored, unfiltered information on the internet. This can't be allowed to continue, and rest assured this is the one and only reason for the cyber-security bill, not some trumped-up fake threat of cyber-warfare from our enemies.

Gullible Americans have fallen for false flag black ops going on 100 years, to the great benefit of the global power elite. Why stop now?

Back in full effect soon

Don't give up on me! It's not that I've lost interest in my blog and haven't been paying attention. I've recently changed residence and it's taking forever to get my internet hooked up. Should only be a few more days, at which point I'm going to hit you hard like an animal being freed from its cage.

In the meantime, I'll make occasional posts from my Blackberry, but as anyone with a BB knows, this is extremely tedious. Thanks for following my blog, and please, spread the word. And be on the look-out...I could be back online any day!

Sunday, July 5, 2009

Remarks to the WNY Tea Party on July 4th

by James Ostrowski

Frank Sinatra used to ask in song, "What is America?"

Let me change that question slightly to "What was America?", because whatever America was, no longer exists.

You can say the pledge of allegiance and sing the national anthem all you want but please don’t pretend you are honoring the land of Washington and Jefferson. It has been many decades since America was governed by Jeffersonian principles of limited government or Washington’s foreign policy of minding our own damn business. Having a global military empire is not what I would call minding our own business.

America is a free country? In your dreams maybe. Or, if you define a free country as a country whose government is free to do whatever it pleases, then, yes, America is a free government. Perhaps you think a free country is a country with elections. When did you ever agree to exchange your right to liberty for the right to vote for which politicians will be your new slave masters? And where do you go to undue that idiotic "bargain" you never made in the first place?

If we can’t tell the difference between individual freedom and voting, all is lost. If you fail to understand that majority rule and elections are just an excuse to violate your natural right to liberty, we might as well all go home right now.

We just stumbled on the answer to the question "What was America?" For thousands of years of recorded history, men and women were governed by thugs who grabbed power by brute force and then called themselves kings, emperors, czars, kaisers, caesars, khans, shahs, and sultans. Then, about 300 years ago, a movement arose that led to the creation of America. We keep that movement alive here today. That movement holds that all human beings have a natural human to right to liberty that the government, democracy or not, could never violate.

I asked at the last tea party, what were those men and women at Lexington and Concord fighting for? The natural right to liberty. Liberty is simply the ability to do what you wish with what you own.

Doing what you wish – with what you own. Liberty is what the American Revolution was fought for. Jefferson explained that in the Declaration of Independence and in his first inaugural when he said: "a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government."

It’s not an issue of left or right, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. Neither party has remotely stood for liberty for many, many decades, in fact, during the lifetimes of anyone standing here today.

The idea isn’t liberal as that term is now understood, or conservative. America was based on the radical idea of natural liberty which led to the violent overthrow of the evil old regime first in England, then in America, then in France.

Radical doesn’t mean violent, however. The founders tried every peaceful means for redress and their actions at Lexington and Concord were defensive in response to an attack by the British. No, those who favor the natural right to liberty constitute the party of peace since liberty is peace and peace is liberty.

So, radical doesn’t mean violent. It means principled. It means going to the root cause of our problems. That root cause is the death long ago of the natural human right to liberty as a governing principle.

Liberty, that age-old dream of humanity – we have never tasted it. We can only imagine what it was like after the Revolution for Americans of that era to wake up in the morning and know that the day is yours, not the king’s or some politician’s. Your life is yours. Your property is yours. You are in command of your destiny.

May I suggest that’s why we are here today. We Patriots are here today to keep the flame of liberty burning. We stand on the shoulders of giants who have fought and died for liberty for many centuries in many countries. Their dream has not died; it is merely asleep. America is not dead so long as the idea of liberty lives. We here today are keeping its flame alive. And we honor those brave men and women at Lexington and Concord who stood up to the best army on earth and sent them scurrying back to Boston, carrying their wounded and dead.

If we have one-tenth of their courage, we can win this fight to restore the Republic and finally win the fight for the natural right to liberty which is the very definition of America.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of The People to alter or to abolish it . . .

Happy birthday America. Long live the American dream!

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Saddam's Noble Lie

    "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere." - George W. Bush

It really can't be argued anymore that Saddam had WMD. It was bad enough that people actually believed he was a threat to the United States. Nobody ever really believed that; they just hated Saddam and wanted a war with someone. Why not him?

But here we have conclusive proof, straight from the horse's mouth, that Saddam didn't have WMD, yet kept up the facade that he did to project strength to the Iranians, who he apparently feared more than the U.S. And who would say Saddam was a moral or noble leader? Certainly not me, but at the same time, who can say he didn't have a right to defend himself, even if the best he could do was project the illusion of power that was completely non-existent, against his country's mortal enemy? Where would it leave Iraq to allow Iran, on the verge of becoming a nuclear power, to know that they had, in fact, completely disarmed, and were utterly at Iran's mercy were they to choose to attack Iraq?

The war in Iraq was based on a lie first and foremost because the root justification for that war - 9-11 - was a false flag black op perpetuated by criminal elements within the U.S. government. But not even that lie was big enough to justify invading Iraq. Unfortunately for the 4,000+ dead American soldiers and the many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were 'liberated' of their lives, Saddam was also a liar. His lies were slightly more noble than ours.