From http://www.roguegovernment.com/Blood_Samples_Raise_Questions_of_Privacy/16266/0/6/6/Y/M.html
Blood Samples Raise Questions of Privacy
Published on 06-30-2009 Email To Friend Print Version
Source: Washington Post
Matthew Brzica and his wife hardly noticed when the hospital took a few drops of blood from each of their four newborn children for routine genetic testing. But then they discovered that the state had kept the dried blood samples ever since -- and was making them available to scientists for medical research.
"They're just taking DNA from young kids right out of the womb and putting it into a warehouse," said Brzica, of Victoria, Minn. "DNA is what makes us who we are. It's just not right."
The couple is among a group of parents challenging Minnesota's practice of storing babies' blood samples and allowing researchers to study them without their permission. The confrontation, and a similar one in Texas, has focused attention on the practice at a time when there is increasing interest in using millions of these collected "blood spots" to study diseases.
Michigan, for example, is moving millions of samples from a state warehouse in Lansing to freezers in a new "neonatal biobank" in Detroit in the hopes of helping make the economically downtrodden city a center for biomedical research. The National Institutes of Health, meanwhile, is funding a $13.5 million, five-year project aimed at creating a "virtual repository" of blood samples from around the country.
The storage and use of the blood is raising many questions, including whether states should be required to get parents' consent before keeping the samples long-term or making them available to scientists, and whether parents should be consulted about the types of studies for which they are used. The concern has prompted a federal advisory panel to begin reviewing such issues.
"There has not been a good national discussion about the use of these samples," said Jeffrey Botkin, a pediatrician and bioethicist at the University of Utah who is studying policies and attitudes about the newborn blood samples as part of a federally funded project. "Genetics is an area that touches a nerve. The public is concerned about massive databases."
Hospitals prick the heels of more than 4 million babies born each year in the United States to collect a few drops of blood under state programs requiring that all newborns be screened for dozens of genetic disorders. The programs enable doctors to save lives and prevent permanent neurological damage by diagnosing and treating the conditions early.
Although parents are usually informed about the tests and often can opt out if they object for religious and other reasons, many give it little thought in the rush and exhaustion of a birth. And parents are generally not asked for permission to store the samples or use them for research.
Each state determines what is done with the blood spots afterward. The District discards them after a year. Virginia saves them for up to 10 years but does not allow them to be used for research, officials said. Maryland has been storing blood spots since 2004 and may make its inventory of about 350,000 samples available to researchers. At least nine other states also keep the blood spots indefinitely.
"We consider them a national treasure," said Sharon Terry of the Genetic Alliance, a coalition that promotes genetics research. "We think they offer us the beginnings of a national blood bank to understand disease at an early age and follow people longitudinally over time."
The stored samples are mostly used to validate the accuracy of newborn screening and evaluate new tests. But scientists are also using them for other types of research, including to study specific genetic disorders, explore the frequency and causes of birth defects, decipher how genes and environmental factors interact, and probe whether exposure to chemical pollutants early in development plays a role in cancer and other diseases.
Research projects are only approved, officials in Maryland and other states said, after undergoing careful scientific and ethical review. In most cases, all identifying information is stripped from the samples.
"I've never heard anyone complain that their privacy was violated or their dried blood was used for something that negatively impacted them," said Michael S. Watson of the American College of Medical Genetics, which has the NIH contract to create an electronic database of newborn blood samples from across the country.
But the states can still link each sample to an individual child -- and that worries some parents, patient groups, bioethicists and privacy advocates, especially with advances in genetics and electronic data banks linking medical information from different sources.
"It's fine and good to say these can't be identified, but how real is that?" said Hank Greely, a Stanford University bioethicist. "Just because you don't have a name or Social Security number doesn't mean you can't identify it. Once we start using DNA for more and more things like regular medical records, somebody could do a cross-check and say whose blood it is."
As scientists continue to discover new genetic markers, many wonder what such databases might reveal.
"I'm not a big scaremonger about the dangers of DNA medicine," Greely said. "But you could use someone's DNA to make some inferences about their future health, about their future behavior, and if you got samples from their parents or a DNA databank, you can make inferences about family relationships."
Because of those and other concerns, parents and privacy activists in Minnesota are asking that more than 800,000 blood spots that have been stored without parents' approval since 1997 be destroyed.
"Once learning the genetics of one child, you could see an insurance company seeing that possibility for the next child and making it clear that this is a preexisting condition that the company would not cover. Or perhaps an employer that found out about it wouldn't want to have us as an employee," said Twila Brase of the Citizens' Council on Health Care in St. Paul.
Guaranteeing Privacy
The Minnesota case prompted a similar parents' lawsuit in March against Texas, which since 2002 has stored an estimated 4 million samples. The litigation spurred the Texas legislature to require the state health department to start getting parents' permission to store the samples and honor requests that samples be destroyed. But the lawsuit is still pending over what should be done with the samples already on file.
"I don't want to sound paranoid, but I'm not comfortable with a governmental agency having this information, with potentially the ability to share it with sister governmental agencies, such as criminal agencies," said Maryann Overath, an Austin lawyer with two sons who sued the state.
Law enforcement agencies have been cataloguing millions of DNA fingerprints in recent years, raising similar concerns.
State officials argue that strict safeguards protect the privacy of information associated with the newborn blood samples and say details about a child's medical history are provided to researchers only if parents are contacted individually for approval.
"Privacy is very important, and we protect it every way we can," said David Orren, the Minnesota health department's chief legal counsel.
In Michigan, officials plan to start asking new parents for permission to include their children's samples in the stockpile. But officials decided it would be impractical to try to contact the parents of all 3.5 million children whose samples are already on file. Instead, they are publicizing the biobank to allow parents to object if they don't want their children's samples included.
But even if the question of consent is resolved, other issues remain.
"There might be some research that offends moral sensibilities of citizens, such as research into prenatal screening for some genetic condition that might lead some parents to make a decision to selectively abort affected fetuses," said Tom Tomlinson, a bioethicist at Michigan State University.
Concerned that the debate might undermine the newborn screening programs, the federal Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children will discuss the issue in September.
"There are obviously legal and ethical issues that need further discussion," said R. Rodney Howell, who chairs the committee. "Unfortunately we live in a world of conspiracy theories. We want to inform people that these spots are retained in some states and that they are carefully guarded. We want to be totally transparent."
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Oregon Legalizes Hemp
From http://www.roguegovernment.com/Oregon_Legalizes_Hemp/16268/0/17/17/Y/M.html
Oregon Legalizes Hemp
Published on 06-30-2009
Email To Friend Print Version
Source: Raw Story
Oregon’s House of Representatives voted Monday night to legalize the cultivation of hemp, becoming the sixth state to do so just this year.
Oregon’s Senate voted 27 to 2 in favor of the new law last week. Monday’s 46 to 11 House vote means that the measure will become law, barring an unlikely veto by Governor Ted Kulongoski.
The move is part of a rapidly growing nationwide trend to liberalize laws relating to marijuana. Hemp is a botanical cousin of marijuana, traditionally used to make clothing, rope and other durable fiber goods.
“Hemp is a versatile, environmentally-friendly crop that has not been grown in the U.S. for over fifty years because of a misguided and politicized interpretation of the nation’s drug laws by the Drug Enforcement Administration,” Vote Hemp President Eric Steenstra said in a statement.
“While a new bill in Congress, HR 1866, is a welcome step, the hemp industry is hopeful that President Obama’s administration will recognize hemp’s myriad benefits to farmers, businesses and the environment.”
According to Vote Hemp, this year Maine, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota and Vermont and ”all passed resolutions or memorials urging Congress to allow states to regulate hemp farming.”
California is at the forefront of the marijuana debate, with a movement growing to decriminalize marijuana for personal use in the state by 2010.
But in Oregon’s debate, politicians were careful to distinguish between hemp and weed, and to highlight the fact that the new law would allow farmers to cultivate hemp, not grow marijuana.
Some members of Oregon’s legislature displayed t-shirts reading “Senate Bill 676 is about rope, not dope.”
Oregon Legalizes Hemp
Published on 06-30-2009
Email To Friend Print Version
Source: Raw Story
Oregon’s House of Representatives voted Monday night to legalize the cultivation of hemp, becoming the sixth state to do so just this year.
Oregon’s Senate voted 27 to 2 in favor of the new law last week. Monday’s 46 to 11 House vote means that the measure will become law, barring an unlikely veto by Governor Ted Kulongoski.
The move is part of a rapidly growing nationwide trend to liberalize laws relating to marijuana. Hemp is a botanical cousin of marijuana, traditionally used to make clothing, rope and other durable fiber goods.
“Hemp is a versatile, environmentally-friendly crop that has not been grown in the U.S. for over fifty years because of a misguided and politicized interpretation of the nation’s drug laws by the Drug Enforcement Administration,” Vote Hemp President Eric Steenstra said in a statement.
“While a new bill in Congress, HR 1866, is a welcome step, the hemp industry is hopeful that President Obama’s administration will recognize hemp’s myriad benefits to farmers, businesses and the environment.”
According to Vote Hemp, this year Maine, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota and Vermont and ”all passed resolutions or memorials urging Congress to allow states to regulate hemp farming.”
California is at the forefront of the marijuana debate, with a movement growing to decriminalize marijuana for personal use in the state by 2010.
But in Oregon’s debate, politicians were careful to distinguish between hemp and weed, and to highlight the fact that the new law would allow farmers to cultivate hemp, not grow marijuana.
Some members of Oregon’s legislature displayed t-shirts reading “Senate Bill 676 is about rope, not dope.”
More articles
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13785781/The-Bilderberg-Group
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16654603/The-History-of-Abortion
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16907509/Alfred-Kinsey
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16426616/The-Occult-World
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15089793/The-Oklahoma-City-Bombing
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14431276/Biometrics-and-the-Mark-of-the-Beast
New Technology Allows Parents to Hold Life-Size Model of Their Unborn Child
From http://lifenews.com/int1249.html
New Technology Allows Parents to Hold Life-Size Model of Their Unborn Child
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 29, 2009
Email RSS Print
London, England (LifeNews.com) -- Stunning new technology is allowing parents to go beyond a 3D or 4D ultrasound to bond with their unborn child in ways never imaginable. A student at the Royal College of Art in Britain has created life-like models based on pictures of unborn children that are the exact shape and size of the baby in the womb.
Fetal models have long been a staple of county fairs and health education classes across the country, but one student has gone further.
Brazilian student Jorge Lopes is a PhD. student at the college and he has pioneered the use of converting data from ultrasounds and MRI scans to form life-size plastic models in a process called rapid prototyping.
"It’s amazing to see the faces of the mothers. They can see the full scale of their baby, really understand the size of it," Lopes told the London Daily Mail newspaper.
One way to conceive of the idea behind the new process is to imagine a printer that relies on plastic powder instead of the ink that normally goes on a sheet of paper. As the plastic build up, it creates a 3D model instead of a flat image on paper.
Aine Duffy from the RCA added, "It's stunning technology - here at the RCA we use it for everything from new medical devices, to car components, to jewelry, to architectural models."
Lopes' work is slated to appear at an exhibition opening in London today.
The process is drawing positive comments from Dr. Staurt Campbell, who pioneered ultrasound imaging in Britain in the 1980s.
"I don't know whether I am looking at science or I am looking at art," he said, calling the process "absolutely unique" and "a fantastic development."
New Technology Allows Parents to Hold Life-Size Model of Their Unborn Child
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 29, 2009
Email RSS Print
London, England (LifeNews.com) -- Stunning new technology is allowing parents to go beyond a 3D or 4D ultrasound to bond with their unborn child in ways never imaginable. A student at the Royal College of Art in Britain has created life-like models based on pictures of unborn children that are the exact shape and size of the baby in the womb.
Fetal models have long been a staple of county fairs and health education classes across the country, but one student has gone further.
Brazilian student Jorge Lopes is a PhD. student at the college and he has pioneered the use of converting data from ultrasounds and MRI scans to form life-size plastic models in a process called rapid prototyping.
"It’s amazing to see the faces of the mothers. They can see the full scale of their baby, really understand the size of it," Lopes told the London Daily Mail newspaper.
One way to conceive of the idea behind the new process is to imagine a printer that relies on plastic powder instead of the ink that normally goes on a sheet of paper. As the plastic build up, it creates a 3D model instead of a flat image on paper.
Aine Duffy from the RCA added, "It's stunning technology - here at the RCA we use it for everything from new medical devices, to car components, to jewelry, to architectural models."
Lopes' work is slated to appear at an exhibition opening in London today.
The process is drawing positive comments from Dr. Staurt Campbell, who pioneered ultrasound imaging in Britain in the 1980s.
"I don't know whether I am looking at science or I am looking at art," he said, calling the process "absolutely unique" and "a fantastic development."
The Truth Behind The Iraq “Sovereignty” Propaganda
From http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-truth-behind-the-iraq-sovereignty-propaganda.html
The Truth Behind The Iraq “Sovereignty” Propaganda
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops to remain stationed at dozens of U.S. military bases throughout the country
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
The corporate media is getting all giddy and affording blanket coverage to the story of Iraqis who are “regaining their sovereignty” as U.S. troops are pulled out from Iraqi cities. This is of course lurid and baseless propaganda - hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops will remain in Iraq stationed at the dozens of military bases that have been built across the country.
“As of now, there are approximately 130,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq. Most of the U.S. soldiers that had been deployed in Iraqi cities are being returned to garrison elsewhere in country. The United States Air Force controls Iraq’s airspace. The United States Navy controls Iraq’s territorial waters,” points out the Cryptogon blog.
“Sovereignty: No. Propaganda: Yes.”
After the “official” full withdrawal date of 2011, which Admiral Mike Mullen has indicated isn’t even guaranteed, “Mr. Obama plans to leave behind a “residual force” of tens of thousands of troops to continue training Iraqi security forces, hunt down foreign terrorist cells and guard American institutions,” reported the New York Times back in February.
“Residual force” is a euphemism for “occupying army,” since only the most stupidly naive could ever believe that Iraq is now nothing more than a subservient client state of the new world order empire.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
A senior military officer spelled it out more plainly to the Los Angeles Times, “When President Obama said we were going to get out within 16 months, some people heard, ‘get out,’ and everyone’s gone. But that is not going to happen,” the officer said.
Indeed, at the last count which took place nearly three years ago, the U.S. military had already built no less than 55 fully functional military bases in Iraq, with funding in place to build many more.
Furthermore, U.S. troops aren’t even leaving the cities altogether. Reports confirm that U.S. tanks will continue to patrol the areas outside of the “green zone” and the airport in Baghdad. The streets of major cities will still be patrolled by U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers manning checkpoints everywhere harassing people for ID. In addition, if the Iraqis “request help” from U.S. troops to undertake security procedures, they’ll be right back on the streets just as before.
Iraqis themselves are not fooled by the charade. As the New York Times admits, the “celebrations” today “seemed contrived”, “Police cars were festooned with plastic flowers, and signs celebrating “independence day” were tied to blast walls and fences around the city. On Monday, night a festive evening celebration in Zahra Park with singers and entertainers drew primarily young men, many of them off-duty police officers,” according to the report.
“There is no doubt this is not national sovereignty because the Americans will stay inside Iraq in military bases,” said Najim Salim, 40, a teacher in Basra. “But the government wants to convince the citizens that there is a withdrawal of foreign troops, although the government could not protect citizens in some cities in Iraq even with the presence of U.S. forces.”
According to Websters dictionary, “sovereignty” is defined as “freedom from external control”.
Anyone who believes that Iraq is a sovereign country and has “freedom from external control,” or will ever achieve it while hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops are stationed at dozens of bases throughout the country, probably still believes that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
The Truth Behind The Iraq “Sovereignty” Propaganda
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops to remain stationed at dozens of U.S. military bases throughout the country
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
The corporate media is getting all giddy and affording blanket coverage to the story of Iraqis who are “regaining their sovereignty” as U.S. troops are pulled out from Iraqi cities. This is of course lurid and baseless propaganda - hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops will remain in Iraq stationed at the dozens of military bases that have been built across the country.
“As of now, there are approximately 130,000 U.S. military personnel in Iraq. Most of the U.S. soldiers that had been deployed in Iraqi cities are being returned to garrison elsewhere in country. The United States Air Force controls Iraq’s airspace. The United States Navy controls Iraq’s territorial waters,” points out the Cryptogon blog.
“Sovereignty: No. Propaganda: Yes.”
After the “official” full withdrawal date of 2011, which Admiral Mike Mullen has indicated isn’t even guaranteed, “Mr. Obama plans to leave behind a “residual force” of tens of thousands of troops to continue training Iraqi security forces, hunt down foreign terrorist cells and guard American institutions,” reported the New York Times back in February.
“Residual force” is a euphemism for “occupying army,” since only the most stupidly naive could ever believe that Iraq is now nothing more than a subservient client state of the new world order empire.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
A senior military officer spelled it out more plainly to the Los Angeles Times, “When President Obama said we were going to get out within 16 months, some people heard, ‘get out,’ and everyone’s gone. But that is not going to happen,” the officer said.
Indeed, at the last count which took place nearly three years ago, the U.S. military had already built no less than 55 fully functional military bases in Iraq, with funding in place to build many more.
Furthermore, U.S. troops aren’t even leaving the cities altogether. Reports confirm that U.S. tanks will continue to patrol the areas outside of the “green zone” and the airport in Baghdad. The streets of major cities will still be patrolled by U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers manning checkpoints everywhere harassing people for ID. In addition, if the Iraqis “request help” from U.S. troops to undertake security procedures, they’ll be right back on the streets just as before.
Iraqis themselves are not fooled by the charade. As the New York Times admits, the “celebrations” today “seemed contrived”, “Police cars were festooned with plastic flowers, and signs celebrating “independence day” were tied to blast walls and fences around the city. On Monday, night a festive evening celebration in Zahra Park with singers and entertainers drew primarily young men, many of them off-duty police officers,” according to the report.
“There is no doubt this is not national sovereignty because the Americans will stay inside Iraq in military bases,” said Najim Salim, 40, a teacher in Basra. “But the government wants to convince the citizens that there is a withdrawal of foreign troops, although the government could not protect citizens in some cities in Iraq even with the presence of U.S. forces.”
According to Websters dictionary, “sovereignty” is defined as “freedom from external control”.
Anyone who believes that Iraq is a sovereign country and has “freedom from external control,” or will ever achieve it while hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops are stationed at dozens of bases throughout the country, probably still believes that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
Planned Parenthood Abortion Center Staffer: We Bend the Rules on Sexual Abuse
From http://lifenews.com/state4265.html
Planned Parenthood Abortion Center Staffer: We Bend the Rules on Sexual Abuse
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 30, 2009
Email RSS Print
Birmingham, AL (LifeNews.com) -- A new undercover video shows what others have when it comes to Planned Parenthood and how it handles potential cases of sexual abuse. New footage shows a staffer at a Birmingham, Alabama abortion center telling a woman who appears to be a victim of statutory rape that "we bend the rules."
The video is the latest from Lila Rose, a UCLA student who has become a muckraker for her series of videos exposing the nation's largest abortion business.
In this new video, the Birmingham Planned Parenthood counselor tells Rose, who pretends to be a 14-year-old statutory rape victim that it "does sometimes bend the rules a little bit" rather than report sexual abuse to state authorities.
Rose told the staffer that she was 14 and had been impregnated by a 31-year-old boyfriend. She told the Planned Parenthood official she needed a secret abortion so her parents would not find out about her sexual relationship with the older man.
Rose asks, "Is it a problem about my boyfriend?"
The counselor, identified as "Tanisha" in the video, responds, "As long as you consented to having sex with him, there's nothing we can truly do about that."
Rose then says that her boyfriend "said he could get in big trouble," and Tanisha acknowledges that "he could, especially if your parents find out that he's 31."
The Planned Parenthood official then tells Rose that the center manager, Desiree Bates, "sometimes does bend the rules a little bit" and adds "whatever you tell us stays within these walls" and "we can't disclose any information to anybody."
However, Alabama code 26-14-3 requires health professionals to disclose suspected cases of sexual abuse to state officials immediately.
"The law is explicit about a healthcare provider's duty to report, yet Planned Parenthood pretends they cannot say anything," Rose tells LifeNews.com. "Planned Parenthood increases its business and influence by circumventing state reporting laws, but inflicts terrible harm upon the vulnerable young girls sent back to statutory rapists."
The video also shows the Planned Parenthood staff apparently evading the state's parental consent law.
Tanisha also seems to tell Rose that a signature from an "older sister that's over the age of 18" or someone "with the same last name" could function as a substitute for parental consent so Planned Parenthood could perform an abortion on a minor.
Yet, Alabama Code 26-21-3 specifies that the written permission of either a parent or legal guardian is necessary before a minor may obtain an abortion.
This is the seventh Planned Parenthood center implicated in a multi-state child abuse scandal involving the deliberate and unlawful suppression of evidence of statutory rape. Alabama is the fourth state to be implicated in the controversy, along with Arizona, Indiana, and Tennessee.
Recently, the investigation of a clinic in Memphis, TN assisted state legislators in their effort to successfully divert nearly $1 million in taxpayer subsidies from Planned Parenthood to law-abiding local health clinics.
"When to 'bend the rules a little' means hiding a case of statutory rape from Child Protective Services and looking for ways around the parental consent requirement, Planned Parenthood becomes directly responsible for ensuring that statutory rapists can continue their abuse of young girls," Rose says.
Related web sites:
Live Action Advocates - http://www.liveaction.org
Planned Parenthood Abortion Center Staffer: We Bend the Rules on Sexual Abuse
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 30, 2009
Email RSS Print
Birmingham, AL (LifeNews.com) -- A new undercover video shows what others have when it comes to Planned Parenthood and how it handles potential cases of sexual abuse. New footage shows a staffer at a Birmingham, Alabama abortion center telling a woman who appears to be a victim of statutory rape that "we bend the rules."
The video is the latest from Lila Rose, a UCLA student who has become a muckraker for her series of videos exposing the nation's largest abortion business.
In this new video, the Birmingham Planned Parenthood counselor tells Rose, who pretends to be a 14-year-old statutory rape victim that it "does sometimes bend the rules a little bit" rather than report sexual abuse to state authorities.
Rose told the staffer that she was 14 and had been impregnated by a 31-year-old boyfriend. She told the Planned Parenthood official she needed a secret abortion so her parents would not find out about her sexual relationship with the older man.
Rose asks, "Is it a problem about my boyfriend?"
The counselor, identified as "Tanisha" in the video, responds, "As long as you consented to having sex with him, there's nothing we can truly do about that."
Rose then says that her boyfriend "said he could get in big trouble," and Tanisha acknowledges that "he could, especially if your parents find out that he's 31."
The Planned Parenthood official then tells Rose that the center manager, Desiree Bates, "sometimes does bend the rules a little bit" and adds "whatever you tell us stays within these walls" and "we can't disclose any information to anybody."
However, Alabama code 26-14-3 requires health professionals to disclose suspected cases of sexual abuse to state officials immediately.
"The law is explicit about a healthcare provider's duty to report, yet Planned Parenthood pretends they cannot say anything," Rose tells LifeNews.com. "Planned Parenthood increases its business and influence by circumventing state reporting laws, but inflicts terrible harm upon the vulnerable young girls sent back to statutory rapists."
The video also shows the Planned Parenthood staff apparently evading the state's parental consent law.
Tanisha also seems to tell Rose that a signature from an "older sister that's over the age of 18" or someone "with the same last name" could function as a substitute for parental consent so Planned Parenthood could perform an abortion on a minor.
Yet, Alabama Code 26-21-3 specifies that the written permission of either a parent or legal guardian is necessary before a minor may obtain an abortion.
This is the seventh Planned Parenthood center implicated in a multi-state child abuse scandal involving the deliberate and unlawful suppression of evidence of statutory rape. Alabama is the fourth state to be implicated in the controversy, along with Arizona, Indiana, and Tennessee.
Recently, the investigation of a clinic in Memphis, TN assisted state legislators in their effort to successfully divert nearly $1 million in taxpayer subsidies from Planned Parenthood to law-abiding local health clinics.
"When to 'bend the rules a little' means hiding a case of statutory rape from Child Protective Services and looking for ways around the parental consent requirement, Planned Parenthood becomes directly responsible for ensuring that statutory rapists can continue their abuse of young girls," Rose says.
Related web sites:
Live Action Advocates - http://www.liveaction.org
Can credit default swaps be abolished?
From http://www.infowars.com/can-credit-default-swaps-be-abolished/
Can credit default swaps be abolished?
Text size
Washington’s Blog
June 30, 2009
Tim Geithner was asked whether credit default swaps should be abolished altogether.
Remember, the Nobel economist who helped create the pricing formulas for CDS said the CDS are so dangerous that existing over-the-counter contracts should be voided:
The “solution is really to blow up or burn the OTC market, the CDSs and swaps and structured products, and let us start over,” he said, referring to credit-default swaps and other complex securities that are traded off exchanges. “One way to do that, through the auspices of regulators or the banking commissioners, is to try to close all contracts at mid-market prices.”
Many other economists agree.
But in a question and answer session, Tim Geithner said we need CDS for financial “creativity” and “innovation”:
Question: During questioning before Congress you were asked why exotic investment instruments like credit default swaps shouldn’t just be done away with. You responded that you did not want to stifle “creativity” in the financial markets. Why do we want a “creative” financial market? – Anonymous
Answer: We want a creative financial market because a creative economy requires it—the innovations generated by our markets and institutions help to make our economy the most vibrant and flexible in the world. The new products, services and capital, they produce are exactly what help turn a new idea into the next big company. Overall, we do not believe that you can build a system based on banning individual products—our core challenge is ensuring we have a system that has a proper balance between innovation on the one hand and consumer protection on the other. We propose keeping the system safe for innovation by having stronger protections against risk in CDS and other derivative markets with stronger capital buffers, greater disclosure so investors and consumers can make more informed financial decisions, and a system that is better able to evolve as innovation advances and the structure of the financial system changes.
Here’s the actual exchange (page
Of course, the U.S. economy is not “the most vibrant and flexible in the world”. It is the most broke in the world.
But is Geithner right that financial “creativity” and “innovation” are good things?
No.
The Canadian banking system is the world’s most stable banking system precisely because it is boring instead of innovative.
As Paul Krugman writes that banking has to be made boring again, to prevent the kinds of results which came from high -flying finance in the 1920’s (the Great Depression) and late 1990s early 2000s (the current melt down). Krugman also notes:
Part of the problem is that boring banking would mean poorer bankers, and the financial industry still has a lot of friends in high places. But it’s also a matter of ideology: Despite everything that has happened, most people in positions of power still associate fancy finance with economic progress.
Indeed, the most “boring” type of banking system imaginable would be to take the power to create credit away from the private banking giants and give it back to the government, as the Founding Fathers originally intended. By abandoning the “creativity” and “innovation” which has allowed the banksters to charge trillions in unnecessary interest fees to the American people bankrupt our nation and drive us into a Depression, we can get back to the “pursuit of happiness” which our forefathers fought and died for and which the Declaration of Independence promises.
See also this.
Can credit default swaps be abolished?
Text size
Washington’s Blog
June 30, 2009
Tim Geithner was asked whether credit default swaps should be abolished altogether.
Remember, the Nobel economist who helped create the pricing formulas for CDS said the CDS are so dangerous that existing over-the-counter contracts should be voided:
The “solution is really to blow up or burn the OTC market, the CDSs and swaps and structured products, and let us start over,” he said, referring to credit-default swaps and other complex securities that are traded off exchanges. “One way to do that, through the auspices of regulators or the banking commissioners, is to try to close all contracts at mid-market prices.”
Many other economists agree.
But in a question and answer session, Tim Geithner said we need CDS for financial “creativity” and “innovation”:
Question: During questioning before Congress you were asked why exotic investment instruments like credit default swaps shouldn’t just be done away with. You responded that you did not want to stifle “creativity” in the financial markets. Why do we want a “creative” financial market? – Anonymous
Answer: We want a creative financial market because a creative economy requires it—the innovations generated by our markets and institutions help to make our economy the most vibrant and flexible in the world. The new products, services and capital, they produce are exactly what help turn a new idea into the next big company. Overall, we do not believe that you can build a system based on banning individual products—our core challenge is ensuring we have a system that has a proper balance between innovation on the one hand and consumer protection on the other. We propose keeping the system safe for innovation by having stronger protections against risk in CDS and other derivative markets with stronger capital buffers, greater disclosure so investors and consumers can make more informed financial decisions, and a system that is better able to evolve as innovation advances and the structure of the financial system changes.
Here’s the actual exchange (page
Of course, the U.S. economy is not “the most vibrant and flexible in the world”. It is the most broke in the world.
But is Geithner right that financial “creativity” and “innovation” are good things?
No.
The Canadian banking system is the world’s most stable banking system precisely because it is boring instead of innovative.
As Paul Krugman writes that banking has to be made boring again, to prevent the kinds of results which came from high -flying finance in the 1920’s (the Great Depression) and late 1990s early 2000s (the current melt down). Krugman also notes:
Part of the problem is that boring banking would mean poorer bankers, and the financial industry still has a lot of friends in high places. But it’s also a matter of ideology: Despite everything that has happened, most people in positions of power still associate fancy finance with economic progress.
Indeed, the most “boring” type of banking system imaginable would be to take the power to create credit away from the private banking giants and give it back to the government, as the Founding Fathers originally intended. By abandoning the “creativity” and “innovation” which has allowed the banksters to charge trillions in unnecessary interest fees to the American people bankrupt our nation and drive us into a Depression, we can get back to the “pursuit of happiness” which our forefathers fought and died for and which the Declaration of Independence promises.
See also this.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Life is Precious
Global Taxes are threat nowadays. Cliff Kincaid accuses President Barack Obama of acquiescencing to a global plan to create a new international socialist order that is financed by global taxes onto the American people. The Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis (and its Impact on Development) begins to consider the adoption of a document calling for a "new voluntary and innovative sources of financing initatives to provide additional stable sources of development finance..." This is U.N. jargon for global taxes. Cliff believes that these taxes aren't voluntary at all and people could be forced to pay them. One proposal is to try to generate billions of dollars to be revenue for global purposes (which involves taxes on greenhouse gas emissions and financial transactions like stock trades). The document was agreed to at an informal meeting expert "facitiliators" and was made available on June 22 at 3 p.m. It is doubtful that any changes will be made to it. The conference was postponed from June 1-3 to June 24-26 at the U.N. in New York. While the “outcome document” has been watered down somewhat from the previous version, it still reaffirms attainment of the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals, which would require the payment of $845 billion from U.S. taxpayers. The commitment to the MDGs was a stated goal of the Global Poverty Act, which Barack Obama introduced as an U.S. Senator. It required that the U.S. to devote 0.7 percent of the Gross National Income to foreign aid. President Barack Obama now can bypass Congress by simply directing Susan Rice (or the Ambassador to the U.N.) to approve the U.N. conference document. The pressure can be increased in Congress to come up with the money in order to satisfy "international commitments." This pattern is similar to giving more money for the International Monetary Fund or the IMF. After agreeing at the G-20 summit to provide more money for the IMF, the Obama White House slipped the cash and credit into the recently passed emergency war funding bill. The Obama White House had added billions in cash, as well $100 billion line of credit for the IMF. Rep. Mike Pence disagrees with using 108 billion dollars for a global bailout for the IMF. We have a 2 trillion annual deficit now. Pence believes that this plan is a disservice to taxpayers and to those who defend us. The U.N. conference wants a world reserve currency (via the IMF and the U.N.) since the American dollar value is decreasing. This could be SDRs or the special drawing rights, which is a form of international currency that enables global institutions like the International Monetary Fund to give more foreign aid to the rest of the world. This document would end America as the world's leading economic power if it was implemented. The United Nations have been known for corruption when its "peacekeepers" have been implicated in sexual abuse and other human rights violations. Pro-U.N. agent and economist Joseph Stiglitz is coordinating a "Commission of Experts" that reports to U.N. General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto. Miguel D'Escoto is the notorious Communist Catholic Priest who received the Lenin Peace Prize from the old Soviet Union. Stiglitz produced his own document that wants more SDRs to fund global institutions, a new global reserve currency, and a new global credit facility. These are new world order ideals. The document notes that an international airline ticket tax is now in effect, as a result of the actions of the “Leading Group on Solidarity Levies” that now involves close to 60 countries and major international organizations. This money is going to fight global diseases. The term “Solidarity Levies” is U.N.-speak for global taxes. The U.N. wants to be slick and wants the U.S. to collect the taxes. These taxed are subsequently turned over to institutions like the U.N. So, the world body can act like a global IRS. The mainstream media mostly isn't reporting on this vital story. So, we know that global currency agendas and a proposed global IRS system is very real.
Canada has a socialist-like medical system. Eyad Jamaleddine from Infowars on June 26, 2009 wrote an article about this issue. He wrote that most of Quebec is similar to a police state in China or Washington, D.C. America has a great history from the Apollo missions, the Bill of Rights, and the promotion of liberty the world over. Now, challenges ironically face us with the violations of our liberty here in the USA. He called Quebec a socialist province. Quebec is the second most taxed place in the world. In Quebec, you have to wait between 12 and 20 hours in an ER waiting room before seeing a doctor. Oncology or cancer treatment facilities are back up so much that many patients die on the waiting lists in Canada. Eyad saw a pregnant woman waiting 13 hours to see a doctor and fainting in the bathroom after loosing a substantial amount of blood (and a 5 week fetus) before being rushed into surgery. In Quebec, a man died in another waiting room after going into a local hospital. The reason for it was because he felt chest pain and waited over 8 hours. His cause of death was mild stroke. Even the government run ministry of transport allowed Quebec's roads to be a disaster. There are problems causing deaths and injuries each year, because road construction is done cheaply by government subcontractors (as taxpayer money is laundered for other causes). Some rebut that harsh weather is the cause, when Eastern Ontario roads and Vermont roads are exposed to the same weather yet do not display a tenth of wear that Quebec Roads do. Eyad said that Quebec has educational problems. Many middle class families are forcing their children to be sent into private school, because they hope to free them from a burden of public institutions. Quebec has about 8 million citizens. There are over 300 million people in America as well. In America, a total socialist system would increase taxation and increase corruption. In Quebec, there is forced ticketing taxation where motorists are forcibly charged and are guilty until proven innocent. The lesson here is that Big Government for the sake of trying to solve all of our problems don't work. Quebec is a key example on why there should be limited government. So, government that's effective isn't evil. Yet, too much government power in the lives of the people can cause great evil in America indeed.
A ruling in favor of eugenics still stands in America. Paul Lombardo tried to uncover the wrongs in history. Back in 1980, he was a graduate student from the University of Virginia. He found out that 2 sisters were sterilized in the 1920's for being "feeble minded." The younger sister didn't know that she had a tubal ligation. She didn't learn that until she was in her late 60's when her surgery hadn't been for an apprendicitis. The older, more famous sister — Carrie Buck — was the subject of the now infamous lawsuit over the legality of the operation, Buck v. Bell , that was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. Buck was the first victim of the sterilization law of 1924. This involuntarily sterilization lasted until 1974 in Virginia and it was used against 8,300 Virginians. Lombardo was shocked by it. He is now a legal historian at Georgia State University in Atlanta. Now, the wicked Supreme Court Justice supported forced sterilization in the Buck vs. Bell decision. Lombardo researched the case and found that Buck didn't have a real legal representation (according to research in the New York University Law Review). He made a Ph.D. dissertation focused on the attorney who fought to have Buck sterilized. His goal is to research on issues pertaining to eugenics. Aubrey Strode, the legislator who had written the Virginia law, became the lawyer representing the colony in the fight to sterilize Buck. Strode and Buck's appointed attorney, Irving Whitehead, were childhood friends. Whitehead, a longtime supporter of sterilization, had been a founding director of the Virginia Colony. The wild thing is that the evil decision of Buck (she was from Charlottesville, VA) vs. Bell has never been overtuned. These eugenic schemes extended into anti-immigration laws, laws against interracial marriage, and sterilization of those considered "defective" which are immoral. In 2002, the Virginia Legislature passed a resolution specifically recognizing the mistreatment of Carrie Buck. That year Lombardo paid more than $1,200 for the posting of a historical marker in front of a Charlottesville community center to commemorate the 75th anniversary of Buck v. Bell. Carrie and Vivian are buried in Charlottesville's Oakwood Cemetery, Vivian next to her adoptive parents, who reported on her death certificate that they did not know the name of her birth mother. Over 30 states in the USA once had sterilization laws by force. Buck died in 1983 at the age of 76. So, the lesson here is that eugenics and forced sterilization are evil. We should fight against it in the world.
Steven Ertelt from LifeNews.com on June 26, 2009 showed a study that finds that adult stem cells (not embryonic stem cells) are best suited to repair damaged or diseased muscle structure. This new study is from the researchers from Maryland and Indiana. This research is being published in the medical journal called "Nature." It involved experiments with mice. The scientists found out that genes involved in muscle development are turned off soon after birth, and are not used by adult stem cells that repair muscle. The researchers at Carnegie Institute's Department of Embryology in Baltimore learned that a different set of genes active in adult muscle stem cells take over to repair muscle damage. This suggests that adult stem cells are best suited for repairing muscle in muscular dystrophy and other muscle injuries. Lead author Christoph Lepper said “I thought that if they are so important in the embryo, they must be important for adult muscle stem cells. I was totally surprised to find that the muscle stem cells are normal without them.” "Our discovery should encourage future investigations into how widespread genetic transitions may occur in different adult stem-cell types. Age-dependent differences in stem-cell properties should also urge careful consideration of the age of stem cells used in transplantation-based regenerative medicine," the authors added. Dr. David Prentice is a former biology professor at the Indiana State University. He is now a research fellow at the Family Research Council and emailed comments to Lifenews.com responding to the study. Prentice said that the implication that embryonic stem cells are inadequate and adult stem cells can repair functions in the body (relating to medical therapies). He called the device as efficient. Matt Mohler of Citizens for Science and Ethics also commented on the new study. "These findings strengthen the argument that scientists should continue to focus their resources on adult stem cell research," he said. There are tons of proof already now that adult stem cells and IPSCs are vastly superior to embryonic stem cells. ESCs are completely obsolete today.
The Arkansas State Health Department falsely said that mandatory Vaccinations are constitutional. A member of the public was told by the authorities that mandatory vaccinations could be sent by the government via gunpoint if necessary. That's fascist of course. This person calling the Arkansas authorities wanted to seek advice to get a waiver form for a future mass swine flu vaccination program (relating to the legal council at the Arkansas State Health Department). His main concerns centered about the fact that the company chosen to mass produce the swine flu vaccine (that was Baxter) was recently caught in a scandal after it emerged they had sent out vaccines contaminated with the H5N1 avian flu virus to 18 countries from their Austrian branch. It was only by providence that the contamination was found after the batch was first tested on ferrets in the Czech Republic, before being shipped out for injection into humans. The ferrets all died and the shocking discovery was made. Some accuse Baxter of being involved in a conspiracy to provoke a pandemic that would cause billions of profits from producing the vaccine to a bird flu outbreak. The U.S. government ordered a mass vaccination many years ago in response to a swine flu outbreak. The program ended after the shot caused over 500 cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome, which is a severe paralyzing nerve disease. 30 people died as a direct result of the vaccinations. The legal council told a falsehood to the caller that forced vaccination is Constitutional and fine when nothing in the Constitution permits forced vaccinations at all. The caller then asks how the mandatory vaccine would be enforced by law, “for example somebody sticking a gun in my face,” to which the legal council responds, “you could be held liable.” The legal council at the Arkansas State Health Department cites the 1905 Supreme Court case of Jacobson v Massachusetts to argue that governments can force citizens to take vaccines. Less than 50 years before, in Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Supreme Court also ruled that black people were slaves - property of their slaveowners with no inherent rights whatsoever. 22 years after Jacobson v Mass., in Buck v Bell, the Supreme Court also ruled that people designated “feeble-minded” by the government could be sterilized. The fact that the Supreme Court made a ruling over 100 hundred years ago saying the government could inject people by force doesn’t make it morally or constitutionally justifiable. To allow the government to use a needle to stick it inside of your body by force is the epitome of violating human rights from the Constitution. Legal orders were used to oppress Native Americans (including Hitler used the law to mistreat Jews, Gypsies, political dissidents, homosexuals, and other who dissented with the Nazis' dictatorial policies) doesn't mean that they were morally right either. Evil sometimes uses decrees as an excuse to permit it, but it is still evil. Mandatory vaccinations are easily an agenda of the government that should be opposed. Even Time Magazine in April 28th, 2009 wants it for the American, but it's draconian in its cosmology. I reject mandatory vaccinations 100%.
Jesuit links to the new world order are becoming more and more apparent. Dame of Malta Phyllis Schlafly promotes the CNP and the left/right paradigm. This is apart of the system of dividing people more along political lines. The Jesuits also work with the establishment Left (which includes Catholics). One example is how Barack Obama is backed by Chicago Jesuit Golluzzo (who worked for the Gamaliel Foundation). This Foundation is a subsidiary of the Ford Foundation. The Ford Foundaiton is a key agent of the cartel capitalists and are allies of the Papacy. Vice President and Papal agent Joseph Biden had a honorary degree from the Order's St. Joseph University in Philadephia. Zbigiew Brzezinski, is a CFR member, Bilderberger, Trilateralist and adjunct professor a Jesuit Georgetown University. This Polish Roman Catholic worked at Columbia University in 1981. Barack Obama worked there in 1981 as well. The Campaign for Human Development (CHD) worked as conduit get a majority of Roman Catholics in America to vote for Barack Obama. When in 1998 some Catholics complained that CHD grants were not used for Catholic charity but were actually funding groups opposed to church teachings, CHD changed its name to Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD). The name change did not redirect the flow of money. In 2007 alone, CCHD increased its support of ACORN, giving ACORN 37 grants totaling $1,037,000. JFK didn't act in this fashion. Although a K of C, John F. Kennedy rejected the voucher system, wanted to slowly get rid of American troops from Vietnam, and wanted to follow the American Constitution above canon law. Papal authors like Michael Collins Piper seem to omit the multitude of Knights of Malta (Constantianian Order members, Order of St. Francis I, The Golden Fleece, etc.) involved in backing the pro-Labor Zionist government in Israel plus the other Middle Eastern nations. The Labor Zionist got much of their philosophy from the Sabbeatean Frankist movement (which was supported by the Vatican in the 1700's). That should tell you something. The Jesuits and the Vatican are involved in these affairs. Piper refused to understand the William F. Buckley is a Knight of Malta, that his quoted magazine of the Jesuit La Civilta Cattolica equated Papal doctrine with fascist, that Willis Carto is pro-Nazi (he is friends with SMOM J. Peter Grace), etc. makes him ignorant or a Coadjutor. So, the whole truth ought to be shown not just some of it.
Celebrities dying in such bad circumstances are tragic and sad. Their deaths remind us constantly that death can occur upon anyone. Another lesson here is that we have to get right with God before we die since tomorrow isn't guaranteed. Ed MacMahon, Farrah Fawcett, and of course Michael Jackson all died last week. Michael Jackson has been called the "King of Pop." Farrah Fawcett died and she was a member of the Roman Catholic Church (with its false doctrines of calling Mary a Queen of Heaven, the Rosary, calling the Pope Holy Father which is blasphemy, etc.). She even allowed a priest to give her the Last Rites since she was a devout Catholic. Romans 3:23-25 says that, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." Only God can forgive our sins not a priest. She was a super model and a former Playboy celebrity. She used to be on the 1970's hit television series of Charlie's Angels. She died of cancer at the age of 63. Michael Jackson died mysteriously on June 25, 2009. He revolutionized culture and music with his videos plus actions. Michael Jackson inspired a lot of people and broke barriers culturally and racially. He modernized music videos and gave money to charity. He was controversial being accused of pedophilia and intentionally disfiguring his skin complexetion (plus face). He was mentally and physically abused by his father Joseph Jackson. That is one of the many reasons why he lived such a troubled life. His music had a variety from attempting to have social commentary to sexual antics, and violence. The biggest selling album in history is his own album of Thriller. It sold over 50 million copies. He is known for embracing some spiritualism (by believing that he communicated with the spirit of Liberace in a secret room of mirrors, he claim that some lyrics are channeled to him, and he was embracing of spirit communication). Aleister Crowley had a secret room of mirrors to contact spirits and contact his sick rituals. Jackson wanted world peace, but believe in an one world philosophy like many artists before him. Michael Jackson used prescription drugs and his temporary doctor isn't saying much to the police. There is suspicion that this doctor knows much than he is letting on. That is why the Jackson family desires a 2nd autopsy to discover the real truth about why Jackson died. He was once a Jehovah Witness (a false religion that denies that Jesus Christ is Almighty God, they deny Jesus's bodily resurrection, and they even deny blood transfusions) then changed reportedly into the religion of Islam. After his death, Jackson's brother Jermaine gave a press conference and wished that Allah would always be with his deceased brother. The artist Prince is a Jehovah Witness. Islam denies that God has a Son and Muslims praise the pagan sun god of Allah. Islam uses bondage against people to follow the culture of the 7th century (via praying Mecca 5 times a day in accordance to the cycle of the moon, doing zadat, doing hajj, etc.). You don't need these ceremonies to be saved. The only thing you need is the grace of Jesus Christ that poured from his blood. Now, people are celebrating Michael Jackson's life. We shouldn't gloat over the death of Michael Jackson or bash him. We should just tell the truth about his life and his life was a warning. It warns us that we should appreciate our physical image, and never let past hurts ruin our relationship with God. We should let the past become inspiration to fight evil, love God, and live our lives better than the past. Michael Jackson and these other celebrites are victims of the many evils in popular culture. Life is precious and we should be very careful on how we live our lives.
By Timothy
Brookings Publication mentions possibility of ‘Horrific Provocation’ to Trigger Iran Invasion
From http://www.prisonplanet.com/brookings-publication-mentions-possibility-of-horrific-provocation-to-trigger-iran-invasion.html
Brookings Publication mentions possibility of ‘Horrific Provocation’ to Trigger Iran Invasion
Jurriaan Maessen
Prisonplanet.com
June 29, 2009
In a recent policy paper published by the influential Brookings Institute, the authors propose almost anything to guarantee dominance of Persia by the new world order, including bribery, lying, cheating and mass murdering by an all-out military assault of Iran. The paper ‘Which path to Persia: Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran’ is just one of many recent and not so recent examples of the firm intent of the globalists to engage Iran militarily and acquire its natural resources in the same effort.
The group of authors- a cozy little convergence of globalists- contemplate four separate options on ‘how to deal with Iran’ in the cold bureaucratic language that poses as scientific but is really nothing more than the intelligent musings of a calculating psychopath. The first option, ‘Dissuading Tehran’ through diplomatic means is being discussed as something tried, tested and discarded. The second option, ‘Disarming Tehran’ covers several ways of rallying the ‘international community’ around the globalists’ intentions. In the third part, ‘Toppling Tehran’ the warmongering increases as the writers contemplate both covert and overt military action against the Islamic republic of Iran. In the fourth and last section, ‘Deterring Tehran’ the option of ‘containment’ is elaborated upon. The proposed final strategy predictably involves all of the above mentioned options, in roughly the same order of appearance.
To ensure the cooperation of surrounding countries, the authors propose bribery as an effective tool. After the authors assert that ‘it may be necessary to cut some deals in order to secure Moscow’s support for a tougher Iran policy’, the authors continue with their ‘brainstorming’, advising a widespread bribery campaign in order to ensure international cooperation in regards to Iran:
‘Other countries also will want payoffs from the United States in return for their assistance on Iran. Such deals may be distasteful, but many will be unavoidable if the Persuasion approach is to have a reasonable chance of succeeding.’ And further on: ‘To be successful, a Persuasion approach would invariably require unpleasant compromises with third-party countries to secure their cooperation against Iran.’
This means the US will have to cut all kinds of deals with dictators, bloodthirsty local tyrants and other corrupt kings of Arabia- even facilitating them with weapons. Besides rallying the ‘international community’ around the Anglo-American establishment with the help of these ‘unpleasant compromises’, the paper stresses it will also be necessary to persuade the Iranians themselves to topple their government (page 39):
‘Inciting regime change in Iran would be greatly assisted by convincing the Iranian people that their government is so ideologically blinkered that it refuses to do what is best for the people and instead clings to a policy that could only bring ruin on the country.’
But the authors underline the necessity of creating a favourable climate for the transnationalists in which to operate.
‘(…) any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context (…) The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer- one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.’
Here the authors seem to abandon even the facade of civility as they proceed. Even though the authors put these vile warmongering words in quotes, they cannot mask the mindset. They mean to rally the ‘international community’ through bribery and deceit- as a steppingstone towards military strikes. The path toward such military strikes will be made smooth by economically strong-holding surrounding countries, forcing them to accept western military action as well as the justifications for it without question.
Military action. This is as acutely on the mind of the current chickenhawks, as the invasion of Iraq was on that of the neocons in the last couple of decades. Apparently, the authors feel compelled to give a justification for the bravura of their manuscript.
‘We chose to consider this extreme and highly unpopular option partly for the sake of analytical rigor and partly because if Iran responded to a confrontational American policy- such as an airstrike, harsh new sanctions, or efforts to foment regime change- with a major escalation of terrorist attacks (or more dire moves against Israel and other American allies), invasion could become a very “live” option.’
As the geopolitical feeding frenzy increases, the authors clearly begin to lose their cool as they begin to talk about the real plan behind all this elaborate brainstorming, reflecting the long-term agenda of the globalists for whom they work:
‘Like Iraq’, the authors state, ‘Iran is too intrinsically and strategically important a country for the United States to be able to march in, overthrow its government, and then march out, leaving chaos in its wake. (…) Iran exports about 2.5 million barrels per day of oil and, with the right technology, it could produce even more. It also has one of the largest reserves of natural gas in the world. These resources make Iran an important supplier of the energy needs of the global economy. Iran does not border Saudi Arabia- the lynchpin of the oil market- or Kuwait, but it does border Iraq, another major oil producer and a country where the United States now has a great deal at stake.’
And exactly in line with their masters tendency of using false flags, they allow themselves the luxury of speculating openly about a possible ‘provocation’ to escalate things to the point of armed conflict.
‘(…) it is not impossible that Tehran might take some action that would justify an American invasion. And it is certainly the case that if Washington sought such a provocation, it could take actions that might make it more likely that Tehran would do so (although being too obvious about this could nullify the provocation). However, since it would be up to Iran to make the provocation move (…), the United States would never know for sure when it would get the requisite Iranian provocation. In fact, it might never come at all.’
Now that would be a great disappointment, wouldn’t it. Under the headline ‘The Question of a Provocation’ on page 66, the authors press the point even further:
‘With provocation, the international diplomatic and domestic political requirements of an invasion would be mitigated, and the more outrageous the Iranian provocation (and the less that the United States is seen to be goading Iran), the more these challenges would be diminished. In the absence of a sufficiently horrific provocation, meeting these requirements would be daunting.’
Reminiscent of the Pearl Harbor-quote by raving neocons pre-9/11, the authors continue imagining how excellent it would be to have an Iranian-sponsored terror attack within the US to trigger war and march off toward Iran. During all this, the authors are aware how unlikely it is that Iran would actually commit such an attack on American soil (probably because they know who is usually responsible for such mass terror attacks):
‘Something on the order of an Iranian-backed 9/11, in which the plane wore Iranian markings and Tehran boasted about its sponsorship.(…). The entire question of “options” become irrelevant at that point: what American president could refrain from an invasion after the Iranians had just killed several thousand American civilians in an attack in the United States itself?‘Regarding the question of international support for an US invasion of the Islamic Republic, the Brookings people lament:
‘Other than a Tehran-sponsored 9/11, it is hard to imagine what would change their minds.’
The same goes for their plans in regards to that old favorite of the elite, covert psychological warfare, in order to subdue a sovereign nation. In chapter 7 of the manuscript, called ‘Inspiring an Insurgency’, it examines the possibility of propagandizing the Iranian people into helping out the globalists lute their nation:
‘The core concept lying at the heart of this option would be for the United States to identify one or more Iranian opposition groups and support them as it did other insurgencies in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Kurdistan, Angola, and dozens of other locales since the Second World War. The United States would provide arms, money, training, and organizational assistance to help the groups develop and extend their reach. U.S. media and propaganda outlets could highlight group grievances and showcase rival leaders.’
Isn’t that a familiar sight? Could one way to ‘highlight’ group grievances be to mass distribute the death of a poor woman and then claim it’s all thanks to Twitter?
All this hinting at another false-flag attack underway and prepping the international community for a future invasion of Iran is becoming increasingly serious as the warmongering is being stepped up. This is the time to fix our eyes upon these globalists and their think tanks. If their blatant arrogance permits them to openly publish their bloodthirsty musings, we should be vigilant enough to pass this knowledge around lest we have another 9/11 on our hands.
Source: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2009/06_iran_strategy/06_iran_strategy.pdf
Brookings Publication mentions possibility of ‘Horrific Provocation’ to Trigger Iran Invasion
Jurriaan Maessen
Prisonplanet.com
June 29, 2009
In a recent policy paper published by the influential Brookings Institute, the authors propose almost anything to guarantee dominance of Persia by the new world order, including bribery, lying, cheating and mass murdering by an all-out military assault of Iran. The paper ‘Which path to Persia: Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran’ is just one of many recent and not so recent examples of the firm intent of the globalists to engage Iran militarily and acquire its natural resources in the same effort.
The group of authors- a cozy little convergence of globalists- contemplate four separate options on ‘how to deal with Iran’ in the cold bureaucratic language that poses as scientific but is really nothing more than the intelligent musings of a calculating psychopath. The first option, ‘Dissuading Tehran’ through diplomatic means is being discussed as something tried, tested and discarded. The second option, ‘Disarming Tehran’ covers several ways of rallying the ‘international community’ around the globalists’ intentions. In the third part, ‘Toppling Tehran’ the warmongering increases as the writers contemplate both covert and overt military action against the Islamic republic of Iran. In the fourth and last section, ‘Deterring Tehran’ the option of ‘containment’ is elaborated upon. The proposed final strategy predictably involves all of the above mentioned options, in roughly the same order of appearance.
To ensure the cooperation of surrounding countries, the authors propose bribery as an effective tool. After the authors assert that ‘it may be necessary to cut some deals in order to secure Moscow’s support for a tougher Iran policy’, the authors continue with their ‘brainstorming’, advising a widespread bribery campaign in order to ensure international cooperation in regards to Iran:
‘Other countries also will want payoffs from the United States in return for their assistance on Iran. Such deals may be distasteful, but many will be unavoidable if the Persuasion approach is to have a reasonable chance of succeeding.’ And further on: ‘To be successful, a Persuasion approach would invariably require unpleasant compromises with third-party countries to secure their cooperation against Iran.’
This means the US will have to cut all kinds of deals with dictators, bloodthirsty local tyrants and other corrupt kings of Arabia- even facilitating them with weapons. Besides rallying the ‘international community’ around the Anglo-American establishment with the help of these ‘unpleasant compromises’, the paper stresses it will also be necessary to persuade the Iranians themselves to topple their government (page 39):
‘Inciting regime change in Iran would be greatly assisted by convincing the Iranian people that their government is so ideologically blinkered that it refuses to do what is best for the people and instead clings to a policy that could only bring ruin on the country.’
But the authors underline the necessity of creating a favourable climate for the transnationalists in which to operate.
‘(…) any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context (…) The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer- one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.’
Here the authors seem to abandon even the facade of civility as they proceed. Even though the authors put these vile warmongering words in quotes, they cannot mask the mindset. They mean to rally the ‘international community’ through bribery and deceit- as a steppingstone towards military strikes. The path toward such military strikes will be made smooth by economically strong-holding surrounding countries, forcing them to accept western military action as well as the justifications for it without question.
Military action. This is as acutely on the mind of the current chickenhawks, as the invasion of Iraq was on that of the neocons in the last couple of decades. Apparently, the authors feel compelled to give a justification for the bravura of their manuscript.
‘We chose to consider this extreme and highly unpopular option partly for the sake of analytical rigor and partly because if Iran responded to a confrontational American policy- such as an airstrike, harsh new sanctions, or efforts to foment regime change- with a major escalation of terrorist attacks (or more dire moves against Israel and other American allies), invasion could become a very “live” option.’
As the geopolitical feeding frenzy increases, the authors clearly begin to lose their cool as they begin to talk about the real plan behind all this elaborate brainstorming, reflecting the long-term agenda of the globalists for whom they work:
‘Like Iraq’, the authors state, ‘Iran is too intrinsically and strategically important a country for the United States to be able to march in, overthrow its government, and then march out, leaving chaos in its wake. (…) Iran exports about 2.5 million barrels per day of oil and, with the right technology, it could produce even more. It also has one of the largest reserves of natural gas in the world. These resources make Iran an important supplier of the energy needs of the global economy. Iran does not border Saudi Arabia- the lynchpin of the oil market- or Kuwait, but it does border Iraq, another major oil producer and a country where the United States now has a great deal at stake.’
And exactly in line with their masters tendency of using false flags, they allow themselves the luxury of speculating openly about a possible ‘provocation’ to escalate things to the point of armed conflict.
‘(…) it is not impossible that Tehran might take some action that would justify an American invasion. And it is certainly the case that if Washington sought such a provocation, it could take actions that might make it more likely that Tehran would do so (although being too obvious about this could nullify the provocation). However, since it would be up to Iran to make the provocation move (…), the United States would never know for sure when it would get the requisite Iranian provocation. In fact, it might never come at all.’
Now that would be a great disappointment, wouldn’t it. Under the headline ‘The Question of a Provocation’ on page 66, the authors press the point even further:
‘With provocation, the international diplomatic and domestic political requirements of an invasion would be mitigated, and the more outrageous the Iranian provocation (and the less that the United States is seen to be goading Iran), the more these challenges would be diminished. In the absence of a sufficiently horrific provocation, meeting these requirements would be daunting.’
Reminiscent of the Pearl Harbor-quote by raving neocons pre-9/11, the authors continue imagining how excellent it would be to have an Iranian-sponsored terror attack within the US to trigger war and march off toward Iran. During all this, the authors are aware how unlikely it is that Iran would actually commit such an attack on American soil (probably because they know who is usually responsible for such mass terror attacks):
‘Something on the order of an Iranian-backed 9/11, in which the plane wore Iranian markings and Tehran boasted about its sponsorship.(…). The entire question of “options” become irrelevant at that point: what American president could refrain from an invasion after the Iranians had just killed several thousand American civilians in an attack in the United States itself?‘Regarding the question of international support for an US invasion of the Islamic Republic, the Brookings people lament:
‘Other than a Tehran-sponsored 9/11, it is hard to imagine what would change their minds.’
The same goes for their plans in regards to that old favorite of the elite, covert psychological warfare, in order to subdue a sovereign nation. In chapter 7 of the manuscript, called ‘Inspiring an Insurgency’, it examines the possibility of propagandizing the Iranian people into helping out the globalists lute their nation:
‘The core concept lying at the heart of this option would be for the United States to identify one or more Iranian opposition groups and support them as it did other insurgencies in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Kurdistan, Angola, and dozens of other locales since the Second World War. The United States would provide arms, money, training, and organizational assistance to help the groups develop and extend their reach. U.S. media and propaganda outlets could highlight group grievances and showcase rival leaders.’
Isn’t that a familiar sight? Could one way to ‘highlight’ group grievances be to mass distribute the death of a poor woman and then claim it’s all thanks to Twitter?
All this hinting at another false-flag attack underway and prepping the international community for a future invasion of Iran is becoming increasingly serious as the warmongering is being stepped up. This is the time to fix our eyes upon these globalists and their think tanks. If their blatant arrogance permits them to openly publish their bloodthirsty musings, we should be vigilant enough to pass this knowledge around lest we have another 9/11 on our hands.
Source: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2009/06_iran_strategy/06_iran_strategy.pdf
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Pro-Life Group Wants Justice Department to Investigate Death Threats, Gets Refusal
From http://lifenews.com/state4259.html
Pro-Life Group Wants Justice Department to Investigate Death Threats, Gets Refusal
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 26, 2009
Email RSS Print
Wichita, KS (LifeNews.com) -- A pro-life group is asking the Justice Department to review several death threats it has received in the wake of the shooting of late-term abortion practitioner George Tiller. However, Operation Rescue officials say the Obama administration has not responded.
The pro-life group has released the copies of audio recordings of calls it has received from abortion advocates who threatened the pro-life organization after Tiller's death.
One caller says it's "time to start killing Bible-thumping morons" while another says "I hope somebody comes and kills you all" and a third caller says "One of you is going to die."
"Would you want some protection after receiving these kinds of threats?" asked Operation Rescue president Troy Newman. "Too bad. The current government isn't interested in protecting your life... unless you happen to be pro-abortion."
In an email to LifeNews.com, Newman says there is a dichotomy in how the Obama administration has responded -- with Attorney General Eric Holder offering protection to abortion centers and staffers but pledging no support for pro-life groups that feared retaliation.
"Apparently, the Obama administration's Justice Department is playing favorites when it comes to protecting the lives of Americans," Newman says. "If you promote or provide abortions, Attorney General Eric Holder will dispatch U.S. Marshals to protect you when threatened. But if you're not one of those privileged minority... you're out of luck. Even if you receive scores of death threats."
"We expected that Barack Obama would not be a friend to life; but we didn't expect the favoritism to be so blatant and so callous," he added.
Other pro-life advocate shave also received death threats in the aftermath of the Tiller shooting.
Staff at the Wichita office of Kansans for Life received calls from abortion advocates that were threatening.
"This person was out of control, emotionally, you could just tell," Mary Wilkinson said of one call.
"I hope you're happy," the person said. "You've killed him. Now I hope somebody comes and kills you all."
At the office of the Kansas Coalition for Life, one person left a text message a few hours after the shooting: "One of you is going to die for what you did to Tiller."
Instead of responding to the threats, Newman says he worries the Obama administration and abortion advocates will use the Tiller killing for political gain.
"To be honest, I'm very concerned for the safety of my family and friends who are making a stand for life every day. But I'm also very concerned that the Obama administration and other Democrats may try to capitalize on the murder of Tiller to defuse the abortion issue in upcoming Supreme Court confirmation hearings," he says.
"Like so many other pro-life leaders, I have condemned the killing of Tiller. But I'm also concerned that pro-abortion activists are going to use this incident to brand the entire pro-life movement as 'extremist,'" he said.
Related web sites:
Audio recording of death threats
Buzz up!
__________________________________
From http://lifenews.com/state4261.html
Abortion Advocate Attacks Pro-Life Group's Office, Tries to Disable Security System
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 26, 2009
addthis_pub = 'sertelt';
Email RSS Print
Wichita, KS (LifeNews.com) -- An abortion advocate attacked the national headquarters of the pro-life group Operation Rescue on Friday. The attack, which came weeks after the shooting of late-term abortion practitioner George Tiller, saw someone attempt to disabled the pro-life organization's security system.
Operation Rescue is located in the same central Kansas city where Tiller ran his late-term abortion business and was killed.
The incident could be seen as a retaliation for that killing, even though Operation Rescue was not involved in it.
The incident occurred on Friday afternoon and Troy Newman, the group's president, heard a noise through his office window. He observed the assailant through the security cameras attempting to gain access to the roof.
Newman rushed outside and confronted the man, who then tried to punch Newman. When that failed, he flung his bicycle at Newman then fled the scene.
One security camera was stolen causing an estimated $1,000 in damage.
Police were called and a report was filed, but the suspect is still at large.
Newman was on the phone with a reporter from the Washington Times at the time of the incident and was ironically talking about the death threats his group has received in thee weeks following the Tiller shooting.
"In light of the recent events, the targeting of our security system is troubling," he told LifeNews.com.
Newman said local police officials were not as cooperative as they could have been: "We can't help but think that if this attack happened to an abortion clinic, there would be federal marshals patrolling and investigating. The police seemed apathetic. It's almost as if pro-lifers are second-class citizens."
"We are just thankful that no one was injured and that the attacker was interrupted before he could do more damage. We will be increasing our security precautions as a result of this incident. We have a very dedicated staff, and no amount of intimidation will deter us from our work," he added.
Operation Rescue has released a video from their security cameras showing the attacker who attempted to disable the security system.
The video shows the suspect lurking outside its headquarters before the incident.The man who is alleged to have shot Tiller, Scott Roeder, has no links to any legitimate pro-life group other than a couple of postings on a public forum on a pro-life web site. Otherwise, he has never been a volunteer of, staff member of or in any way associated with either national, state or local pro-life groups.
That and hundreds of condemnations of the Tiller shooting from pro-life groups hasn't stopped abortion advocates from exploiting Tiller's death for political gain and blaming pro-life advocates for his death.
The Obama administration has also come under fire for ignoring alleged vandalism of another abortion center prior to the shooting.
Related web sites:Operation Rescue - http://www.operationrescue.org
Pro-Life Group Wants Justice Department to Investigate Death Threats, Gets Refusal
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 26, 2009
Email RSS Print
Wichita, KS (LifeNews.com) -- A pro-life group is asking the Justice Department to review several death threats it has received in the wake of the shooting of late-term abortion practitioner George Tiller. However, Operation Rescue officials say the Obama administration has not responded.
The pro-life group has released the copies of audio recordings of calls it has received from abortion advocates who threatened the pro-life organization after Tiller's death.
One caller says it's "time to start killing Bible-thumping morons" while another says "I hope somebody comes and kills you all" and a third caller says "One of you is going to die."
"Would you want some protection after receiving these kinds of threats?" asked Operation Rescue president Troy Newman. "Too bad. The current government isn't interested in protecting your life... unless you happen to be pro-abortion."
In an email to LifeNews.com, Newman says there is a dichotomy in how the Obama administration has responded -- with Attorney General Eric Holder offering protection to abortion centers and staffers but pledging no support for pro-life groups that feared retaliation.
"Apparently, the Obama administration's Justice Department is playing favorites when it comes to protecting the lives of Americans," Newman says. "If you promote or provide abortions, Attorney General Eric Holder will dispatch U.S. Marshals to protect you when threatened. But if you're not one of those privileged minority... you're out of luck. Even if you receive scores of death threats."
"We expected that Barack Obama would not be a friend to life; but we didn't expect the favoritism to be so blatant and so callous," he added.
Other pro-life advocate shave also received death threats in the aftermath of the Tiller shooting.
Staff at the Wichita office of Kansans for Life received calls from abortion advocates that were threatening.
"This person was out of control, emotionally, you could just tell," Mary Wilkinson said of one call.
"I hope you're happy," the person said. "You've killed him. Now I hope somebody comes and kills you all."
At the office of the Kansas Coalition for Life, one person left a text message a few hours after the shooting: "One of you is going to die for what you did to Tiller."
Instead of responding to the threats, Newman says he worries the Obama administration and abortion advocates will use the Tiller killing for political gain.
"To be honest, I'm very concerned for the safety of my family and friends who are making a stand for life every day. But I'm also very concerned that the Obama administration and other Democrats may try to capitalize on the murder of Tiller to defuse the abortion issue in upcoming Supreme Court confirmation hearings," he says.
"Like so many other pro-life leaders, I have condemned the killing of Tiller. But I'm also concerned that pro-abortion activists are going to use this incident to brand the entire pro-life movement as 'extremist,'" he said.
Related web sites:
Audio recording of death threats
Buzz up!
__________________________________
From http://lifenews.com/state4261.html
Abortion Advocate Attacks Pro-Life Group's Office, Tries to Disable Security System
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
June 26, 2009
addthis_pub = 'sertelt';
Email RSS Print
Wichita, KS (LifeNews.com) -- An abortion advocate attacked the national headquarters of the pro-life group Operation Rescue on Friday. The attack, which came weeks after the shooting of late-term abortion practitioner George Tiller, saw someone attempt to disabled the pro-life organization's security system.
Operation Rescue is located in the same central Kansas city where Tiller ran his late-term abortion business and was killed.
The incident could be seen as a retaliation for that killing, even though Operation Rescue was not involved in it.
The incident occurred on Friday afternoon and Troy Newman, the group's president, heard a noise through his office window. He observed the assailant through the security cameras attempting to gain access to the roof.
Newman rushed outside and confronted the man, who then tried to punch Newman. When that failed, he flung his bicycle at Newman then fled the scene.
One security camera was stolen causing an estimated $1,000 in damage.
Police were called and a report was filed, but the suspect is still at large.
Newman was on the phone with a reporter from the Washington Times at the time of the incident and was ironically talking about the death threats his group has received in thee weeks following the Tiller shooting.
"In light of the recent events, the targeting of our security system is troubling," he told LifeNews.com.
Newman said local police officials were not as cooperative as they could have been: "We can't help but think that if this attack happened to an abortion clinic, there would be federal marshals patrolling and investigating. The police seemed apathetic. It's almost as if pro-lifers are second-class citizens."
"We are just thankful that no one was injured and that the attacker was interrupted before he could do more damage. We will be increasing our security precautions as a result of this incident. We have a very dedicated staff, and no amount of intimidation will deter us from our work," he added.
Operation Rescue has released a video from their security cameras showing the attacker who attempted to disable the security system.
The video shows the suspect lurking outside its headquarters before the incident.The man who is alleged to have shot Tiller, Scott Roeder, has no links to any legitimate pro-life group other than a couple of postings on a public forum on a pro-life web site. Otherwise, he has never been a volunteer of, staff member of or in any way associated with either national, state or local pro-life groups.
That and hundreds of condemnations of the Tiller shooting from pro-life groups hasn't stopped abortion advocates from exploiting Tiller's death for political gain and blaming pro-life advocates for his death.
The Obama administration has also come under fire for ignoring alleged vandalism of another abortion center prior to the shooting.
Related web sites:Operation Rescue - http://www.operationrescue.org
Honduran President Ousted in Coup
From http://www.infowars.com/honduran-president-ousted-in-coup/
Honduran President Ousted in Coup
Text size
ELISABETH MALKIN
The New York Times
June 28 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
MEXICO CITY — The Honduran president, Manuel Zelaya, was ousted by the army on Sunday after pressing ahead with plans for a referendum that opponents said could lay the groundwork for his eventual re-election, in the first military coup in Central America since the end of the cold war.
Soldiers entered the presidential palace in the capital, Tegucigalpa, and disarmed the presidential guard early Sunday, military officials said. Mr. Zelaya’s private secretary, Eduardo Enrique Reina, confirmed the arrest.
Mr. Zelaya flew into exile in Costa Rica, telling a local television station, “They are creating a monster they will not be able to contain.”
Read entire article
Honduran President Ousted in Coup
Text size
ELISABETH MALKIN
The New York Times
June 28 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
MEXICO CITY — The Honduran president, Manuel Zelaya, was ousted by the army on Sunday after pressing ahead with plans for a referendum that opponents said could lay the groundwork for his eventual re-election, in the first military coup in Central America since the end of the cold war.
Soldiers entered the presidential palace in the capital, Tegucigalpa, and disarmed the presidential guard early Sunday, military officials said. Mr. Zelaya’s private secretary, Eduardo Enrique Reina, confirmed the arrest.
Mr. Zelaya flew into exile in Costa Rica, telling a local television station, “They are creating a monster they will not be able to contain.”
Read entire article
Iranian authorities arrest eight British embassy employees in Tehran
From http://www.infowars.com/iranian-authorities-arrest-eight-british-embassy-employees-in-tehran/
Iranian authorities arrest eight British embassy employees in Tehran
Text size
Borzou Daragahi
Los Angeles Times
June 12, 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Dubai, United Arab Emirates — Iranian authorities arrested eight local employees of the British embassy in Tehran, accusing them of “playing major parts” in the recent unrest over a presidential election, the semi-official Fars news agency reported today.
The move comes amid deteriorating relations between Iran and the West in the wake of a crackdown against Iranians opposed to the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The Iranian president rebuked his American counterpart Saturday as the two countries fell back into a familiar pattern of back-and-forth barbs that may imperil the Obama administration’s plans to open a direct dialogue with Tehran over its nuclear program.
Read entire article
Iranian authorities arrest eight British embassy employees in Tehran
Text size
Borzou Daragahi
Los Angeles Times
June 12, 2009
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Dubai, United Arab Emirates — Iranian authorities arrested eight local employees of the British embassy in Tehran, accusing them of “playing major parts” in the recent unrest over a presidential election, the semi-official Fars news agency reported today.
The move comes amid deteriorating relations between Iran and the West in the wake of a crackdown against Iranians opposed to the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The Iranian president rebuked his American counterpart Saturday as the two countries fell back into a familiar pattern of back-and-forth barbs that may imperil the Obama administration’s plans to open a direct dialogue with Tehran over its nuclear program.
Read entire article
Pro-Lifer Mark Crutcher on Alex Jones Tv 5/6: Illegal Activites Inside The Abortion Industry !!
Note by Me: I don't agree with Jones on every issue, but he's right on this issue.
By Timothy
New World Order Rams Through Sham Cap & Trade Bill
From http://www.infowars.com/new-world-order-rams-through-sham-cap-trade-bill/
New World Order Rams Through Sham Cap & Trade Bill
Text size
Zachary T Baker
Infowars
June 27, 2009
The U.S. House of Representatives are nothing more than prostitutes for the international banking cartel. Brothels in Washington D.C. were packed Friday afternoon with eager congressman who sold Americans out 219-212 in favor of The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES). Also dubbed “Waxman- Markey” the bill will implement the infamous cap-and-trade system on greenhouse gas emissions, signaling the NWO’s final moves towards total financial bondage.
Al Gore, part owner of carbon offset company Generation Investment Management, testified in front of a congressional committee that a cap-and trade system along with a direct carbon tax would be ideal.
Under the guise of philanthropic style environmentalism, the New World Order is blasting forward with draconian legislation every week it seems. Using thuggish tactics such as switching bill numbers & phone numbers to DC representatives and of course, good old fashion disinofo bombs got the job done. Cap and trade sets a limit on the amount of greenhouse gases that a factory, business, utility, or other energy producer is allowed to emit The goal of the Waxman- Markey bill is to cut CO2 emissions by 17 percent by 2020.
Most energy producers and manufactures will be severely affected by these caps, bu the increase cost will be passed onto their customers through higher prices. Companies will purchase permits that will allow them to exceed the “cap” These permits will be issued by our gangster government, and then be auctioned off to the same companies participating in the cap-and trade system. The theory is to create a free market for carbon permits where the price is set by those being forced to participate in the new system.
Consumers will be affected the most by this these new caps on energy. Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the Commission Budget Office testified before the Committee on Finance in May. He says a cap-and trade system would be devastating to the working poor. According to Elmendorf, the cost to for an average American household would be $1,600 a year, with low-income households carrying a heavier burden because they spend more of their income on energy than higher-income households.
Remaining scraps from revenue created by the auctioning off of carbon permits will go to the families with lower incomes such as a whopping $161 per year tax credit for single persons and $359 for 5-person families. Here’s the rub. According to Elmendorf, “such price increases would be essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program because they would be the most important mechanism through which businesses and households were encouraged to make investments and behavioral changes that reduced CO2.”
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
The federal government will have an annual allowance of almost a trillion dollars worth of grants/ bribe money to use as they seem fit.. Much like the mafia acting as a middleman between people and businesses, the EPA will create a list of companies who are “trade sensitive” or rely on imports.
With General Electric’s smart grid technology in place, energy companies along with their customers will have no other choice but to convert to the communist style system of rationing vital utilities. What smart grid visionaries foresee are home thermostats and appliances that adjust automatically depending on the cost of power.
The availability of $4.5 billion in federal economic recovery money for smart grid technology gives incentives for companies to convert over to the new digitalized grid.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu says, “If you want to create mischief one very good way to create a great deal of mischief is to actually bring down a smart grid system. This system has to be incredibly secure.”
“Is the average consumer willing to pay the upfront costs of a new system and then respond appropriately to price signals? Or will people view a utility’s ability to reach inside a home to turn down a thermostat as Orwellian?” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said at a recent hearing on smart grid.
Lastly, there is the option for companies to avoid a cap on their CO2 emissions by offsetting them. Al Gore, part owner of carbon offset company Generation Investment Management testified in front of a congressional committee that a cap-and trade system along with a direct carbon tax would be ideal.
Limiting the amount of CO2 will do nothing to help make the planet less warm, make us energy independent or create millions of jobs. It will on the other hand destroy whatever is left of our industry here in the North American Union by leaving companies no choice but to move offshore. Some of the biggest oil reserves in the world are here in North America, yet we rely on foreign oil. The elites indirectly control every facet our life.
Citizens will never be energy independent until every home is off the grid. Green jobs will include heavily fluoridated drones enforcing new EPA laws/codes. Besides, the amount of jobs that will be lost due to companies either moving offshore orgoing bankrupt will certainly be higher than the millions created by our fuhrer. With the hookers in Washington granting dictatorial powers to the Federal Reserve last week, it seems as though HR 2998 is part a two prong attack. The New World Order is moving fast, and there is really only two more obstacles in their way: our right to speak freely and our right to protect ourselves.
Sources:
1) http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2454/text
2) “Smart grid” — power lines move into digital age By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer H. Josef Hebert, Associated Press Writer Sat Jun 6, 6:04 pm ET
3) http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/101xx/doc10115/Cap_and_Trade_Testimony.1.1.shtml
New World Order Rams Through Sham Cap & Trade Bill
Text size
Zachary T Baker
Infowars
June 27, 2009
The U.S. House of Representatives are nothing more than prostitutes for the international banking cartel. Brothels in Washington D.C. were packed Friday afternoon with eager congressman who sold Americans out 219-212 in favor of The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES). Also dubbed “Waxman- Markey” the bill will implement the infamous cap-and-trade system on greenhouse gas emissions, signaling the NWO’s final moves towards total financial bondage.
Al Gore, part owner of carbon offset company Generation Investment Management, testified in front of a congressional committee that a cap-and trade system along with a direct carbon tax would be ideal.
Under the guise of philanthropic style environmentalism, the New World Order is blasting forward with draconian legislation every week it seems. Using thuggish tactics such as switching bill numbers & phone numbers to DC representatives and of course, good old fashion disinofo bombs got the job done. Cap and trade sets a limit on the amount of greenhouse gases that a factory, business, utility, or other energy producer is allowed to emit The goal of the Waxman- Markey bill is to cut CO2 emissions by 17 percent by 2020.
Most energy producers and manufactures will be severely affected by these caps, bu the increase cost will be passed onto their customers through higher prices. Companies will purchase permits that will allow them to exceed the “cap” These permits will be issued by our gangster government, and then be auctioned off to the same companies participating in the cap-and trade system. The theory is to create a free market for carbon permits where the price is set by those being forced to participate in the new system.
Consumers will be affected the most by this these new caps on energy. Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the Commission Budget Office testified before the Committee on Finance in May. He says a cap-and trade system would be devastating to the working poor. According to Elmendorf, the cost to for an average American household would be $1,600 a year, with low-income households carrying a heavier burden because they spend more of their income on energy than higher-income households.
Remaining scraps from revenue created by the auctioning off of carbon permits will go to the families with lower incomes such as a whopping $161 per year tax credit for single persons and $359 for 5-person families. Here’s the rub. According to Elmendorf, “such price increases would be essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program because they would be the most important mechanism through which businesses and households were encouraged to make investments and behavioral changes that reduced CO2.”
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
The federal government will have an annual allowance of almost a trillion dollars worth of grants/ bribe money to use as they seem fit.. Much like the mafia acting as a middleman between people and businesses, the EPA will create a list of companies who are “trade sensitive” or rely on imports.
With General Electric’s smart grid technology in place, energy companies along with their customers will have no other choice but to convert to the communist style system of rationing vital utilities. What smart grid visionaries foresee are home thermostats and appliances that adjust automatically depending on the cost of power.
The availability of $4.5 billion in federal economic recovery money for smart grid technology gives incentives for companies to convert over to the new digitalized grid.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu says, “If you want to create mischief one very good way to create a great deal of mischief is to actually bring down a smart grid system. This system has to be incredibly secure.”
“Is the average consumer willing to pay the upfront costs of a new system and then respond appropriately to price signals? Or will people view a utility’s ability to reach inside a home to turn down a thermostat as Orwellian?” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said at a recent hearing on smart grid.
Lastly, there is the option for companies to avoid a cap on their CO2 emissions by offsetting them. Al Gore, part owner of carbon offset company Generation Investment Management testified in front of a congressional committee that a cap-and trade system along with a direct carbon tax would be ideal.
Limiting the amount of CO2 will do nothing to help make the planet less warm, make us energy independent or create millions of jobs. It will on the other hand destroy whatever is left of our industry here in the North American Union by leaving companies no choice but to move offshore. Some of the biggest oil reserves in the world are here in North America, yet we rely on foreign oil. The elites indirectly control every facet our life.
Citizens will never be energy independent until every home is off the grid. Green jobs will include heavily fluoridated drones enforcing new EPA laws/codes. Besides, the amount of jobs that will be lost due to companies either moving offshore orgoing bankrupt will certainly be higher than the millions created by our fuhrer. With the hookers in Washington granting dictatorial powers to the Federal Reserve last week, it seems as though HR 2998 is part a two prong attack. The New World Order is moving fast, and there is really only two more obstacles in their way: our right to speak freely and our right to protect ourselves.
Sources:
1) http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2454/text
2) “Smart grid” — power lines move into digital age By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer H. Josef Hebert, Associated Press Writer Sat Jun 6, 6:04 pm ET
3) http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/101xx/doc10115/Cap_and_Trade_Testimony.1.1.shtml
Saturday, June 27, 2009
India Plans ID Cards For Its $1.1 Billion Citizens
From http://www.roguegovernment.com/India_Plans_ID_Cards_For_Its_%241.1_Billion_Citizens/16215/0/6/6/Y/M.html
India Plans ID Cards For Its $1.1 Billion Citizens
Published on 06-26-2009 Email To Friend Print Version
Source: FT
India’s government has launched one of the biggest bureaucratic exercises in the country’s history – the issue of a single identity card for each of its 1.1bn citizens.
Montek Singh Ahluwalia, deputy chairman of the planning commission, said the scheme was part of the government’s “inclusive growth” programme aimed at penetrating India’s notorious red tape to deliver social services more directly to citizens, particularly those on the bottom rung of the economic ladder.
“Clearly such a platform, once it’s established, would be useful in a variety of ways for all kinds of agencies that deal with the public, for example, tax identification, drivers’ licences, beneficiaries of public services and beneficiaries of below-the-poverty-line services,” Mr Singh told the FT.
India is notorious for a cumbersome bureaucratic system inherited from British colonial rule that has become more internecine over the decades, making life difficult for the average citizen, particularly the poor and illiterate.
Different government agencies issue their own forms of ID and do not recognise those of other agencies or other states. It can be difficult for a person moving from one state to another to open bank accounts or have their driving licences recognised.
This has led to the kind of corruption and wastage that once compelled Rajiv Gandhi, prime minister until 1989, to complain that only 15 cents of every dollar spent by the government reached the poor.
Nandan NilekaniThe scheme will be run by a new agency, the Unique Identification Authority of India, and headed by Nandan Nilekani (pictured right), co-founder of Infosys Technologies, India’s second-largest computer services outsourcing group, who will have the rank of cabinet minister.
The appointment of Mr Nilekani, one of India’s leading authors and thinkers, marks the first time one of the country’s new generation of technologists has been promoted to the top ranks of government.
The project envisages assigning an identity card with a unique number to every citizen by 2011 and aims at doing away with multiple identification cards.
“I see this as an instrument of empowerment,” Mr Nilekani told the FT. “At the moment everyone’s reinventing the wheel in terms of identifying people. Especially for the poor, they have the most difficulty getting themselves identified.”
India’s opposition National Democratic Alliance had mooted a proposal when it was in power in 2002 to introduce multi-purpose identity cards to check infiltration from neighbouring countries into India and to tackle terrorism. However, the country’s leftist parties, which have benefited from the support of illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, objected. .
Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president of the Centre for Policy Research, a Delhi-based think tank, said that although there were security and privacy issues involved, a single identity card was an “overwhelming necessity”.
India Plans ID Cards For Its $1.1 Billion Citizens
Published on 06-26-2009 Email To Friend Print Version
Source: FT
India’s government has launched one of the biggest bureaucratic exercises in the country’s history – the issue of a single identity card for each of its 1.1bn citizens.
Montek Singh Ahluwalia, deputy chairman of the planning commission, said the scheme was part of the government’s “inclusive growth” programme aimed at penetrating India’s notorious red tape to deliver social services more directly to citizens, particularly those on the bottom rung of the economic ladder.
“Clearly such a platform, once it’s established, would be useful in a variety of ways for all kinds of agencies that deal with the public, for example, tax identification, drivers’ licences, beneficiaries of public services and beneficiaries of below-the-poverty-line services,” Mr Singh told the FT.
India is notorious for a cumbersome bureaucratic system inherited from British colonial rule that has become more internecine over the decades, making life difficult for the average citizen, particularly the poor and illiterate.
Different government agencies issue their own forms of ID and do not recognise those of other agencies or other states. It can be difficult for a person moving from one state to another to open bank accounts or have their driving licences recognised.
This has led to the kind of corruption and wastage that once compelled Rajiv Gandhi, prime minister until 1989, to complain that only 15 cents of every dollar spent by the government reached the poor.
Nandan NilekaniThe scheme will be run by a new agency, the Unique Identification Authority of India, and headed by Nandan Nilekani (pictured right), co-founder of Infosys Technologies, India’s second-largest computer services outsourcing group, who will have the rank of cabinet minister.
The appointment of Mr Nilekani, one of India’s leading authors and thinkers, marks the first time one of the country’s new generation of technologists has been promoted to the top ranks of government.
The project envisages assigning an identity card with a unique number to every citizen by 2011 and aims at doing away with multiple identification cards.
“I see this as an instrument of empowerment,” Mr Nilekani told the FT. “At the moment everyone’s reinventing the wheel in terms of identifying people. Especially for the poor, they have the most difficulty getting themselves identified.”
India’s opposition National Democratic Alliance had mooted a proposal when it was in power in 2002 to introduce multi-purpose identity cards to check infiltration from neighbouring countries into India and to tackle terrorism. However, the country’s leftist parties, which have benefited from the support of illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, objected. .
Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president of the Centre for Policy Research, a Delhi-based think tank, said that although there were security and privacy issues involved, a single identity card was an “overwhelming necessity”.