Those who Visit the Blog

Sunday, February 28, 2010

IMF Boss Proposes Globalist World Reserve Currency

From http://www.infowars.com/imf-boss-proposes-globalist-world-reserve-currency/

IMF Boss Proposes Globalist World Reserve Currency






SEWELL CHAN

The New York Times

February 27, 2010
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
");
//]]>-->

The chief of the International Monetary Fund said Friday that the organization should reorient itself to better detect systemic risks to the global economy and quickly step in with emergency loans when financial crises emerge.
The I.M.F. leader, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, also floated the idea of creating a global reserve currency that could serve as an alternative to the dollar.
After a speech at the I.M.F. headquarters, Mr. Strauss-Kahn said in response to a question about the fiscal crisis in Greece that the fund would be “happy to help if asked” but that the European Union appeared able to resolve the crisis on its own.
Read entire article

Chile's Earthquake's aftershocks

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sciencefair/post/2010/02/aftershocks-rattle-chile-after-earthquake/1

Revolt 426's extra words

From http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.200

Let's recount, i never said a word about a Limit, regardless - Lincoln increased spending by 300% into productive infrastructureI never said a word about anything to do with a 1980 Gold Price.. (perhaps you are looking at another persons quote again)I said McKinley advocated a Gold Standard (And he advocated using Lincolns policies, as you highlighted partially with the Tariffs and building railways)I addressed the Panama Canal, which was not infrastructure on or for the United States but an act of Britsh backed imperialism.And privately funded railroads? where is this coming from? yea they exist - have you seen any MODERN RAILROADS LATELY? ..... how about ANY OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE?.Let's see who is wrong, you compared Abraham Lincoln to Teddy Roosevelt - two complete opposites that had nothing to do with each other (Roosevelt was a traitor, Lincoln actually saved the Union from collapsing) , and then you say Teddy Roosevelt was a Greenbacker because he expanded the monetary supply in 1907?... this means, what?. Because he expanded the monetary supply by issueing Greenbacks there still wasn't a Gold Standard (It was SUSPENDED TEMPORARILY).

Who is lying? huh?. who links to a blog for information about Presidents?. Have you even responded to 75% of the things i've written (instead of cherry picking what you could point and say "Ad Hominem" aka "You are a liar i have no counter argument from the Austrian school), or the video you said you didn't watch or ..... maybe i should just stop, you aren't really worth wasting time blathering about diversions, "Teddy Roosevelt was a Lincoln Nationalist" is that a joke?. Actually McKinley's policy was "We are going to fight through the Gold Standard" meaning, we are going to BUILD THINGS. So, infact 90% of the history you posted was nonsense including your pathetic attempt at attacking Stephen Zarlenga as opposed to actually debunking his refute, which (If anyone read it : http://monetary.org/refute.htm) they would see that Mengers theory makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.So go ahead, ad hominem, and populem, ad nauseum , strawman this to death.

Oh heavens, i am still ALSO waiting for the explanation to how the OUTSTANDING DEBT is going to magically correct when the monetary supply contracts.... i almost forgot about one of the major reasons a Gold Standard would cause genocide..........What happened to that?, wasn't on your cherry picking list like the video i used to highlight what i am talking about?.

-Revolt 426

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12517

________________




What caused that Depression? a reversal of Lincoln's policy of spending currency into productive infrastructure. And no, we've not been bankrupt (until mid 2007) since 1933. Even Ron Paul admits this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz7yBRihxSM

While McKinley may have advocated a Gold Standard, there is no doubt he was a Lincoln Nationalist - he wanted to build a railway to South America (Or Ibero America), Teddy Roosevelt came in and reversed that ideal and added a lot of kookery (In other regards , not economics).

I forgot about War Plan Red, (Although i concede it has nothing to do with economics).... This also occured after McKinley was killed, and we do know Lord Palmerston of Britain was responsible for the Confederacy seceeding..... War Plan Red actually led to Pearl Harbor. So we have Lincoln, 100% enemy of Britain, and Teddy Roosevelt 100% ALLY of Britain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red.

.....War Plan Red was created because Americans knew Britain was locked in a strategic alliance with Japan, the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902. American planners thought that Britain’s imperial reach would bring it into conflict with the US. In 1935 War Plan Red was updated and specified which roads to use in the invasion. "The best practicable route to Vancouver is via Route 99" (Carlson, 2005). Further, in 1935 Americans planned to build three military airfields near the Canadian border and disguise them as civilian airports. "In February 1935, the War Department arranged a Congressional appropriation of $57 million dollars to build three border air bases for the purposes of pre-emptive surprise attacks on Canadian air fields" (Berlin Glasnost, 1992-2007). The airfields were to be kept secret but their existence were accidentally published on the front page of the New York Times on May 1, 1935.

Had James A Garfield AND McKinley (Who wanted to build railways to South America, and was a Lincoln nationalist greenbacker Republican) NOT been assassinated, that would not have even been a Depression, and McKinley's was succeeded by Teddy Roosevelt (Whom was the cousin of a British Intelligence officer) that re-instutued the Gold Standard (The opposite of what McKinley wanted) - however i am glad you brought this point up....

Since we have proven the privatized issuence of currency inevitably leads to chaos, you've actually highlighted the whole point in the Government issuence of currency, which is people have FAR MORE control over it than say, the Federal Reserve?.....

When an entity that issues currency can BYPASS Congressional appropriations, Executive signing and Treasury issuence of credit........ this leads to Weimar Germany, and Hitler. History repeats itself, it is good to not make the same mistakes over and over again.

-Revolt 426



____________


By the way, for those that do not understand, the Federal Reserve is not a Bank, it is a Banking System (A parasitical one) therefor, putting the system into bankruptcy.

Do you think we can tell China "We aren't paying our debt, screw you" and avoid a war?. We are dealing with a Global Collapse of the entire world monetary system and we have the same clowns with the same non existent arguments .....

Bankruptcy Reorganization is the only Constitutional way to destroy all derivatives (You know, the 1.5 Quadrillion $ Worth that is destroying the entire planet) , once the FED system is ridded of the Derivative mess, you can go ahead and Nationalize it into the Treasury department and have a sovereign currency...

Ammended * It is also under bankruptcy judge supervision

-Revolt 426

___________________________________________


By the way, it is noteworthy to mention Lincoln did the exact opposite in regards to foreign relations , and Teddy Roosevelt had British Traitors all over his immediate family.

Actually, without Lincoln allying with the Czar of Russia, the Civil War would have destroyed the United States.

Teddy Roosevelt was put in to destroy relations with certain countries to pave the way for WWI

If you read any of the posts in this thead, you would know that there is indeed a sound alternative to the Austrian method and the status quo, you just choose to ignore it... which is unfortunate but atleast you acknowledge the resultant would be an incalculable amount of foreclosers and debt defaults of various kinds.

With a greenback system you are able to
A) issue currency without a CAP into productive means which does not cause inflation. (What causes inflation is when you allow the printing of currency into UN-Productive means and the Net Production levels fall below the monetary supply)

B) There will have to be a Government Intervention to keep people in their homes regardless of any reform because this is the greatest economic collapse in the history of man kind due to it's globalized unique nature and massive population levels to sustain.

C) Rebuild the Nations infrastructure which is the only thing that would allow a recovery in the first place.

-Revolt 426

______________________

The problem is that "fiscal stimulus" usually means borrowing the money in question before "spending" it. This borrowing aspect is the literal opposite of what I'm proposing:

----------------------------------

http://www.wealthmoney.org/happen.html

What Would Happen?If the American Transportation Act were passed and became effective January 1, 2006, you would no longer pay tax on gasoline, diesel or other fuels. You would pay no tax on oil products, no tollway fees, no axle taxes, license fees, or other taxes normally collected to pay for roads and bridges. Taxes to build and maintain roads and bridges would no longer be collected. No more bonding would be necessary for road & bridge construction and maintenance. Property taxes would be lower. All new money would now be created and exchanged into circulation as a Wealth (debt-free) payment for the labor and raw resources used in combination to build and maintain our roads and bridges. These are a Wealth produced that benefit ALL citizens equally. This was the principle behind the 'monetizing' of gold and silver bullion Free as a Wealth to the people who produced it and a debt-free medium of exchange to ALL. The government would hold the roads and bridges in "trust" for the people who would thereafter use them free-of-charge with no taxation or fees of any kind. The new money would represent the Wealth of our Nation (peoples' labor and raw sources) just like gold certificates once represented the Wealth metal money produced by the people and deposited with the Treasury. The certificate represented the production and was as good as the Wealth (gold or silver) it represented.

[Continued...]----------------------------------There's a fundamental difference between monetizing debt (as Keynesian borrow-and-spenders would have us do) and monetizing wealth.

Economic Reform?If they are not spent productively you get an economic breakdown like we are currently seeing, this can lead to inflation.The point of spending them into productivity is that productivity (Labor) is required for Capitalism to exist.Our current workforce is a "Service Economy" meaning, there is virtually no production left due to outsourcing to slave wage nations via "Free Trade" agreements.....You cannot subsitute production with services, because it leads to the current situation. I hope that answers the question.

-Revolt 426

_____________________

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.320

only in dreamland, can you prosecute people for fraud after they collapse the entire economic system. My argument "Hinges" on what U.S. History has shown us, your argument has no historical base whatsoever. The delusional fantasy that "the threat of proseuction" Is going to stop a sociopath from creating a situation like this is histerical.. only certain regulations (Like the regulation that prohibited banks from speculating with deposit money that you oppose) would stop the actual collapse. You would prefer to wait for the collapse, and then prosecute them after the entire economy is wiped out. And since i know there is someone in the thread that is going to equate what i just said to "thought crimes" , firstly i never said all regulation was good - secondly, Derivatives being private, off the book contracts is the REASON why this has occured... if there was a regulation on financial speculations, this could not possibly have occured.

Congress had quite a difficult time getting a bailout bill through (IT failed the first time) for 750 Billion dollars after they were lied to by Bernanke who said the entire planet would meltdown in 24 hours and we would have martial law (This would not happen without the FED)........ the remainder of bailout money has actually been issued by BYPASSING Congress, and if you don't understand that 13 Trillion is ALOT more then 750 Billion, then you should go do some math homework. If you recall, the first bailout vote had so many phone calls opposing it that it failed...........

And last i checked, Ron Paul's audit the fed bill has 190 co-sponsers? are they all evil?.

Just another argument made without thinking......... They should be prosecuted as fraud AND REGULATED to prevent this situation from occuring AGAIN.

-Revolt 426

_______________

www.secretofoz.com


The Rosary

http://papalbusters.blogspot.com/2008/10/rosary-not-scriptural.html

Solar Storms Could Be The Next Katrina

From http://www.roguegovernment.com/Solar_Storms_Could_Be_The_Next_Katrina/19733/0/9/9/Y/M.html

Solar Storms Could Be The Next Katrina
Published on 02-28-2010 Email To Friend Print Version


Source: NPR


Every few decades, the sun experiences a particularly large storm that can release as much energy as 1 billion hydrogen bombs. Officials from Europe and the U.S. say an event like that could leave millions on Earth without electricity, running water and phone service.

A massive solar storm could leave millions of people around the world without electricity, running water, or phone service, government officials say.


That was their conclusion after participating in a tabletop exercise that looked at what might happen today if the Earth were struck by a solar storm as intense as the huge storms that occurred in 1921 and 1859.

Solar storms happen when an eruption or explosion on the surface of the sun sends radiation or electrically charged particles toward Earth. Minor storms are common and can light up the Earth's Northern skies and interfere with radio signals.

Every few decades, though, the sun experiences a particularly large storm. These can release as much energy as 1 billion hydrogen bombs.

How Well Can We Weather The Solar Storm?

The exercise, held in Boulder, Colorado, was intended to investigate "what we think could be close to a worst-case scenario," says Tom Bogdan, who directs the Space Weather Prediction Center in Boulder. The Center is a part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

"It's important to understand that, along with other types of natural hazards, (solar) storms can cause impacts," says Craig Fugate, Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), who also took part in the tabletop exercise.

Bogdan and Fugate say that eventually there will be another storm as big as the ones in 1921 and 1859 — a sort of solar Katrina.

But the impact is likely to be far worse than in previous solar storms because of our growing dependence on satellites and other electronic devices that are vulnerable to electromagnetic radiation.

In the tabletop exercise, the first sign of trouble came when radiation began disrupting radio signals and GPS devices, Bogdan says.

Ten or 20 minutes later electrically charged particles "basically took out" most of the commercial satellites that transmit telephone conversations, TV shows and huge amounts of data we depend on in our daily lives, Bogdan says.

"When you go into a gas station and put your credit card in and get some gas," he says, "that's a satellite transaction."

Disabled Satellites Are Just The Beginning

The worst damage came nearly a day later, when the solar storm began to induce electrical currents in high voltage power lines. The currents were strong enough to destroy transformers around the globe," Bogdan says, leaving millions of people in northern latitudes without power.

Without electricity, many people also lost running water, heat, air conditioning and phone service. And places like hospitals had to rely on emergency generators with fuel for only two or three days, Bogdan says.

In many ways, the impact of a major solar storm resembles that of a hurricane or an earthquake, says Fugate.

But a solar Katrina would cause damage in a much larger area than any natural disaster, Fugate says. For example, power could be knocked out almost simultaneously in countries from Sweden to Canada and the U.S., he says. So a lot more people in a lot more places would need help.

Individuals don't need to make any special preparation for a solar storm, Fugate says. The standard emergency kit of water and food and first aid supplies will work just fine.

"If you've got your family disaster plan together, you've taken the steps, whether it be a space storm, whether it be a system failure, whether it be another natural hazard that knocks the power out," Fugate says.

Barack Obama and the Patriot Act

http://www.infowars.com/obama-and-the-patriot-act-yes-we-can-kill-the-bill-of-rights/

Hayek exposed as a proponent of an EU-like system

http://american_almanac.tripod.com/vonhayek.htm

Freedoms

http://www.infowars.com/olympic-fanfare-reigns-as-our-precious-freedoms-are-lost/

How Did It Begin?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19757351/How-did-It-Begin

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Revolt 426 on the German Hyperinflation before WWII

From http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.160

Right, so if you owe 200,000$ on a mortgage, installment loan, commercial loan (or one of numerous other loans) , if there is deflation - you cannot REPAY the loan and you will go bankrupt.

Now, think about how many of these loans are oustanding, and we have a serious problem.

No, there is no easy way out - but instituting a Gold Standard is CERTAINLY not the answer ( and i did not attack the entire Austrian school, just about 3 key issues)..


You may be interested to look at how Germany ended up with hyperinflation (Through the privatized issuence of currency):


The great German hyper-inflation of 1922-1923 is one of the most widely cited examples by those who insist that private bankers, not governments, should control the money system. What is practically unknown about that sordid affair is that it occurred under the auspices of a privately owned and controlled central bank.

Up to then the Reichsbank had a form of private ownership but with substantial public control; the President and Directors were officials of the German government, appointed by the Emperor for life. There was a sharing of the revenue of the central bank between the private shareholders and the government. But shareholders had no power to determine policy.

The Allies' plan for the reconstruction of Germany after WWI came to be known as the Dawes Plan, named after General Charles Gates Dawes, a Chicago banker. The foreign experts delegated by the League of Nations to guide the economic recovery of Germany wanted a more free market orientation for the German central bank.

[Hjalmar] Schacht relates how the Allies had insisted that the Reichsbank be made more independent from the government:

"On May 26, 1922, the law establishing the independence of the Reichsbank and withdrawing from the Chancellor of the Reich any influence on the conduct of the Bank's business was promulgated."

This granting of total private control over the German currency became a key factor in the worst inflation of modern times.

The stage had already been set by the immense reparations payments. That they were payable in foreign currency would place a great continuing pressure on the Reichsmark far into the future.

HOW IS A CURRENCY DESTROYED?

In a sentence, a currency is destroyed by issuing or creating tremendously excessive amounts of it. Not just too much of it but far too much. This excessive issue can happen in several ways, for example by British counterfeiting as occurred with the U.S. Continental Currency, and with the French Assignats. The central bank itself might print too much currency, or the central bank might allow speculators to destroy a currency through excessive short selling of it, similar to short selling a company's shares, in effect allowing speculators to "issue" the currency.

The destruction of an already pressured national currency through speculation is what concerns us in this case. A related process was recently allowed to destroy several Asian currencies, which dropped over 50% against the Dollar in a few months time, in 1997-98, threatening the livelihood of millions.

It works like this: First there is some obvious weakness involved in the currency. In Germany's case it was World War One, and the need for foreign currency for reparations payments. In the case of the Asian countries, they had a need for U.S. dollars in order to repay foreign debts coming due.

Such problems can be solved over time and usually require national contribution toward their solution, in the form of taxes or temporary lowering of living standards. However, because currency speculation on a scale large enough to affect the currency's value is still erroneously viewed as a legitimate activity, private currency speculators can make a weak situation immeasurably worse and take billions of dollars in "profits" out of the situation by selling short the currency in question. This doesn't just involve selling currency that they own but making contracts to sell currency that they don't own -- to sell it short.

If done in large amounts, in a weak situation, such short selling soon has self-fulfilling results, driving down the value of the currency faster and further than it otherwise would have fallen. Then at some point, panic strikes, which causes widespread flight from the currency by those who actually hold it. It drops precipitously. The short selling speculators are then able to buy back the currency that they sold short, and obtain tremendous profits, at the expense of the producers and working people whose lives and enterprises were dependent on that currency.

The free market gang claim that it's all the fault of the government that the currency was weak in the first place. But by what logic does it follow that speculators take this money from those already in trouble? Currency speculation in such large amounts should be viewed as a form of aggression, no less harmful than dropping bombs on the country in question.

Industrialists should realize that when they allow such activity to be included under the umbrella of "business activity," they are making a serious error. They should help isolate such speculation and educate the populace on how destructive it is, so that it can be stopped through law.

Limitations could easily be placed on speculative currency transactions without limiting those that are a normal part of business and trading, while stopping the kind of transactions that are thinly disguised attacks on the country involved. Placing a small tax on such transactions would be a healthy first move.

TOO MANY GERMAN MARKS ISSUED

By July 1922 the German Mark fell to 300 marks for $1; in November it was at 9,000 to $1; by January 1923 it was at 49,000 to $1; by July 1923 it was at 1,100,000 to $1. It reached 2.5 trillion marks to $1 in mid November, 1923, varying from city to city.

In the monetary chaos Hamburg, Bremen and Kiel established private banks to issue money backed by gold and foreign exchange. The private Reichsbank printing presses had been unable to keep up and other private parties were given the authority to issue money. Schacht estimated that about half the money in circulation was private money from other than Reichsbank sources.

CAUSE OF THE FIRST INFLATION: SCHACHT'S FIRST "EXPLANATION"

There is often a false assumption made that the government allowed the mark to fall, in order to more easily pay off the war indemnity. But since the Versailles Treaty required payment in U.S. Dollars and British Pounds, the inflationary disorder actually made it much harder to raise such foreign exchange.

Hjalmar Schacht's 1967 book, The Magic of Money, presents what appears to be a contradictory explanation of the private Reichsbank's role in the inflation disaster.

First, in the hackneyed tradition of economists, he is prepared to let the private Reichsbank off the hook very easily and blame the government's difficult reparations situation instead. He minimized the connection of the private control of the central bank with the inflation as mere co-incidence....

THEN SCHACHT GIVES THE REAL EXPLANATION

Schacht was a lifelong member of the banking fraternity, reaching its highest levels. He may have felt compelled to give his banker peers and their public relations corps something innocuous to quote. But Schacht also had a streak of German nationalism, and more than that, an almost sacred devotion to a stable mark. He had watched helplessly as the hyper-inflation destroyed "his mark."

For whatever reasons, after 44 years he proceeded to let the cat out of the bag, with some truly remarkable admissions, which shatter the "accepted wisdom" the Anglo-American financial community has promulgated on the German hyper-inflation....

SCHACHT'S REVELATION

It was in describing his 1924 battles in stabilizing the Rentenmarks that Schacht made his revelation, giving the private mechanism of the hyper-inflation. Schacht was obviously very upset when the speculators continued to attack the new Rentenmark currency. By the end of the November 1923:

"The dollar reached an exchange rate of 12 trillion Rentenmarks on the free market of the Cologne Bourse. This speculation was not only hostile to the country's economic interests, it was also stupid. In previous years such speculation had been carried on either with loans which the Reichsbank granted lavishly, or with emergency money which one printed oneself, and then exchanged for Reichsmarks.

"Now, however, three things had happened. The emergency money had lost its value. It was no longer possible to exchange it for Reichsmarks. The loans formerly easily obtained from the Reichsbank were no longer granted, and the Rentenmark could not be used abroad. For these reasons the speculators were unable to pay for the dollars they had bought when payment became due (and they) made considerable losses."

Schacht is telling us that the excessive speculation against the mark -- the short selling of the mark -- was financed by lavish loans from the private Reichsbank. The margin requirements that the anti-mark speculators needed and without which they could not have attacked the mark was provided by the private Reichsbank!

This contradicts Schacht's earlier explanation, for there is no way to interpret or justify "lavishly" loaning to anti-mark speculators as "helping to keep the government's head above water." Just the opposite. Schacht was a bright fellow, and he wanted this point to be understood. He waited until he wrote the Magic of Money in 1967. His earlier book, The Stabilization of the Mark (1927), discussed inflation profiteering but did not clearly identify the private Reichsbank itself as financing such speculation, making it so convenient to go short the mark.

Thus it was a privately owned and privately controlled central bank, that made loans to private speculators, enabling them to speculate against the nation's currency. Whatever other pressures the currency faced (and they were substantial), such speculation helped create a one way market down for the Reichsmark. Soon a continuous panic set in, and not just speculators, but everyone else had to do what they could to get out of their marks, further fueling the disaster. This private factor has been largely unknown in America.


-- Stephen Zarlenga, The Lost Science of Money, pp. 579-87

More on the Chile Earthquake and Tsunami in 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/world/americas/28chile.html



http://cnmnewsnetwork.com/11313/hawaii-tsunami-warning-2010-a-consequence-of-chile-earthquake-2010/

Senate Bill Allows Obama to Declare “Cybersecurity Emergency”

http://www.infowars.com/senate-bill-allows-obama-to-declare-cybersecurity-emergency/

Glenn Beck And Alex Jones Working Together To Destroy Debra Medina's Campaign For Texas Governor

From http://www.roguegovernment.com/Glenn_Beck_And_Alex_Jones_Working_Together_To_Destroy_Debra_Medina%27s_Campaign_For_Texas_Governor/19707/0/13/13/Y/M.html




Glenn Beck And Alex Jones Working Together To Destroy Debra Medina's Campaign For Texas Governor
Published on 02-26-2010
Email To Friend Print Version

Source: www.roguegovernment.com - By Lee Rogers

The Debra Medina for Texas governor campaign is clearly being sabotaged by both Glenn Beck and Alex Jones in a carefully staged divide and conquer operation. Medina’s campaign of limited government, lower taxes and state sovereignty has not made the establishment powers happy. When Medina was interviewed by Beck on his show he used the issue of the 9/11 truth movement in an attempt to make her look bad in the eyes of Republican voters. It was an obvious operation by Beck to try to sabotage her campaign in favor of other establishment cronies like Rick Perry and Kay Bailey Hutchinson who are running against her in the Republican primary. Although this sort of action was to be expected from someone like Beck who is an obvious paid propagandist that engages in all sorts of dishonest journalism, it was of more interest to see Alex Jones use the same issue to also demonize Medina. Essentially we have Beck associating Medina with the 9/11 truth movement to make her look bad and Jones also demonizing Medina by criticizing her for distancing herself from the 9/11 truth movement based off of comments she made during an interview on the Mark Davis radio show. Even more ridiculous is that Jones did this right as Medina’s campaign was picking up traction and after he openly came out and supported her. This is yet another case of Jones using New World Order tactics to divide people. Just a short while ago, he intentionally disrupted a pro Second Amendment rally in Austin Texas by shouting over a bull horn while others were attempting to speak. This is despite the fact that he was actually invited to speak at the rally. Again, more proof that Jones is a self-absorbed ego driven lunatic who should be considered an enemy of freedom.

Clearly, the entire Tea Party movement which believes in limited government and lower taxes is being lead and controlled by establishment forces. The tea party movement has been divided amongst two factions. We have people like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck leading one side of the spectrum who align themselves more with the insane conventional beliefs propagandized in the corporate media. On the other side you have people like Ron Paul and Alex Jones who talk about auditing the Federal Reserve and restoring the Constitution. You also have people in the 9/11 truth movement aligned with Paul and Jones who are demanding a new investigation into the 9/11 attacks. With both Beck and Jones using the issue of the 9/11 truth movement to run the Medina campaign into the ground it shows that Beck and Jones have the exact same goals. This could be why Jones has been going out of his way to spend a ridiculous amount of time criticizing Beck because it is an attempt to conceal the fact that both Beck and Jones have the same agenda and are controlled by the same people.

Jack Blood a former insider within the Alex Jones camp who used to be an occasional fill in guest host for Jones finally came out and exposed Jones for the fraud that he is on yesterday’s edition of his radio show Deadline Live. Apparently, the fact that Jones came out attempting to deep six Medina’s political campaign using the 9/11 issue was the last straw for Blood. In the broadcast, Blood revealed that Jones would call him late at night trying to figure out ways to destroy other individuals in the truth and freedom movement that were critical of him. Blood also revealed that Jones is an incredibly unstable individual who can’t hold his liquor and would often try to start fights with other people after he’s had a few drinks. He also revealed that many of the autographed copies of his film Terrorstorm that Jones sold as part of a promotion were not autographed by him, but instead were autographed by members of his staff. Blood and some of the callers that call into his show make other intriguing revelations of the various tactics Jones has used to divide people and to get them fighting amongst themselves so that he in the end would benefit. The entire show is very much worth listening to and can be heard via this link.
We also have groups such as the Council for National Policy and other phony right wing establishment groups that are clearly guiding and influencing the Tea Party movement. The Council for National Policy is a secretive religious and political based organization formed in 1981 by Tim Lehaye that meets behind closed doors three times a year. Its membership includes people who are involved heavily in the so-called patriot movement and appear frequently on the Alex Jones show. People like Paul Craig Roberts, Dr. Stan Monteith, Jerome Corsi and Larry Pratt have confirmed links to the Council for National Policy and have been frequent guests on the Jones program. Establishment hacks promoting the globalist agenda like John Ashcroft, Dick Cheney, Gary Bauer, Trent Lott, George W. Bush and others have been linked to or have spoken in front of the Council for National Policy. Interests associated with the Council for National Policy and Sarah Palin’s political action group have also been backing the 2010 Kentucky Senate campaign of Rand Paul which is strange in its own right. Grover Norquist another individual linked to the Council for National Policy has been associated with Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty organization. Norquist was a speaker at Paul’s 2008 Rally for the Republic but is also a supporter of John McCain’s 2010 Arizona Senate campaign. This is an obvious ideological conflict of interests considering that McCain is an obvious establishment politician. Even more ridiculous is the fact that McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign was supported by war criminal and globalist Henry Kissinger. Would somebody who really believes in freedom support a man like McCain who is backed by someone like Kissinger?

Besides the phony Tea Party movement we must also recognize that the entire electoral system has been co-opted with the use of electronic voting machines and other forms of fraud. Essentially, the Medina campaign is destined not to be successful considering that forces within the corporate and alternative media want her to fail and that the electoral system is a fraud in of itself.
In all honesty, Medina put herself in this situation by not offering a clear and concise stance on the issue of the 9/11 truth movement. At this point if someone runs for office they should just speak the truth about how insane and sick the world is regardless of if they get elected or not. They need to go all the way so that it finally becomes acceptable to talk about any and all issues that to this point are largely relegated to the alternative and conspiracy research communities. The fact that we have issues that are considered off limits is entirely insane if this is supposed to be a free country. Anybody who spends a half an hour worth of time researching the 9/11 attacks can understand quickly that the official story is a lie. If a politician can’t spend even just a small amount of time researching the 9/11 attacks and understand what it really is they aren’t worth supporting. The 9/11 lie has been used to legitimize all of the evil we have seen over the past 8 years and is an issue that needs to be openly talked about.
But the problem even goes even beyond this. The two-party system which provides us with a myriad of false choices is no longer worth supporting and legitimizing. The system that is the United States of America is going to collapse and even if a few so-called good cops like Debra Medina are put into key positions of power, it is not going to save this country from what will be a horrendous fall. Our energy is better served educating people as to how diabolical this system really is instead of wasting time supporting politicians who can’t even provide a firm stance on the issue of the 9/11 attacks or who run campaigns that were never run to win. The 2008 presidential campaign of Ron Paul which was clearly engineered and run to fail should have been a clear signal to all involved that the entire electoral and political system is a fraud. Simply put, this criminal system should no longer be supported and validated with our participation.




Louisiana Cops Plan for “End of the World” Scenario

http://www.infowars.com/louisiana-cops-plan-for-end-of-the-world-scenario/

U.N Still Pushing for Global Environmental Control

From http://www.roguegovernment.com/U.N_Still_Pushing_for_Global_Environmental_Control/19723/0/2/2/Y/M.html

U.N Still Pushing for Global Environmental Control
Published on 02-26-2010
Email To Friend Print Version

Source: Fox News
Leaked planning documents (PDF)
Despite the debacle of the failed Copenhagen climate change conference last December, the United Nations is pressing full speed ahead with a plan for a greatly expanded system of global environmental governance and for a multitrillion-dollar economic transfer scheme to ignite the creation of a "global green economy."
In other words: Copenhagen without the authority — yet — of Copenhagen.
The world body even has chosen a time and a place for the culmination of the process: a World Summit on Sustainable Development to be held in Rio de Janeiro in 2012, the 20th anniversary of the famed "Earth Summit" that gave focus and urgency to the world environmentalist movement.
The 2012 summit date is significant for another reason: It marks the end of the legal term of agreement for the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, which includes carbon reduction targets, and provided the legal basis for an international cap-and-trade market for carbon, centered in Europe. The U.S. first signed then backed away from the Kyoto deal without ratifying it; until its apparent collapse, the comprehensive Copenhagen deal was intended to include the U.S. and supplant Kyoto with a new, legally binding regime.
The new Rio summit will end, according to U.N. documents obtained by Fox News, with a "focused political document" presumably laying out the framework and international commitments to a new Green World Order.
Just exactly what that environmental order will look like, and the extent of the immense financial commitments needed to produce it, are under discussion this week at a special session in Bali, Indonesia, of the United Nations Environment Program's 58-nation "Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum," which oversees UNEP's operations.
The GC/GMEF, as it is known, is made up of environmental ministers and top-level bureaucrats from a roster of supervising nations — the U.S. is one of them — and its meeting is surrounded by a galaxy of environmentalist non-government organizations (NGOs) and environmental journalists from around the world.
Idyllic Bali is a favored venue for U.N. environmental meetings, in part because of its seclusion from too many outside eyes, and because its Pacific location and small size make it a highly congenial hothouse for environmental enthusiasm. In 2007, it served as a launching pad for the Bali Action Plan, which laid the negotiating basis for the Copenhagen treaty process.
The latest Bali session runs from Feb. 24 to 26, and is accompanied by a welter of other UNEP activity ranging from sessions on international waste management and chemical disposal, to the start of a process aimed at a new international treaty covering the storage and disposal of environmental mercury.

But the major topics are a global system of governance and what amounts to the next stage of a radical transformation of the world economic and social order, in the name of saving the planet.
Alongside that, as always, are discussions of vast sums of money that should flow to developing nations to help them make the transition to the new, greener world. As one of the papers written in advance of the meeting to "stimulate discussion" puts it, "the situation ... presents genuine opportunities for a dramatic shift from what can be termed 'business as usual.'"
For the anonymous bureaucrats who wrote the discussion papers, "business as usual" apparently means the current world economy, which the anonymous authors disparagingly term the "brown economy," or the "current dominant economic model." It is, according to the UNEP documents, a model in crisis, "which currently consumes more biomass than the Earth produces on a sustainable basis," and also "depletes natural capital" and "risks perpetuating and exacerbating persistent poverty and distributional disparities."
The new green economy under discussion at Bali will be something very different: For starters, it is much more vague, and as far as the discussion paper authors are concerned, it will stay that way.
The paper paints the coming green order in nebulous and utopian terms. It "implies the decoupling of resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth." It involves "substantially increased investment in green sectors, supported by enabling policy reforms." The investments will "provide the mechanism for the reconfiguration of businesses, infrastructure and institutions, and for adoption of sustainable consumption and production processes." It will lead to "more green and decent jobs, reduced energy and material intensities in production processes, less waste and pollution, and significantly reduced greenhouse-gas emissions."
But when it comes to measuring the achievement of those goals, the paper says, "it is counter-productive to develop generic green economy indicators applicable to all countries given differences in natural, human and economic resources." In the process of turning brown to green, "a green economy in one country may look quite dissimilar to a green economy in another country."
All of which may make judging the value of investment in the ecological transformation difficult to evaluate, except for insiders. But then, the paper suggests that the world may have an additional governing structure composed of exactly those insiders. As the paper puts it:
"Moving towards a green economy would also provide an opportunity to re-examine national and global governance structures and consider whether such structures allow the international community to respond to current and future environmental and development challenges and to capitalize on emerging opportunities."
The discussion paper, published — but not distributed — on Dec. 14, 2009, assumes that the goal of the green economic transformation is the same as that of the ill-fated Copenhagen conference: a 50 percent reduction in global carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. That, the paper says, will require a staggering $45 trillion dollar to accomplish — much of it in transfers from rich nations to poorer ones.
The paper, however, paints that as a bargain — "an average yearly investment of just over $1 trillion." About half of that would go for "replacing conventional technologies with low-carbon, environmentally sound alternatives."
Click here to read the Green Economy paper.
Another major investment target would be "ecosystem-based adaptation and mitigation"—paying people and governments to maintain and expand forests, wetlands, coral reefs and other productive sources of "natural capital," which the current "dominant economic model" — the paper provides no other specifics — abuses.
But that is only the beginning of the transformation. Consumption patterns must change, so that fewer wasteful products are consumed, and more ecologically proper ones are produced — organic food and beverages, for example. The UNEP authors, citing other analytical papers produced by UNEP, claim that "the global market for environmental products and services is projected to double from the present $1.37 trillion per year to $2.74 trillion by 2020."
Beyond the organic food market, however, "environmental products and services" are not defined in much detail. One area would be the management of chemicals and solid and hazardous waste — as the paper puts it, "solid waste management alone consumes on average 20-50 percent of most city budgets."

In social terms, one of the most important goals of the transformation would be jobs, jobs, jobs — all of them green, and many of them, as it happens, already in existence.
The report notes, for example, that the U.S. recycling industry as of 2002 already employed over 1 million people; more investment would thus provide "significant opportunities" for more job creation. The same goes for looking after trees: Citing the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, the paper claims that "10 million new green jobs could be created by investing in sustainable forest management."
The report argues that significant amounts of the money developed countries have thrown at the problem of ending their current steep recessions could be counted as the type of green investment it envisages as part of the trillion-a-year future. In the U.S., for example, the document says that 11.6 percent of the economic stimulus as of August 2009 — about $112.8 billion — is the type it sees as vastly increasing in the future.
Where is all the money supposed to come from? The paper is emphatic that government alone doesn't have enough. The paper says that "regulated market mechanisms" are needed to "to promote new and innovative investments in green technology."
But above all, the paper asserts, the focus on ecological transformation must become all-encompassing if it is to succeed. Quoting from UNEP's formal medium-term strategy for 2010 to 2013, it says that "linkages between environmental sustainability and the economy will emerge as a key focus for public policymaking and a determinant of future market opportunities."
In other words, the green economy requires a green-oriented political revolution. As UNEP's medium-term strategy puts it: "The current environmental challenges and opportunities will cause the environment to move from often being considered a marginal issue at the intergovernmental and national levels to the center of political and economic decision-making."
The authors of the UNEP "discussion" papers see that organization — the U.N.'s principal environmental watchdog — and especially its governing "Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum," as the central nexus of that new eco-centric regime — and that strengthening its authority at both the national and international levels will be a growing theme as the 2012 Rio Conference looms nearer.
"It is clear that environmental ministers alone cannot meet today's environmental challenges," asserts yet another Bali discussion paper. "One step towards strengthening their standing vis-à-vis other sectors is to strengthen the national [environmental] governance system."
Meantime, UNEP's GC/GMEF "is mandated to bring all environmental aspects together and to formulate broad policy advice and guidance" in the area of "international environmental governance reform" — with the aim of having it all ratified, eventually, by the U.N. General Assembly.
Click here to read the discussion paper on international environmental governance.
In all of this, it appears, the 2012 Rio Conference on Sustainable Development and the preliminary meetings that will determine its agenda is intended to play an important role in focusing attention on the agenda being discussed at Bali, and in creating the suggested frameworks of future "international governance." Above all, the planned Rio summit will be a framework that welds together the UNEP framework of environmentalism with the U.N.'s traditional anti-poverty agenda — which also involves huge investment transfers to poor countries from rich ones.
The two agendas come together in the rubric for Rio: sustainable development. As the paper on governance turgidly puts it: "eradicating poverty, changing unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development [are] overarching objectives of and essential requirements for sustainable development."
Vast international wealth transfers, crash investments in "green" technologies for energy, food, transportation and virtually everything else, with the aim of making enormous cuts in carbon emissions by 2050 — the sum of all the discussions underway at Bali appears indistinguishable from the Copenhagen agenda that was declared dead in December.
Except the U.N. and many nations — including the U.S. — apparently don't think so. Indeed, a series of new Copenhagen process negotiations have just been set for Bonn in April, with another set for late May to early June.
Their official aim is to bring Copenhagen back from the dead by the end of this year at a final negotiating session in Mexico.

In a press release announcing the negotiating round, Yvo de Boer, head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which manages the Copenhagen negotiating process, declared that "this constitutes a quick return to the negotiations" — and a continuing determination to put a new treaty in place as the capstone of the Green World Order.
But at the same time, he made clear that a deal by the end of the year is unlikely; 2011 is more feasible.
If that happens, de Boer won't be applauding from his current position. He has resigned, effective July 1, to become a consultant.
The first major preparatory meetings for the Rio summit in 2012 will be held at U.N. headquarters in New York City in mid-May.
George Russell is executive editor of Fox News.

An 8.8 Earthquake hit Chile (Warnings come to places as far as Hawaii)

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2010/02/100227-tsunami-warning-for-hawaii-after-huge-chile-earthquake/

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/02/27/chile.quake/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chile_earthquake

Arrested Terrorist Leader Exposes Extensive CIA Connections

http://www.infowars.com/arrested-terrorist-leader-exposes-extensive-cia-connections/

Friday, February 26, 2010

Obama Appoints Federal Reserve Operative to Debt Panel

http://www.infowars.com/obama-appoints-federal-reserve-operative-to-debt-panel/

http://www.prisonplanet.com/gun-control-and-the-war-on-drugs.html

The Roy Rogers Masonic Connection

http://www.thewatchmanwakes.com/JohnMacarthur-RoyRogers-Freemasonry.html

The Newsletter

http://cuttingedge.org/newsletters/newsalert.htm

Updates on Architecture as Riddles in Stone Part 3

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26163095/Architecture-as-Riddles-in-Stone-Part-3


http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?p=3543

Friday Updates in late February 2010

Money is an important subject. The Citibank controversy puts dubious FDIC guarantee back in the spotlight. The 7 day restriction on bank withdrawals could mean the difference between preserving or destroying your life savings if the U.S. dollar collapses. It's shows the vulnerability of the fractional reserve banking system and the FDIC's shaking guarantee that it can insure desposits in the event of a bank run. Citibank's notice informed its customers of the right to request 7 days notice before funds can be withdrawn from all checking, savings and money market accounts was necessary to ensure compliance with Federal Reserve regulations. FOX news business reported on this little known regulation yesterday in a piece written by Darryl R. Isherwood. “The requirement is part of Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933. It applies to all accounts classified as Negotiable Order of Withdrawal [NOW] accounts – basically interest-bearing checking and savings accounts held by individuals and non-profits. Banks are not required to hold reserves in place to cover NOW accounts, so the rule prevents a run on withdrawals for which there are no reserves,” states the report. For those still unaware of the fact, it comes as a shock that your has no reserves with which to cover withdrawals (if there was a sudden loss of confidence and a good old run on the bank as has happened on many times over the past 2 years in the UK and the U.S.). The report says that a spokeswoman says that the bank chagned the status of the bulk of its consumer checking accounts last year to take advantage of an FDIC policy (to provide unlimited account protection to certain types of accounts. When Citi transferred the accounts back to their original status, it triggered the notification of the seven day requirement. FDIC claims it gurantees insurance to the tune of $250,000 per depositor per bank, but the rising number of bank failures and those placed on the "problem list" has created frears that the tank is running dry. Alarmingly, The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. only has about $50 billion to “insure” about $1 trillion in assets across the nation’s financial institutions. This was even admitted in a Yahoo.com article shortly after the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. When Americans realize the fact that banks are “going to run out of money”, the article nonchalantly stated, a run on the banks will accelerate. On Tuesday, the FDIC said that its deposit insurance fund suffered a $12.6 billion drop in the final three months of 2009 due to accelerating bank closures. The fund's reserve ratio was -0.39% at the end of the quarter and the lowest on record for the combined bank and thrift fund according to the announcement. Financial experts have predicted that the failure of 300-500 U.S. banks would absorb all of the FDIC's insurance funds. This is why people are worried that banks imposing delays on access to their savings, not as a result of some Internet conspiracy going out of control (as the FOX News Business article implies), but as a consequence of true magnitude of what could plausibly heppen in a worse case sceanario. If the U.S. dollar was to suffer a sudden and drastic collapse as some financial expert predicted (and hyperinflation occurs, then people might have real access to money or swap it for another currency of a period of 7 days could be the difference between preserving your life savings or having them rendered practically worthless). If the United States suffered a Weimar Republic style collapse and the cost of a pound of butter soared to a million dollars. Generations of wealth could be gone overnight with people to not be able to access their savings. Many people are flocking to physical gold and silver builion in trying to preserve their wealth. With banks affording themselves the power to loan out increasing multiples of what they hold at any one time while the money supply is artificially doubled, being reminded of the fact that our nest eggs consist of nothing more than numbers on a computer screen which can be withheld from us at the discretion of the banks isn’t exactly going to restore trust in traditional methods of saving.


An Oregon Planned Parenthood group is beginning to sell women a dangerous abortion drug. This group is found in southwestern Oregon. This drug have killed more than 13 women worldwide. It has injured thousands more people. Planned Parenthood of Southwest Oregon will sell the mifespristone drug to women starting next month. A study last year found 20 percent of women using the abortion drug face media complications. Planned Parenthood CEO Cynthia Pappas informed media outlets the abortion business will sell the abortion drug to women whose pregnancies are not yet at the ninth week. Pappas said the coming retirement of more abortion pracitioners makes it so Planned Parenthood needs to look more closely at increasing access to the dangerous abortion drug. She also indicated the decision makes abortion avaliable to rural women. The Register Guard newspaper also indicates Pappas said nurse practitioners workign at Planned Parenthood centers will be able to dispense the abortion drug even through the FDA recommends that it be given out under the supervision of a licensed physician. With 28,000 customers and eight centers from Eugene to Aushland, Pappas will likely sell a large number of the abortion drugs, which come in a two part process that first starves the unborn child to death and then expels the body of the dead baby. Oregon Right to Life Executive Director Gayle Atteberry told the newspaper she was disappointed to learn the abortion drug is coming to that part of the state and that it kills an unborn child in the same way as a surgicial abortion. “We're totally opposed to that. It kills a baby just as much as a surgical abortion does,” she said. Because Oregon does not have a parental involvement law, Atteberry worries pregnant teenagers may be more likely to have an abortion because the abortion drug makes it easier for them to hide their pregnancy and abortion from their parents. In 2009 in fact, a high school basketball coach near Portland was charged with five counts of sexual abuse involving a 17 year old girl he oversaw as a coach. Police arrested 51 year old Howard Avery and charged him with 3 counts of sexual abuse and other charges. The court documents make it clear that the sexual acts were done without consent and involve statutory rape since the girl is underage. These acts weren't the first time since Avery admitted to the Oregonian newspaper in years past that he had sexual relationships with other students. He said that he had a sexual relationship with one student in the 1990's and paid for her to have an abortion when she became pregnant as a result. Pappas claimed that the abortion businees urges teens to contact their parents even though undercover videos show they have helped conceal cases of sexual abuse and statutory rape. In Oregon in 2007, 12,000 women had abortions.



The United Nations is heavily New Age. That's the truth. The United natiosn have been ruled by people that agree with globalism or the power of a few people to control the affairs of most of the world. The U.N. have an anti-Semite past. One of the U.N. Secretary-Generals, Kurt Waldheim, was a former Nazi German officer who committed crimes against the Jews and was listed by the War Crimes Commission as a war criminal. The information about his past did not become public until after his term as Secretary-General, but it is not surprising that Waldheim condemned Israel’s dramatic rescue of Jewish hostages in Entebbe in 1976. He also was at the helm when the United Nations passed the “Zionism Is Racism” resolution. They claim to care for the Third World, but did nothing to stop the genocide going on in the nation of Rwanda (some Papists were war criminals in that affair). Some times, the United Nations don't make a distinction between arming oneself for protection and using aggression in foreign affairs unfjustifably. Robert Muller joined the U.N. in 1951 and has been a New Age proponent. He supported the U.N. Mediation Room in 1977 that believes in a comsic unity of people. He believed that man can reach divinity. He of course ecumenicalism and a new Age religious paradigm. In 1956-57 Hammarskjöld completely remodeled the UN chapel. It had been opened in 1952 as a non-denominational prayer room, the brainchild of a Christian lay organization whose members included the department store millionaire J.C. Penney. Hammarskjold turned it into a New Age Meditation Room. The arm chairs, flags of the nations, draperies, and potted plants were removed, and a six-and-a-half ton block of iron ore was deposited in the center of the room, the polished top of which is lit by a single beam of light from the ceiling. The light depicts “divine wisdom,” and the block depicts an empty altar representing “God worshipped in many forms” (http://www.aquaac.org/un/sprtatun.html). Hammarskjöld said, “It is the altar to the God of all” (“A Room of Quiet,” http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/dag/meditationroom.htm). U Thant was the UN Secretary General from 1961 to 1971 and he supported the agenda of the New Age Jesuit priest Teilhard de Chardin. He believed in tolerance and desire to use philosophy to develop a new world. The Vatican have worked with the U.N. in religious matters as well like promoting world unity at the expense of national sovereignity. The Luciferian Lucis Trust is linked to the U.N. Alice Bailey was one leader in it who hated nationalism, hate Israel, and wanted an unversial world religion. He was oppose to mainstream Christianity that denied the existence of Hell (his husband was the 32nd Degree Freemason and occult proponent Foster Bailey). From the Earth Charter to other groups, the New Age components to the United Nations is easy to comprehend.



AIDS is a series matter. There are numerous symptoms to AIDS. Symptoms in HIV spread slowly when a first has just been infected. Some people have been infected with HIV for 10 or more years with no symptoms of illness. They can still infect other human beings in that span of time with a reduce risk of infecting other with safe sex or abstinence. Testing is an easy way to see if a person is infected with HIV. HIV infection symptoms can include a dry cought, a fever that comes and goes, a deep tiredness that can't be explained, blotches that can be red, pink. or purplish under the skin or inside the mouth, nose of eyelids, heavy night sweats, rapid weight loss, memory loss, etc. These symptoms doesn't mean a person has HIV or AIDS. Only an HIV test can make certain whether a person has HIV or not. Some doctors feel that HIV can transform into AIDS into a matter of years. Children who are born with HIV and people who got HIV through a blood transfusion tend to get sick more quickly. HIV according to mainstream doctors is the last stage of HIV infection. Since 1996, powerful virus-fighting drugs have been introduced that dramatically delay the progression of HIV to AIDS. Other new treatments and drugs are now being used to treat illnesses associated with AIDS. People with AIDS, HIV, just like all of us should live a life with the right food to eat, have regular exercise, don't use illict drugs, reduce stress, avoid smoking, avoid alcohol, etc. There are of course many HIV/AIDS myths that are commonly shown even in 2010. One myth is that AIDS is a death sentence or your life is over. Nothing can be further form the truth. Antiretrovial therapy and other treatment have made numerous people to live a very long and joyful life with AIDS. People are trying to find cures as we speak for HIV and AIDS. Another myth is that HIV/AIDS only affects homosexual men, drug users, prostitutes, and sexual promisicous people. HIV is an equal opportunity virus that can affect anybody under certain circumstances (like newborn babies, women, teens, seniors, and folks of every race, ethnicity, nationality, and background). It is true that unsafe sex, multiple sex partner, and intravenous drug use that's unsafe can increase the risk for HIV infection and AIDS. More women recieve HIV since they are being infected by contaminated needles or some have sex with HIV-infected men. One other myth is that HIV/AIDS can spread by casaul contact with someone with HIV, mosquitoes, tattoes, breather the air, and kissing a HIV infected person on the check. HIV is spread only when someone is exposed to blood, semen, vaginal fluid or mother's milk from someone who is infected with HIV. The virus doesn't live long in the open environment outside the body. There is virtually no evidence that HIV infection can be spread from tears or sweat.

Secret Societies dealing with world history is real. Some have pointed out that Grand Orient 's goal is rather overt in trying to promote political influence in remoudling Europe under the guise of secularism plus humanism (beyond just charity, helping burn victims, and chipping children). Many religious groups oppose the Grand Orient's agenda. In 2008, Marcel Conradt, Freemason and parliamentary assistant to the Socialist MEP Veronique De Keyser, criticized religious lobbies and sects. He wants to influence legislation and decision makers especially MEPs. In other words, Marcel want God out of politics not just criticizing cults like Scientology or the Raelian movement. Since then, a special recognition was given to churches. The Lisbon Treaty guarantees them an “open, transparent and regular” dialog with the institutions. They are regarded as “partners” rather than as “lobbyists” who are required to divulge their sources of funding. Secularists believe that imbalances exxist among religion and government. Marcel mentioned that the Commission head named Barroso, Parliament (Buzek) and the Council (Van Rompuy) are chaired by people with religious conviction. There is controversy on whethe the EU can display religious symbols in public buildings causing tensions. Some don't like Papal influence in the EU. Jean-Michel Quillardet, former Grand Master of the Grand Orient de France, outlines the transformation undertaken by Freemasonry throughout Europe. He sid that he wants Masonry to defend secularism (and that Europe apart from its Christian roots owes much to the philosophies of Greece plus Rome). He met with the President of European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso. Jean-Michel Quillardet said that the Grand Orient wants to create a Masonic federation in Europe, which is one of the few times Masons admit their real globalist tendencies and agenda overtly. It's out in the open what Freemasonry desire. They not only want the revival of Solomon's Temple , but a federalized world system of Lodges. The truth is that we don't extreme secularism as advocated by some Masons or a theocratic empire promoted by the Catholic Church (and Dominionists). We just need religious freedom and political freedom.

By Timothy

Is Alex Jones turning on Debra Medina because she is a genuine independent?

From http://z10.invisionfree.com/The_Unhived_Mind_II/index.php?showtopic=193&st=450

Is Alex Jones turning on Debra Medina because she is a genuine independent?

Thursday, 25 February 2010 10:48

As part of the controlled alternative media, Alex Jones promotes people like Ron Paul, who appears to allow his own election campaign to be sabotaged and still who maintains 9/11 was a terrorist attack, as well as UK controlled opposition puppet Nigel Farange.

So when Alex Jones turns against Texan governor hopeful Debra Medina claiming she said "truthers are despicable people" when she apparently said no such thing, it is worth taking note.

Perhaps Medina is the real deal?

An email string on the Median controversy:


WELL THANK YOU DUSTAN FOR YOUR RETURN MESSAGE AND CARING TO CORRECT ME.



WHAT IS IMPORTANT NOW IS TO CONTACT ALEX JONES AND STOP THIS WHILE IT IS STILL YOUNG BECAUSE NOW EVERYONE IN THE PATRIOT NETWORKS ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS. IF THERE HAS BEEN A MISUNDERSTANDING, PLEASE MAKE DOUBLE HASTE TO CORRECT IT.



SINCE YOU HAVE SHOWN THE CARE TO CORRECT ME, WHICH I TRULY APPRECIATE, I WILL CORRECT MY STANCE AND FORWARD THIS REPLY AROUND TO THE NETWORKS AND RADIO HOSTS AROUND THE COUNTRY.



PLEASE, GET DEBRA ON TOMORROW WITH ALEX JONES AND ON JOHN STADTMILLER'S NETWORK SHOWS AS WELL AS MIKE CHAMBERS SHOW TO CHANGE THE MESSAGE ALEX JONES IS SPREADING. DID YOU HEAR TODAY'S AJ SHOW? YOU CAN STILL LISTEN TO IT AS IT IS REPEATING EVERY FOUR HOURS:





ALEX JONES: 1-800-259-9231, 651-695-7777



RBN CONTACT INFO: http://republicbroadcasting.org/?page_id=13



MIKE CHAMBERS: mike@mikechamberslive.com



PERHAPS SHE CAN CALL IN TOMORROW BEFORE THE SHOW AND GET ON IN AN EMERGENCY INTERVIEW TO STRAIGHTEN THIS OUT BEFORE YOU LOSE ANYMORE SUPPORT. THERE ARE SURE LOTS OF PEOPLE FALLING OFF EVERY DAY.



WE REALLY DO NEED REAL POLITICIANS TO BE ELECTED, AND THAT IS EVEN IF WE GET TO AN ELECTION IN NOVEMBER WITHOUT ANOTHER FALSE FLAG EVENT OR WAR ERUPTING.



ALSO, I APOLOGIZE IF MY MESSAGE WAS FROM A ONE SIDED AND TAINTED VIEW. MORE EVIDENCE AS TO WHY WE NEED MORE TRUTH IN MEDIA, ALL MEDIA!



IN SERVICE,



DR JAY









--- On Wed, 2/24/10, Medina for Texas Campaign > wrote:



> Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 12:22 PM



> Jay,



> That interview was last week.

> No where does Debra say

> "truthers are despicable people". No where

> does she say asking

> questions is despicable. Here's the

> transcript:

>

> **************************************

>

> M: Then there's

> just one other thing that's left, because not being a

> truther is great. I'm thinking, of course you're

> not, of course you're not, but

> sometimes the wisdom is defined by knowing whom to praise

> and whom to, quite

> frankly, condemn. Someone walkin' around with the

> belief that America would do

> this to its own people, that President Bush and those

> around him would

> slaughter our own citizens in order to justify war, is a

> despicable thing to

> believe.



> D:

> Agreed.

>

> **************************************



> We are THIS close to

> beating the establishment. We have to keep up

> the pressure, dig in, work hard and we can win this

> election. The status

> quo would like nothing better than to derail this campaign

> and keep one of

> their own in office. We've seen from their years

> in office that neither

> Kay nor Rick have any interest in representing the people

> of Texas ahead of

> their own personal agendas. What have they done to

> make your life better?

> To protect your rights to life, liberty and property?

> When have

> they EVER scaled back the size of government to any

> meaningful degree?



> We not only have the

> chance to change history in Texas, and restore our

> rights as a free people, but also the course of the US.

> The world is

> watching what we do here in Texas. Are we going to

> let this stop us?

> I have placed my faith in the ability of Debra Medina

> to lead us in this

> fight, and I will stand by her and fight for our rights

> with her. I will

> not cave because the opposition is trying to divide and

> conquer. No one

> said this was going to be an easy fight. It's up

> to us to stay the

> course, keep our eye on the prize, and keep

> fighting.



> Thank

> you,



> Dustan



> Medina for

> Governor

The 'NAPOLITANO' family

http://z10.invisionfree.com/The_Unhived_Mind_II/index.php?showtopic=18657&view=getnewpost

Beck’s Failure To Retract Global Warming Advocacy Provokes Online Firestorm

From http://www.infowars.com/becks-failure-to-retract-global-warming-advocacy-provokes-online-firestorm/

Beck’s Failure To Retract Global Warming Advocacy Provokes Online Firestorm






Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, February 26, 2010

Glenn Beck has failed to respond to a firestorm of reaction to his comments made during a February 21st interview with USA Weekend magazine in which he completely reversed his position on climate change by revealing that he believed in man-made global warming.
As we reported earlier this week, Beck appeared to stab his conservative audience in the back when he told USA Weekend magazine that man-made climate change was occurring in an article entitled Don’t judge Beck by his cover.

In the article, Beck tells interviewer Dennis McCafferty, “You’d be an idiot not to notice the temperature change.”
“He also says there’s a legit case that global warming has, at least in part, been caused by mankind,” writes McCafferty, under the sub headline, “He believes in global warming.”
“The blogosphere is on fire with reaction to McCafferty’s USA Weekend piece,” according to World Net Daily’s Chelsea Schilling, who pointed out that posters on the prominent conservative forum Free Republic were furious at Beck for seemingly performing a huge flip-flop on the issue.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
");
//]]>-->

“Seems like the rose-colored glasses are beginning to fall off those who used to view Mr. Beck with good approval?” wrote one.
“OK, final straw for Beck with me,” added another.
“When an unflattering quote comes out about someone, anyone, they all say, “I was misquoted.” Everyone does it. The people who were actually misquoted take legal action if a retraction/correction isn’t printed. In fact, that’s why newspapers print retractions/corrections. If Beck doesn’t sue USA Weekend, then it tells me his protestations ring hollow,” writes another.
Other respondents said they thought the article was a hit piece and that Beck’s comments on global warming had been misreported. However, Beck’s reaction to the controversy suggests otherwise.
Following the outcry, Beck responded by accusing McCafferty of inventing four of the ten things attributed to him in the article, but since Beck made no mention whatsoever of it, we can only assume that his global warming comment wasn’t one of them.

“Beck had plenty of criticism of the USA Weekend story… he didn’t raise any objections to the article’s portrayal of his environmental views,” remarks Mother Jones’s Kate Sheppard.
Since Beck changes his tune every time the wind blows (he was for the bailout before he was against it), we can only assume that increasing suspicion from conservatives over his global warming comments will force Beck to back peddle and issue some form of retraction.
However, for some this will only confirm the fact that Beck is a shill and a performing circus clown who cries on cue while hoodwinking millions of conservatives into supporting policies which represent the antithesis of true conservatism, like a national sales tax (an idea also embraced by Nancy Pelosi), while attacking people who espouse real conservative principles without constantly flip-flopping, like Congressman Ron Paul and his supporters, who he smeared as potential terrorists.

A link on Freemasonry

http://www.bibleprobe.com/freemasonry.htm

Massachusetts State House Holds Hearing on Bill to Legalize Assisted Suicide

http://lifenews.com/bio3062.html

Leaked UN Documents Reveal Plan For “Green World Order” By 2012

From http://www.infowars.com/leaked-un-documents-reveal-plan-for-green-world-order-by-2012/


Leaked UN Documents Reveal Plan For “Green World Order” By 2012






Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, February 26, 2010

Leaked policy documents reveal that the United Nations plans to create a “green world order” by 2012 which will be enforced by a structure of global governance and funded by a gargantuan $45 trillion transfer of wealth from richer countries, as the globalists’ insidious plan to centralize power, crush sovereignty while devastating the economy is exposed once again.
As we warned at the time, the failure of Copenhagen in December did not spell the end of the global warming heist, but merely a roadblock in the UN’s agenda to create a world government funded by taxes paid by you on the very substance you exhale – carbon dioxide.
Using the justification of the vehemently debunked hoax that carbon dioxide is a deadly threat to the planet, the UN is already working to resurrect the failed Copenhagen agreement, with a series of new Copenhagen process negotiations set to take place in April, May and June.
Leaked planning documents (PDF) obtained by Fox News lift the lid on the UN’s plan to impose global governance by the time of their 2012 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Rio, which will mark the 20th anniversary since the notorious “Earth Summit” held in the same city.
“The new Rio summit will end, according to U.N. documents obtained by Fox News, with a “focused political document” presumably laying out the framework and international commitments to a new Green World Order,” reports Fox News’ George Russell.
“Just exactly what that environmental order will look like, and the extent of the immense financial commitments needed to produce it, are under discussion this week at a special session in Bali, Indonesia, of the United Nations Environment Program’s 58-nation “Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum,” which oversees UNEP’s operations.”
The document outlines the globalist’s mission to enact a “radical transformation of the world economic and social order” by putting “a new treaty in place as the capstone of the Green World Order”.
This system will be managed by “an additional governing structure composed of exactly those insiders,” writes Russell.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
");
//]]>-->

“Moving towards a green economy would also provide an opportunity to re-examine national and global governance structures and consider whether such structures allow the international community to respond to current and future environmental and development challenges and to capitalize on emerging opportunities,” states the white paper (emphasis mine).
The imposition of such “global governance structures” will be achieved with the help of “vast wealth transfers” from richer countries (in the form of carbon taxes levied on citizens) to poorer nations, amounting to no less than $45 trillion dollars. The paper also outlines the need to change the “consumption patterns” of people living in richer countries, which undoubtedly is a euphemism for lowering living standards.
The policy proposes that the old economic model be discarded in pursuit of a new global green economy focused around “green jobs”.

As we have previously highlighted, the promise that the creation of “green jobs” will offset the inevitable damage to the economy that a 50 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions will cause is a complete fallacy.
The implementation of so-called “green jobs” in other countries has devastated economies and cost millions of jobs. As the Seattle Times reported back in June, Spain’s staggering unemployment rate of over 18 per cent was partly down to massive job losses as a result of attempts to replace existing industry with wind farms and other forms of alternative energy.
In a so-called “green economy,” “Each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital,” states the report.
As we have documented, a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of 50-80 per cent would inflict a new great depression in the United States, reducing GDP by 6.9 percent – a figure comparable with the economic meltdown of 1929 and 1930.

The UN’s mission to create a legally binding treaty on the reduction of CO2 emissions is running parallel with measures already being enforced at state level in the U.S. which bypass stuttering federal efforts to impose the cap and trade fraud.
The very foundation of the global warming argument has been completely eviscerated by the Climategate scandal, which proved that United Nations IPCC scientists forged and exaggerated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures while engaging in witch hunts to cull dissenting opinions from appearing in IPPC reports.
Despite this, control freaks intent on taxing the life-giving gas carbon dioxide have signaled that they no longer care about the truth behind man-made climate change and have resolved to slam through their totalitarian agenda anyway. EPA head Lisa Jackson told reporters this week that “The science regarding climate change is settled, and human activity is responsible for global warming,” even though she failed to refute the fact that there had been no global warming since 1995, as was admitted by CRU scientist Professor Phil Jones.

DNC Instructs Obamatrons to Call Talk Radio and Support Totalitarian Care

http://www.infowars.com/dnc-instructs-obamatrons-to-call-talk-radio-and-support-totalitarian-care/

The Grand Orient Masonic Revolution

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/Blog/?p=3543

MLK on Middle Eastern Affairs

http://www.jewish-history.com/mlk_zionism.html

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlktempleisraelhollywood.htm

More News

http://christianinfobomb.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14171

http://www.bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Farage Attacks Bilderberg EU President As “Quiet Assassin” Of Nation States

http://www.infowars.com/farage-attacks-bilderberg-eu-president-as-quiet-assassin-of-nation-states/

Pro-Life Group Says Campaign to Stop Abortion After George Tiller is Successful

http://lifenews.com/state4845.html

THE VATICAN IS SNOOPING AT OUR WEBSITES

http://z10.invisionfree.com/The_Unhived_Mind_II/index.php?showtopic=27898

Other News

CDC Panel Calls for Flu Vaccine for All

Man takes Chicago to Supreme Court over handgun ban

Racist birth control? Claims Israel culling Ethiopian Jews

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.80

http://www.godonthe.net/cme/links/masons.htm

JFK History

From http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=209x6742



Sounds like yet another deeply misleading book about JFK. We should not be surprised that many of these are published by those on the "left" ( See history of Encounter Magazine the left-liberal magazine aimed at gatekeeping the left entirely published by the CIA)


WHAT AM I ACTUALLY SAYING ABOUT JFK?

1) Chomsky and Cockburn are essentially CORRECT in arguing that JFK got to power as a Cold Warrior, with some signs of change-- for example in the context of 1960 he met with MLK and NIxon refused to. You can be as cynical as you want, until you study the context of that action in 1960 with the Dems still controlling the Solid SOuth.

2.) Even before becoming president, Kennedy did show some NOT RADICAL BUT STILL SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT POSITIONS REGUARDING ANTI-COLONIAL STRUGGLES IN AFRICA AND SOUTHEAST ASIA AS COMPARED WITH OTHERS IN SENATE AND ELITE US OPINION.

3) KENNEDY DISAGREED STRONGLY OVER LAOS AND PREVENTED A US LAND WAR THERE IN 1961 OVER VERY STRONG OPPOSITION FORM THE JCS AND CIA AND MUCH OF THE CORPORATE MEDIA, MOST SIGNIFICANTLY LUCES'S TIME-LIFE.

4) KENNEDY BEGAN TO HAVE A NUMBER OF VERY SERIOUS DIFFERENCES WITH THE CIA OVER AUTONOMY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF HIS ADMINISRATION WHICH BECAME OVERT AND DANGEROUS DURING THE BAY OF PIGS INVASION-- WHICH WAS PLANNED BEFORE HE CAME INTO OFFICE.

5) KENNEDY IT IS TRUE-- WAS VERY STRONGLY ANTI-CASTRO AND WAS SEEKING CASTRO'S REMOVAL FROM POWER IN THE BEGINNING OF HIS TERM. CAN YOU THINK OF ANYONE WHO COULD HAVE BEEN ELECTED PRESIDENT AT THAT TIME AND WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN? (keep in mind here Monroe doc, history of US fo.po. etc.)

6) KENEDY WAS GOING TO PULL OUT OF VIETNAM. THIS IS NO LONGER EVEN DEBATEABLE SAVE AMONG NEWSWEEK, THE NEW YORK TIMES AND NOAM CHOMSKY!

7) KENNEDY MANAGED TO STAVE OFF A FULL US GROUND WAR IN VIETNAM IN 1961-62. YES THIS INVOLVED SOME SERIOUS COMPROMISES, BUT WE ONLY HEAR ABOUT THE COMPROMISES FROM GURU CHOMSKY AND NOT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY.

8) JFK BEGAN VERY SERIOUS AND CONCRETE MOVES TOWARDS DETANTE WITH THE USSR IN 1963, AS IS MOST PROFOUNDLY EVIDENT IN HIS JUNE 10TH 1963 SPEECH AT AMERICAN UNIVERSITY WHICH IS NEVER MENTIONED BY CHOMSKY AND HIS FELLOW KENNEDY BASHERS AT HIS BELOVED NYT.

9) KENNEDY RESISTED THE MOST INTENSE PRESSURE IMAGINABLE -- FROM THE PERMANENT MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE BUROCRACY THAT HAD BEGAN TO OSSIFY AND BECOME THE REAL INSTRUMENT OF POWER IN THE US AFTER ITS BIRTH ONLY 13 YEARS BEFORE-- DURING THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS. THERE WAS OVERWHELMING AND VIRUTALLY UNANIMOUS PRESSURE FROM CIA AND JCS TO CARRY OUT AN INVASION THAT WOULD HAVE HAD AN EXTREMELY HIGH PROBABILITY OF TRIGGERING WORLD WAR III.

10) KENNEDY HAD SHOWN THAT HE WAS NOT AFRAID TO CHALLENGE US CORPORATE ELITES BY GOING DIRECTLY TO THE AIRWAVES AND CRITICIZING CORPORATE GREED IN A WAY THAT I CHALLENGE YOU TO FIND A SIMILAR EXAMPLE SINCE. I AM HERE REFERrING TO THE STEEL CRISIS OF 1962.

11) KENNEDY WAS THE ONLY PRESIDENT SINCE WORLD WAR TWO THAT HAS EVER REFUSED TO RECOGNIZE A RIGHT WING COUP D'ETAT IN LATIN AMERICA. UNPRECEDENTED. WAS HE CHE? NO, BUT TO ROCKEFELLER AND WALL STREET HE WAS A VERY VERY REAL AND SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN COMPARISON TO THE CORPORATE MAINSTEAM ON LATIN AMERICAN AND ALSO IN COMPARISION WITH
PREVIOUS US FOREIGN POLICY TOWARD THE REGION.

12) KENNEDY WAS ALLY OF SUKARNO IN INDONESIA EVEN AT A TIME WHEN THE CIA WAS HAD ALREADY BEGUN ITS SUBVERSION OF THAT COUNTRY WHICH CULMINATED IN THE GENOCIDE OF 1965 UNDER PRESIDENT JOHNSON. KENNEDY WAS ACTUALLY PLANNING A STATE VISIT TO SUKARNO IN 1963-- GURU CHOMSKY SOMEHOW MANAGES TO FORGET THIS AS HE DOES RFK S COMMENTS -- VIRUTALLY ALONE AMONG ALL US POLS--DURING THAT GENOCIDE.

13) KENNEDY TOOK ACTIVE STEPS TO SUPPORT THE POPULARLY ELECTED PRESIDENT OF BRAZIL GOULART IN 1963. EVEN AS HE DID THIS THE CIA WAS COORDINATING THE COUP THAT WOUL HAPPEN SHORTLY AFTER HIS DEATH.
Please see the book endorsed by Daniel Ellsberg, JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE: WHY HE DIED AND WHY IT MATTERED. BY JAMES W. DOUGLASS

-EPIC1934