|Podcasts||Community||Create a Podcast|
Agenda 21, the UN blueprint for global transformation, sounds good to many well meaning people. Drafted for the purpose of creating "sustainable societies", it has been welcomed by nations around the world. Political, cultural, and media leaders have embraced its alluring visions of social justice and a healthy planet. They hide the lies behind its doomsday scenarios and fraudulent science. Relatively few consider the contrary facts and colossal costs.
After all, what could be wrong with preserving resources for the next generation? Why not limit consumption and reduce energy use? Why not abolish poverty and establish a global welfare system to train parents, monitor intolerance, and meet all our needs? Why not save the planet by trading cars for bikes, an open market for "self-sustaining communities," and single dwellings for dense "human settlements" (located on transit lines) where everyone would dialogue, share common ground, and be equal?
The answer is simple. Marxist economics has never worked. Socialism produces poverty, not prosperity. Collectivism creates oppression, not freedom. Trusting environmental "scientists" who depend on government funding and must produce politically useful "information" will lead to economic and social disaster.
What will it take for America, American citizens, We The People to realize what is happening to us and our country? And then, what do we need to do to stop and reverse it?
Those 2 questions take up such miniscule space on my PC screen. They barely consume 2 breaths to speak. But, to me, the consequence of those few words, stand to empower or destroy a nation. Currently, America as you know it, or as you believe it to be, is gone.
Before any problem can be addressed it must first be recognized and understood. That is the purpose for this talk.
For those that have resolved within themselves that indeed there is a serious problem with the current course of events within this country and the world, I applaud you and encourage you to self reflect on what this country means to you and our future generations by understanding what it meant to past generations, including the founders of this nation. I hope this internal examination results in your desire to be ever vigilant in quest eradicate this continually escalating atrocity against mankind. If the result is anything less and you don’t feel compelled to assist in the sustenance this nation then your job has already been done for you. No input required.
For those that are not aware of the effort to eliminate the sovereignty of this and all nations, in a quest for a single world government and economy, created and controlled by a relatively small group of international banking elite, then I encourage you listen to this talk in it’s entirety and then embark upon your own quest for the truth about this matter.
Fast forward to this past summer when a leaked Army manual dated 2006 entitled, “Civil Disturbance Operations” surfaced outlining plans not only to confiscate firearms domestically during mass unrest, but to actually detain and even kill American citizens who refuse to hand over their guns. This manual works in conjunction with “FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations,” another Army manual leaked this year, which instructs troops on how to properly detain and intern Americans into re-education camps, including ways that so-called “psy-op officers” will “indoctrinate” incarcerated “political activists” into developing an “understanding and appreciation of U.S. policies and actions.”
As you can see for yourself, this DHS contract requests huge quantities of all the following ammunition (and much more):
• Over one million rounds of hollow-point .223 rifle ammo
• Over half a million rounds of non-hollow-point .223 rifle ammo
• 220,000 rounds of 12 gauge shotgun #7 ammo (target ammo)
• Over 200,000 rounds of 12 gauge shotgun #00 buckshot ammo (tactical anti-personnel ammo)
• 66,000 rounds of 12 gauge shotgun slugs (tactical anti-personnel, anti-vehicle rounds)
• Over two million rounds of hollow-point .357 Sig JPH (hollow-point) pistol ammo (anti-personnel)
• Over four million rounds of .40 S&W JPH (hollow-point) pistol ammo (anti-personnel)
• Over 60,000 rounds of .308 match grade anti-personnel sniper rounds (BTHP)
• Plus, hundreds of thousands of additional rounds of .38 special, .45 auto, 9mm, 7.62x39 (AK rifle) ammo, and others.
This is on top of the massive 450 million .40 S&W hollow point rounds the DHS has already requisitioned (http://www.naturalnews.com/035649_DHS_ammunition_domestic_war.html).
The Wanta Saga leads us into the uncharted territory of government corruption when this American hero was arrested and imprisoned for a non-existent unpaid, estimated civil tax scam in Wisconsin. Lee Wanta’s story involves other names with which we are familiar – like Vince Foster and Hillary Clinton and Marc Rich who was the last person former President Bill Clinton pardoned before leaving office.
The thing for which Ambassador Lee Wanta is best known is that of being the richest man in the world. Many have called him the $27.5 trillion man. I hope we’ll have time to explain how this one American patriot earned all of that money and how he intended – and still intends – to use it to benefit the people of the nation he so loves.
There is no end to the story – not yet. The reason there isn’t an end yet is because not enough people know about what really happened – and that’s why I’m here today, speaking on behalf of Ambassador Lee/Leo Wanta. When I talked with Lee this morning, he mentioned that the dollar is taking a bath in the international markets. We also talked about how, if the Federal Reserve, the President and the Secretary of the Treasury would just give him access to his own money, he could stop the fall of the American economy.
Bill Casey decided Lee Wanta should work with him and the group expanded to include military and other intelligence sources and they had a number of meetings. They agreed that if they had $150 billion, they could destabilize the economy of the Soviet Union. Lee was made Trustor of President Reagan’s Presidential Task Force and, in that capacity, was officially responsible for the $150 billion grant President Reagan approved. He was ALSO responsible for returning it to the U.S. Treasury – and he did. Within six months.
Do you believe that preppers are a few cards short of a full deck? Do you assume that anyone that is "preparing for doomsday" does not have their elevator going all the way to the top floor? Well, you might want to read this first before you make a final decision that all preppers are crazy. The information that you are about to read shook me up a bit when I first looked it over. To be honest, I had no idea how incredibly vulnerable our economic system is to a transportation disruption. I am continually getting emails and comments on my websites asking "how to prepare" for what is coming, so when I came across this information I knew that I had to share it with all of you. Hopefully what you are about to read will motivate you to prepare like never before, and hopefully you will share this information with others.
Originally, I was going to write an article about the rising unemployment in Europe today. Did you know that unemployment in the eurozone is now at a 15 year high? It has risen for 10 months in a row with no end in sight.
But I have written dozens of articles about the economic crisis in Europe already. So before starting on that article I started thinking of all the "preparation" questions I have been getting lately and I went over and checked out one of my favorite preparation websites: shtfplan.com.
Well, an article had just been posted over there about a report put out by the American Trucker Associations entitled "When Trucks Stop, America Stops".
I went and found that original report and I was stunned as I read it.
The truth is that our "just in time" inventory and delivery systems leave us incredibly vulnerable to a nationwide disaster.
You see, it is very expensive to hold and store inventory, so most manufacturers and retailers rely on a continual flow of deliveries that are scheduled to arrive "just in time", and this significantly reduces their operating expenses.
This is considered to be good business practice for manufacturers and retailers, but it also means that if there was a major nationwide transportation disruption that our economic system would grind to a halt almost immediately.
Once store shelves are picked clean, they would not be able to be replenished until trucks could get back on the road. In the event of a major nationwide disaster, that could be quite a while.
Continued at www.NWO3.com
Obama has failed to produce a certificate of his birth. He has instead produced a certificate of live birth from Hawaii. He was born in 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959. They were trying to register people in the books avidly since Hawaii was a state and the USA even then loved keeping files on people. The people in the Islands of Hawaii were doing a lot of births at home. Many did not have birth certificates. They got into issuing these certificates to document the population. Things were loose back then new to statehood and all. There has been a failure to produce his birth certificate showing the birth records at the hospital signed by a doctor etc. These records are sealed we are told. Of course I do not believe it. Anyone who makes it to the White House is an accomplished liar, well here maybe not such an accomplished liar but a lair anyway.
It was here, in Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden established a safe haven for his terrorist organization
[Osama bin Laden was recruited by the CIA, Al Qaeda was set up with the support of the CIA. Osama's safe haven was protected by US intelligence] .
It was here, in Afghanistan, where al Qaeda brought new recruits, trained them, and plotted acts of terror.
[The Mujahideen were recruited and trained by the CIA. America's ally Saudi Arabia financed the Wahabbi koranic schools, Ronald Reagan praised the Mujahideen as "Freedom Fighters". Unknown to the American public, the US spread the teachings of the "Islamic jihad" in textbooks "Made in America", developed at the University of Nebraska]
The sheer magnitude and complex web of deceit surrounding the individuals and organizations involved in this conspiracy is mind boggling, even for the most astute among us. Most people react with disbelief and skepticism towards the topic, unaware that they have been conditioned (brainwashed) to react with skepticism by institutional and media influences that were created by the Mother of All mind control organizations: The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London. Author and de-programmer Fritz Springmeier (The Top 13 Illuminati Bloodlines ) says that most people have built in "slides" that short circuit the mind's critical examination process when it comes to certain sensitive topics. "Slides", Springmeier reports, is a CIA term for a conditioned type of response which dead ends a person's thinking and terminates debate or examination of the topic at hand. For example, the mention of the word "conspiracy" often solicits a slide response with many people. (Springmeier has co-authored three books on trauma-based programming which detail how the Illuminati employs highly tuned and extrememly sophisticated Mind Control (MC) training programs that begin the programming process while the intended victim is still within the womb. Mind Control is a much greater problem than most people realize. According to Cisco Wheeler, a former Illuminati mind control programmer, there are 10 million people who have been programmed as mind controlled slaves using trauma-based MC programs with names like Monarch and MK Ultra. The newer, non-trauma, electronic means of MC programming that grew out of the Montauk Project, may include millions more. Al Bielek, who played a principle role in the development of the Montauk Project, said that there likely 10 million victims of Montauk style mind control programming worldwide, the majority located in the USA. He also said that there are covert Montauk Programming 'Centers' in every major city in the U.S. )
What most Americans believe to be "Public Opinion" is in reality carefully crafted and scripted propaganda designed to elicit a desired behavioral response from the public. Public opinion polls are really taken with the intent of gauging the public's acceptance of the Illuminati's planned programs. A strong showing in the polls tells the Illuminati that the programing is "taking", while a poor showing tells the NWO manipulators that they have to recast or "tweak" the programming until the desired response is achieved. While the thrust and content of the propaganda is decided at Tavistock, implementation of the propaganda is executed in the United States by well over 200 'think tanks' such as the Rand Corporation and the Brookings Institute which are overseen and directed by the top NWO mind control organization in the United States, the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) in Menlo Park, California.
The Rockefeller World, Council on Foreign Relations, and the Trilateral Commission
by Andrew Gavin Marshall
It is quite apparent in the history of America from the late 19th century and into the 20th century, that the Rockefeller family has wielded massive influence in shaping the socio-political economic landscape of society. However, up until the first half of the 20th century came to a close, there were several other large dominant families with whom the Rockefellers shared power and purpose, notably among them, the Morgans. As the century progressed, their interests aligned further still, and following World War II, the Rockefellers became the dominant group in America, and arguably, the world. Of course, there was the well-established business links between the major families emerging out of the American Industrial Revolution going into the 20th century, followed with the establishment of the major foundations designed to engage in social engineering. It was with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) that the changing dynamics of the Morgan-Rockefeller clan became most apparent.
As discussed earlier in this book, the Council on Foreign Relations is the ultimate networking and socializing institution among the American elite. The influence of the CFR is unparalleled among other think tanks. One study revealed that between 1945 and 1972, roughly 45% of the top foreign policy officials who served in the United States government were also members of the Council, leading one prominent member to once state that membership in the Council is essentially a “rite of passage” for being a member of the foreign policy establishment. One Council member, Theodore White, explained that the Council’s “roster of members has for a generation, under Republican and Democratic administrations alike, been the chief recruiting ground for Cabinet-level officials in Washington.”
The CIA, as previously examined, is also no stranger to this network, since more often than not in the first several decades of the existence of the Agency, its leaders were drawn from Council membership, such as Allen Dulles, John A. McCone, Richard Helms, William Colby, and George H.W. Bush. As some researchers have examined:
The influential but private Council, composed of several hundred of the country’s top political, military, business, and academic leaders has long been the CIA’s principal “constituency” in the American public. When the agency has needed prominent citizens to front for its proprietary (cover) companies or for other special assistance, it has often turned to Council members.
Roughly 42% of the top foreign policy positions in the Truman administration were filled by Council members, with 40% in the Eisenhower administration, 51% of the Kennedy administration, and 57% of the Johnson administration, many of whom were holdovers from the Kennedy administration. The Council has had and continues to have enormous influence in the mainstream media, through which it is able to propagate its ideology, advance its agendas, and conceal its influence. In 1972, three out of ten directors and five out of nine executives of the New York Times were Council members. In the same year, one out of four editorial executives and four of nine directors of the Washington Post were also Council members, including its President, Katharine Graham, as well as the Vice-President Osborn Elliott, who was also editor-in-chief of Newsweek. Of both Time Magazine and Newsweek, almost half of their directors in 1972 were also Council members.
The Council also has extensive ties to the other major American think tanks, most especially the Brookings Institution, as well as the RAND Corporation, the Hudson Institute, the Foreign Policy Association, and of course, the special-purpose foundations such as the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, of which fifteen of its twenty-one trustees (as of 1971) were also Council members, and its president from 1950 to 1971, Joseph E. Johnson, was also a director of the Council during the same time period.
The Council and the major philanthropic foundations have had extensive ties not only to each other, but in working together in constructing research and programs of study in foreign affairs. The State Department undertook a study of 191 university-connected centers for foreign affairs research, which revealed that the largest sources of funding came from the Ford Foundation (which funded 107 of the 191 centers), the federal government (which funded 67 centers), the Rockefeller Foundation (18 centers), and the Carnegie Corporation (17 centers), and that, “for eleven of the top twelve universities with institutes of international studies, Ford is the principal source of funding.” These foundations, aside from being major sources of funding for the Council throughout the years from its origins, also share extensive leadership ties with the Council. At the top of the list is the Rockefeller Foundation, which in 1971 had fourteen out of nineteen of its directors also being members of the Council; the Carnegie Corporation followed with ten out of seventeen; then came the Ford Foundation with seven out of sixteen; and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund with six out of eleven board members also being members of the Council. It should also be noted that the Carnegie network extended beyond the Carnegie Corporation, and also included the Carnegie Endowment, the Carnegie Institute of Washington, and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. From its founding until 1972, one-fourth of all the Council’s directors had served as trustees or directors of at least one of the several Carnegie foundations. John J. McCloy had served as chairman of both the Council and the Ford Foundation at the same time, from the 1950s until the late 60s.
Does Your Candidate Look Presidential Enough?
It is amazing to me that with the many problems we have in our country, there are those who are still interested in whether or not someone looks presidential. It comes up all of the time. And, don't believe for a minute that these comments only come from those cheesy media outlets that talk about one's looks based on a genuine lack of knowledge about the real issues of an election. They really don't have a choice except to focus on this perspective. They have nothing else to talk about. But, it is sad that you might hear this comment from mainstream media who has all of the tools, to at least, be able to have a grasp on the real issues that face our country.
But, even they will find time to include a portion of their coverage or commentary to bring up the "who looks presidential" comment. First of all, what does that statement even mean? If there is a look that a candidate should strive for, what is that look and who set that look as the standard? Is it short or tall? Is it black or white or brown or a mix of the three? Is it overweight or slim? Is it athletic or studious? Is it mature or youthful? What is this look that we keep hearing about?
I took some time to review some people who had actually been president. Surely, they would have the presidential look. They must have it. If not, how did they get elected? I started with our first President George Washington. President Washington is generally considered to have been a good President, but his looks are a different story. I'm not one to criticize, but George was not necessarily an attractive man. Let’s face it … bad wig, unusually common face, and a mouth full of wooden teeth. Did he look presidential? Apparently to somebody ... he did. Sorry, but I don't see it. By the way, his wife Martha was no beauty queen either.
What about Honest Abe, our 16th president? He happens to be my favorite president of all time. I read everything that I can get my hands on concerning his presidency. But looks? Not so much! He was tall and gangly. He had a nose that was eclipsing each time he turned against the rays of the sun and a mole that every plastic surgeon in 1863 Washington would have loved to get their scalpel on. And, that chin-lined beard and top hat; need I say more? A great president but not much for looks either.
What about Teddy Roosevelt? He served two terms and was generally well respected. But, did he look like a president? Some might argue that. When he put on his battle gear, he looked more like a stand-in for The Crocodile Hunter. Dainja, Dainja!!! He seemed more at home on the back of a horse than in the big seat of the presidency. He wore those round glasses and accompanying lancet very well but neither was very stylish. That look might have been well suited for the land down under and someone with a slight vision impairment, but it did not bode so well for a president. He was a smart and courageous man, no doubt, but not so much of a fashion icon. In his defense, very few men can carry off that bloused trouser look. He gave it his best shot.
I would be remiss if I did not at least mention our 27th President, William Howard Taft. You remember Mr. Taft don't you? He was the heaviest President in our nation's history at over 300 pounds. He was definitely substantial, but Presidential?... I'm not so sure. Taft is the only President to actually get stuck in the White House tub. I can't imagine he looked very Presidential at the time. He wasn't much for looks, but you have to give him some credit. He never met a meal that he didn't like. And, what about our fourth President, James Madison? At only five foot, four inches and less than 100 pounds, could he have possibly looked Presidential? Maybe he was the first to coin the "light" phrase. As in Presidential- Lite. I'm sure his parents were proud of the little rascal, but I suspect that he looked much tinier than Presidential.
So who is it that someone would say looked presidential? Was it Kennedy, was it Eisenhower, or maybe it is Obama? Although I do not hold my breath every time a strong wind blows by those ears of our current leader. On any given day, I expect him to take flight. I have no idea what it means to look presidential. Is it one of our current slates of candidates? I look at Gingrich, I look at Ron Paul. Is that the look we are talking about? Really? If it is based on sheer "easy on the eye" concept, maybe it is Romney or Perry. At least, you can look them head on without putting one hand over your eye as a natural filter. I think that whoever started this whole business has been to one too many movies. Robert Redford and Harrison Ford looked presidential in the movies, but we must not forget they were acting. Come to think of it, maybe the line between fact and fiction is not that different. Aren't they all actors to some degree? Hey, it worked very well for Ronald Reagan. He did pretty well at both. Someone once said that politics is show business for ugly folks. I'm just saying.
Perhaps looks should have nothing to do with it and we just stick with qualifications and abilities. Nah, it'll never happen. We'll just keep searching for the candidate that has that look, whatever it is, that looks presidential. Let's just be glad that Ben Franklin never made it to the White House. He is responsible for so many of the great things that have happened in our country, but I challenge anyone to say that he had the look. He would add a factor and an element to this whole formula that would require such a corrective curve to the point that would never allow us to find the look we are searching for. Give him his due. He was the originator of bifocals and could work that mullet like it was nobody's business. Most of us wish that his early, yet apparently long lasting, fashion statement had also been struck by lightning on that fateful night. It wasn't pretty then and it's not pretty now.
So the search continues. We're not sure what is it but somebody has it and we won't stop until we find it. It may, however, prove difficult. In the meantime, here's looking at you. Feeling Presidential?
About this column: Stan Hall is a victim advocate with the Gwinnett County District Attorney's Office and Director of the Victim Witness Program in Gwinnett County. He also writes a weekly column and is host of a government access cable show, both of which are titled "Behind the Badge."
Yes, America is Still in an Official State of Emergency
by Washington's Blog
Is the U.S. still in an official state of emergency, and if so, what that means.
The answer is yes, we are still in a state of emergency.
On September 11, 2001, the government declared a state of emergency. That declared state of emergency was formally put in writing on 9/14/2001:
"A national emergency exists by reason of the terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center, New York, New York, and the Pentagon, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, I hereby declare that the national emergency has existed since September 11, 2001 . . . ."
That declared state of emergency has continued in full force and effect from 9/11 [throughout the Bush administration] to the present.
On September 10 2009, President Obama continued the state of emergency:
The terrorist threat that led to the declaration on September 14, 2001, of a national emergency continues. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue in effect after September 14, 2009, the national emergency with respect to the terrorist threat.
Does a State of Emergency Really Mean Anything?
Does a state of emergency really mean anything?
Yes, it does:
The Washington Times wrote on September 18, 2001:
"Simply by proclaiming a national emergency on Friday, President Bush activated some 500 dormant legal provisions, including those allowing him to impose censorship and martial law."
Is the Times correct? Well, it is clear that pre-9/11 declarations of national emergency have authorized martial law. For example, as summarized by a former fellow for the Hoover Institution and the National Science Foundation, and the recipient of numerous awards, including the Gary Schlarbaum Award for Lifetime Defense of Liberty, Thomas Szasz Award for Outstanding Contributions to the Cause of Civil Liberties, Lysander Spooner Award for Advancing the Literature of Liberty and Templeton Honor Rolls Award on Education in a Free Society:
In 1973, the Senate created a Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency (subsequently redesignated the Special Committee on National Emergencies and Delegated Emergency Powers) to investigate the matter and to propose reforms. Ascertaining the continued existence of four presidential declarations of national emergency, the Special Committee (U.S. Senate 1973, p. iii) reported:
"These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law. . . . taken together, [they] confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional processes. Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communications; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens."
(Most or all of the emergency powers referred to by the above-quoted 1973 Senate report were revoked in the late 1970's by 50 U.S.C. Section 1601. However, presidents have made numerous declarations of emergency since then, and the declarations made by President Bush in September 2001 are still in effect).
It is also clear that the White House has kept substantial information concerning its presidential proclamations and directives hidden from Congress. For example, according to Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy:
"Of the 54 National Security Presidential Directives issued by the [George W.] Bush Administration to date, the titles of only about half have been publicly identified. There is descriptive material or actual text in the public domain for only about a third. In other words, there are dozens of undisclosed Presidential directives that define U.S. national security policy and task government agencies, but whose substance is unknown either to the public or, as a rule, to Congress."
As former United States congressman Dan Hamburg wrote in October:
While ... Congress and the judiciary, as well as public opinion, “can restrain the executive regarding emergency powers,” nothing of the sort has occurred.
Under the 1976 National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601-1651), Congress is required to review presidentially declared emergencies. Specifically, “not later than six months after a national emergency is declared, and not later than the end of each six-month period thereafter that such emergency continues, each House of Congress shall meet to consider a vote on a joint resolution to determine whether that emergency shall be terminated.” Over the past eight years, Congress has failed to obey its own law, a fact that casts doubt on the legality of the state of emergency.
As far as public opinion is concerned, how many Americans are even aware that a state of emergency even exists. For that matter, how many members of Congress know? ...
The Obama administration is essentially arguing that the United States is currently in a state of resisting foreign invasion a full eight years after the attacks of 9/11!
This is ludicrous. [Dr. Harold C. Relyea, a specialist in national government with the Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the Library of Congress] argues that Congress and the judiciary, as “co-equal branches of constitutional government,” serve as a check on the executive power. As we have seen, Congress has either been shut out of this process, or, as in so many cases, it has capitulated. Dr. Relyea then offers that public opinion can restrain the executive. But the public doesn’t even know they’re living under a state of emergency. The media doesn’t report it, and the government is certainly not in the business of providing information that might raise the hackles of real Americans.
It’s time for the American people to rise to this challenge. Write your member of Congress, and your senators. Tell them to obey their own laws. Tell them to end this phony and treacherous state of emergency that imperils the freedom of us all.
Hamburg's must-read article also discusses the suspension of Possse Comitatus, the operation of Northcom inside the U.S., and the refusal of the Department of Homeland Security to provide information on the state of emergency to Congress or even to Congress members on the Homeland Security committee with the highest security clearances.
Greece: The Epicenter of Global Pillage
February 22nd, 2012
by Stephen Lendman
Predatory bankers make serial killers look good by comparison. Their business model creates crises to facilitate grand theft, financial terrorism, and debt entrapment.
They steal all material wealth and then some. They systematically rob investors and strip mine economies for self-enrichment.
They demand they get paid first. They hold nations hostage to assure it. They turn crises into catastrophes.
They leave mass impoverishment, high unemployment, neo-serfdom, and human wreckage in their wake.
Their Federal Reserve/ECB/IMF/World Bank/political class lackeys do their bidding.
They're more dangerous than standing armies. They wage war by other means. They cause "demographic shrinkage, shortened life spans, emigration and capital flight," explains Michael Hudson.
They're a malignancy ravaging societies and humanity. Greece is the epicenter of what's metastasizing globally. The latest bailout deal highlights out-of-control pillage.
On February 20, New York Times writer Stephen Castle headlined, "Europe Agrees on New Bailout to Help Greece Avoid Default," saying:
On Tuesday morning, Luxembourg president/Euro Group head Jean-Claude Juncker announced:
"We have reached a far-reaching agreement on Greece's new program and private-sector involvement. The new program provides a comprehensive blueprint for putting the public finances and the economy of Greece back on a sustainable footing."
In fact, it assures human misery and economic destruction, not restoration. It's a deal only bankers can love. It demands Greece reduce its debt from 160% to about 120% of GDP by 2020, but how incurring more debt achieves it wasn't explained.
It also demands sacking 150,000 public workers by 2015, slashing private sector wages 20%, lowering monthly minimum wages from 750 to 600 euros, cutting unemployment benefits from 460 to 360 euros, and reducing pensions 15% en route to eliminating them altogether.
Media reports said bondholders agreed to a 53.5% face value haircut - the equivalent of losing 75% overall. In fact, only 30% of toxic assets are involved. Most held aren't touched. Greece must make good on them, no matter the impossible burden.
Private lenders will swap current holdings for new lower face value/lower interest rate bonds. Representing bondholders, Institute of International Finance's Charles Dallara and BNP Pariba's Jean Lemierre called the deal "solid....for investors, a fair deal for all parties involved."
In other words, raping Greece for bankers is "solid" and "fair." Its citizens had no say. Without rights, what's best for them wasn't discussed.
They're left with huge wage and benefit cuts combined with mass layoffs. Greece faces less tax revenue to cover domestic priorities. In late 2011 alone, its economy shrank 7%. January revenues fell 7% year-over-year. Value-added tax receipts decreased 18.7% from last year. Death spiral financial deterioration continues monthly.
Moreover, the nation's $650 billion debt burden is double the reported amount. The more it increases, the harder it is to service and repay, the more future aid's needed, and deeper the country's economic catastrophe heads for total collapse.
The deal escrows $170 billion to assure bankers get paid. Investment advisor Patrick Young got it right telling Russia Today that dealmakers don't trust Greece living up to terms because its track record is so bad.
"So we now have a situation," said Young, "where Greece said we'll do anything you want, but the problem is" too great a burden to bear. "It's a catastrophe pushing people to the brink of starvation."
No matter. Finance ministers will give Greece some money on dreadful terms "where like a nine year old child, every Friday it has to go to daddy, say it's done its homework, say it's been a good boy, can it please have next week's pocket money to pay its civil servants. (It's) a horrible loss of sovereignty."
Troika power runs Greece - the IMF, ECB and EU. They're predators saying pay up or else.
Reports say its government will change its constitution to prioritize repaying debt ahead of vital domestic obligations.
Other terms involve lenders cutting interest rates on bailout loans by 0.5% over the next five years, and 1.5% thereafter. An estimated 1.4 billion euros would be saved by 2020.
The ECB will compensate by distributing profits on its 40 billion Greek debt holdings. In addition, Eurozone countries will contribute their Greek bond income through the end of the decade.
Still to be decided is EU/IMF burden sharing. Both agreed to contribute. Not discussed or considered is leaving 11 million Greeks on their own out of luck. They have three choices - starve, leave, or rebel.
The Rot Beneath the Surface
On February 21, Financial Times contributor Peter Spiegel headlined, "Greek debt nightmare laid bare," saying:
"A 'strictly confidential' report on Greece's debt projections prepared for eurozone finance ministers reveals Athens' rescue programme is way off track and suggests the Greek government may need another bail-out" soon after the latest one.
Even under the most optimistic scenario, imposed austerity's punishing Greece so severely, its burden's impossible to bear.
Agreed on terms are "self-defeating." Forced austerity elevates debt levels, weakens the economy, and prevents Greece "from ever returning to the financial markets by scaring off future private investors."
As a result, continued financial infusions are needed. Double or more the agreed amount's required. Current problems increase exponentially toward total collapse, default and bankruptcy.
The report explained Greece's impossible burden. It also "paints a troubling outlook for the debt restructuring, expected to begin this week." Bond swapping creates "a class of privileged investors who will chase off" others when Greece tries selling fixed income securities at market. Germany, the Netherlands and Finland opposed a deal doomed to fail.
The report warned "Greek authorities may not be able to deliver structural reforms and policy adjustments at the (envisioned) pace." Perhaps never with shrinking revenues unable to cover liabilities.
It's "now uncertain whether market access can be restored in the immediate post-programme years." Left unsaid was restoring it's impossible ever. Greece faces protracted deep depression. Its life force is ebbing. Only its obituary remains to be written.
A Final Comment
Greece's debt deal provides a model for future European sovereign restructurings. It's one of six or more troubled countries. Portugal looks like the next domino to fall, but Spain, Italy, Ireland, and others may follow.
Moreover, implementing Greece's deal entails problems. Reality may prevent fulfilling promises. If April elections are held, new MPs may balk. Declaring a debt moratorium, defaulting and leaving the Eurozone are options.
Moreover, private lenders may object. Legal challenges may follow. A sweetheart banker deal may unravel. Pressuring China and Japan to help isn't working. China Investment Corporation, the nation's sovereign wealth fund, and Chinese central bankers aren't willing to buy troubled European sovereign debt. According to one official, "(w)e aren't stupid."
How it all plays out isn't known. Technocrats run Greece. They may cancel April elections and stay in power. Public sentiment remains the wild card. Impossible to bear pain may become uncontainable rage. More than buildings may burn.
If political Greece doesn't care, people must act on their own. Revolutionary seeds are planted. They can erupt any time. Change only comes bottom up. It's long past time to get started.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
The Invention Of AIDS
By Boyd E. Graves, J.D.
Do people with HIV/AIDS owe royalties to the patent holder of the AIDS virus?
In April 1984, Dr. Robert Gallo filed a United States patent application for his invention, the HIV/AIDS Virus. Normally, when a patent is filed and approved, as Dr. Gallo's was, anyone who uses the product or invention owes a royalty payment to the inventor. Thus, holding the intellectual property laws to their fullest interpretations, one must only wonder why Dr. Gallo has yet to file a lawsuit seeking to recover damages from the usage of his invention? As odd as this scenario may sound, it bears need for additional scrutiny.
The scientific evidence is complete and compelling, the AIDS Virus is a designer bi-product of the U.S. Special Virus program. The Special Virus program was a federal virus development program that persisted in the United States from 1962 until 1978. The U.S. Special Virus was then added as 'compliment' to vaccine inoculations in Africa and Manhattan. Shortly thereafter the world was overwhelmed with mass infections of a human retrovirus that differed from any known human disease, it was highly contagious and more importantly, it could kill.
A review of the Special Virus Flow Chart ("research logic") reveals the United States was seeking a 'virus particle' that would negatively impact the defense mechanisms of the immune system. The program sought to modify the genome of the virus particle in which to splice in an animal "wasting disease" called "Visna".
According to the Proceedings of the United States of America, AIDS is an evolutionary, laboratory development of the peculiar Visna Virus, first detected in Icelandic sheep. Recently, American and world scientists confirm with 100% certainty the laboratory genesis of AIDS. This fact is further underscored when one reviews the 'multiply-spliced' nature of the HIV 'tat' gene and Dr. Gallo's 1971 Special Virus paper, "Reverse Transcriptase of Type-C virus Particles of Human Origin".
Dr. Gallo's 1971 Special Virus paper is identical to his 1984 announcement of AIDS. Upon further review the record reveals that he filed his patent on AIDS, before he made the announcement with Secretary Heckler. Earlier this year, Dr. Gallo conceded his role as a 'Project Officer' for the federal virus development program, the Special Virus.
The Flow Chart of the program and the 15 progress reports are irrefutable evidence of the United States' secret plan to cull world populations via the unleashing of a stealth biological microorganism that would 'waste' humanity. In light of this true genesis of the world's most divesting biological scourge, it is the United States that owes 'royal' payments to the innocent victims. Each and every victim of AIDS is deserving of a formal apology and a sense of economic closure for an invention of death and despair, perpetrated by the United States.
The eyes of the world are upon the General Accounting Office's Health Care Team, under the direction of William J. Scanlon. Between 1964 and 1978, the secret federal virus program spent $550 million dollars of taxpayer money to invent AIDS. It is now necessary to spend whatever it takes to dismantle an invention that has led to the greatest crime against humanity in the history of the world.
VIEW Web Archives: http://www.boydgraves.com
DOWNLOAD US SVCP Flow Chart: http://www.boydgraves.com/flowchart
SIGN Review Petition: http://www.boydgraves.com/petition
DONATE On-line: http://www.boydgraves.com/donate
WRITE To Congress: http://www.congress.org
RESEARCH Archives: : http://www.boydgraves.com/order/order.html
"We must let nature determine the finish line, not man. We are greater than any federal virus program, we are the human race."
--Dr. Boyd E. Graves, Lead Plaintiff for Global AIDS Apology U.S. Supreme Court Case No. 00-9587
WARREN S. RICHARDSON, J.D.
Attorney at Law
May 5, 2000
Mr. William J. Benson
1128 East 160th Place
South Holland, IL 60473
You may address me simply as Warren and I’ll call you Bill. My first comment is to applaud you for the tremendous amount of work you have done in bringing to light the enormous volume of factual data- over 17,000 pages of certified government documents from each of the 48 states (the number in 1913) as well as from the National Archives in Washington, D.C. In fact, the whole project, which includes your two books, is truly monumental.
Before going to the subject of your books-the 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America was not properly ratified-I wish to lay some groundwork. In 1895 the United States Supreme Court ruled a direct income tax to be unconstitutional in the case of Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan and Trust Company (158 U.S. 601). Since our forefathers who established our form of government (a republic, not a democracy) by splitting the federal power into three equal branches (legislative, judicial, and administrative), it was clearly within the Court’s discretion to render their verdict in the Pollock case.
The Supreme Court’s decision in that case can only be changed by one of two methods:
The Supreme Court, assuming it has valid reasoning, could reverse the Pollock case; or,
An Amendment to the Constitution authorizing a direct income tax could be passed by a vote of two-thirds of both houses of Congress and then ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the States.
Following the procedure of item 2, above, the Secretary of State has the duty of announcing to the public, the President, and the Congress that a proposed amendment has been accepted or rejected.
The people who wished to overturn the Pollock case chose the second alternative.
In my professional opinion your two books demonstrate, at least to me, that the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified even though the Secretary of State made the public announcement that it had been properly ratified. When only four states of the required 38 ratified it properly, how could it be considered valid? In view of the facts, how could it become a valid part of our Constitution? Since the Pollock case has not been reversed by the Supreme Court, what is the legal framework upon which the current income tax law is based?
Although I am a lawyer, it is important to note that I am not a constitutional scholar; therefore I do not speak as one. As noted above, it is my opinion that, based on your overwhelming evidence, the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified. Furthermore, I believe that it is imperative to have legal scholars in constitutional law study this matter deeply and render their opinions on whether the 16th Amendment was properly ratified. Provided they come to the same conclusion we do (that it was not properly ratified), what would be the logical next move? That last question is a real tough one because of the politics involved. Assume that the Supreme Court rules upon a case properly brought before it that the tax system of the U.S. is not legal. Can you even visualize the reaction of the members of Congress?
Bill, you have done a magnificent job in providing the factual data about whether the 16th Amendment was properly ratified. I am hopeful that we can find the scholars who will go to the next step and suggest what should be done now.
Thanks for your hard work. You have done a great service to your country.
P.S.: Since a personal letter cannot be distributed, or even shown, to anyone other than the recipient without permission of the author, I hereby authorize you to show it (not publish it) to other people at your discretion.