US Caught in Web of Lies by Gordon Duff


Bundy Ranch, BLM Abused Cliven Bundy’s Cattle, Mass Graves, PETA, Ranch Damaged

Bundy Ranch, BLM Abused Cliven Bundy’s Cattle, Mass Graves, PETA, Ranch Damaged, Bureau of Land Management

The US federal government might have just evoked the fury of animal right groups over their shocking treatment of cattle at the Bundy Ranch, and may soon face legal charges of severe animal abuse in Clark County, Nevada.

Federal agency’s treatment of residents at the Bundy Ranch this past week included tasering, beating, wrongful arrest, threatening residents with attack dogs, and mobilizing a federal paramilitary force whose barrels were trained on US citizens, all in all, spending at least $3 million of tax payer money in an effort to sell stolen cattle over state lines in Utah and California. A legal argument has also been made that the US Department of Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is now guilty of racketeering under the federal RIC) statute (Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations). If all that wasn’t enough, evidence is now emerging regarding pattern of extreme cruelty and abuse, and suspected culling of animals from the Bundy Ranch.

Nevada Assemblywoman Michelle Fiore has released new shocking information and images which document the horrors which BLM agents have inflicted on previously happy and healthy livestock.

During a live radio broadcast of The Pete Santilli Show on GNM, Fiore reveals new details of “the BLM’s method of herding where they have slaughtered horses and cows. This time we have video of it, and pictures of it.”

“I did post the first picture of one cow who was shot in the back of the head from a helicopter (photo above).”

“I personally helped save a calf who still had an umbilical cord attached to her as she was separated from her mom. It is such a disgusting event (…)… they (BLM) don’t herd cattle – they slaughter cattle”, said Fiore.

According to the Bundy family, in total, 27 baby calves have been rescued thus far, but farmers are still having trouble matching them up with their mothers.

‘Abusively corralled’

“If you look at the stewardship of land, and herding of cattle, first of all these particular cattle that were grazing on 600,000 acres – understand that when the Bundy family would herd their own cattle, there would be water taps to where the cattle would go down to the water and herd them humbly and softly – no cruelty, no abuse, herding them to where the cattle could get injured”.

“We now have an evidenced-based argument now with how the BLM cannot take care of that cattle. We have cows giving birth (in the federal pen) where baby calves have been stepped on and killed.”

“This is the BLM’s practice. They herd animals with helicopters, ATV’s, and shotguns… If any cows get out of line – they get a bullet in the back of the head”.

“Make sure the BLM are off state land and make sure the BLM are not allowed to herd cattle again”.

Mass Graves
“Near their compound, right off the highway, they were digging holes (…)… They tried to bury some cows on the compound, but I guess they didn’t dig the hole deep enough, so throw a cow in and they dirt over him and you have cows legs cows’ legs sticking up out of the dirt”.

Daniel-P-Love-BLMEarlier this week GMN revealed a secret recording of the BLM Special Agent in Charge, Daniel P. Love (photo, left), who had stated that the BLM have not killed any cattle. Fiore’s reply to Love’s claim:

“He’s a flat out liar, period.”

It was confirmed by ranchers and observers last week of how the BLM and their “contract cowboy” had deployed aggressive practices whilst rustling the Bundy’s herd, using tactical helicopters (image, below) forcing cattle to removal zones, often times driving cows uphill in 90F heat – a lethal practice known to cause tremendous stress and exhaustion to the animals, causing sickness and even premature death.

Evidence of BLM’s Deadly Abuse of Animals Taken from Bundy Ranch
Last week, farmers suspected that BLM agents were also scooping up the dead animals with heavy equipment like Backhoe diggers, and either burying carcasses somewhere on the 600,000 acre public grazing land, or disposing of them somewhere off site.

In addition, reports by observers confirmed that spring heifers who were subject to abusive BLM tactics were forced to abandon some calves behind to hide in the desert bush (a common practice by mothers who are being rustled, who later can backtrack to retrieve their young) putting the calves at risk of death.

Critics now believe the BLM and Clark County Sheriff’s Office could be facing a strong legal challenge for their reckless handling of the ill-fated operation underlined by a litany of both human and animal rights abuses.

These men and woman are Americans attacking Americans. I’m speechless. If you saw the number of police agencies united, I’d hope you’d be curious. We are talking about dozens of our finest SWAT members from Metro, Metro black & white cars, EMT, fire rescue trucks, detention buses (a.k.a. Paddy wagons), over 50 Ranger and BLM vehicles, numerous highway patrol vehicles, and a Black Hawk Helicopter on the Moapa airfield, just to name a few. We watched the Waco Massacre and Ruby Ridge; was the BLM preparing for a “Bunkerville Slaughter”? I believe in my heart because of these last two disasters, Americans from all over our country traveled from afar to stand with the Bundys and let our government know enough is enough. I’m proud to stand with my fellow Americans.

The numbers don’t calculate. The federal government had the authority and an open checkbook to spend 10 million dollars or more for a maximum return of $200,000.  Here’s how I calculate that number:  the BLM might collect maybe 400 heads of cattle, taking into account the number of cattle they would kill while rounding them up. From the round up, the cattle would go to auction. How much do you think you’ll pay for a half-dead, beat up cow? Let’s say they were able to successful auction off 400 cows for $500.00 each (I’m being very very generous). The brainiac head of BLM authorized 10 million dollars or more to maybe recoup $200,000.  Really? As a CEO I’d fire that decision-maker immediately. In their minds, maybe it’s worth getting rid of the cows, or just killing them, so the cows won’t destroy equipment for a project they might want to implement.

The BLM tried to paint their actions as enforcing the law; however, there are several other reasons why the BLM chose to pick this fight. It cannot be a coincidence that the place where the Bundy’s have grazed their cattle for hundreds of years would suddenly become an animal refuge for desert tortoises; is it really desert tortoises? If so, why would the BLM be euthanizing them? That’s right, BLM has EUTHANIZED 700-800 desert tortoises. Trust but verify. Click here to read one of many stories about it.

We’re also seeing reports that the BLM land in Gold Butte is very desirable for energy projects, which may have prompted this sudden strong-arm tactic. Don’t trust me, verify it. Click here to read the BLM’s own report on the project.

A major concern in all of this was how the BLM treated the cattle. It is completely irresponsible that after years of conversations, the Feds would begin their roundup during the season when calves are being born. In this mess, newborn calves were separated from their mothers; some were trampled in their holding pens and left for dead. A helicopter acted as a cowboy to heard the cows, causing a few to have heart attacks and die. The conditions of the holding pens where they kept the cows for days were heartless and cruel. Where was PETA?

I do want to comment about the upstanding citizens who came to show their support, including the Oath Keepers, a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, police, and first responders who are committed to defending the Constitution. They are honorable men and women who acted professionally and respectfully.  There were many groups of freedom fighters who traveled from all over our country to stand together. I have a very serious request to all agency officers and that request is, “not to obey your superiors when given a direct order to attack your fellow Americans fighting for the freedoms granted to us by our Constitution”.  Take a sick day or a vacation.

Reports on the ground that day also confirmed that even more armed Federal reinforcements were on the way, but luckily were caught up in stand-still traffic ten miles out from the scene. What were they planning? Photos by a GMN photographer positioned behind federal lines at the Battle of Bundy Ranch, further reveal the scale and scope of Washington’s military operation on US soil.

Viewers can judge for themselves whether or not the US Federal government was playing a deceptive, deadly game with American lives - on both sides.

21WIREa-Bundy-Fed-Standoff-April-12-2014-Copyright-GMN (2)
ARMED RANGERS: Back line of armed agents arrive on the scene.

SWAT TEAMS: Local police TAC teams commandeered by the federal government.

CONVOYS GATHERS: Alphabet soup agencies gather to mount their military operation.

TARGETING MEDIA: Watching us, watching them – BLM Sniper points rifle at GMN photographer.

LAYERS OF FIRE: ‘Paintball’ (pepperball), CS Gas in the front, and bullets from the rear.

EYE IN THE SKY: Ariel survelliance overhead as Cowboys move towards federal line.

AGENT IN CHARGE: Dan Love pulls out before Cowboys move to reclaim their herd.

LOVE LOST: Special Agent Love realizing that BLM have painted themselves into a corner.

PULLING BACK: Federal soldiers begin to pull back.

21WIREw-Bundy-Fed-Standoff-April-12-2014-Copyright-GMN 21WIREx-Bundy-Fed-Standoff-April-12-2014-Copyright-GMN
PACKING UP SHOP: Federal soldiers pack-up after giving the right of way to Bundy Cowboys and their supporters.

LIBERATION: Cowboys and supporters prepare to open the cattle gates.

COWS COMING HOME: First cattle released heading back to the Bundy Ranch.

MOTHERS AND BABIES: Cattle families coming home after release from BLM’s federal penitentiary.

AN AMERICAN MOMENT: Bundy Cowboys flying old glory, driving their herd back to pasture.

21WIRE can also reveal a secret recording made prior the final standoff on Saturday afternoon, between BLM Special Agent Dan Love and GMN host Pete Santilli, where Agent Love says, “Constitutions are not decided in the dirt.”

Agent Love adds, “I guarantee you the constitution is on my side – not your side… (…) You (the people) can fight your argument from jail.”

Here’s a photo taken from the air of the BLM’s secret bovine concentration camps. After this photo was released, the BLM ordered the FAA to shut down the air space over the ranch, creating a wartime “no fly zone” to prevent more pictures from being taken

Government tactics caused death of cattle

“It was confirmed by ranchers and observers last week of how the BLM and their ‘contract cowboys’ had deployed aggressive practices whilst rustling the Bundy’s herd, using tactical helicopters [and] forcing cattle to removal zones, often times driving cows uphill in 90-degree heat — a lethal practice known to cause tremendous stress and exhaustion to the animals, causing sickness and even premature death,” the wire service reported.

“In addition, reports by observers confirmed that spring heifers who were subject to abusive BLM tactics were forced to abandon some calves behind to hide in the desert bush (a common practice by mothers who are being rustled, who later can backtrack to retrieve their young) putting the calves at risk of death.”

Critics now believe the BLM and Clark County Sheriff’s Office could face legal challenges for reckless handling of the situation. It is now obvious that they were all complicit in the commission of horrific atrocities against animals.

Some have made a legal observation that the BLM, which falls under the U.S. Department of the Interior, may be guilty of racketeering under federal RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organization) statutes.


According to several reports breaking on social media Wednesday, federal agents targeting the Bundy Ranch in Clark County, Nev. did much more than merely herd hundreds of cows away from the site prior to backing down from their position Saturday. The following graphic images are being distributed by the Bundy Ranch as proof that multiple head of cattle were slaughtered, apparently under the direction of federal Bureau of Land Management officers.

bundy cows 6Some close-up shots reportedly reveal the entrance point of wounds that took down the family’s livestock.

bundy cows 5The photos show the dead and decaying cattle, offering little room for speculation beyond the assumption that BLM agents were complicit in their deaths.

bundy cows 3With elected officials, including Democrat Sen. Harry Reid, declaring the standoff is “not over,” many worry the government’s apparent predilection for violence could easily spill over to include human targets.

bundy cows 4Many outraged commenters have pointed out the glaring hypocrisy of animal rights groups who, at this point, have remained largely silent regarding allegations of cattle mistreatment on the ranch by federal forces.

BLM killed prize bulls and cut holes in water tanks and destroyed fences during the stand-off last week in Clark County, Nevada.

When injustice becomes law resistance becomes a duty

Rothschild Inherits a Semiconductor Patent for Freescale Semiconductors

March 23, 2014

The disappearance of four members of a patent semiconductor traveling on Malaysia Airlines MH370 makes the famous billionaire Jacob Rothschild at the sole owner of the important patent.

The mystery surrounding the Malaysian Airlines MH-370 is growing as each day passes with more mysterious silence shadowing the disappearance of the airline. More and more conspiracy theories are beginning to boom on the internet. One of the conspiracies one is the Freescale Semiconductor’s ARM microcontroller ‘KL-03′ which is a new improvised version of an older microcontroller KL-02. This crazy story about how Illuminati Rothschild exploited the airlines to gain full Patent Rights of an incredible KL-03 micro-chip is going haywire across the internet especially when it’s involving Jacob Rothschild as the evil master plotter.

A US technology company which had 20 senior staff on board Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 had just launched a new electronic warfare gadget for military radar systems in the days before the Boeing 777 went missing.

Freescale Semiconductor has been developing microprocessors, sensors and other technology for the past 50 years. The technology it creates is commonly referred to as embedded processors, which according to the firm are “stand-alone semiconductors that perform dedicated computing functions in electronic systems”.

Why were so many Freescale employees traveling together? What were their jobs. Were they on a mission and if so what was this mission? Can these employees be the cause of the disappearance of this plane? Could the plane have been then hijacked and these people kidnapped? Did these employees hold valuable information, did they have any valuable cargo with them? Did they know company and technological secrets? With all the might of technology why cant this plane be located? Where is this plane where are these people?”

The 20 Freescale employees, among 239 people on flight MH370, were mostly engineers and other experts working to make the company’s chip facilities in Tianjin, China, and Kuala Lumpur more efficient, said Mitch Haws, vice president, global communications and investor relations.

“These were people with a lot of experience and technical background and they were very important people,” Haws said. “It’s definitely a loss for the company.”

In Malaysia, Freescale’s modern operations facility that manufactures and tests integrated circuits (IC) is based in Petaling Jaya.

Based on information obtained from Freescale’s website, the facility began operations in 1972 covering an eight hectare site and is specifically designed for the manufacturing and testing of microprocessors, digital signal processors and integrated radio frequency circuits.

It also owns Freescale RF which is involved in creating solutions for Aerospace and Defence listed below.

1. Battlefield communication

2. Avionics

3. HF Radar – Band L- and S-

4. Missile Guidance

5. Electronic Warfare

6. Identification, friend or foe (IFF)

Freescale’s shareholders include the Carlyle Group of private equity investors whose past advisers have included ex-US president George Bush Sr and former British Prime Minister John Major.

Carlyle’s previous heavyweight clients include the Saudi Binladin Group, the construction firm owned by the family of Osama bin Laden.

The fact that Freescale had so many highly qualified staff on board the Boeing 777 had already prompted wild conspiracy theories about what might have happened.

The company says they were flying to China to improve its consumer products operations, but Freescale’s fresh links to electronic warfare technology is likely to trigger more speculation and deepen the mystery.

Experts have been baffled how a large passenger jet seems to have flown undetected and possibly beaten military radar systems for up to six hours.

Avoiding radar via “cloaking technology” has long been one of the objectives of the defense industry and Freescale has been active developing chips for military radar.

On its website, the company says its radio frequency products meet the requirements for applications in “avionics, radar, communications, missile guidance, electronic warfare and identification friend or foe”.

Last June it announced it was creating a team of specialists dedicated to producing “radio frequency power products” for the defense industry.

And on March 3, it announced it was releasing 11 of these new gadgets for use in “high frequency, VHF and low-band UHF radar and radio communications”.

The company did not respond to questions from Express Online, including whether any of its missing employees had been working on the defense products.

It neither provided any responses to the latest bizarre conspiracy theory being widely published on the comments sections of newspaper websites and other internet forums.

The comment reads: “It reads: “Have you pieced together the puzzle of missing flight 370 to Beijing China? If not, here are your missing pieces.

Four days after the  flight MH370  disappear, semiconductor patent was approved by the U.S. patent office patent is divided in parts of 20% between five starters. One of the owners is the company itself, Freescale Semiconductor, Austin, Texas (USA), and the other four Chinese employees of the company: Peidong Wang, Zhijun Chen, Cheng and Li Ying Zhijong, all the Suzhou City. And they all passengers of Malaysia Airlines plane disappeared on March 8, according Eternity .

It adds: “Here is your motive for the missing Beijing plane. As all four Chinese members of the Patent were passengers on the missing plane.

Patent holders can alter the proceeds legally by passing wealth to their heirs. “However, they cannot do so until the Patent is approved. So when the plane went missing, the patent had not been approved.”

However, the absurd theory does not add up.

Although a Freescale patent does exist under number US8650327, none of the names listed actually appear on the passenger manifest released by the Malaysian authorities.

If the patent holder dies, the other owners share equally in dividends from the deceased.  If four of the five patentees die, then the patentee left alive gets 100% of the patent. That remaining patent holder is the company Freescale Semiconductor. Who owns Freescale Semiconductor? The answer is: Jacob Rothschild. British billionaire owns the company Blackstone, which in turn owns the company Freescale Semiconductors. Several speculations on the Internet now pay attention to this circumstance. The Rothschilds are a dynasty of financiers and international bankers of German-Jewish origin . The family is from the nineteenth century one of the most influential families of bankers and financiers of Europe.

The search continues for Flight MH370 but speculation surrounding its fate grows by the day.

Click here to enlarge the patent number

Papers Please! Drivers License Checkpoint in Rutherford County ~ Cop Block

Got checkpoints?? Here’s how you can take action to raise awareness of the illegal nature of cops asking for “your papers” when no crime has been committed. Stand in your power, never cower and always know your 4th amendment rights…

Sharing Is Caring! Please Like, Share & Subscribe so others see this message.

COPBLOCK.ORG Badges Don’t Grant Extra Rights

On Friday, March 21, 2014 a group of individuals wearing Tennessee Highway Patrol costumes stopped and demanded identification from travelers not suspected of any crime. That should cause any thinking person to ponder – just who are the criminals in this situation?

In addition to a Jeep driver who spoke the truth, present with cameras, signs and a mindset not welcoming to such draconian checkpoints were Murfreesboro inhabitants Adam G. House and Axl David, accompanied by Pete Eyre.


(615) 741-3181 District 3, Troop B


Sofia Smallstorm – Hour 1 – Chemtrails to Pseudo-Life & Synthetic Biology

Outstanding interview exposing NEW disturbing information on chemtrail emissions, the progression of Morgellons disease, radiation releases and the links to transhumanism. Henrik Palmgren “Creepy, scary of of cou+rse weirdly fascinating at the same time….”

March 19, 2014
Sofia Smallstorm is known for her research on 9/11, which culminated in the documentary 9/11 Mysteries. She is also known for her research on the connection between chemtrails and synthetic biology. With Sofia, we’ll explore a different angle of engineering popularly called “futurism.” Synthetic biology is the new frontier of science, combining genetics, robotics and nano-technology with artificial intelligence, hybridizing natural forms and engineering tissues beyond our wildest dreams. What is the deep agenda behind this science? Sofia talks about the presence of Morgellons disease in humans, which illustrates what nanotechnology is capable of. She also elaborates on the scope of planetary engineering and how much of planetary life it includes. We’ll hear about radiation biology and bacteria by the name of deinococcus radiodurans that may be important to transhumanists in the near future. In the second hour, Sofia speaks more about the explosion of cellular technology and synthetic biology and how these may be used to create life forms and change the world as we know it. How would our world be organized then? Will we turn ourselves over to machines or will we become technological hybrids?





This post is dedicated to every fellow blogger and positive change agent pioneering the new paradigm.  The position we are in is not always an easy path to walk. It takes courage and bravery to publish the truth when others will not, or to pioneer a new product that can help free humanity. In this process we receive tons of correspondence from the public. The love and support of our fellow humanity gives us the strength to persevere and continue doing the great work. However, not all correspondence is positive. Anger, hatred, fear and threats on one’s life are attacks that every change agent endures.


We all deal with these attacks differently. Most of us just ignore them, some of us can’t deal with the negativity, retreat into isolation and stop doing the work.








Here is what to look for:


-negative comments on Youtube videos
-smear articles written on blogs to discredit someone’s reputation
-negative comments on blogs
-negative comments on facebook
-negative comments on crowdfunding campaigns
-negative comments in forums
-negative comments in chat rooms
-negative emails sent to positive change makers


As an example, here is an email sent to the Fix the World Organization from a paid troll. It is the worst threat we have received to date:


——– Original Message ——–



Contact Us: I’m on to you.


28 Feb 2014 23:18:03 -0700


Billy <>





I love the depth that you have gone to. This little scam of yours will never work. The Anonymous network has been notified – the cabin crew are working on you – we have your IP address, the address you have been doing all this scamming from, and so much more. If you want to get out with your dignity, 24 hours your sites, social media accounts and go fund me accounts will be closed down or we will be sending all of your information to the media and law enforcement – after they are finished with you we will make your life a living hell until the only way out is suicide – your choice – the money or your life.


The agency that employs these people is called the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group. (JTRIG)


The core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are to:


1. To inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets.
2. To use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable.


These are some of the actual pages from the JTRIG training document: “The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.”














This next slide shows just how much planning goes into this:






These documents were recently leaked by Edward Snowden and revealed by Glenn Greenwald. We finally have the hard evidence we need. For more alarming information about this please check out the following links:


We have compassion and love for individuals who might feel that being a paid troll is their only option. We would invite them to break free from their slave masters and join us in creating the new paradigm.  At the Fix the World Organization, we have a team of living human beings that field through all comments and emails daily. We keep a record of the names, email addresses, and IP addresses, of all that are perceived to be malicious. Many of the bloggers and positive change agents are friends. We talk, compare notes, and share this list of paid trolls with each other.


To my fellow bloggers and change agents, I hope this helps combat the negativity.
To the people who follow our work, I hope this helps you spot a troll and call them out into the light.



Yes, There Are Paid Government Trolls On Social Media, Blogs, Forums And Websites

February 26th, 2014

By Michael Snyder

Troll Warning - Photo by Gil

Do you want solid proof that paid government shills are targeting websites, blogs, forums and social media accounts?  For years, many have suspected that government trolls have been systematically causing havoc all over the Internet, but proving it has been difficult.  But now thanks to documents leaked by Edward Snowden and revealed by Glenn Greenwald, we finally have hard evidence that western governments have been doing this.  As you will see below, a UK intelligence outfit known as the Government Communications Headquarters, through a previously secret unit known as the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group, has been systematically attempting “to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse”.  This should be deeply disturbing to anyone that values free speech on the Internet.

It isn’t just that the British government is trying to influence what people are thinking.  The reality is that this is far bigger than a mere propaganda campaign.  As Greenwald recently noted on his new website, the “integrity of the Internet itself” is at stake…

By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.

So what techniques are the British using to control and manipulate discourse on the Internet?  According to Greenwald, the documents that Snowden has uncovered show that they are willing to sink to despicable lows in order to get the results that they desire…

Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and(2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums.

The following is a list of Internet infiltration techniques that were listed on one particular slide that Snowden leaked…

-Infiltration Operation

-Ruse Operation

-Set Piece Operation

-False Flag Operation

-False Rescue Operation

-Disruption Operation

-Sting Operation

You can check out this slide for yourself right here.

There is also evidence that the Canadian government has been involved in this sort of thing as well.  The following comes from Natural News

You’ve probably run into them before — those seemingly random antagonizers who always end up diverting the conversation in an online chat room or article comment section away from the issue at hand, and towards a much different agenda. Hot-button issues like illegal immigration, the two-party political system, the “war on terror” and even alternative medicine are among the most common targets of such attackers, known as internet “trolls” or “shills,” who in many cases are nothing more than paid lackeys hired by the federal government and other international organizations to sway and ultimately control public opinion.

Several years ago, Canada’s CTV News aired a short segment about how its own government had been exposed for hiring secret agents to monitor social media and track online conversations, as well as the activities of certain dissenting individuals. This report, which in obvious whitewashing language referred to such activities as the government simply “weighing in and correcting” allegedly false information posted online, basically admitted that the Canadian government had assumed the role of secret online police.

You can see a video news report about this activity up in Canada right here.

Are you disturbed yet?

You should be.

So what kind of people are the governments of the western world targeting online?

Well, when it comes to the U.S. government, all you have to do is to look at their official documents to see who they consider the “problems” to be.  For much more on this, please see my previous article entitled “72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered ‘Potential Terrorists’ In Official Government Documents“.

Sadly, the reality of the matter is that the days of the free and open Internet are numbered.  The governments of the world are increasing their control over the Internet with each passing day, and eventually a time will likely come when we will not be able to communicate openly like this any longer.

Things have gotten so bad in the U.S. already that even Google is spooked

A recent court decision that endorsed a broad view of the Federal Communications Commission’s authority over the Internet has Google and other Web companies nervous.

In closed-door meetings with regulators and Capitol Hill staff, Google’s lawyers have said they’re worried how the FCC may use its newfound powers, according to multiple people familiar with the meetings.

The extent of the FCC’s authority over Google and other Web services remains unclear, and the current FCC has given no indication that it is interested in pushing aggressive new regulations. But the possibility that the commission could begin telling Google how to organize its search results or handle its users’ data is enough to spook the company’s army of Washington lobbyists.

And this is just the beginning.

If you think that the control freaks that are running things now are bad, just wait until you see the next generation of control freaks.

For example, there is one prominent student writer at Harvard that apparently believes that free speech at her university should be abolished and that any professor that does not advocate for her politically-correct version of “justice” should be fired

A student writer at Harvard University is raising eyebrows after publishing her belief that free speech on campus should be abolished and professors with opposing views be fired.

Sandra Korn, a senior who writes a column for the Harvard Crimson newspaper, thinks radical leftism is the only permissible political philosophy, and the First Amendment only hinders colleges from brainwashing students with her viewpoint.

“Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice,” states the subtitle of her Feb. 18 column, in which she insists Harvard stop guaranteeing students and professors the right to hold controversial views and conduct research putting liberalism in a negative light.

“If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals?” Korn asks.

This is what control freaks always want.

They always want to shut down those that are presenting opposing views.

They don’t believe in free speech and a “marketplace of ideas”.  Rather, they believe in shoving what they believe down the rest of our throats.

And now we have solid proof that the governments of the western world are paying people to manipulate discourse on social media, blogs, forums and websites.

So will there be great outrage over this, or will the apathetic public just roll over and ignore this like they have so many other times the past few years?

A Corporate Coup in Disguise The Trans-Pacific Partnership would create a virtually permanent corporate rule over the people.


Photo Credit:




What if our national leaders told us that communities across America had to eliminate such local programs as Buy Local, Buy American, Buy Green, etc. to allow foreign corporations to have the right to make the sale on any products purchased with our tax dollars? This nullification of our people’s right to direct expenditures is just one of the horror stories in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

This is a super-sized NAFTA, the 1994 trade scam rammed through Congress by the entire corporate establishment. NAFTA promised the “glories of globalization”: prosperity across our land. Unfortunately, corporations got the gold. We got the shaft — thousands of factories closed, millions of middle-class jobs went south, and the economies of hundreds of towns and cities were shattered.

Twenty years later, the gang that gave us NAFTA is back with the TPP, a “trade deal” that mostly does not deal with trade. Of the 29 chapters in this document, only five cover traditional trade matters! The other chapters amount to a devilish “partnership” for corporate protectionism:

—Food safety. Any of our government’s food safety regulations (on pesticide levels, bacterial contamination, fecal exposure, toxic additives, etc.) and food labeling laws (organic, country-of-origin, animal-welfare approved, GMO-free, etc.) that are stricter than “international standards” could be ruled as “illegal trade barriers.” Our government would then have to revise our consumer protections to comply with weaker standards.

—Fracking. Our Department of Energy would lose its authority to regulate exports of natural gas to any TPP nation. This would create an explosion of the destructive fracking process across our land, for both foreign and U.S. corporations could export fracked gas from America to member nations without any DOE review of the environmental and economic impacts on local communities — or on our national interests.

—Jobs. US corporations would get special foreign-investor protections to limit the cost and risk of relocating their factories to low-wage nations that sign onto this agreement. So, an American corporation thinking about moving a factory would know it is guaranteed a sweetheart deal if it moves operations to a TPP nation like Vietnam. This would be an incentive for corporate chieftains to export more of our middle-class jobs.

—Drug prices. Big Pharma would be given more years of monopoly pricing on each of their patents and be empowered to block distribution of cheaper generic drugs. Besides artificially keeping everyone’s prices high, this would be a death sentence to many people suffering from cancer, HIV, AIDS, tuberculosis and other treatable diseases in impoverished lands.

—Banksters. Wall Street and the financial giants in other TPP countries would make out like bandits. The deal explicitly prohibits transaction taxes (such as the proposed Robin Hood Tax here) that would shut down speculators who have repeatedly triggered financial crises and economic crashes around the world. It restricts “firewall” reforms that separate consumer banking from risky investment banking. It could roll back reforms that governments adopted to fix the extreme bank-deregulation regimen that caused Wall Street’s 2007 crash. And it provides an escape from national rules that would limit the size of “too-big-to-fail” behemoths.

—Internet freedom. Corporations hoping to lock up and monopolize the Internet failed in Congress last year to pass their repressive “Stop Online Piracy Act.” However, they’ve slipped SOPA’s most pernicious provisions into TPP. The deal would also transform Internet service providers into a private, Big Brother police force, empowered to monitor our “user activity,” arbitrarily take down our content and cut off our access to the Internet. To top that off, consumers could be assessed mandatory fines for something as benign as sending your mom a recipe you got off of a paid site.

—Public services. TPP rules would limit how governments regulate such public services as utilities, transportation and education — including restricting policies meant to ensure broad or universal access to those essential needs. One insidious rule says that member countries must open their service sectors to private competitors, which would allow the corporate provider to cherry-pick the profitable customers and sink the public service.

Lori Wallach, director of Global Trade Watch, correctly calls the Trans-Pacific Partnership “a corporate coup d’etat.” Nations that join must conform their laws and rules to TPP’s strictures, effectively supplanting U.S. sovereignty and canceling our people’s right to be self-governing. Worse, it creates virtually permanent corporate rule over us.

Is it impossible to stop? Nope. There is also a broad, well-organized and politically experienced coalition of grassroots groups, which has stopped other deals and will do it again. We the people can protect our democratic rights from this threat of corporate usurpation. Check out

To find out more about Jim Hightower, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Web page at

Jim Hightower is a national

How and why you should fight ALL fines – by an ex-Police Sergeant.




My name is Stan. I am a retired Sergeant of Police in Victoria for 14 years. I was also a police prosecutor at times, so I know what I am talking about. I spent half my life in Magistrates Court during my time in the Force. I was only ever a very fair copper, and I am proud of my time in the job, looking after the interests of Victorians, often to the detriment of my family and my health.


I never booked any driver for a trifling offence “ever”. People committing trifling offences commonly used to get a warning and a licence / vehicle check. It had to be serious before I booked anyone.


I am so annoyed at what is happening these days, in what I call “Indiscriminate revenue gathering” It is absolutely disgusting. The government and the Police Force need to hang their heads in shame. If you did a survey of current serving members of the police forces in this country, you would be hard pushed to find many who disagree with me.


I know how the legal system works, and I know how to beat the system. This is how to do it, and if about 10% of all drivers booked follow my specific instructions, then the entire system will crash and become unworkable to the extent, that the government will have no choice but to stop issuing fines for every type of traffic offence. The whole lot of them. Seriously.


I do not feel guilty about coming out with this information, as I think it’s about time someone stood up for hard working, civil minded, law abiding taxpayers in this country, who are being screwed.


This is very simple and very basic. The idea is to clog up the system in the traffic camera office and the courts by drivers exercising their rights to remain innocent until proven guilty.




1. Do not accept the alleged offence. There are numerous valid reasons to dispute every single alleged offence. Often the charges are incorrect or the evidence is illegally or incorrectly gathered.


2. Challenge it, tell them that you are going to defend the matter. Make them earn their miserable $150 or $200 or whatever. They have to prepare evidence and witnesses. Just the wages for the camera operator or the Policeman on the day of the court, will be more than the actual fine. You are also taking a camera operator or a member of the Police Force off the street for the day. But it won’t get to that point… on….


3. If a court date is ever set, and it does not suit you, do not accept it, ask for a delay to a time and place that suits you.


4. When they re set the date, delay it as often as possible. keep pleading not guilty all through the process. You have every right to be sick, or go for an adjournment if the day does not suit for any legitimate reason. For example you may have pressing family or work commitments which prevent you from attending a particular court on a particular day.


5. If it ever actually gets to court, (which is unlikely if everyone does this) and if you are unwell that day, ring the court in the morning and tell them that you cannot make it as you are sick. The camera operator, and a police prosecutor will already be at court, and will be greatly inconvenienced, by having to come back another day. The whole time this is going on, the amount of paperwork involved at the traffic camera office is huge. Several staff are involved, and it rapidly becomes very costly, probably running into thousands. …..with me so far…..keep reading…….


6. The court system is then placed under such a massive load by people who wanted “their day in court” that it simply will not be able to cope unless they open up about another 50 magistrates courts, and this is obviously going to cost the government a lot more than any revenue raised. If all the above fails, which is highly unlikely….and you actually go to court and get convicted……you have a right of appeal. Make sure you appeal the conviction. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see what happens. They are not going to spend millions chasing hundreds.


7 Tell everyone you know to challenge their alleged offences, and the entire system will crash within a few weeks.








UPDATE: I receive this through an email today, so for all readers: 


That is taken DIRECTLY from a PAID, Members ONLY website of ours – accordingly, we require you to please credit us with this e-mail. It took us a LOT of work to get that ex-police officer to write such a detailed e-mail and, whilst we obviously encourage people to fight back against their fines, we would like them to do so with our step-by-step system to do that, which is detailed in our 85 page e-book.


Accordingly, please explain that to people on your website or, at the very least, direct people to our website for further details.


 We thank you for your co-operation.


  The Team at Aussie Speeding Fines


Authors of – “Speeding Fines – What You REALLY Need to Know!”





US and UK pursuing a ‘massive land grab’ in South Sudan

December 24, 2013 16:49

 SPLA-N fighter stands with a mortar shell near Jebel Kwo village in the rebel-held territory of the Nuba Mountains in South Kordofan (Reuters/Goran Tomasevic)

SPLA-N fighter stands with a mortar shell near Jebel Kwo village in the rebel-held territory of the Nuba Mountains in South Kordofan (Reuters/Goran Tomasevic)


Salva Kiir government in South Sudan is effectively “a terrorist government put in power by the West” to tap into country’s vast resources, war correspondent Keith Harmon Snow, told RT.


RT: How possible is another irrevocable split – this time of South Sudan? Or has that already happened in reality?

Keith Harmon Snow: It is already happening in reality. The fighting since December 15 has led to the murder of about 5,000 people in the Juba area according to reports we are getting from South Sudan. Of course, none of this is in the international media at all; the international press is completely relying on the government of Salva Kiir for their facts and their information. And the government of Salva Kiir is effectively a terrorist government put in power by the West.

RT: What interests are the US and UK pursuing in South Sudan? Why they are involved there?

KS: Massive land grab! We are talking about agricultural resources that have not been tapped into that [huge] agribusiness want to take control of it. Sudan is home to massive properties that are producing, or have produced in the past, the main ingredient for soft drinks and ice cream, which is gum-arabic. The Darfur area in particular was [important] because the gum-arabic produced there [accounts for two-thirds] of the world’s supply, and it’s the best gum-arabic in the world. South Sudan has mining reserves and it also has massive oil reserves. Those are the biggest interests: land, oil, mining and agricultural production.

RT: How is the conflict affecting the oil industry and what is the international community doing about it?

KS: The oil industry in Sudan has backed the terrorism that happened there and agents of power that have put in place the government of Salva Kiir. The agents that supported the South Sudan, Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), would be the government of Uganda and powerful factions from the United States, including cooperative executives from the oil companies.

The interests of the oil companies have been served by bringing the SPLA into power, which they did, and they succeeded in creating a separate independent state called South Sudan. In the process, the oil has continued to flow out of South Sudan. They have brought about this situation and every day there is killing inside South Sudan; it benefits the oil companies because if you remove the people you have greater control of the land.


andout photo from UNMISS shows officers from the UNMISS Japanese contingent provide water to civilians seeking refuge in UN House, the UNMISS (United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan) compound on the southwestern outskirts of Juba on December 16, 2013. (AFP/UNMISS)

andout photo from UNMISS shows officers from the UNMISS Japanese contingent provide water to civilians seeking refuge in UN House, the UNMISS (United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan) compound on the southwestern outskirts of Juba on December 16, 2013. (AFP/UNMISS)

RT: How strong are the government’s forces now?

KS: The Sudan People’s Liberation Army, which would be the government forces, has been split into several factions, and in the fight that has occurred recently has been the faction that is the government in power: Salva Kiir, versus Riek Machar. Both of these guys, Riek Machar and Salva Kiir, were from the Sudan People’s Liberation Army previously.

[The] government [of] Salva Kiir has perpetrated massive atrocities against the Luo-Nuer since December 15, especially the Nuer people in the Juba area, where the reports are 5,000 killed; and that would be mostly women and children, non-combatants of any sort. I don’t see any possibility of what we would call democracy in South Sudan.

RT: Tens of thousands of civilians have found shelter in UN compounds. How vulnerable are they at this point?

KS: You have to look at the UN occupation of South Sudan as a part of a complete occupation, domination and expropriation of the land of Sudan from the people of Sudan. The UN interests in Sudan serve the power structures, they don’t serve the people.

The fact that they have created a refugee camp is just another business opportunity for organizations like Save the children, or the Norwegian People’s Aid, which has [projected] itself as a humanitarian organization, and has actually shipped weapons into South Sudan. You have to look at this from this prospective: the UN, the African Union, the Ugandan troops, and there are 3,000 Ugandan troops currently in South Sudan backed by the Pentagon, backed by the African command of the Pentagon.

This is what’s going down in South Sudan. It’s not an internal tribal war, it’s a western corporate occupation and what we would call pacification of South Sudan strictly for the land grab and for the resource grab that’s going on. And the people that are suffering the atrocities committed by the government of Salva Kiir have started to fight back. [The] Nuer were unhappy with the Dinka government, which has now turned on the Nuer people, and that’s where the war comes from.

A guy at Smith college, Dr. Eric Reeves, has been a number one propagandist about South Sudan being the victims of atrocities for all these years, when in fact the government today, the Sudan people’s Liberation government, has been the power that has been committing those atrocities in South Sudan as well as in North Sudan.


The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Take your mandatory flu shot and shove it!





Last week the city Board of Health voted to force annual flu vaccinations on all babies and children under age 5 who attend day-care centers and preschool programs. Here, Sophia Ling, mother of 3-year-old Oona and a fitness instructor in Staten Island, tells The Post’s Mary Kay Linge how the risks of the shot outweigh the benefits — and wants nannying bureaucrats to stop trampling parents’ rights.


When I first heard about the new flu vaccine rule, I was upset but not surprised. The Board of Health did this so quietly, with no input from parents of young children. The unanimous vote was cast before New Yorkers had any chance to protest.


I don’t respond well to being bullied on a matter of personal health. I also dislike the underhanded way this is being forced only on our youngest citizens. Parents of toddlers aren’t an organized political faction — we’re a bit too busy keeping our kids safe and calculating the distance to the nearest potty.


To get more facts about the flu vaccine, I turned to the Staten Island Natural & Attachment Parenting group on Facebook. Moms banding together are a powerful force. I followed links to documents from the Centers for Disease Control, vaccine manufacturers and research studies. The more I learned, the more livid I became.


In any given year, the CDC admits, the flu vaccine may be totally ineffective against the flu. That’s because scientists have to guess which strains of the flu virus will be going around each year. Some years, they guess wrong.


At best, the flu vaccine may be 60 percent effective. To me, a 0 to 60 percent efficacy rate equals one thing: fail.


Plenty of people who get the flu shot come down with flu anyway. It happened to me, actually — the only time I got a flu shot, during my pregnancy, I was sick for a week.


Not only that, the CDC says, “the flu vaccine works best among healthy adults and older children,” less well for babies and toddlers — the very people being targeted by the city’s new rule. Safety testing on children, especially babies and toddlers, has been limited.


And the side effects of the flu vaccine are very real. The manufacturers’ warning labels give a long list of potential risks — everything from fever and headache to convulsions, blood disorders and Guillain-Barré syndrome. Last flu season, at least five young children died as a direct result of the flu vaccine, according to the federal database that tracked adverse reactions during the 2012-13 flu season.


So, am I willing to roll the dice and hope that Oona is one of the lucky ones? No. In my judgment, the potential risks to my daughter outweigh the possible benefits.


I’m not against vaccination per se. Oona is getting all the vaccinations required by New York state. But those shots have much higher efficacy rates, confer long-term or lifetime immunity and protect against far more dangerous illnesses than the flu.


So now I may have to change my plans for my daughter and me. Rather than send Oona to preschool in the fall, I may choose to homeschool her until she turns 6.


How sad it would be if our new mayor’s signature issue — early childhood education — is undone because parents refuse to be bullied by a government bent on taking away our most basic rights.


The Kardashian 2013 Christmas Card: A Tribute to the Illuminati Entertainment Industry

Dec 2nd, 2013 

If there was an award for the less Christmas-y Christmas card in the History of the world, I believe that the 2013 Kardashian Christmas card would take the prize. Shot by elite fashion photographer David Lachapelle, the card is a rather grim and depressing summation of the entertainment world – an industry ruled by a shadowy elite that is turning popular culture into a toxic wasteland populated with vacuous celebs such as the Kardashians.

The wide panoramic card is filled with symbolism and references describing everything that the Illuminati entertainment industry is about. The shot takes place in an abandoned movie theater, one that appears to destroyed and vandalized.  Here’s the card (click to enlarge).


There’s a lot going on there, so let’s look at it from left to right.

First, there's Kim Kardashian posing with a revealing outfit. Her curves are pretty much the only reason why her entire family is famous right now. That is maybe one there's a huge dollar sign next to her.

First, there’s Kim Kardashian posing with a revealing outfit. Her curves are main reason why her entire family is famous right now. That is maybe why there’s a huge dollar sign next to her.

Behind the Jenner sisters are two Illuminati pyramids, complete with the All-Seeing Eye. Can't say that this card is subtle about who "owns" this entire family. Scaterred around them are dismembered mannequins, a symbol that is often used to represent Mind Control, a practice that is rampant in the Illuminati entertainment industry.

Behind the Jenner sisters are two Illuminati pyramids, complete with the All-Seeing Eye. The card can’t be clearer about “owns” this entire family. Scattered around the card are dismembered mannequins, a symbol that is often used to represent Mind Control, a practice that is rampant in the Illuminati entertainment industry.

The sister on the left wears a vulva-shaped headdress making her look like some kind of priestess. They stand on a pile of "celeb-worship" magazines, mountain of garbage on which their careers are built on (Kanye depicted as Jesus on the cover of Rolling Stones part of it). Behind the sisters (at the base of the pyramid) is an almost ironic box of Wheaties featuring Bruce Jenner when he was an Olympic athlete.

Kylie (left) wears a vulva-shaped headdress making her look like some kind of high priestess. The sisters stand on a pile of “celeb-worship” magazines, the mountain of garbage on which their careers are built on (Kanye depicted as Jesus on the cover of Rolling Stones is part of it). Behind the sisters (at the base of the pyramid) is an almost ironic box of Wheaties featuring Bruce Jenner when he was an Olympic athlete.

Khloe Kardashian is posing on the backseat of a car (why?) while Kourtney's son Mason lays on it as if life was sucked out of him. Above them is a baby-Jesus looking cutout with glory around the head. Is that North West? No idea. The matriarch of the family, Kris Jenner looks like some kind of female Pharaohe while Bruce is stuck in a tube, about to run out of air. Between them is the word "cashier", maybe meaning that its all about money transactions. Above both of them is tagged the word "fame", maybe implying that they're ready to do whatever it takes to be famous.

Khloe Kardashian poses sitting on the backseat of a car (why?) while Kourtney’s son Mason lays on it, looking as if life was sucked out of him. Above them is a cardboard cutout looking like a baby-Jesus, with a glory around its head. Is that North West? The matriarch of the family, Kris Jenner looks like some kind of female Pharaoh while Bruce is distress, stuck in a tube, about to run out of air. Between them is the word “cashier”, maybe meaning that it is all about money transactions. Above both of them is tagged the word “fame”, implying that they’re ready to do whatever it takes to be famous.

Next to Bruce is a disemembered mannequin wearing his Olympic medal. Did Bruce lose his "hero" status to become an encapsulated pawn of the entertainment industry?

Next to Bruce is a dismembered mannequin wearing his Olympic medals. Did Bruce lose his “hero” status to become an encapsulated pawn of the entertainment industry?

Contrasting with the family’s obsession with fame and fortune are images of African mothers and babies in the background. Of course, nobody appears to care about them, the world prefers to gossip about the family that is “famous for being famous”.

In short, this card sums up what popular culture in 2013 is all about: Illuminati, mind control, superficiality, exploitation of children and all around mind-numbing, time-wasting idiocy. Merry Christmas!


How the World Bank Is Hurtling Us Toward Environmental Ruin


The environmentally unsustainable development that the Bank has continued to finance is contributing to a global ecological debt that now is foreclosing on the future of human societies.


Photo Credit: Lightspring

December 2, 2013  |

Excerpted from Foreclosing the Future by Bruce Rich. © 2013 Bruce Rich. Reproduced by permission of Island Press, Washington D.C.

In 2000 a dedicated physician working to promote public health for the poor in developing countries condemned the World Bank for promoting “corporate-led economic globalization” that “not only failed to improve living standards and health outcomes among the poor, but also… inflicted additional suffering on disenfranchised and vulnerable populations.” He recounted his own experience in a Latin American country where the World Bank subsidized huge multinational mining and oil investments while encouraging the weakening of environmental laws that “led to significant ecological degradation from deforestation, oil spills, and poisoned waterways.”

These words were written by Dr. Jim Yong Kim, who assumed the presidency of the World Bank on July 1, 2012.

Kim’s words in 2000 (in a book he co-edited, Dying for Growth, a macabre pun on what the World Bank model of growth was doing to the poor) were all the more disquieting in that they came the better part of a decade after the 1992 Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit, the landmark United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. In Rio, in one of the largest diplomatic gatherings in history, 118 heads of state and numerous international development institutions such as the World Bank made wide-ranging pledges and commitments to address global environmental issues while helping the poor.

More than 20 years after Rio ’92 and 13 years after Dr. Kim’s warnings about the effects of distorted economic globalization, scientific evidence is growing that the global economy has put the entire global climate system at risk, as well as the planetary web of biodiversity and life forms. Species are dying at an alarming and accelerating rate. Economically caused global warming is already undermining the benign, stable climate conditions that have enabled the rise of human civilizations over the past 7,000 years. The inability of our institutions to address these trends is rooted in a continuing worldwide failure of governments and of markets to deal with the impacts of human activity on the natural world.

The World Bank Group is a microcosm of this breakdown. The Bank’s failures to confront the environmental challenges of economic development illuminate the political failures and hypocrisies of most of the governments of its members. The Bank is to blame, but its member governments are even more so.

This book builds on an earlier analysis I published nearly two decades ago, Mortgaging the Earth, which identified many of the persistent institutional and political pathologies that undermine the Bank’s effectiveness. Since then, unfortunately, the environmentally unsustainable development that the Bank has continued to finance is contributing to a global ecological debt that now is foreclosing on the future of human societies.

The world urgently needs global governance at the very moment when it is failing. The World Bank Group has a unique wealth of experience that could help build governance at the local, national, and international levels, if only the Bank would learn from its experience rather than flee from it. Quite a few years ago, an internal review of the Bank’s operations described the problem as unfounded institutional optimism based on pervasive institutional amnesia. In a world desperately in need of global environmental leadership, the Bank could and should play a more positive role.

The Role of the World Bank Group

In the second decade of the twenty-first century, the World Bank is no longer as financially influential as it once was. The growth of international private-sector finance, and of global public lending institutions in newly industrializing nations such as China and Brazil, mean that the Bank has now become just one financial player among others.

But the Bank remains critically important. It continues to put itself forth as an intellectual and policy leader for economic development in the United Nations system and in the global economy at large. The Rio Earth Summit chose the Bank to administer a new fund to finance environmental projects— the Global Environment Facility. After Rio the Bank and other development institutions did try to incorporate environmental concerns more fully into their decision making. More recently, the richer countries chose the World Bank to administer most of the new funds they have contributed to address climate change in developing nations. Still more important for the global environment than these new funds is the ecological impact of the activities financed by the Bank Group’s core lending and finance, which has averaged around $57 billion annually in recent years.

Since the early 1990s the World Bank has also played no small role in promoting a one-sided economic globalization that has liberalized markets and unleashed capital flows. It has done so without effective regulation at either the national or international level to counteract environmental and social abuses unleashed by these flows. Of course, the Bank has been just one player, albeit an influential one, in promoting this agenda, together with the finance ministries of many industrialized countries, led by the United States, as well as private international banks and multinational corporations.

One particularly corrosive effect of this globalization agenda has been a disproportionate growth of corruption in developing nations, resulting in massive outflows of stolen funds from even the poorest countries, laundered through proliferating international tax havens. This corruption is undermining not just the Bank’s environmental performance, but international development efforts across the board.

When one examines the failures to conserve ecosystems, or to mitigate the environmental impacts of development, one finds that failed governance at all levels is almost invariably at the root. The Bank itself is a prime example. Many of its problems are associated with a dysfunctional institutional culture in which the relentless pressure to move money out the door, even in violation of the Bank’s own polices and rules, often overrides all other considerations. What is remarkable about this “loan approval culture” is how well documented it has been for decades through reams of internal Bank reports, and how little the Bank’s management, and member- country governments, whether donors like the United States and other industrialized nations, or developing country borrowers, have done to effectively change it.

Nothing Good from the World Bank?

In September 2007, more than 700 people from all over the subcontinent—villagers, farmers, students, and local advocates—came to Delhi for a mammoth week-long investigative tribunal to examine the World Bank’s social and environmental record. One hundred and fifty representatives of communities claiming to be adversely affected by Bank projects and policies presented testimony before a “jury” that could hardly be dismissed as marginalized radicals: it included the first woman to be appointed chief justice of an Indian state (Kerala), a former justice of India’s Supreme Court, and a former justice of the High Court of Mumbai. Others judging the World Bank’s record included the most internationally renowned historian of ancient India (Romila Thapar), a distinguished economics professor, and Booker Prize–winning author Arundhati Roy.30

The 28-point indictment of the tribunal and the “jury” asserted that the Bank had actively helped to weaken Indian environmental law to benefit large corporate investments. It attacked the Bank for financing the privatization of power, water, education, and health, and for its promotion of user fees for these services, making them unaffordable for India’s poor and leading to their “deepening deprivation.” It lambasted the Bank’s support for carbon trading as subsidizing a private market for selling greenhouse-gas emissions that “in practice is doing nothing to reduce them.” “Our conclusion based on these testimonies,” the tribunal wrote, “is that the majority of World Bank–sponsored projects do not serve their stated purpose, nor do they benefit the poor of India. Instead in many cases, they have caused grievous and irreversible damage to those they intend to serve.”

Several prominent economists who had worked at the Bank for years have been no less withering in their analysis. Take Herman Daly, who worked at the Bank from 1988 through 1994. Daly is famous worldwide as a proponent of ecological economics; for Daly our world economic system, based as it is on an assumption of limitless growth, is on an ultimate collision course with the ability of the Earth’s ecological systems to sustain human populations. In his view, national economies, as well as the world economy itself, will have to adopt totally different goals and values, namely those of a steady state in terms of traditional material growth and the use of resources. A steady-state economy would not preclude development in the sense of technical progress and social welfare. It was a credit to the World Bank at the time that they employed him. But in a September 2011 interview Daly was brutally blunt. He observed that at first he thought that he and the Bank’s environmental staff “at times were being persuasive. But eventually I came to believe that it was really a lost cause and mainly window dressing.” In his view the fatal flaw was the ideology of free-market growth, espoused by many economists and most Bank staff like the defining creed of a religious cult. “I don’t expect,” he stated, “anything good from the World Bank.”

One of the Bank’s top research economists for 17 years, William Easterly (now a professor of economics at New York University), wrote a book in 2001 concluding that every approach to economic development the Bank had undertaken since the 1950s had failed. He was forced to resign after making the mistake of further publishing his findings as an op-ed piece in the Financial Times. One of his main conclusions was that top-down, centralized institutions like the World Bank, with pretensions to global knowledge, global plans, and global solutions, inexorably fail. In 2007 he described the World Bank as the “High Church of Development.” Dead serious, but also with black humor, he wrote: “A dark ideological specter is haunting the world. It is almost as deadly as the tired ideologies of the last century—communism, fascism, and socialism—that failed so miserably. It feeds some of the most dangerous trends of our time, including religious fundamentalism. It is the half-century-old ideology of Developmentalism. And it is thriving.”

Harvard professor Lant Pritchett worked for nearly 20 years at the World Bank, from 1988 to 2007, co-authoring a number of key policy documents in the early 2000s. In September 2010, at a seminar sponsored by the Bank, he let loose. “Economic analysis played zero role in financing decisions [at the Bank],” he declared. “To stop projects was a career killer.” He was reported to “liken the World Bank to a coalition of single-interest groups,” observing “that entrenched single-issue advocacy groups [within the Bank] defend their political entitlement to finance their sectors, too often without adequate economic rationale.”

Easterly and Pritchett contend that the Bank only pretends to use rigorous economic analysis in designing its loans—in reality, the focus is on getting the money out the door, and the various Bank policies and procedures are window dressing. For Herman Daly the argument is not about reforming the Bank to be made more effective in promoting economic growth— rather, the whole ideology of growth is a dead end.

As we shall see in the course of this book, both analyses are correct, and on a deeper level not contradictory: the Bank’s perverse internal incentives are a fundamental problem, and the global environment cannot be sustained without challenging the ideology of limitless economic expansion.

Environmental Failures

Despite the billions the World Bank reported it was lending for environmental and natural-resources management, allegations proliferated in the 2000s that it was more of a menace to the global environment than a solution. These accusations percolated upwards from nongovernmental groups to governments and parliaments.

In June 2011 the United Kingdom House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee lambasted the Bank, calling into question the environmental impacts of the Bank’s lending for agriculture and forestry, as well as extractive industries such as mining, oil, and gas. The Committee recounted that “witnesses highlighted several examples including support for asparagus cultivation in Peru which has resulted in fast depletion of ground water, investments which encourage extensive exploration in the Amazon region for oil and gas for export, and support for off shore oil exploration off the coast of Ghana which would dump the drilling waste at sea.” The committee chair, Joan Walley, declared that “the World Bank should not assume continued support [from the UK] unless it changes its ways.”

The Commons Environmental Audit Committee’s biggest concern was what it characterized as the Bank’s climate-destroying energy portfolio, particularly shocking given that major donor countries to the Bank had contributed many billions of additional funds to mitigate global warming by reducing carbon-intensive energy use in developing nations.

In recent years the Bank claimed to have made fighting climate change, which many scientists believe is the world’s gravest ecological challenge, a top environmental priority. Under Zoellick the World Bank positioned itself to be the world’s leading public climate banker; in 2008 industrialized countries chose it to administer some $6.7 billion in new “Climate Investment Funds” to finance clean, low-carbon energy in developing countries as well as to assist poorer countries in adapting to global warming that is already occurring. Later, at the Cancun, Mexico, international climate treaty negotiations in 2010, the richer industrialized countries also chose the World Bank to manage as interim trustee the first $30 billion of a Green Climate Fund, which is supposed to disburse $100 billion a year by 2020. Additionally, the Bank was a pioneer in jumpstarting the global carbon market: in the decade starting in 2000, with support from rich countries, it established 13 global funds with over $3 billion of assets to promote global trading of carbon-emission-rights off sets.

All of this new climate money was managed by the Bank outside its much larger main lending portfolio. The environmentally minded British Members of Parliament seemed to think that giving more money to the Bank for climate mitigation was throwing good money after bad. “The current state of the World Bank’s lending to support fossil-fuel-powered energy generation is unacceptable and counterproductive,” the committee asserted. In 2010 alone the Bank’s total energy lending totaled about $10 billion, of which roughly $6.5 billion was for fossil fuels, and only $3.5 billion was for energy efficiency and renewable power such as wind, solar, geothermal, and small hydropower. The Bank inflated these 2010 green power figures by counting disbursements from these separate donor climate funds—by one estimate between $520 and $870 million.

In fact, from 2007 to 2010 the Bank lent as much for coal-fi red power development—coal being the most carbon-intensive of all fuels—as the total amount donors put into the Climate Investment Funds. It financed two giant coal plants in India and South Africa that will be among the 50 biggest sources of greenhouse-gas emissions on Earth. The South African plant, Medupi, will be the fourth-largest coal plant on Earth, and its annual GHG emissions will exceed those of 135 of the world’s 212 nations. Thus it was no surprise that the UK House of Commons committee concluded that “the World Bank is not the most appropriate channel for future UK climate finance. It undermines our low-carbon objectives.”

“A Decade of “Mainstreaming the Environment”

Was there indeed a pervasive culture of perverse incentives at the Bank—all the more pervasive, in fact, because it was unwritten?

The Bank’s own internal studies over the years revealed that the institution’s environmental failures were often rooted in deep-seated patterns of behavior. A year before the Tiger Summit, in 2009, the Independent Evaluation Group made a damning assessment of the Bank’s record of sustainable development. Its institution-wide Environmental Strategy, launched in 2001, was supposed to go beyond a “do no harm” agenda, which in theory was already achieved by the Bank’s environmental procedures and safeguards.(The reality was quite different, as the study of projects affecting tiger habitat shows). The strategy proclaimed that the next step would be “mainstreaming” environmental concerns into all of the Bank’s lending: for example, into its infrastructure, agriculture, and forestry projects. The IEG concluded that since 2001 “preliminary indicators suggest that mainstreaming has decreasedin some sectors, such as agriculture, energy and transport…”

Environmental components of projects were, on average, less successful than other aspects of Bank lending. “The Bank’s record on environmental stewardship has been uneven,” IEG concluded with typical understatement. In fact, it found that the Bank only attempted to systematically track the results of about one-quarter of all the environmental projects it was involved in.

To understand what really drove the Bank’s environmental failures, whether it was inadequate monitoring of its projects, or lending for big projects without proper consideration of environmental safeguards, the IEG singled out a finding that internal Bank reports and external studies of the institution had emphasized for many years. Like a Greek chorus, these studies had bemoaned for over two decades the Bank’s pervasive “culture of [loan] approval”—the drive to get projects launched. This has resulted in tragedies for the environment and for some of the poorest people on Earth. “Staff and management performance evaluations depend greatly on project approvals,” the IEG observed. “If it were known that approvals depended on having solid information on the results of similar projects, behavior might change significantly” (emphasis added). The IEG report went on: “Internal incentives favor projects with large commitments [of money], which can disadvantage environmental initiatives.” Managers and staff preferred large infrastructure, for example, for electric-power generation, rather than energy-efficiency investments.

Bank finance for environmental purposes had increased in recent years, mainly because, as noted above, rich industrialized countries chose the Bank to administer special new funds dedicated to the environment, funds that were technically not part of the institution’s main lending portfolio but that were used in practice to top it off.

Such findings were old news, and they raised troubling questions about the credibility of the Bank as an international development institution and as a trustee of public money. Yet, as we shall see in later chapters, the Bank’s donor countries, and especially the borrowers, were not particularly interested in changing this state of affairs.

Bruce Rich is lawyer who has worked for three decades with national environmental organizations. He is an expert on public international finance and the environment. He received the United Nations Global 500 Award for environmental achievement for his research and advocacy concerning multilateral development banks. He is the author of Mortgaging the Earth and To Uphold the World.


Water-Powered Cars & Inventors Killed


November 21, 2013


(Left, Genepax, a Japanese car that can drive at 50km/h for an hour on a liter of water.)


Humanity is being held hostage
by the Illuminati bankers who control
the oil cartel.

“The number one thing that will diffuse the [Illuminati agenda] is to bring in an alternate energy source.”
by David Richards


Water-powered cars have existed for years.

Oil, with its attendant evils – pollution, oil wars, oil spills – are unnecessary.

Water-powered cars have been given scant media coverage. In some cases, the inventors were intimidated into ceasing their work or assassinated.

The Illuminati quash free energy technology because it would transform society and breakdown the economic order. If you control the energy, you control the people.

Stanley Meyer, who invented a water fuel device, encapsulated the agenda: ‘The internationalists want zero industrial growth, zero population growth… There is a move to force countries to sign over their natural resource rights, and if you sign over your natural resource rights, they have taken over the countries without even firing a shot. The number one thing that will diffuse the entire episode is to bring in an alternate energy source.’

Most of the cars use water as a source of hydrogen, which is a very efficient fuel.

Here is a list of men and companies who have invented water powered cars.

Herman Anderson(1918-2004) – Herman had an illustrious career as a scientist at NASA testing hydrogen powered rockets. He used this knowledge to create a water-powered vehicle which he believed would transform the world.

Herman created a water powered Chevy Cavalier (left). See Video

He was allowed to drive it, but was banned from selling or manufacturing the vehicle in his home State of Tennessee. The official reason was that the car gave off too much radiation. However, hybrid cars (that use both electricity and oil) produce a similar level of radiation and are legal. Go figure.

In 2008, a Japanese company called Genepax unveiled a water-powered car. They received a patent for the vehicle in Japan and demonstrated it to the press. The car is extremely efficient, able to drive at 50km/h for an hour on a litre of water. It runs on virtually any form of water too, even tea and soda.

A year after the launch Genepax stopped selling the cars due to lack of funds. They currently have a website that explains how to convert your car to run on water.

Stanley Meyer (1940-1998) – The most famous water car inventor. The American created the ‘water fuel cell’, claiming that any car fitted with it could run purely on water. A local television station filmed him driving a dune buggy powered by the device.

The British Advanced Energy Institute reported, ‘We recently sent a delegation to witness Stan’s work, to really evaluate it, and came back saying “this is one of the most important inventions of the century.”‘

In 1998, Stanley was murdered. He and his brother Stephen met two Belgian men at a restaurant who claimed to be potential investors. After drinking a sip of cranberry juice, Stanley grabbed his neck and ran outside, where he was violently sick. Stephen recalls, “I ran outside and asked him, ‘What’s wrong?’. He said, ‘They poisoned me.’ That was his dying declaration.”

The following day Stephen tracked down the Belgian men. “I told them that Stan had died and they never said a word, absolutely nothing, no condolences, no questions.” A week after his death, the Feds came to Stan’s home and confiscated his car and research equipment.

Steve Ryan’s water powered motorcycle
- In 2005, “60 Minutes” featured the inventor Steve Ryan demonstrating his water-powered motorbike. The footage shows Ryan fueling the bike with just water and then driving it 50mph along a highway.

Ryan’s firm, BiosFuel were planning to sell motorbikes with the conversions in them. However, the company went quiet before announcing, ‘Due to political and economical reasons, we are unable to sell the motorcycles.’

The Joe Cell - An Australian man, only identified by the name of Joe “X”, has designed an Energy Cell that utilizes water for a fuel.


Whistleblowers in Jeopardy as Nuclear Industry Looks for Shortcuts ~ Arnie Gunderson

nuclear regulatory
Global Research, November 16, 2013

In sworn testimony in Monroe, Michigan, the NRC admitted that it has stripped whistleblower protection from the licensing of new nuclear power plants.

By flip-flopping on what it means to be an applicant, the whistleblowers who are truly looking to protect the public health and safety are having their lives and livelihoods jeopardized.

Fairewinds Chief Engineer Arnie Gundersen discusses what this means as utilities look for shortcuts and cheaper ways to build new nukes.


US Media Provides “Branded Content” in Support of Hydraulic Fracking: “Native Ads” used to Promote Fracking under a “Progressive” Label




MSNBC “Leans Forward” Into Running


Three years into its “Lean Forward” re-branding campaign, MSNBC has given new meaning to the catchphrase, leaning forward into running branded content promoting hydraulic fracturing (“fracking).


Looking to beef up its web presence, MSNBC has brought “Lean Forward” online with a new and improved website, calling it a “Platform for the Lean Forward, progressive community.” A key part of funding that platform: running “native advertisements” for America’s Natural Gas Alliance and General Electric.


“General Electric and America’s Natural Gas Alliance are the site’s launch partners,” explained an October 30 MediaPost article.


“GE, the first native ad partner for, will collaborate with MSNBC to deliver a content series that highlights how the ‘Industrial Internet’ and ‘Brilliant Machines Innovation’ are reshaping our world. America’s Natural Gas Alliance will be featured in sponsored polls in the ‘Speak Out’ section of the site centered on natural gas facts.”


GE, former owner of NBC, of which MSNBC is one of its many tentacles, is fully invested in the fossil fuel industry, with assets in fracking, coal, offshore drilling, tar sands, and more. ANGA is the shale gas industry’s lobbying tour de force, both at the federal and state level.


Native advertising – also referred to as “branded content” or “native content” – is quickly replacing banner ads and pop-up ads as the go-to channel of reaching consumers for advertising executives.


“Native content is a digital advertising method in which the advertiser attempts to gain attention by providing content in the context of the user’s experience, matching both the form and function of the environment in which it is placed,” explained a recent MarketingWeek article.


If banner ads and pop-up ads are “overt ads,” then native ads are best described as “covert ads,” akin to the controversial “video news releases” for TV news.


“The tricky bit is to not get too focused on traditional marketing and advertising, to integrate the story so that it feels seamless. There has to be a narrative. It can’t just be putting advertising into the editorial mix because then it feels incongruous,” Matt Elek, Managing Director for VICE Magazine said in a recent interview with MarketingWeek.


“The point of native advertising is that it has to be content because if you end up in someone’s newsfeed and you’re advertising, then it can have the reverse effect of what’s intended, they’ll feel tricked into having blatant advertising messages merged in.”


Federal Trade Commission Hearing on Native Ads


It’s the “feels seamless” part of the native ads experience that has garnered the attention of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).


“[T]he blurring line between editorial and advertising — native ads’ secret sauce — has raised concerns that consumers are being duped. That in turn has caught the eye of the U.S. government,” wrote Ad Age.


On December 4, the FTC will host its first ever workshop on native ads.


“Increasingly, advertisements that more closely resemble the content in which they are embedded are replacing banner advertisements – graphical images that typically are rectangular in shape – on publishers’ websites and mobile applications,” says an FTC press release announcing the workshop.


“The workshop will bring together publishing and advertising industry representatives, consumer advocates, academics, and government regulators to explore changes in how paid messages are presented to consumers and consumers’ recognition and understanding of these messages.”


Advertising industry executives have already expressed concerns rthat egulations could be in the works.


“Part of the fear is that the regulators may ultimately decide that all sponsored content should be labeled because that’s an easy black and white line,” Linda Goldstein, partner and chairwoman for the advertising, marketing and media division at the law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips said in a recent interview with The New York Times.


Fusing Advertising with Editorial Content


MSNBC is far from a lonely native advertising bystander, joined in the hustle by the likes of The Huffington Post, BuzzFeed, The New York Times, Associated Press and others.


A case in point: On September 10, Huffington Post Green ran a native ad article titled, “8 Cities Embracing Natural Gas” sponsored by ANGA.


Iowa View: State has turned into a ‘toilet’ for industrial ag


Iowa View


Oct. 13, 2013   |


BILL LEONARD of Des Moines is a retired Des Moines Register editorial writer. Contact:


It’s time for an Iowa reality check.

Led by the factory-farm lobby, we have all but swept the landscape clean of the Iowa your parents knew, sacrificing the heritage that once truly set Iowa apart. The result stinks — figuratively and literally.

“Family farm” once meant a fruitful homestead built on an ethic of hard work, a love of the land, a spirit of neighborliness and a reverence for nature. Today, “family farm” is a hallowed but hollow buzzword of the political spin doctors and is used to give legitimacy to a lie. It’s the benign image masking land-use practices that, as Iowa environmental writer Bob Watson put it, “have made Iowa a toilet for industrial agriculture.”

It didn’t have to happen. But proper conservation is inconvenient to the short-sighted objectives of industrial farming. Gov. Terry Branstad says we must not put teeth in conservation policies lest we hurt the farm family. A subservient Legislature appropriates another few million of your money for another of the endless studies that take the place of action.

At the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation’s 2013 summer policy conference recently, President Craig Hill said that farmers, “as stewards of the land, [should] take a long, hard look at how we care for two of our most precious resources: soil and water.”

Yes, take a look — and wave it goodbye.

Conservation is every bit as important as Hill makes it sound. But “sound” is all it amounts to, unless we establish and enforce rules that the Farm Bureau solidly blocks.

We’ve had years of voluntary conservation — years of seeing our topsoil disappear, our rivers become poisoned. Our legislators continue to preach and pretend reverence for the family farm while bowing and scraping before the industrial-farm lobby — a small, but very rich, minority of Iowans. When politics is for sale, rich means rule.

Growth, usually synonymous with progress, changed the farm landscape (with the help, some contend, of the agricultural scientists who sought ways to increase profits through economies of size while ignoring ways to improve small-farm efficiency). The idea of 160-acres-and-independence disappeared, replaced by the 2,000-acre spread that swallowed up its neighbors. But conservation is as practical and as important on a 2,000-acre farm as on a quarter-section.

There are, of course, big farm operators who are also dedicated conservationists, doing their best to see that the farm they will pass to the next generation carries the same or more potential than it had when they took over. All of Iowa’s dedicated conservationists should be acknowledged and rewarded.

But the painful reality is that too often, when size becomes paramount, conservation becomes a joke.

How come?

Today, 62 percent of Iowa farmland is farmed by renters. Realistically, they are far less likely to have either the financial or the personal investment in the land and its preservation that the true family farmer had. The land’s owner, likely an urban­ite, may be three or four generations removed from the ethic — or even the knowledge — of conservation.

Meanwhile, the same taxpayers whose water is polluted, whose air is fouled, whose health may be endangered by misuse of antibiotics in livestock, by ag chemicals and manure, pays billions to perpetuate the system. And the biggest payoffs go to the richest few. Nationwide, the largest 10 percent of subsidy recipients get 72 percent of the money.

Besides crop subsidies, there’s the crop-insurance giveaway, which the Cato Institute, a bastion of conservatism, calls a “long-standing ripoff of American taxpayers.”

That’s because the insurance premiums paid by landowners cover just 30 percent of what they collect. You pay 70 percent.

Iowa is second only to Texasin farming the federal treasury. From 1995 to 2012, taxpayers gave Iowa farm owners $24.9 billion, including $16.4 billion in subsidies, $4 billion in crop insurance, $3.9 billion in conservation subsidies and $646 million in disaster relief.

Ten percent of Iowa farms collected 59 percent of the money. Their average payment was 22 times as much as the average given those in the bottom 80 percent. Within that 80 percent are the 19 percent — the little guys — who got nothing.

But hey, we’re a farm state, that’s our livelihood and that’s what Iowa is all about, right? Consider:

Farm work is the principal job of fewer than 5 percent of Iowa’s work force.

In 2010, less than 6 percent of the total of all goods and services produced by Iowans came from farming. Add the billions brought in by ag-related industries, and the share is still less than one-fourth of the total.

But the politicians run the state as if farming was the end-all and be-all of our existence and as if that almighty 10 percent must be accommodated at all cost. Why?

Ask your legislator, particularly if your legislator supports voluntary conservation. Ask if your legislator was part of the huge majority that brought passage of the incredible, unconscionable ag-gag law, making it a crime to blow the whistle on mistreatment of factory-farm animals.

We’re losing our topsoil, our clean water, our respect for our land, our heritage, our reputation. And maybe our common sense.

There’s a way out of the toilet. It means governing to serve the best interests of all, not the handful whom your taxes have made rich.


Bloomberg: Dear NSA, Thanks for Making Us All Insecure

Photograph by Mark Viker/Getty Images

By David Meyer September 06, 2013

Dear stupid, stupid NSA,

I’ve got to hand it to you: As an agency set up with the task of breaking codes and spying on people, you seem to be doing a pretty sterling job.

You and your counterparts in the U.K., Australia, Canada, and New Zealand (and possibly elsewhere) are able to monitor most of the communications flowing around the world. You appear to have successfully subverted the American Web services that everyone uses, and you’ve used the value and size of the U.S. market to bring all manner of Internet backbone providers and hardware vendors on-side too.

Now we also know that you have—in your own words—some capabilities against the encryption in TLS/SSL, HTTPS, SSH, VPNs, VoIP, WEBMAIL, and other network communication technologies. So even if it takes a fair amount of effort (unlike your indiscriminate data-trawling techniques), that’s basic Internet security out the window then. Nicely done.

We’re still pretty sure that strong cryptography [Project XIII uses AES strong encryption] is safe (Edward Snowden said so, and he’s yet to be proven wrong on this stuff), but even there it’s not unreasonable to suspect you can muscle your way in if the situation merits it.

Again, well played, maybe.

However, you’ve not stopped at code breaking—you have also made sure that vulnerabilities have been inserted into commercial encryption systems, IT systems, networks, and endpoint communications devices used by targets.

Here’s where the stupidity creeps in: You actively work to influence policies, standards, and specifications for commercial public key technologies and shape the worldwide commercial cryptography marketplace to make it more tractable to advanced cryptanalytic capabilities being developed by yourself.

In other words, instead of just building a better lock pick, you are trying to make sure that all locks are faulty by design.

What is so jaw-droppingly idiotic about your actions is that you have not only subverted key elements of modern cryptography, but you have also appointed yourself as the guardian of the knowledge that the resulting vulnerabilities exist. And if your own security systems were up to the task, then those secrets wouldn’t be sitting in the offices of the New York Times and ProPublica.
One must possess a Panglossian* view on things to assume that Edward Snowden was the first person out of the many thousands in his position to make away with such material. He brought it to the public, and without that move there’s a good chance you wouldn’t have even known he took it. So who else has it? Bet you have no idea. So well done; you’ve probably put your own citizens at risk.

But let’s ignore that distinct likelihood for a moment, and concentrate on the aftermath of Snowden’s revelations.

If the first tranche of those revelations will hit the U.S. Web services and cloud economy hard—estimates vary as to how hard, and only time will tell—then the crypto scandal is going to do the same to the U.S. security industry. In fact, it’s probably going to hurt more. Most people have too much invested in American Web services to pull out on short notice; it’s relatively trivial in many cases to switch security services.

Of course, the implications aren’t only glum for U.S. firms. There are enough hints in your leaked documents to suggest that you got to some foreign firms, too. And as you seem to have influenced the standards-setting process (sometimes cackhandedly) the global security industry must now think about starting from scratch.

Sadly for you, this time round your influence will be vastly diminished: It’s going to be much harder to insert your demands into the finished product. As far as the rest of the world is concerned, the forum provided by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology will now carry less weight. And because the security industry will now shift to open source—there is no other option if the new standards are to be trusted—installing hidden backdoors will be nearly impossible.

But what’s really going to hurt is the U.S.’s slow loss of control over the Internet itself. As crypto guru Bruce Schneier wrote on Thursday:

I have resisted saying this up to now, and I am saddened to say it, but the U.S. has proved to be an unethical steward of the Internet. The U.K. is no better. The NSA’s actions are legitimizing the Internet abuses by China, Russia, Iran, and others. We need to figure out new means of Internet governance, ones that make it harder for powerful tech countries to monitor everything. For example, we need to demand transparency, oversight, and accountability from our governments and corporations.Unfortunately, this is going to play directly into the hands of totalitarian governments that want to control their country’s Internet for even more extreme forms of surveillance. We need to figure out how to prevent that, too. We need to avoid the mistakes of the International Telecommunications Union, which has become a forum to legitimize bad government behavior, and create truly international governance that can’t be dominated or abused by any one country.

Just because the U.S. invented the Internet doesn’t mean it gets to maintain the level of control it now exercises forever. Particularly when you’ve now forced everyone to think about reengineering it.

Oh, and by the way, whether or not you do succeed in cracking the encryption protecting 4G communications by the end of this financial year, as you have predicted, you can probably expect U.S. influence in international telecommunications standards-setting to take a knock, too.

So in summary, you’ve blown it—and not just for yourselves. Good luck readjusting in the coming years!

Yours etc.,


Editorial Note: IMO, what we’re witnessing with the NSA is just another sign of entropy and self-cannibalization by the system…

Money Laundering Exposed As A Key Component Of The Housing Bubble’s “All Cash” Bid

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/10/2013 18:02 -0400

In August 2012, when isolating one of the various reasons for the latest housing bubble, we suggested that a primary catalyst for the price surge in the ultra-luxury housing segment and the seemingly endless supply of “all cash” buyers (standing at an unprecedented 60% of all buyers lately as reported by Goldman) is a very simple one: crime. Or rather, the use of US real estate as a means to launder illegal offshore-procured money. We also identified the one key permissive feature which allowed this: the National Association of Realtors’ exemption from Anti-Money Laundering provisions. In other words, all a foreign oligarch – who may or may not have used chemical weapons in their past: all depends on how recently they took their picture with the Secretary of State – had to do to buy a $47 million Florida house, was to get the actual cash to the US. Well good thing there are private jets whose cargo is never checked.

This is how we framed the problem last August:

… a foreigner who may or may not have engaged in massive criminal activity and/or dealt with Iran, Afghanistan, or any other bogeyman du jour at some point in their past, and is using US real estate merely as a money-laundering front perhaps? Sadly, we will never know. Why? As explained before, it is all thanks to the National Association of Realtors – those wonderful people who bring you the existing home sales update every month (with a documented upward bias every single time) – which just so happens is the only organization that actively lobbied for and received an exemption from AML regulation compliance. In other words, unlike HSBC, the NAR is untouchable, even if it were to sell a triplex to Ahmedinejad on West 57th street.

As a reminder, here is where the NAR stands on the issue of its most generous clients possibly being some of the worst criminal known to man, courtesy of Elanus Capital:

Many of you reading this will undoubtedly have spent time in an international bank and been forced to sit through countless hours of “know your client” and AML training. Fascinating to note that the National Association of Realtors lobbied for and received a waiver from such regulation. That’s right, realtors actually went to the U.S. government and said: we want to be able to help foreign business oligarchs and other nefarious business people launder money through the real estate markets of the United States – and prevailed.

Here’s their official position:

“NAR supports continued efforts to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism through the regulation of entities using a risk-based analysis. Any risk-based assessment would likely find very little risk of money laundering involving real estate agents or brokers. Regulations that would require real estate agents and brokers to adopt anti-money laundering programs may prove to be burdensome and unnecessary given the existing ML/TF regulations that already apply to United States financial institutions.

Hat’s off to the NAR – that is some serious doublespeak. My translation: We’ll support you as long as we don’t have to support you.

If after skimming the above, readers are still confused what the reason is for the luxury segment of the US housing market continuing to rise in price even as all other segments of the quadruplicate US housing market as explained here languish, we suggest rereading it as many times as necessary.
It appears that a year later this too hypothesis has been proven. Earlier today the Post reported that “U.S. authorities announced Tuesday that they are seeking forfeiture of pricey Manhattan real estate linked to a fraud they say was uncovered by a whistleblowing Russian lawyer before he died behind bars. A civil forfeiture complaint filed against the assets of a Cyprus-based real estate corporation and other holding companies alleges that some of the proceeds from the $230 million tax fraud in Russia were laundered through the purchase of four luxury condominiums located in a Wall Street doorman building and two commercial spaces in prime locations in midtown and Chelsea.”

The lately ubiquitous was quick to take credit:

“Today’s forfeiture action is a significant step toward uncovering and unwinding a complex money-laundering scheme arising from a notorious foreign fraud,” U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said in a statement. “While New York is a world financial capital, it is not a safe haven for criminals seeking to hide their loot, no matter how and where their fraud took place.”

Oh but it is because quite simply nobody cares where the money comes from, the NAR is exempt from doing even the most cursory background check, and as long as the prevailing average home price rises, everyone is happy.

What is curious is where the source of the info came from:

The whistleblower, Sergei Magnitsky, was a lawyer for U.S.-born British investor William Browder. He alleged in 2008 that organized criminals colluded with corrupt Russian Interior Ministry officials to claim a fraudulent $230 million tax rebate after illegally seizing subsidiaries of Browder’s Hermitage Capital investment company.

He subsequently was arrested on tax evasion charges and died in prison in November 2009 of untreated pancreatitis at age 37. His death prompted widespread criticism from human rights activists, and the Russian presidential human rights council found in 2011 that he had been beaten and deliberately denied medical treatment.

Browder, who has campaigned to bring those responsible for Magnitsky’s death to justice, has claimed that one of the corrupt tax officials bought luxury real estate in Moscow, Dubai and Montenegro and wired money through her husband’s bank accounts worth $39 million.

That this is the first of many such money laundering schemes to be exposed is obvious to anyone. With the recent witchhunt of Russian, and other billionaires, in Europe following the Cyprus debacle, it is only logical that the vast majority parked their cash in what until now, was the last safe use of illicit funds: US real estate, where the policy don’t ask, don’t tell is more alive now than ever, and has spawned countless HGTV (and CNBC) shows highlighting the resurgent New York City (and other high end cities’) housing market.

The bigger question is just how far will Bharara take this, and comparable such future actions. And more importantly, how will the panicked NAR lobby respond if suddenly a key source of “all cash, sight unseen” buyers disappears. Finally, if indeed money laundering is no longer possible into US real estate, kiss yet another of the several key spokes (alongside foreclosure stuffing, the private equity REO-to-Rent investment wave and the Emerging Market capital flow crisis) of the artificial housing recovery goodbye. Why?

Apartments in the luxury 35-story Manhattan high-rise can sell for more than $3 million, according to real estate websites. Amenities include a gym, a pool and rooftop deck.

Now take this single example and multiple by hundreds and thousands of times.