Wendy Williams only joined FAINT CLUB-Here’s 100 more FAINTING PEOPLE on Live TV PT1


 

Note: Synthetic humans, is there evidence this technology is real? Good question. From my unique room with a view, this is outstanding sleuthing on behalf of AC, eye opening indeed. I first heard of synthetic humans from a Project Camelot whistleblower back in 2010-11’ish. It appears Hollywood and Washington DC have been utilizing this technology extensively for some time now. Very interesting clips showing a pattern of fainting at presidential political rally’s and the reaction from the podium is virtually identical with almost every incident.

I’ve fainted a couple of times at the sight of blood and it looked nothing like that, it was always a ‘somewhat’ smooth, quick collapse to the ground. Nothing jerky, no stumbling and the ability to grasp objects slipped out of my hands. Afterward it took at least a few minutes to come back to full consciousness and functionality. Injoy!

Blessings!

Wendy Williams only JOINED “FAINT CLUB” (she didn’t START it). I’ve compiled over 200 examples of PEOPLE FAINTING for REAL, and this is Part 1 Of at least a 2-part series on this bizarre subject…. It gets weird, though. It’s okay if you don’t feel compelled to look too deeply into this one, as it is the darkest part of what has been done to the most influential people throughout time by the evil faction I like to call the “Quantum Infiltration.”

CHECK OUT MY FRIEND MANDELA EFFECT COMEDY’s YouTube channel!! Link: https://www.youtube.com/user/influent… Also check out my friend youlittlerocket’s video on Dr. Peter Beter: https://youtu.be/nc0m5UMPwtU

Thank you for watchin’, and ❤️ MUCH LOVE TO YOU! ❤️ As always, feel Free to LIKE, COMMENT, SUBSCRIBE & SHARE! Want more AC? Become a Patreon Supporter toady & get EXCLUSIVE ACCESS to BONUS FOOTAGE, VIP LIVE CASTS & MORE! http://patreon.com/affectedcollective

Advertisements

Oliver Stone’s “The Putin Interviews” reveals vulnerable side of the Russian president ~ SOTT.net


Before we stumble into a nuclear war and end life on the planet, the American people might want to watch Oliver Stone’s four-part series of interviews with Russian President Vladimir Putin on “Showtime.” Stone accomplishes what Western journalists should do but don’t, by penetrating deeply into the personality of this historic figure.

Director Oliver Stone interviewing Russian President Vladimir Putin for Showtime’s “The Putin Interviews.”

Typically these days, American TV news personalities use interviews with a demonized foreign leader, like Putin, to demonstrate their own “toughness” on air, hurling insulting questions at the target and pretending that this preening behavior proves their courage.

In reality, it is bad journalism for a wide variety of reasons: The interview subject will normally retreat into canned talking points, so nothing is really learned; the TV viewer will get to see some theatrics but no insights into what makes the foreign leader tick; and – most importantly – chances of going to war with the despised leader’s country increase.

Yet, it’s not all bad: the “confrontation” will boost the career prospects of the self-aggrandizing “journalist” who will add the highlights of the insult-fest to his or her video résumé.

Stone does something quite different and, in today’s modern world, quite remarkable. As you go deeper into the four segments of “The Putin Interviews,” you begin to realize that Stone, the award-winning movie director, is using his directorial skills to peel back the layers of self-consciousness that can inhibit an actor from reaching his or her full potential, but, in this case, Stone is using those same techniques to get Putin to reveal more of his true self.

By coming across as unthreatening and personable – almost like the TV detective Columbo – Stone strips away many of Putin’s defenses, creating a dynamic in which the Russian president struggles between his characteristic cautiousness and a willingness to be more candid.

Putin seems to like Stone while sensing that Stone is playing him. In one of the early interviews, in July 2015, Stone asks Putin about the “ambiguity” of Josef Stalin’s legacy, obviously a sensitive and complex question for a Russian who may admire Stalin’s determination during World War II but abhor Stalin’s excesses in annihilating political enemies.

“I think you are a cunning person,” Putin tells Stone.

Stone Directs Putin

At the start of a late interview in February 2017, Stone even acts like a director, dispatching Putin down a hallway so his entrance can be more dramatically filmed. “Pretend we haven’t seen each other in months,” Stone tells Putin.

After Putin has retreated down the hallway, Stone yells, “Action! Action!” but when nothing happens, he tells the official interpreter, “Tell him ‘action’ in Russian.”

Then, after more delay, Stone seeks out his assistant director: “Where’s my A.D.? Come on! Where’s my A.D.?” before worrying that maybe Putin “went into another meeting.”

But Putin finally strolls down the hallway, carrying two cups of coffee, offering one to Stone in English, “Coffee, sir?”

Yet, perhaps the climatic scene in this tension between “director” and “actor” comes at the end of the four-part series when Putin seems to recognize that Stone may have gotten the better of him in this friendly competition spread out in conversations from July 2015 to February 2017.

After finishing what was meant to be the last interview (though a later one was tacked on), Putin turns to Stone and voices concern for the risks that the director is taking by undertaking this series of interviews which Putin knows – because the interviews are not openly antagonistic to Putin – will draw a hostile reaction from the mainstream U.S. media.

At that moment, the roles get reversed. Putin, the wary subject of Stone’s interviews, is being solicitous of Stone, throwing the director off-balance.

“Thank you for your time and your questions,” Putin tells Stone. “Thank you for being so thorough.” Putin then adds: “Have you ever been beaten?”

Caught off guard, Stone replies: “Beaten? Oh, yes.”

Putin: “So it’s not going to be something new, because you are going to suffer for what you are doing.

Stone: “Oh, sure, yeah. I know but it’s worth it if it brings some more peace and cautiousness to the world.”

Putin: “Thank you.”

What the savvy Putin understands is that Stone will face recriminations in the United States for treating the Russian president with any degree of respect and empathy.

In modern America – the so-called “land of the free, home of the brave” – a new media paradigm has taken hold, in which only the official U.S. side of a story can be told; any suggestion that there might be another side of the Russia story, for instance, makes you a “Putin apologist,” a “Moscow stooge” or a disseminator of “propaganda” and “fake news.”

Harsh Reviews

And Putin was not mistaken. The early mainstream media’s reaction to Stone’s interview series has concentrated on attacking Stone for not being tougher on Putin, just as Putin expected.

For instance, The New York Times headlines its review in its print editions, “Letting Vladimir Putin Talk, Unchallenged,” and begins with a swipe at Stone for his “well-established revisionist views on American history and institutions.” Stone is also mocked for questioning the current elite groupthink that Russia helped make “Donald J. Trump president of the United States.”

The Washington Post column by Ann Hornaday was even snarkier, entitled in print editions: “Stone drops cred to give a Russian bear hug.” Although only seeing the first two segments of the four-part series, Hornaday clearly wanted Stone to perform one of those self-righteous confrontations, like all the “star journalists” do, beating their breasts and repeating the usual litany of unsubstantiated charges against Putin that pervade the major U.S. media.

Hornaday writes: “But what might have once promised to be an explosive on-screen matching-of-wits instead arrives just in time to be colossally irrelevant: an erstwhile scoop made instantly negligible by the breaking news it’s been engulfed by, and the imaginative and ideological limits of its director.”

Comment: One can easily see how US journalism itself has become ‘engulfed by the imaginative and ideological limits of their directors’. There are no mainstream outlets that challenge the official narratives on foreign policy, particularly with regard to Russia or Syria. There is no in-depth analysis uncovering the mechanisms at play, no diverse panels, and very limited informed discussion or even debate on such issues. Put simply, The NYT and Wapo doth protest too much.

The truth, however, is that Stone asks pretty much all the tough questions that one would pose to Putin and succeeds in drawing Putin out from his protective shell. In so doing, Stone sheds more light on the potentially existential conflict between the two nuclear-armed superpowers than anything else that I have seen.

While the series makes some genuine news, it also allows Putin to explain his thinking regarding some of the key controversies that have stoked the New Cold War, including his reaction to the Ukraine crisis. While Putin has offered these explanations before, they will be news to many Americans because Putin’s side of the story has been essentially blacked out by the major U.S. newspapers and networks.

A Vulnerable Character

Personally, I came away from watching “The Putin Interviews” both more and less impressed with the Russian leader. What I saw was a more vulnerable personality than I had expected, but I was impressed by Putin’s grasp of global issues, including a sophisticated understanding of American power.

Putin surely does not appear to be the diabolical monster that current American propaganda presents, which may be the greatest accomplishment of Stone’s series, revealing Putin as a multi-dimensional and complex figure. You may go into the series expecting a cartoonish villain, but that is not what you’ll find.

Putin comes across as a politician and bureaucrat who found himself, somewhat unwittingly and unwillingly, thrust into a historical role at an extraordinarily challenging time for Russia.

In the 1990s, Russians were reeling from the devastating impact of U.S.-prescribed economic “shock therapy” after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The nation’s riches were sold off to well-connected thieves who became known as the “oligarchs,” overnight billionaires who used their riches to gain control of the political and media levers of power. Meanwhile, average Russians fell into poverty and saw their life expectancy drop at unparalleled rates for a country not at war.

Boris Yeltsin, the Russian Federation’s first president and a corrupt drunkard who was kept in power by American manipulation of the 1996 Russian election, picked Putin, a former KGB intelligence officer and security bureaucrat, to be his prime minister in August 1999.

To Stone, Putin explains his hesitancy to accept the promotion: “When Yeltsin offered me the job for the first time, I refused. … He invited me into his office and told me he wanted to appoint me Prime Minister, and that he wanted me to run for President. I told him that was a great responsibility, and that meant I would have to change my life, and I wasn’t sure I wanted to do that. …

“It’s one thing when you are a bureaucrat, even a high-level one, you can almost live an ordinary life. You can see your friends, go to the cinema and the theater, and not assume personal responsibility for the fate of millions of people and for everything that is going on in the country. And to assume responsibility for Russia back then was a very difficult thing to do.”

Family Fears

Putin continues: “Frankly speaking, I didn’t know what President Yeltsin’s final plans were with regard to me. And I didn’t know how long I would be there. Because at any moment the President could tell me, ‘You are fired.’ And there was only one thing I was thinking about, ‘Where to hide my children?’ …

“Just imagine, if I were dismissed, I didn’t have any bodyguards. Nothing. And what would I do? How would I live? How would I secure my family? And back then I decided if that was my fate, then I had to go to the end. And I didn’t know beforehand that I would become President. There were no guarantees of that.”

However, at the dawn of the new Millennium, Yeltsin surprisingly announced his resignation, making Putin his heir apparent. It was a time of extraordinary crisis for Russia and Russians.

When Stone compares the challenges that President Ronald Reagan faced in the 1980s to those that Putin confronted when he took power in 2000, Putin replied, with classic Russia whimsy, “Almost being broke and actually being broke are two entirely different things.”

Once assuming office, however, Putin set about reining in many of the oligarchs and rebuilding the Russian economy and social safety net. His success in achieving an economic turnaround and a marked improvement in the social metrics explain much of his enduring popularity with the Russian people.

But Putin does not come off as a natural politician. When you see Putin up close for the several hours of these interviews, you can’t miss his unease in the spotlight, a tight control, even a shyness. Yet, there is a winning quality from that vulnerability which seems to have further endeared him to the Russian people.

Compared to many Western politicians, Putin also has retained a common touch. One scene shows Stone interviewing Putin as the Russian president drives his own car, something you would never see an American president doing.

Putin also takes Stone along for a hockey match in which the now 64-year-old Putin dons a uniform and laces up skates for a wobbly performance on the ice. By his own admission, he just began skating a few years earlier and he takes a couple of falls or stumbles. Putin doesn’t come across as the all-powerful autocrat of U.S. propaganda.

At the end of part two of “The Putin Interviews,” Stone even gets Putin to watch Stanley Kubrick’s 1964 Cold War classic “Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb,” a very dark comedy about the U.S. and the Soviet Union bumbling into a nuclear conflagration, a film that Putin hadn’t seen before.

After watching the movie with Stone, Putin reflects on its enduring message. “The thing is that since that time little has changed,” Putin says. “The only difference is that the modern weapon systems have become more sophisticated, more complex. But this idea of retaliatory weapons, and the inability to control such weapon systems still hold true to this day. It has become even more difficult, more dangerous.”

Stone then gives Putin the movie’s DVD case, which Putin carries into an adjoining office before realizing that it is empty. He reemerges, holding the empty case with the quip, “Typical American gift.” An aide then rushes up to hand him the DVD.

Comment: Putin is extending a hand to the American people, sharing an intimate and sincere understanding of his experiences, challenges and motivations. Many in the West have largely accepted the over-simplistic US caricature of Putin as an ‘evil dictator’. Stone’s documentary offers quite a different picture, for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

Congress gives Native American lands to foreign mining company with new NDAA


Ed Note: The desecration, pillaging and plundering of sacred lands MUST stop NOW!  I ask my fellow global citizens to unite behind the Apache, along with tribes in Alaska and Washington to protect and preserve these lands for future generations, just as we did for the supporters of Mauna Kea when the TMT threat our sacred mountain on the Big Island.

Further destruction of ancient, sacred lands ON ANY CONTINENT is ABSOLUTELY UN-ACCEPTABLE. I REMOVE ANY IMPLIED OR TACIT CONSENT OF THE DESTRUCTION OF NATIVE SACRED LANDS FROM THE SYSTEM OF DOMINATION AND CONTROL…AND SO IT IS!

Please share…Mahalo!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Reuters/Gary Cameron
Congress is poised to give a foreign mining company 2,400 acres of national forest in Arizona that is cherished ancestral homeland to Apache natives. Controversially, the measure is attached to annual legislation that funds the US Defense Department.

This week, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees quietly attached a provision to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would mandate the handover of a large tract of Tonto National Forest to Resolution Copper, a subsidiary of the Australian-English mining company Rio Tinto, which co-owns with Iran a uranium mine in Africa and which is 10-percent-owned by China.

The “Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘Buck’ McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015” – named after the retiring chairmen of the Senate and House Armed Services panels – includes the giveaway of Apache burial, medicinal, and ceremonial grounds currently within the bounds of Tonto. News of the land provision was kept under wraps until late Tuesday, when the bill was finally posted online.

The land proposed to be given to Resolution Copper, in exchange for other lands, includes prime territory Apaches have used for centuries to gather medicinal plants and acorns, and it is near a spot known as Apache Leap, a summit that Apaches jumped from to avoid being killed by settlers in the late 19th century.

Lands included in the plan will stop 1,500 feet short of Apache Leap and will not initially include an area known as Oak Flats, though, when it comes to the oaks, contradictory legal parameters are but a minor hurdle for a company like Resolution Copper to eventually drill there.

The House may vote on the NDAA as soon as this week with rules included that would bar the Senate from amending the legislation. On Wednesday night, a last-minute effort to strip the land provision from the NDAA failed in the House Rules Committee, which voted to give one hour for debate over the NDAA in the House.

Terry Rambler, chairman of the San Carlos Apache Tribe, told The Huffington Post he was saddened by news of the proposal, yet not all that surprised.

Senator John McCain.(Reuters / Joshua Roberts )

“Of all people, Apaches and Indians should understand, because we’ve gone through this so many times in our history,” Rambler said.

“The first thing I thought about was not really today, but 50 years from now, probably after my time, if this land exchange bill goes through, the effects that my children and children’s children will be dealing with,” Rambler added.

“Since time immemorial people have gone there. That’s part of our ancestral homeland,” Rambler said. “We’ve had dancers in that area forever – sunrise dancers – and coming-of-age ceremonies for our young girls that become women. They’ll seal that off. They’ll seal us off from the acorn grounds, and the medicinal plants in the area, and our prayer areas.”

Arizona Sen. John McCain was instrumental in adding to the NDAA the land deal that had been pursued by Rio Tinto for a decade, according to HuffPo. Some in Congress were reportedly concerned with the deal, but it ultimately materialized thanks to economic assurances. Rio Tinto claims mining in Tonto will generate $61 billion in economic activity and 3,700 direct and indirect jobs over 40 years.

Rambler said whether Rio Tinto’s economic assertions are true or not, it may not matter.

“It seems like us Apaches and other Indians care more about what this type of action does to the environment and the effects it leaves behind for us, while others tend to think more about today and the promise of jobs, but not necessarily what our creator God gave to us,” he said.

Rambler said he was particularly concerned with long-term ramifications, including the company’s intent to use “block cave” mining, which means digging under the ore, causing it to collapse.

“What those mountains mean to us is that when the rain and the snow comes, it distributes it to us,” Rambler said. “It replenishes our aquifers to give us life.”

Resolution Copper has said its mining plan for the area has been filed with the National Forest Service and that it will comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that supposedly protects federal lands.

AFP Photo / Jeff Topping

But Rambler said NEPA is no match for Resolution Copper’s intent.

“This is what will happen – the law in one area says there will be consultation, but the law in another area of the bill says the land exchange will happen within one year of enactment of this bill,” Rambler said. “So no matter what we’re doing within that one year, the consultation part won’t mean anything after one year. Because then it’s really theirs after that.”

Basically, NEPA will only protect lands that remain in federal hands. The rest is fair game, according to federal law.

“We would only have to do NEPA on any activity that would take place on remaining federal land,” said Arizona Bureau of Land Management official Carrie Templin.

The 2015 NDAA contains other land deals, including one that would subject 70,000 acres of Tongass National Forest in Alaska to logging and another provision that would give 1,600 acres from the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State for purposes of industrial development, a plan that has spurred tribal protest.

Gold-Backed Ruble, Yuan to Trigger Global De-Dollarization


17:22 05.12.201

A gold-backed ruble and gold-backed yuan could start a ‘snowball exit’ from dollar F. William Engdahl notes, adding that it will diminish America’s ability to use the reserve dollar role to finance Washington’s perpetual overseas wars.

The irony of the situation is that the central banks of China, Russia, Brazil and other countries “diametrically opposed” to US foreign policy course are forced to stockpile dollars in the form of “safe” US Treasury debt in order to protect their economies, American-German researcher, historian and strategic risk consultant F. William Engdahl stresses.The truth of the matter is that the role of the US dollar as the world’s major reserve currency is the countries’ economic Achilles Heel, the strategic risk consultant elaborates.

At the same time, by buying US Treasury debt in dollars, they are de facto financing Washington’s “endless” overseas military operations.

Fortunately, “[t]hat’s quietly changing. In 2014 Russia and China signed two mammoth 30-year contracts for Russian gas to China. The contracts specified that the exchange would be done in Renminbi [yuan] and Russian rubles, not in dollars. That was the beginning of an accelerating process of de-dollarization that is underway today,” Engdahl writes in his article for New Eastern Outlook.

The researcher points out that on November 27 Russia’s Central Bank reported that it has included the Chinese Renminbi (yuan) into its official reserves for the first time.Furthermore, in August 2015 Russian currency traders bought almost 18 billion yuan and only 3 billion US dollars. It is obvious that Russia is gradually increasing the use of the yuan in Russian financial markets, substituting it for the US dollar.

“But the actions of Russia and China to replace the dollar as mediating currency in their mutual trade, a trade whose volume has grown significantly since US and EU sanctions in March 2014, are not the end of it,” the researcher remarks.

According to Engdahl, there are clear signs showing that gold “is about to make dramatic return to the world monetary stage.”

And it’s not all good news for Washington.

While it is believed that the US Federal Reserve holds about 8,133 tons of gold, the rumors circulated that things are not what they seem and “the gold chamber of Fort Knox” are nearly empty, Engdahl narrates.

Adding more fuel to the fire are doubts surrounding US’ official gold statistics, a strange event occurred in 2012.

“In 2012 the German Government asked the Federal Reserve to return German central bank gold ‘held in custody’ for the Bundesbank by the Fed. Shocking the world, the US central bank refused to give Germany her gold back, using the flimsy excuse that the Federal Reserve ‘could not differentiate German gold bars from US ones…’ Perhaps we are to believe the auditors of US Federal Reserve gold were laid off in the US budget cuts?” the researcher asks.

Engdahl remarks, that Germany is considered the second-largest gold holder with its reserves of 3,381 tons of golden ingots.Meanwhile, Moscow and Beijing are boosting their gold holdings steadily.

Engdahl emphasizes that from January 2013 Russia’s official gold reserves increased by 129 percent to 1,352 tons as of September 30, 2015, adding that during “the dark Yeltsin years” of the 1990s Russia’s golden vaults contain only 343 tons.

“Russia now holds as many ounces of gold as the gold exchange-traded funds (ETFs) do,” he stresses.

According to the researcher, Russia and China are decisively paving the way for the world economy de-dollarization.

“A Russian-Chinese alternative to the dollar in the form of a gold-backed ruble and gold-backed Renminbi or yuan, could start a snowball exit from the US dollar, and with it, a severe decline in America’s ability to use the reserve dollar role to finance her wars with other peoples’ money,” Engdahl concludes.

http://sputniknews.com/politics/20151205/1031294555/gold-ruble-yuan-global-dedolarization.html#ixzz3tTdTFhlb

A Political Earthquake and No One Covered it! ~ Thom Hartman


Note: Even tho I left American politics behind when I “woke-up”,  I’m compelled watching Bernie Sanders get crowds of 10,000 people as mass media continues to ignore his gaining popularity. At this stage of the game I believe Sanders is the best candidate, but the only caveat is every president since Kennedy has been highly controlled with MKUltra mind control technology’s. Immediately after taking oath they ALL get compromised and begin changing their tune.

There are photos online of Pres. Obama with a fresh scar on the back of his head,  insiders knowledgeable in mind control techniques claim that’s when he was “implanted” so he could be controlled.  Is it true, your guess is as good as mine.

That said, with Bernie throwing his hat in the game it’s surely going to be an interesting election year….lets hope he wins. With any luck, by then maybe some of the “controls” will have been removed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thom Hartmann says Bernie Sanders made history in Wisconsin last night, but the mainstream news networks weren’t there to cover it.

If you liked this clip of The Thom Hartmann Program, please do us a big favor and share it with your friends… and hit that “like” button!

http://www.thomhartmann.com
Follow Us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/thom_hartmann

Subscribe to The Thom Hartmann Program for more: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c…

 

 

Billionaire: ‘Wake Up My Fellow Billionaires, There Are Pitchforks In Our Future’


Nick Hanauer is one of the richest men in America, and he’s written a compelling letter to all the other super rich people out there about the state of America’s income inequality, which was published in Politico. You might think he’s writing to all his rich friends to warn them about Democrats talking more and more about wealth redistribution, or about U.N. initiatives to prevent privatizing things like fresh water. You might think he’s one of the people behind calls to start making plans to go hide in New Zealand. This letter could read like that, if you don’t read the whole thing, but it turns out, he’s a rich person who gets it.

Rich people aren’t always the best, brightest, hardest workers

Hanauer starts off his “memo” talking about how he got super rich. Then he says:

But let’s speak frankly to each other. I’m not the smartest guy you’ve ever met, or the hardest-working. I was a mediocre student. I’m not technical at all—I can’t write a word of code.

Right off the bat, he acknowledges that not all the super rich got that way through the sweat of their brow, or because they were unusually intelligent. Yet we hear all the time from Republicans that higher taxes on the rich punishes people for hard work – the backbone of American culture. They never talk about the real backbone of America, which is the middle class, and how they’re punished not just by policy, but also by the super rich.

What’s in store for the super rich, if things keep going the way they are?

Hanauer believes that what sets him apart from others is his ability to see the future. That enables him to know what risks to take, and when, and he profits off them. What does he see for the future of the super rich? He said:

I see pitchforks.

There are pitchforks, and possibly torches, because while he and his super rich friends are “thriving beyond the dreams of any plutocrats in history,” the other 99.99 percent of America is struggling. The French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, even Arab Spring, had their roots in extreme inequality of one type or another. Hanauer warns his friends:

I know you fellow .01%ers tend to dismiss this kind of argument; I’ve had many of you tell me to my face I’m completely bonkers. And yes, I know there are many of you who are convinced that because you saw a poor kid with an iPhone that one time, inequality is a fiction.

Here’s what I say to you: You’re living in a dream world. What everyone wants to believe is that when things reach a tipping point and go from being merely crappy for the masses to dangerous and socially destabilizing, that we’re somehow going to know about that shift ahead of time.

He goes on to say that “revolutions, like bankruptcies, come gradually, and then suddenly.” He’s right, too. One moment it’s a few disaffected people, with movements that seem to fizzle. That can go on for years, like what’s happened to the Occupy movement, and what people believe will happen to the movements wrought from Ferguson and Baltimore. But then the masses are increasingly disaffected, and increasingly angry about having no voice. When they figure out how to find that voice, they will take it, quickly, painfully, and violently if they have to. History has bore this out repeatedly.

What should we do? What should the rich do, besides run away?

In the face of this, what does Hanauer recommend we do? Is he really, quietly recommending that all the rich people get the hell out of Dodge so they don’t have to face the consequences? No, actually he’s not. He wants us to adjust our policies so they’re more favorable to everybody, not a select, rich few. He says:

The model for us rich guys here should be Henry Ford, who realized that all his autoworkers in Michigan weren’t only cheap labor to be exploited; they were consumers, too. Ford figured that if he raised their wages, to a then-exorbitant $5 a day, they’d be able to afford his Model Ts.

What a great idea. My suggestion to you is: Let’s do it all over again. We’ve got to try something. These idiotic trickle-down policies are destroying my customer base. And yours too. [emphasis mine]

He also points out one salient fact that those who tout labor costs as a market price subject to the laws of supply and demand tend to ignore: Pay for CEOs, hedge fund managers and other investment banker-types, and people in those sectors has skyrocketed, and yet, we have more of them, not less. If rising wages and salaries mean less employment, then why do we have so many more of these people than we used to?

Guess the “fact” that rising wages means less employment only applies to the unwashed masses, and not the super rich in their ivory towers. The unwashed masses, he says, are the engine of the economy, not the super rich. Yet, the Republican-pushed trickle-down theory would have us believe that the rich getting richer is good, while the poor getting any richer at all will destroy us. It’s flat-out wrong, and Hanauer knows it. More of the super-rich need to know it, too, and stop lobbying Congress to shrink government by letting the “free market” work, and gutting the social safety net.

Republican cries for shrinking government would be part of a sound solution, if they were interested in shrinking it the right way.

How does the size of the government fit into Hanauer’s ideas? Do we need more, or less, or is the current size good? Republicans want to shrink the government, and he actually agrees. Before you burn him at the stake as a sham, though, consider this: He says you shrink the government the way you shrink an industry – by reducing demand for it. Why do we have so much government that the Republicans hate? Because we have so much need for it, but all that demand is not going to the right places. Therefore, calls to shrink it are not going to the right place, either. Hanauer says:

The only way to slash government for real is to go back to basic economic principles: You have to reduce the demand for government. If people are getting $15 an hour or more, they don’t need food stamps. They don’t need rent assistance. They don’t need you and me to pay for their medical care. If the consumer middle class is back, buying and shopping, then it stands to reason you won’t need as large a welfare state. And at the same time, revenues from payroll and sales taxes would rise, reducing the deficit. [emphasis mine]

He does blast Democrats for pushing the message that we need to treat workers better because we feel sorry for them. He’s right when he says that doesn’t help the conversation. What can help convince the plutocrats to give it a rest is looking at it from business and economic standpoints. The proper standpoints are correctly defining who creates the jobs, and who boosts the profit margins, around here. It’s not the rich. It’s the middle class.

Hanauer’s warning to other greedy billionaires:

Hanauer says, to his super rich friends: “Capitalism left unchecked tends toward concentration and collapse.” Unchecked, unfettered capitalism, this idea that the so-called “free market” can take care of everything if we’d just let it, is catapulting us toward ruin, not prosperity.

The super rich, and their Congressional Republican friends, would do well to learn this, and learn it soon. Or, as Hanauer puts it, “We could sit back, do nothing, enjoy our yachts. And wait for the pitchforks.” What he didn’t say is, “Your choice.”

You can watch his TED Talk here:


 

Featured image via YouTube screen capture

Source: http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/…/billionaire-wake-up-my-fell…/

The Corporate Conspiracy that Killed Industrial Hemp 3-types-cannabis2


Geezzz, our forefathers sure took one heckuva bamboozling…

by Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall

 

The farm bill Obama signed in February 2014 included an amendment to legalize industrial hemp production for research purposes. The amendment allows State Agriculture Departments, colleges and universities to grow hemp (defined as the non-drug oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis) for academic or agricultural research purposes. However it only applies only to states where industrial hemp farming is already legal under state law.

As of September 15, 2014, nineteen states had passed laws to provide for hemp pilot studies and/or for production as described by the Farm Bill stipulations.

Six states (Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Tennessee and South Carolina) have gone even further, with legislation nullifying the longstanding federal ban on hemp cultivation. All six states allow farmers to produce hemp for the commercial market.  A year ago, the Obama Justice Department quietly signaled that they wouldn’t prosecute marijuana use in states that had legalized the drug for recreational and/or medical use. Thus far the same hands-off policy seems to apply to states that have legalized hemp production.

The Fiber Modern Synthetics  Replaced

Hemp cultivation is big business. Even though it hasn’t been grown in the United States for decades, America is one of the fastest-growing hemp markets.  In 2011, the U.S. imported $11.5 million worth of legal hemp products (mainly from China), up from $1.4 million in 2000. With the recent anti-smoking movement and declining tobacco exports, hemp is high on the list replacement crops for tobacco farmers.

Industrial hemp is one of the most versatile plants known to man. Hemp fiber is used in the production of paper, textiles, rope, sails, clothing, plastics, insulation, dry wall, fiber board and other construction materials; while hempseed oil is used as a lubricant and base for paints and varnishes, as well as in cooking and beauty products.

Hemp: Proven Alternative to Petroleum-Based Synthetics

hemp

Hemp-based paper, textiles, rope, construction materials and plastics are the tried and true low tech alternative to modern synthetics that consume large quantities of fossil fuel during manufacture. Prior to the industrial revolution, the vast majority of textiles, clothing, canvas (the Dutch word for cannabis), rope and paper was made of hemp.

Before the invention of the cotton gin in the 1820s, 80% of the world’s textiles, fabrics, and clothing were made of hemp. During the nineteenth century, hemp was the main ingredient of 75% of the world’s paper. Until the US government passed a crippling hemp tax in 1937, most bank notes and archival papers were made of hemp (owing to its greater durability) and most paints and varnishes were made from hemp seed oil.

The Conspiracy to Kill Hemp Production

Hemp first began losing ground in 1850 to cheaper substitutes made of cotton, jute and sisal. Prior to 1917, hemp had to be processed by hand, involving huge labor costs incompatible with mass commercial production. After George W Schlicten automated hemp processing in 1917 with a new machine called the hemp decorticator, Henry Ford set up the first biomass fuel production plant in Iron Mountain Michigan. His intention was to run his Model T on hemp-based ethanol.

ford_quote_about_use_of_hemp_product_smart_marijuana_use

All this was happening at the precise moment that the munitions company DuPont was patenting synthetic fibers (nylon, rayon, Dacron, etc) and plastics derived from petroleum. Hemp posed a major threat to DuPont’s ability to market these synthetic fibers for fabrics, rope and other products because hemp was so cheap and readily available. The chemical giant also had a commercial interest in replacing hemp-based paper with paper produced from wood chips (they held the patent on the sulfates and sulfites used to produce paper pulp) and in replacing ethanol with gasoline as the major fuel source in automobiles (they held the patent on tetraethyl lead, which allowed gasoline to burn more smoothly in the internal combustion engine Ford designed to run on ethanol).

The main co-conspirators in the plot to kill hemp included DuPont, William Randolph Hearst (who owned a logging company and a paper manufacturing plant) and Andrew Mellon, president of Mellon Bank and DuPont’s major financier.

In 1930, Mellon, as US Secretary of the Treasury, created the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and appointed his nephew Henry Anslinger to run it. Between 1935 and 1937, Anslinger and a handful of DuPont’s cronies in Congress secretly wrote a bill to tax hemp production.

Meanwhile Anslinger and Hearst orchestrated a massive media campaign demonizing a dangerous new drug called marihuana that supposedly turned Mexicans and black jazz musicians into crazed killers. Anslinger and his cronies rushed through the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 on a Friday afternoon before any lawmakers had a chance to read it. Only a handful realized the crippling effect the new law, which would also tax hemp, would have on the hemp industry.

In 1970 the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act was declared unconstitutional and replaced with the Controlled Substances Act. The latter official equated hemp with the drug marijuana (even though they come from very different plants*) and enacted an official prohibition against hemp cultivation.


*Industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa, variety sativa) is a tall, skinny plant with few major branches below the primary branches at the top. It has seven long thin leaflets and is grown in rows a foot apart. It produces good quality fiber and has a tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration of 1% or less. Marijuana plants (Cannabis sativa, variety indica), in contrast, are short and bushy and must be spaced six feet apart for optimum growth. They have five leaflets, with three of them nearly twice the width of hemp leaflets. They produce negligible usable fiber and have a THC concentration of 4-20%. See image above.

photo credit: arbyreed via photopin cc

Bookmark and Share

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=324015

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners and technicians. Legal Notice

Posted by on Oct 5 2014, With 872 Reads, Filed under Business, Corruption, Economy, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging iscurrently not allowed.

COMMENTS

To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.
Don’t have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment PolicyFeedback

4 Comments for “Politics of Hemp”

  1. Bravo Dr Bramhall! This is a good beginning on the lords of chaos. The same formula is used today. There is no need for the fertilizer industry and the environmental damage can be seen acrossed the Southwest (ie dustbowl) and Midwest up into Northeast and all the way to the West and all the river systems that have been compromised. So who is naive enough to not understand what fracking is really all about?

  2. One by one Dr. you are exposing these icons of industry, these people that the Jewish media would have us believe built America, for just what they are; conniving and simpering profiteers who should have been dragged into the streets and beaten to death with sticks with the first crash of the stock market. oh well better late than never.

  3. nice summary, Jeanne, and timely. Hearst used his newspaper interests to further the cause of his buddies in the logging industry. that period, including the madness of prohibition Amerika, deserves much closer study because it is highly relevant to the present. the propaganda of the time, particularly the film Reefer Madness (not recommended on the grounds of artistic merit) makes a great case-study in the vast resources the wealthy megalomaniacs are willing to devote to mind-kontrolling the masses so they can have their evil way regardless of Nature, God, or the Future of Humanity. the more one learns of Henry Ford the more he appears a neglected treasure. one senses he stands in the same relation to capitalism as does Ron Paul
    read more …

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

 

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Join Our Daily Newsletter

http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/N3262.TribalFusion/B8202117.111880864;sz=300×250;kw=url_encoded_publisher_data;click=http://a.tribalfusion.com/h.click/atmRoPUV352Uuqmd6tXTeM2H3CQsMC2mQJotTmTdQ9XFv7XFB90aipSbYETFJSWW33nbjpRUBtYTMp5TUk2qr1nEFHXbYgWHrWoAUBnVjnmHnJ3Er82dmM56vZcmbbZc0VrTXGvV0GZbpmqBP3UYVTF7FWm73QTvQQVZbsStBsYtBpWPQO2VrUXFMATPPr4PBbP6FH4WZbEiZbWVC9/;ord=1922554588? http://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aumQwv0UrDUm6n2A3hPAMF2WYpXHnZcpdEy5mZbU5Gj8TGY8Vsb8SPvyTHYVUFMY5rToWaMvVqBjQEYZbQVJAPUitSW38UGU52U2xnWqoYaev4drBSsZbZa2A3Hod6yTHY6Yr371UJkXqApSrYGUFBYTtQWmFQmRUvNXqYo4qFc5E7XnTnBXFf7WtJPnP3BpFMBxiUZc7P/4056396/frame.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/avmQwvWHFXomUZdmVjmodfA5qvh2dum3A7InbfIXsfRYGUY1V7nmTFP2rYWVrnHUPf4PTrQQGFOQdZbMYt7wVAnM3cMXXbQDV6Pw56ZbbQmMA4W3nXdvApWIo56vY5cb7UsM8UcjlPAnyTtUVUbM05bEuWEjoTTFlQqvZaSsjZaQUupSHjbVcYW2rTpntAO0tqIqpZd23E/2522456/frame.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/awmQwv2FXxotep0aPm2HbBQcjH56rJmdAoTH3dXUfcYrJi1qiMSbrDTr3XVHJ4obYnPFbNYaZbN5EZbi2avPmqfGXbfaUtfXoPUBms7tpWfD5E3l5HIN3mjGnr3EXV7QXsnYXGfypEZbP2FUWVUnEUAvTPqb0ScBMPH3tYHbrWAbv3sZb2YbnLVAXo5AveR97npAT10o/4998066/frame.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/axmQwvVmTw26ncRmjI2tZbm0HvCntAy36YW5c7cTVJbWGjjSA3oTdvSTU713U2tWqYoVaYlPaQIScZbKRr6xRdr8VGYR4rTxotIOYEeN3tbFSGbC2AnHmWZayTWfhXr7bXFjiXaamPrMDTFQXVdJ3orJxPbrr1EJy5TYe2qU5nqMCXrY6TtBPom3JmVUwmEroOLk8O9/3879666/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aymQwvoAQBps3qmWYG3aZbk3dyM5AFIprMKXVbVYVF40cfNmE742UvRWbjFWm71PEQ0QV3MPHFu1HbmT6Mn2VU1YFnZcTAaw2AneQPMH3HZbrXWQZcpWao3PUY5sUgTsBcVsJjPPUOWtnSTbj13r2oUqrvVaJaSTZbFSVYIPFAmSd7cVVfV5r2poWAtYa2p4avqsdVGqC/3910526/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aMmQwvodZaO0ETM4trDQcrD4mvIpHioVWJbXrb8YbYh0EaoSrQZbTUM3WWU2mFQqPUBrYqUy4aFf4TM0oTbKYUBdTWBUmPMBpV3wptfE2TZbh5t6m3mBGpFnEXGQ0YsZb31VZbNpTfS5FnRWU7FWP74REMQQVZbsStYr0H7pWPjx3VB5YUBKUAPo26v6QmJK4TQExD3cKx/4104936/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aNmQwv2PreRPBE4dro0tBZdnHAy5PQW3sraTsF7WVMgRmUMTt33TrB42FApWEjsVTMaQaQFRcBZdPFanPHvkWsnQ5U2smtIO0aTp3WbCPVrG2mYJmW6yVdFhXbQkYFQe1qAoPbYAWFr3WdY2mbQnRUjNYqFt3TYa4af1nTrCXUU9THnQnmUJpsUopW3J5HQ0xw9jxU/3927916/adTag.html

WHAT’S HOT

Veterans Today Poll

For over 60 years, US Taxpayers have been funding Israel, Palestine and Middle East. Are you happy with return on investment or would you prefer those monies be invested at home instead?

  • Yes, Very Happy!
  • No, Not Happy! invest in US only

View Results

Archives

 

 

http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/N8278.8427.TRIBALFUSIONADNETWORK/B8275819.111722650;sz=300×250;click=http://a.tribalfusion.com/h.click/aOmRoPpGYwmWnH5Tvj3Wmm56ZbInFvK0GnTYsJ00svvnTbV3U32VFfAVAn3QTMQPsMsSHFMYtBqVPfx2sB50FYKU6Ts5Ar9R6rF4WnO0tvZcpdEo56v04cjfTGJbVsMePAYyTHv3UrJR2FasWqnpTTYaQaBZaRGZbCPFuoPHrlUV3T5UTtnHAOXaXm2HYAQGvB4mnKmdXH8G5vPY/;ord=1922557550? http://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aPmQwv0qPp4WYBSVvA4PJIpW6NVHYb0bn6YFUl0TqrRbUFUUYSWtrYnUZbmPbrnYEnt5aFa5Tn5ma7A1rZbhUdfVnPYZdmV3wmWUJ2qZbi2dmq3AfIpF3E0sM0YcMV0VnwmEZbQ5UUQTUFAVPn5PTb1ScUMQHUNYtruWPMn3cMYYrZbJUm6p56n6RPJC3HvOXT3xnM24Lv/4195476/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aQmQwvR6FK4dnn1WvInH2w56UT3GUaVcQ9WsnkR6FwUdYUUrbP2b6sVTnoVaJcSEJZdSGBCPUmxRWvaUVM34bqrntEnYa2p4tYZdPsrB56JZbmdIoVdfh0UMkYU790qysSrMCWUQ4TdMYnbBmPFrq1E3y5aUl2ajRmT7DYUBcTdMRnAbIms3omt3B2Tv75qiFxxZdZahJ/3002246/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aRmQwvmHQJ5qni3Hay56vJmbYKYGbT1c3X0VrMnavV3UYTVFfZcVA30Qav0QVZboQt7N1HfuWPrN2G330UUBTPuq5AMcQmZbK4HnO1dBZbmt2u36QW3GUgVV3jWcF8RAZbvTtnRWrj35resVaMoVEJbSTYFScQJRrqvStrlVGjU5b6nndusYETx4WQHPVBZa2pUypvWr8G/4285916/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aSmQwv4d3ZdSsJB4A3ZdoHXpTt76YF761UBj0qunRUJFUU31VtQWnrjrQrfrYqFp5T7l4TnRnajFYFJ7WHb0m6MZdmVQqpdnJ5Tn72Hmp4PvZaprrK0sQ01VQV0GBnnEnU2FnSTF7DUPU0QTr0QsZbtStZbr1HvpT6fp2sJWYrFAUPim5PB7QPBC4dvt1HrApaAJsQFYPa/3996986/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aTmQwv4WrOXdMZcptEv5ABV4G7aUcM9UcbiRAJNUWFUUr7X3bEuVqQtWqUaQaBKSVbJPFevStn7WcvW2FuvmH6nYaXM3HnZdSVJZa5AJKptXsVWBb0UQk1bZb90aZaMRrBGTFr2TtY0obbrQFbrYTFs3TZba4T7YoTnIXFB6UdrTn6fLmGjpptUB5qvf2dEN3DbMyoTIIg/4222976/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aUmQwv5Er75HZam3PjLnUbLXs7T1sUXXG7OnErR3bFTVFjGWAvTQEY5PGQsQHUw1tZbpVPrp3GQXXbQLVmqu4mYcQmZbE3tnOXHMAmW2O4mBS3sMaVVnjUVf8RPMoUtZbVTbJ55bZarUaYtWEYaQEBZdQVJCPFuoPHjiWVfU4bunnHqrYqaw3WYHSsBE56MHmaEHviMUZcx/3812116/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aVmQwvSGZbZa2ArJpdamTtQ9YbbdXFUjXaipRrFBUbB1VtU5mrJxQUJmXaYt5aUj2qfXmEjIYU3hUWbPoAnDncrqpWYH2av75dZaN4mvLmbbZc0GvT1VMVXsjnnTB43FZbWWUFBUAnYRTQ5Ps3sQdUOYt7uVmbu4sZbUXUnATPqt5mZb8Q6nD3dntXdrImteo3938qIZdesM/3482166/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aWmQwvXWvApW6y3mvV5Vj8UcF7WGFiPP3yUtJQUFMX3bAmWqrvWTr7Pq3ZcScQLRbmpRWniWsj34UupodiMXTyM3tUBPcFZa26rHpWXnUHQ70bv61b79XT6MRbnZbUFJXWdMXorBsRFBmXTUt5EUk2avRmEMD1rYfUHB1nArJmc7mpHbA2qnf5HEs4PZbGpsvOrJR6hO/3487036/adTag.htmlhttp://a.tribalfusion.com/p.media/aXmQwv5tIN3mFIpbYLXcfRXc301sfOpT7P3FJPVrnGWAM2PEMQPcnpPWJN1HvnTmjv2cQUXrFBT6qo2PUgPAfE3HMn1tJApt6o4PBT4cj6VcY9UVF8P6QoUdM3Ubr12retUqMqTEM7PEQZcSGQIRr6vRW7dUVf54F2nmdErYTev3dfGPsJE2AMZdptiyVTZbPoLBnfJ/3413716/frame.html

New – Interview with SIMON PARKES, BRITISH COUNCILLOR ~ Kerry Cassidy *MUST HEAR*


 OUTSTANDING Interview!! I absolutely love Simon Parkes, here he shares some pretty mind blowing information on a wide range of paranormal subjects. Gotta hand to Kerry’s, she’s still carrying the torch and is at the top of her game here. She’s been at this long enough knows the material and the right questions to ask. IMO Simon is a  the systems approach at giving us Disclosure on an IV drip, they’re slowly feeding the information to see how people react and condition them to the reality of interacting with multiple off-world races. Simon’s career in politics has also given him insights into the world of politics. As well as military political strategy’s which he shares with as much transparency as possible without endangering himself or others.

His multi-dimensional perspective is invaluable in understanding the bigger picture of where we’re at and the direction we’re heading in. Here Simon and Kerry discuss the use of “Majick” and the by the ruling elite, as a form of control over the masses. This interview is one of the best I’ve heard,  it’s right up there with information Mary Rodwell discloses on star children and the activity’s behind ET presence. Enjoy!  5 Stars!

simonparkes.jpg

Possible EMP, Mantis and Reptilians, Anunnaki behind the scenes in Israel, Flt 17 – what really happened… and much more.

This is a ground breaking even explosive interview in terms of content.  This interview was filmed on location in Avebury, England and during the 1st International Bases Conference. This is a very insightful look at the man and his relationships with ET/alien races and the larger picture of what’s going on here on Planet Earth. We cover ascension and how that factors in to the game being played by the Praying Mantis or Mantid race and Reptilian races and humans in power. Also discussed is the relationship of Exopolitics to earth politics and a planned EMP attack on the United States to be attempted by those in power sometime before 2016.

Simon covers the role that “Majick” plays in the upper echelons of power both on the ET and human sides as well as more pragmatic subjects such as the downing of Flight MH 17 — apparently a “dirty bomb” containing biowarfare aimed at a Russian city… The role of the Mossad and the true ET race behind the scenes in Israel.

This interview is a must-see for anyone seeking to understand what is really going on here on Planet Earth.

Japanese Whaling Crew Eaten Alive By Killer Whales, 16 dead


A Japanese whaling crew has fallen victim to a dramatic full on assault by a school of killer whales, killing no less then 16 crew members and injuring 12, has reported the Japanese Government this morning.

The crew of the MV Nisshin Maru (日新丸), Japan’s primary whaling vessel and the world’s only whaler factory ship, was forced to leave the deck temporarily as a gas leak was detected within the ship’s processing factory that resulted in the ship being temporarily disabled all while continuing to carry approximately 1,000 tons of oil.

The resulting panic lead members of the ship to jump off the boat before proper emergency procedures were taken and lifeboats had been set to sea.  The swimming crew members were then ferociously attacked by a school of killer whales, that decimated a large number of the crew within moments. “It was horrific” claims Asuka Kumara, a mechanical engineer who witnessed the gruesome  scene. “The water was red with blood, there were bodies everywhere” he recalls in tears.

Within 30 minutes of the incident, 16 crew members had disappeared into the ocean.

The incident occurred in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, near the South Eastern Coast of South Africa, a controversial area to be whaling as a recent international court ruling has ordered the country to ends its whale hunt in the Antarctic. The East Asian nation halted its annual Antarctic whaling mission after the U.N.’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled last march the hunt violated an international moratorium on commercial whaling.

“It seems Japan just doesn’t give a damn about international law” explains environmental activist and spokesman for Greenpeace Canada, James Ben Shahali, based in Vancouver. “The waste of life is always a shame, but the whales are not to blame here, they were only doing what they are born to do: kill for food” he adds.

Some Greenpeace supporters have even celebrated the incident as a victory for the cause

Japan has slaughtered over 6,000 whales since commercial whaling was made illegal by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) moratorium passed in 1986.

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/japanese-whaling-crew-eaten-alive-by-killer-whales-16-dead/#sthash.mCiUVE4s.dpuf

No joke’: Germany mulls using typewriters to combat US snooping


Note: More and more we’re seeing the need to turn the clock back on modern technology…going back to simpler times. Wish I wouldn’t have gotten rid of my typewriter, so many years ago…

Published: July 15, 2014

Reuters / Desmond Boylan

Reuters / Desmond Boylan

Amid the worsening Berlin-Washington spy row, German politicians are considering going back to old-fashioned manual typewriters for confidential documents to protect national secrets from American NSA spooks.

Patrick Sensburg, the chair of the German parliament’s enquiry into NSA alleged spying, said committee members are considering new security measures and are seriously thinking about abandoning email and returning to old school typewriters.

“As a matter of fact, we already have [a typewriter], and it’s even a non-electronic typewriter,” he told the ARD Morning Show Monday.

The interviewer, apparently surprised by the idea, asked if that was really the case, The Guardian writes. “Yes, no joke”, responded Sensburg of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party.

The committee was set up to investigate the scope of surveillance uncovered by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden who revealed that the US has been eavesdropping Germans and even bugged Merkel’s cell phone. The scandal led to a chill in relations between old allies, Berlin and Washington, with Merkel saying at the time that “monitoring of friends was unacceptable.”

Adding to a row of embarrassing spying scandals, earlier this month Berlin announced it had discovered an alleged American spy in the Defense Ministry.

That came just days after the arrest of a German intelligence officer who worked as a double agent and passed information to the CIA about the parliament’s NSA investigation.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel (Reuters / Thomas Peter)

German Chancellor Angela Merkel (Reuters / Thomas Peter)

Merkel said then that if the allegations were proven correct “it would be for me a clear contradiction as to what I consider to be trusting cooperation between agencies and partners.”

Germany also ordered the CIA station chief in Berlin out of the country.

“Unlike other inquiry committees, we are investigating an ongoing situation. Intelligence activities are still going on, they are happening,” Sensburg told ARD broadcaster, as cited by The Independent.

“Of course we have to keep our internal communication secure, send encrypted emails, use encrypted telephones and other things, which I’m not going to say here,” he added.

Meanwhile, if German politicians do decide to ditch computers in favor of typewriters, they would not be the first to come up with such an idea.

Last year, apparently in a move triggered by the Snowden leaks, the Russian Federal Guard Service (FSO) ordered typewriters capable of both Russian and Latin typeface. The FSO – which protects highest-ranking officials – was going to spend 486,000 rubles (US$14,000) to buy 20 electric portable typewriters.

http://rt.com/news/173020-germany-typewriter-spying-nsa/

Arizona first US state to attempt legal resistance to NSA surveillance


Published time: February 05, 2014 09:55

Civil liberties activists hold a rally against surveillance of US citizens (AFP / Nicholas Kamm)Civil liberties activists hold a rally against surveillance of US citizens (AFP / Nicholas Kamm)

Arizona’s state senate panel approved a bill withdrawing state support for intelligence agencies’ collection of metadata and banning the use of warrantless data in courts. The panel becomes the first legislative body in US to try and thwart NSA spying.

The bill will now have to be approved by majority of the Senate Rules committee before it can move on to the full senate. It prohibits Arizona public employees and departments from helping intelligence agencies collect records of phone-calls and emails, as well as metadata (information on where and when the phone calls were made).

It also proscribes the use of information obtained warrants in state courts.

The bill is entitled the 4th Amendment Protection Act and was introduced by Republican Senator Kelli Ward of Lake Havasu City. It was passed on Monday by the Senate’s Government and Environment committee with a 4-2 vote.

The 10th Amendment allows states to stand up against unconstitutional federal law,” Ward said, as cited by AP. “It’s a state issue because many times the NSA is turning that information over to our local and state law enforcement and using that in cases that are basic criminal prosecutions, not anything to do with terrorism.”

The bill faced significant opposition from state agencies, however, raising fears the legislation could make Arizona vulnerable in case of a terrorist attack. This concern was voiced by Lyle Mann, director of the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board.

An officer could be given information — important information: a shooting, a terrorist attack, whatever it is you want to talk about – but they cannot confirm that the information came from a warrant-covered source. But if they do nothing with the information, something bad is going to happen,” Mann said as cited by Capitol Media Services.

Ward responded by saying that if there was a real threat there would be no problem for the police in obtaining a warrant to seize whatever information they needed. She added that allowing warrantless gathering of metadata was “a slippery slope” to a loss of individual rights.

We can’t sacrifice our liberty in the name of security. That is one of the main things I’m trying to balance. I don’t think we should be giving up liberties, especially liberties that are guaranteed to us in our Constitution under our Fourth Amendment rights in the interest of security, even if it is terrorism or child pornography,” Ward said.

The bill is based on model legislation drafted by the OffNow Coalition, a civil liberties group, opposing NSA surveillance, which believes the bill’s most important part is prohibiting the use of warrantless information in courts.

While Arizona might not be able to physically stop the NSA and other federal agencies from collecting our data without a warrant, legislation such as this can significantly reduce the practical effect of what they are trying to do with it. Namely, use it within the states for non-terror criminal cases, which is a gross violation of the 4th Amendment,” Shane Trejo of OffNow said as posted at the group’s website.

Critics of the bill say it could be unconstitutional, as it challenges the supremacy of the federal government.

The federal law is supreme and the state has to follow it,” said Paul Bender, a constitutional law professor at Arizona state University’s law school, as cited by AP.

Even if passed by the Arizona state senate, the bill could still be blocked by federal courts, as previously happened with the state’s efforts to control immigration reform and push the limits of abortion restrictions.

http://rt.com/usa/arizona-lawmakers-nsa-spying-671/

Mass Arrests, The Event, Bankster Update from Drake’s FB Page, Dec. 26th


 

Ed. note: Interesting read, but until we begin seeing transparency and disclosure thru mass media or when the time comes that Absolute Data is released to the masses, discernment is advised.

Thank you, Jane. This is a transcript from Drake’s Cosmic Voice FB page for a recent teleconference. Take it for what you will.   ~ BP

TRANSCRIPT OF THOMAS’ POST THIS MORNING: ‘THE EVENT’
Source
Thomas has said this is not an endorsement but it is interesting. I have listened this morning and decided to make notes so we could consider some key points [in the order they were presented and not necessarily logical] – and for those who can’t listen for 1hr 40mins. Please don’t shoot the messenger as I don’t have 2nd amendment rights LOL…and I have tried my best to record the names of your legislation and acts ….seem to be learning more about US law the UK … Took 3 hrs!

• There are currently Russian, Chinese and German troops in the US, to go to DC to make arrests and prevent WWIII

• There is a 4th player who is unseen and very powerful – quote ‘and I think we know who this is but most people refuse to accept it’….[my question are they referring to ET?]

• Nuclear arsenals in the Middle East are not working – no access codes are working or targeting facilities

• Prosperity Packages (PP’s) are ‘in the hat’ – and have been reassigned to the Provost Marshall of the US military in Virginia – so unusual move that the military are now in control of the PP situation

• Sudan: US troops there [because?] bankers are trying to start WWIII – which will not be allowed to happen. They planned to use any or a combination of Chemical/Bio/Nukes and other countries said not acceptable.

• Federal Reserve – as of midnight all $ notes became counterfeit – really not a rumour true. No need to panic the US economy is still accepting them and they will be taken in and exchanged when the new currency is put into the banks. The only thing that would create a problem is if someone turned up at a bank with huge amounts of cash not commensurate with their standing and income otherwise ok to exchange for new currency when arrives.

• The ‘big boys’ – trillion dollar people (Bankers and Congress]– cashed out large quantities of Dinars

• NESARA – he has been hearing that they are trying to bring this on-line if not directly ..but quietly There has been high level meetings in the Indian Ocean (British Indian territory) at a tiny atoll named Diego Garcia – nothing there only a landing strip. O’B has been holidaying a lot for extended vacations to Hawaii…said to have been going to Diego Garcia as first priority before vacations.

• Nov 2009(?) O’B passed an executive order for every alphabet agency (?) except NDAA and US DOD issuing orders to regulate the banking system. People have been mad at the NSA – but in actual fact the surveillance has not been to deal with the ordinary people but to get the Bankers. Not just the CIA, FBI, Dept of the Feds, Navy intel. but everybody involved to nail the bankers.

• O’B has been passing executive orders and putting Czars in place – he is not a dictator but has been strategically moving people around to clean up the system. In 1991 George Bush sold the infrastructure of the USA under executive order and O’B has passed an order to re-nationalise the infrastructure. The NDDA is to deal with those in power under Section 802. ‘those that intimate and cohort with Judges and prosecution’… etc. of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and Prosecution – who have been lazy and behaving unethically. The latter have been trying to minimise events in case they are charged with aiding and abetting. So trying to protect themselves. There has been 10 million records seized covering every judge in the state of California.

• The Pope’s decree has eliminated immunity so that now we can go retro-actively and deal with them.

• There exists online an abridged copy of the Patriot Act – everyone needs to read this to see there is nothing in there to do with the American people but to deal with money laundering, RICO and depopulation programmes.

• We can now go to foreign countries and ask them to hand over illicit money or be dubbed terrorists and receive a military response. Switzerland, Cayman Isles, Jamaica, Bahamas and the Caribbean banking havens have been forced by a military presence around the shorelines. The Cayman Isles were entered and they couldn’t explain account holders…found to be belong to dead people and even in dog’s names. Lots of bank accounts were cleaned out – 10’s of 1000’s – and bankers in Switzerland committed suicide.

• A report last week from Bloomberg detailed that pressure was being put on Swiss Bankers who had been put on notice by the IRS and the Govt. to turn over all questionable US citizens’ bank accounts. Other banks (Rothschilds) had assigned 450 lawyers to fight the request. The Rothschilds were told if there are irregularities and hidden money from the US Govt. They must hand over or else they would be penalised with fines and jail sentences. The Swiss bankers are still debating the choice but they have little time left now to decide.

• It must have been something huge because the Rothschilds answer to no one and don’t usually respond to Govts. This Govt. Has 12 of the 22 aircraft carriers that exist worldwide and sail the oceans. The smallest is twice the size of anyone else’s. So if the Rothschilds don’t comply they will be responded to as terrorists under the Patriot Act – the military can go in and there will be backs against the wall. Bankers have been dealt with in China and Vietnam but the details differ (1 executed and 3 in prison in China and 2 shot in Vietnam…or alternatively all executed).

• Karen Hudes had stated that there were underground banks in Hawaii with 70,000 tons of gold to back the new $, and at Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado Springs – Russian troops were guarding another gold deposit. Fort Knox – has seen large troop movement during the last 12 months. So there is gold in 3 locations in large amounts to back the new $ so don’t worry about money. This has been a grand 5 years plan in the making [circa 2008 collapse?]

• The Federal Reserve cessation is not in writing yet it is taking place as we speak so you will not find evidence of it until it gets on TV or in Wall St Journal. It’s breaking news. All the new money will not be on the street at the same time but the 12 central banks are full of money.

• Under the ‘Trading with the Enemy’ Act Section 6 – O’B could deal with all the ‘big boys’ who have cashed in the Dinars. There is a chance he could seize this money under the Act. These people have been running amok and have become the enemy of the country. The US has been under a state of emergency since 1933 so he can do that. This would solve the US’s financial problems right now. Apparently there is a cap in place for the elite of $1 trillion.

• Caller comment: Troops are landing in the USA ‘armed and ready for bear’ – is this indicating martial law? Answer: Firstly, the US has been under Martial Law since 1877 with the Reconstruction Act and a state of emergency. Secondly in 1933, the bankruptcy situation invoked a second state of emergency and the US has been under martial law since that.

• The influx of foreign military are from friendly military governments and the troops are out in the community enjoying football and watching baseball. They are guarding the Colorado Springs gold reserves. There is a need to take people down because of DC passing Posse Comitatus. It was passed to allow the military to enforce law but the 1902 Dicat and the constitution gives the authority to call up the military. So Putin etc. can be used to solve problems by using overseas troops to deal with areas that are owned.

• FEMA Camps or military detention facilities. Originally was said these would be used against the US people – look online there are 800 pages in the Army Field Manual – ‘Capturing and Detaining of People’ and the use of multiple theatres of operation. Multiple meaning multiple countries. The manual tells how to identify ID badges, the country the person is captured in and location. It is not for citizens but to deal with the corrupt. The UN have stood up to these people (he can’t disclose how he knows). Interpol have been fighting in Europe for decades and getting their butts kicked. So O’B asked the UN the help as allies (including Russia and China) in order to prevent WWIII. After all a war of this magnitude would be bad for world health and business.

• Camps have 3 facility types: 1 for criminals and having a court inside – Bankers and the like. 1 as a temporary holding facility to calm people down but not to hurt them just contain them and lastly 1 as a refugee camp for the families of the people that get arrested…when this blows up and soon..the families will be in danger of being lynched and will need to be kept safe.

• Some people from foreign countries including the US, bankers etc. have already been arrested by Interpol and are in camps. The police work for private corporations so they cannot be relied upon or trusted – there was a need to bring someone else in.

• O’B passed an order to create a civilian army (that was propagandised) and this got blocked so had to look to the alternative.

• DC doesn’t care if you have a gun – it is the states that are in rebellion against Congress and their oath against the constitution. He could come and arrest every governor and local cop on the street for treason and espionage, rebellion and insurrection under the Patriot Act and pick them all up.

• No normal people going to camps. The military have said no….otherwise the ‘tanks will be rolling’ and if 50,000 tanks start coming at you let’s see what happens’.

• They have recalled a bunch of people in the military generals etc. and this started around 2 years ago roughly. It has been noticed that there is no-one on the golf courses and O’B is weeding out the ones that won’t stay on message. He is taking others and placing them where he can use them. Apparently a group of military have just been on 2 weeks’ training (rumour not confirmed) these being the US Army Rangers, Green Berets and Reconnaissance Marines who came back with Uniforms for the Dept. Of Justice US Marshalls.

• When this goes down there will be a need for people to step in where state governors are removed and an Agitant General Command Grade Officer might be put in place.

• The Rumours of Nukes being moved are false – the protocol for nukes to be moved around is too tight without major paperwork.

• Caller Question: I have sons and daughters in the military who were told at a big meeting that they would be getting rid of [black?] military officers so it has to be true?…another caller answered and said I am from a black family and I don’t think it’s true. [I didn’t understand this reference and the sound quality wasn’t good]

• There is a major international incident going on now in the US – people have volunteered to assist from overseas. We cannot go on much longer with bankers actively trying to start WWIII and they must be stopped and this will need Russian and other troops to do so.

• Caller Question: If O’B is so the good guy and a white hat or something, we need to judge a fruit by its tree… Why did he pass the NDAA to make people disappear and has offered no transparency that he had promised? Second question what if the troops are here to take over the US. Answer: O’B made a statement in a video where he said ‘there are terrorists out there that cannot be tried because their crimes are beyond comprehension’ and that there is no way to try such as Rockefellers, JP Morgan, Rothschilds et al. as no one will testify against them. So he enacted the NDAA to give authority to do so. Another thing; there is a military base in Cyprus that can be used. [My comment: if he means North Cyprus that would be because they are not recognised as a country after the ‘military coup in 1974 in the north of the island by Turkey. The south remains Greek and is recognised internationally and by the EU – the north is not].

• There are people that he knows have trained with the International troops, if they were coming after the US as a country, the International troops do not have enough force, e.g. 65,000 Russian troops would mean 1,000 per state and that wouldn’t go very far. The speaker lives in a city with 21,000 people for example. There has been propaganda to scare people that O’B is coming after you and the biggest weapon against the people has been the fear mongering.

• In 2011 the US sold near on 49.5 million hunting licences, along with 38 million guns too and that’s just registered. Foreign troops would have no chance against the people…In 1941 it was said ‘there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass’…so think of the scale now.

• Suggest that people go and read O’B’s executive orders and see what he is intending as a military operation to secure infrastructure. When the event goes down the US will shift from a democracy to a republic and it will take about a week for people to really know what happened. The Plan started back in the 1970’s.

• There is reason to believe that the COG (Continuity of Government) has been activated by O’B. He cannot ascertain but believes it is in place. So that if anything goes down the people (levels of military) that have been on long term vacation for over a year at times, can be reactivated and brought back out.

• One of radio people’s comments: the HJR 192 (House Joint Resolution) will keep currency safe. The real money is starting to come out. There was a big shipment 7-8 months ago. Cyprus especially and others have been putting in the prosperity packages in position to complete around March/April 2014. Generals and Sergeants and soldiers are ready to go on Supreme Court panels to sort things out. The Basel plan (finance) is coming into place. Last night a news article said that a plane had been grounded full of gold and the people on board arrested. There was a picture of them standing naked(?) in front of gold bars. The price will go down tremendously. Snowden has been key to the exposure.

• There is a website named ‘1461 days’ showing all the Executive Orders to comply with the 802 Patriot Act from past presidents to present.

• Caller Question: What about the 2nd amendment, Benghazi and IRS abuse – why hasn’t O’B dealt with this? Answer: Blanket arrests have not happened because the Govt. Has been taken over. We are getting ready to clean house. Have you thought about the amount of $ it takes to run the propaganda machine to go against O’B on TV, right wing radio, internet and websites? The people manipulating us with this propaganda are the same ones who would have you enslaved.

Closing Statement: Executive Orders do not apply to the American people they are only of the administration. O’B is the CEO and executive of the corporation. The Vice President is President of Congress and the Senate. The new $100 bill was printed in 2009 and is still a reserve note so as worthless as toilet paper. No-one will be taking the guns – the military wouldn’t even consider it.

http://2012thebigpicture.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/mass-arrests-the-event-bankster-update-from-drakes-fb-page-dec-26th/

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.

http://rt.com/op-edge/south-sudan-land-grab-742/

talian protesters take on police during mass march against austerity budget (PHOTOS)


Published time: October 19, 2013 19:29
Edited time: October 20, 2013 01:40

A group of people clashes with policemen near the Economy minister during an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Filippo Monteforte)

Violence broke out between police and demonstrators in Rome on Saturday as tens of thousands took to the streets to protest Italy’s new budget.

Fifteen protesters were arrested and at least 20 police officers were injured, according to the Corriere della Sera newspaper.

We are laying siege to the city!” chanted the crowd, as a small minority pelted the police and government buildings with water bottles and eggs.

A group of protesters turned over garbage bins and set some of them on fire in front of the Economy Ministry.

Members of the Guardia di Finanza protect themselves as they stand in front of the Economy minister during clashes on the sidelines of an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Alberto Pizzoli)

Members of the Guardia di Finanza protect themselves as they stand in front of the Economy minister during clashes on the sidelines of an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Alberto Pizzoli)

Police say they confiscated tear gas canisters and rocks from some of the radicals in the predominantly youthful crowd and found chains stashed away along the route of the march.

Organizers estimated that 70,000 people took part in the protest, while authorities placed the number closer to 50,000.

With this budget the government is continuing to hurt a country which is already on its knees,” said Piero Bernocchi, leader of the left-wing COBAS trade union that was behind the demonstration.

“Even after austerity has proven to be disastrous, with debt rising, the economy crumbling, and unemployment soaring, they still continue with these policies.

Thousands of people march during an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Alberto Pizzoli)

Thousands of people march during an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Alberto Pizzoli)

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Enrico Letta – who is presiding over a fractious Left-Right coalition – presented the 2014 budget that immediately came under a firestorm of criticism from both sides of the political spectrum.

Left-wingers criticized the document for freezing state sector pay and pensions, while right-wingers and businesses said it failed to stimulate growth with insufficient cuts to Italy’s oppressive corporate taxes.

People try to broke the windows of an Unicredit bank agency during an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Alberto Pizzoli)

People try to broke the windows of an Unicredit bank agency during an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Alberto Pizzoli)

Italy annually spends around 800 billion euro – a sum it cannot afford as it struggles with a recession that started more than two years ago. The latest budget aims to cut the deficit to 2.5 percent – still worse than most of Europe.

On Friday, a general strike paralyzed transport links in the country and forced the cancellation of flights in and out of Rome.

But Saturday’s protests weren’t just about pay. Some called for the government to abandon an expensive fast-train link with France. Others demanded that Italy provide more social housing. Many bemoaned the country’s treatment of immigrants, who have suffered several tragic incidents in recent months as they attempted to reach the coast of Italy.

Letta has gone on television to defend his government, but dissenters have not been placated and say that even bigger demonstrations will be staged next week.

A man throws a bottle in direction of policem during clashes on the sidelines of an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Filippo Monteforte)

A man throws a bottle in direction of policem during clashes on the sidelines of an anti-austerity protest on October 19, 2013 in Rome. (AFP Photo / Filippo Monteforte)

Brzezinski admits alternative media stalling war with Syria


zbigniew brzezinski

During a short interview with Germany’s DW News last Monday, former US National Security Adviser and Trilateral Commission co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski commented on the growing inefficiency of war due to the increased political knowledge of the public.

“Given the contemporary reality of what I have called in my writings ‘Global Political Awakening,’ a policy of force based primarily on Western and in some cases former colonial powers does not seem to me a very promising avenue to an eventual solution to the regional problem,” said Brzezinski, referring to the situation in Syria.

Despite Brzezinski’s noted long-term relationship with Obama which included a top foreign policy adviser position, Brzezinski denied any specific knowledge of his plans regarding Syria, saying that if the administration has a strategy, it’s a “very well-kept secret.”

Obama’s Middle Eastern strategy has been a mere continuation of the policies seen under Bush, exemplified by former four star general and NATO commander Wesley Clark’s admission of the Bush-era Pentagon plan to overthrow several countries including Libya and Syria.

Although Brzezinski at times attempts to appear opposed to military interventionism, President Obama’s actions in Syria, which include the support of admitted Al Qaeda fighters, closely mirrors several of Brzezinski’s previous policies, most notably the opposition to the Soviet Union in 1979, where decisions made by Brzezinski led to the creation of Al Qaeda through the CIA funding of the Afghan Mujaheddin.

Brzezinski’s call of warning to the “global political awakening” has only intensified in recent years. Last year during a speech in Poland, Brzezinski noted that it has become “increasingly difficult to suppress” and control the “persistent and highly motivated populist resistance of politically awakened and historically resentful peoples.” Brzezinski also blamed the accessibility of “radio, television and the Internet” for the “universal awakening of mass political consciousness.”

“[The] major world powers, new and old, also face a novel reality: while the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low. To put it bluntly: in earlier times, it was easier to control one million people than to physically kill one million people; today, it is infinitely easier to kill one million people than to control one million people,” said Brzezinski during a 2010 Council on Foreign Relations speech in Montreal.

Despite attempts by both the Republican and Democratic leadership to gain support for a war in Syria, a new Reuters poll revealed that only 9 percent of Americans support military intervention in Syria. If the United States intervenes, it will be the least popular war in American history.

The massive and growing evidence forced out by the alternative media, which points to a US backed chemical attack by Al Qaeda led rebel forces to be blamed on Assad, has only accelerated the inevitable downfall of the corporate press that is now only trusted by 23 percent of the public.

 

Source: http://www.storyleak.com/brzezinski-global-political-awakening-making-syrian-war-difficult/

Source

Internet TROLLS – what ARE these guys? The Rules of Disinformation, 25 Ways to Suppress the Truth


 

 

 

1008_jenkins

Disinformation has been around as long as governments have, simply because it works. These guys take money to lie and deliberately keep the public blind to geoengineering programs that are taking the lives of men, women, children, and all life on the planet. You’ve got to wonder what went wrong with someone who can do that.

SO WHY DO THESE GUYS DO WHAT THEY DO?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I Was a Paid Internet Shill: How Shadowy Groups Manipulate Internet Opinion and Debate

Written by January 8, 2013 in Conscious Life News
Update 1/12/2013: CLN has received a takedown notice asking us to remove this article on the basis that “It is libelous and utterly false” from someone claiming to be a legal agent of Above Top Secret’s parent company. We are currently investigating and will post status updates as they become available. The original thread now appears to have vanished from Above Top Secret’s website.

Update 1/17/2013: We have requested clarification regarding the takedown request and have not received a response. We will provide updates on any new developments.

Update 4/3/2012: Above Top Secret’s legal agent never responded to our request for clarification of their takedown request. The original thread has now been moved to the “Hoax” category of the website, as ATS claims the author admitted it was a hoax in a private exchange. To the best of our knowledge, this private exchange or the details thereof have not been posted publicly to substantiate this claim. Regardless, we believe that covert operations to manipulate online opinion and debate do exist (and indeed have been publicly acknowledged in many of the supporting links below). Whether this specific case is true or not, it remains a valuable and provocative dialogue still worthy of consideration.

____________________

CLN Editor’s Note: The type of propaganda strategy described in the article below occurs across a wide range of topics and is employed by various corporate, political, and governmental groups to promote a variety of agendas. It is called astroturfing, and it is far more common than most would imagine. 

This post is not about Israel, and it is not partisan. It is simply an illustration of the mechanics of how online debate can be manipulated. As this is an anonymous post, we have no way of verifying the information contained herein, and it is presented only for your consideration.

Our intent in posting this is not to spread paranoia or incite shill witch hunts, but merely to encourage readers to view what they read and engage with online with a more discerning eye.

This alleged confession is presented verbatim from its original thread to preserve its integrity. As such, you may notice some minor typographical errors.

For more information on this important topic, see:

– Alcyone @CLN

 

I Was a Paid Internet Shill

 

internet-shill By Ex-Shill, Above Top Secret

I am writing here to come out of the closet as a paid shill. For a little over six months, I was paid to spread disinformation and argue political points on the Internet. This site, ATS, was NOT one that I was assigned to post on, although other people in the same organization were paid to be here, and I assume they still walk among you. But more on this later.

I quit this job in the latter part of 2011, because I became disgusted with it, and with myself. I realized I couldn’t look myself in the mirror anymore. If this confession triggers some kind of retribution against me, so be it. Part of being a real man in this world is having real values that you stand up for, no matter what the consequences.

My story begins in early 2011. I had been out of work for almost a year after losing my last job in tech support. Increasingly desperate and despondent, I jumped at the chance when a former co-worker called me up and said she had a possible lead for me. “It is an unusual job, and one that requires secrecy. But the pay is good. And I know you are a good writer, so its something you are suited for.” (Writing has always been a hobby for me).

She gave me only a phone-number and an address, in one of the seedier parts of San Francisco, where I live. intrigued, I asked her for the company’s URL and some more info. She laughed. “They don’t have a website. Or even a name. You’ll see. Just tell them I referred you.” Yes, it sounded suspicious, but long-term joblessness breeds desperation, and desperation has a funny way of overlooking the suspicious when it comes to putting food on the table.

The next day, I arrived at the address – the third floor in a crumbling building. The appearance of the place did not inspire confidence. After walking down a long, filthy linoleum-covered corridor lit by dimly-flickering halogen, I came to the entrance of the office itself: a crudely battered metal door with a sign that said “United Amalgamated Industries, Inc.”

I later learned that this “company” changed its name almost monthly, always using bland names like that which gave no strong impression of what the company actually does. Not too hopeful, I went inside. The interior was equally shabby. There were a few long tables with folding chairs, at which about a dozen people were tapping away on old, beat-up computers. There were no decorations or ornaments of any type: not even the standard-issue office fica trees or plastic ferns. What a dump. Well, beggars can’t be choosers.

The manager, a balding man in his late forties, rose from the only stand-alone desk in the room and came forward with an easy smile. “You must be Chris. Yvette [my ex-co-worker] told me you’d be coming.” [Not our real names]. “Welcome. Let me tell you a little about what we do.” No interview, nothing. I later learned they took people based solely on referral, and that the people making the referrals, like my ex-colleague Yvette, were trained to pick out candidates based on several factors including ability to keep one’s mouth shut, basic writing skills, and desperation for work.

We sat down at his desk and he began by asking me a few questions about myself and my background, including my political views (which were basically non-existent). Then he began to explain the job. “We work on influencing people’s opinions here,” is how he described it. The company’s clients paid them to post on Internet message boards and popular chartrooms, as well as in gaming forums and social networks like Facebook and MySpace. Who were these clients? “Oh, various people,” he said vaguely. “Sometimes private companies, sometimes political groups.”

Satisfied that my political views were not strong, he said I would be assigned to political work. “The best people for this type of job are people like you, without strong views,” he said with a laugh. “It might seem counterintuitive, but actually we’ve found that to be the case.” Well, OK. Fine. As long as it comes with a steady paycheck, I’d believe whatever they wanted me to believe, as the guy in Ghostbusters said.

After discussing pay (which was much better than I’d hoped) and a few other details, he then went over the need for absolute privacy and secrecy. “You can’t tell anyone what we do here. Not your wife, not your dog.” (I have neither, as it happens.) “We’ll give you a cover story and even a phone number and a fake website you can use. You will have to tell people you are a consultant. Since your background is in tech support, that will be your cover job. Is this going to be a problem for you?” I assured him it would not. “Well, OK. Shall we get started?”

“Right now?” I asked, a bit taken aback.

“No time like the present!” he said with a hearty laugh.

The rest of the day was taken up with training. Another staff member, a no-nonsense woman in her thirties, was to be my trainer, and training would only last two days. “You seem like a bright guy, you’ll get the hang of it pretty fast, I think,” she said. And indeed, the job was easier than I’d imagined. My task was simple: I would be assigned to four different websites, with the goal of entering certain discussions and promoting a certain view. I learned later that some of the personnel were assigned to internet message boards (like me), while others worked on Facebook or chatrooms. It seems these three types of media each have different strategy for shilling, and each shill concentrates on one of the three in particular.

My task? “To support Israel and counter anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic posters.” Fine with me. I had no opinions one way or another about Israel, and who likes anti-Semites and Nazis? Not me, anyway. But I didn’t know too much about the topic. “That’s OK,” she said. “You’ll pick it up as you go along. For the most part, at first, you will be doing what we call “meme-patrol.” This is pretty easy. Later if you show promise, we’ll train you for more complex arguments, where more in-depth knowledge is necessary.”

She handed me two binders with sheets enclosed in limp plastic. The first was labeled simply “Israel” in magic-marker on the cover, and it had two sections .The first section contained basic background info on the topic. I would have to read and memorize some of this, as time went on. It had internet links for further reading, essays and talking points, and excerpts from some history books. The second, and larger, section was called “Strat” (short for “strategy”) with long lists of “dialogue pairs.” These were specific responses to specific postings.

If a poster wrote something close to “X,” we were supposed to respond with something close to “Y.” “You have to mix it up a bit, though,” said my trainer. “Otherwise it gets too obvious. Learn to use a thesaurus.” This section also contained a number of hints for de-railing conversations that went too far away from what we were attempting. These strategies included various forms of personal attacks, complaining to the forum moderators, smearing the characters of our opponents, using images and icons effectively, and even dragging the tone of the conversation down with sexual innuendo, links to pornography, or other such things. “Sometimes we have to fight dirty,” or trainer told us. “Our opponents don’t hesitate to, so we can’t either.”

The second binder was smaller, and it contained information specific to the web sites I would be assigned to. The sites I would work were: Godlike Productions, Lunatic Outpost, CNN news, Yahoo News, and a handful of smaller sites that rotated depending on need. As stated, I was NOT assigned to work ATS (although others in my group were), which is part of the reason I am posting this here, rather than elsewhere. I wanted to post this on Godlike Productions at first, but they have banned me from even viewing that site for some reason (perhaps they are onto me?). But if somebody connected with this site can get the message to them, I think they should know about it, because that was the site I spent a good 70% of my time working on.

The site-specific info in the second binder included a brief history each site, including recent flame-wars, as well as info on what to avoid on each site so as not to get banned. It also had quite detailed info on the moderators and the most popular regged posters on each site: location (if known), personality type, topics of interest, background sketch, and even some notes on how to “push the psychological buttons” of different posters. Although I didn’t work for ATS, I did see they had a lot of info on your so-called “WATS” posters here (the ones with gold borders around their edges). “Focus on the popular posters,” my trainer told me. “These are the influential ones. Each of these is worth 50 to 100 of the lesser known names.”

Each popular poster was classified as “hostile,” “friendly,” or “indifferent” to my goal. We were supposed to cultivate friendship with the friendly posters as well as the mods (basically, by brownnosing and sucking up), and there were even notes on strategies for dealing with specific hostile posters. The info was pretty detailed, but not perfect in every case. “If you can convert one of the hostile posters from the enemy side to our side, you get a nice bonus. But this doesn’t happen too often, sadly. So mostly you’ll be attacking them and trying to smear them.”

At first, like I said, my job was “meme-patrol.” This was pretty simple and repetitive; it involved countering memes and introducing new memes, and didn’t demand much in-depth knowledge of the subject. Mostly just repetitive posting based on the dialogue pairs in the “Strat” section of the first binder. A lot of my job was de-railing and spamming threads that didn’t go our way, or making accusations of racism and anti-Semitism. Sometimes I had to simply lie and claim a poster said something or did something “in another thread” they really hadn’t said or done I felt bad about this…but in the end I felt worse about the possibility of losing the first job I’d been able to get since losing my “real” job.

The funny thing was, although I started the job with no strong opinions or political views, after a few weeks of this I became very emotionally wedded to the pro-Israel ideas I was pushing. There must be some psychological factor at work…a good salesman learns to honestly love the products he’s selling, I guess. It wasn’t long before my responses became fiery and passionate, and I began to learn more about the topic on my own. “This is a good sign,” my trainer told me. “It means you are ready for the next step: complex debate.”

The “complex debate” part of the job involved a fair amount of additional training, including memorizing more specific information about the specific posters (friendly and hostile) I’d be sparring with. Here, too, there were scripts and suggested lines of argument, but we were given more freedom. There were a lot of details to this more advanced stage of the job – everything from how to select the right avatar to how to use “demotivationals” (humorous images with black borders that one finds floating around the web). Even the proper use of images of cats was discussed. Sometimes we used faked or photo-shopped images or doctored news reports (something else that bothered me).

I was also given the job of tying to find new recruits, people “like me” who had the personality type, ability to keep a secret, basic writing/thinking skills, and desperation necessary to sign on a shill. I was less successful at this part of the job, though, and I couldn’t find another in the time I was there.

After a while of doing this, I started to feel bad. Not because of the views I was pushing (as I said, I was first apolitical, then pro-Israel), but because of the dishonesty involved. If my arguments were so correct, I wondered, why did we have to do this in the first place? Shouldn’t truth propagate itself naturally, rather than through, well…propaganda? And who was behind this whole operation, anyway? Who was signing my paychecks? The stress of lying to my parents and friends about being a “consultant” was also getting to me. Finally, I said enough was enough. I quit in September 2011. Since then I’ve been working a series of unglamorous temp office jobs for lower pay. But at least I’m not making my living lying and heckling people who come online to express their views and exercise freedom of speech.

A few days ago I happened to be in the same neighborhood and on a whim thought I’d check out the old office. It turns out the operation is gone, having moved on. This, too, I understood, is part of their strategy: Don’t stay in the same place for too long, don’t keep the same name too long, move on after half a year or so. Keeping a low profile, finding new employees through word of mouth: All this is part of the shill way of life. But it is a deceptive way of life, and no matter how noble the goals (I remain pro-Israel, by the way), these sleazy means cannot be justified by the end.

This is my confession. I haven’t made up my mind yet about whether I want to talk more about this, so if I don’t respond to this thread, don’t be angry. But I think you should know: Shills exist. They are real. They walk among you, and they pay special attention to your popular gold-bordered WATS posters. You should be aware of this. What you choose to do with this awareness is up to you.

Yours,

ExShill

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

hitler-86660112459

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Finally, let’s not forget our “25 Rules of Disinformation”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


by H. Michael Sweeney 
1997  from HasslBerger Website


Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums.

Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives.

The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive.

Understand that when the those seeking resolution of such crimes proceed in attempting to uncover truth, they try their best to present factual information constructed as an argument for a particular chain of evidence towards a particular solution to the crime. This can be a largely experimental process via trial and error, with a theory developed over time to perfection or defeated by the process.

This is their most vulnerable time, the time when a good disinfo artist can do the greatest harm to the process.

A rational person participating as one interested in the truth will evaluate that chain of evidence and conclude either that the links are solid and conclusive, that one or more links are weak and need further development before conclusion can be arrived at, or that one or more links can be broken, usually invalidating (but not necessarily so, if parallel links already exist or can be found, or if a particular link was merely supportive, but not in itself key) the argument.

The game is played by raising issues which either strengthen or weaken (preferably to the point of breaking) these links. It is the job of a disinfo artist to at least make people think the links are weak or broken when, in truth, they are not.

It would seem true in almost every instance, that if one cannot break the chain of evidence, revelation of truth has won out. If the chain is broken either a new link must be forged, or a whole new chain developed, or the basis is lost, but truth still wins out. There is no shame in being the creator or supporter of a failed chain if done with honesty in search of the truth. This is the rational approach.

While it is understandable that a person can become emotionally involved with a particular side of a given issue, it is really unimportant who wins, as long as truth wins. But the disinfo artist will seek to emotionalize and chastise any failure (real or false claims thereof), and will seek to prevent new links from being forged by a kind of intimidation.

It is the disinfo artist and those who may pull his strings who stand to suffer should the crime be solved, and therefore, who stand to benefit should it be the opposite outcome.

In ANY such case, they MUST seek to prevent rational and complete examination of any chain of evidence which would hang them. Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and observable tools in this process.

However, the public at large is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led astray by these time-proven tactics.

The overall aim is to avoid discussing links in the chain of evidence which cannot be broken by truth, but at all times, to use clever deceptions or lies to make the links seem weaker than they are, or better still, cause any who are considering the chain to be distracted in any number of ways, including the method of questioning the credentials of the presenter.

Please understand that:

  • fact is fact, regardless of the source

  • truth is truth, regardless of the source

This is why criminals are allowed to testify against other criminals. Where a motive to lie may truly exist, only actual evidence that the testimony itself IS a lie renders it completely invalid.

Were a known “liar’s” testimony to stand on its own without supporting fact, it might certainly be of questionable value, but if the testimony (argument) is based on verifiable or otherwise demonstrable facts, it matters not who does the presenting or what their motives are, or if they have lied in the past or even if motivated to lie in this instance – the facts or links would and should stand or fall on their own merit and their part in the matter will merely be supportive.

Moreover, particularly with respects to public forums such as newspaper letters to the editor, and Internet chat and news groups, the disinfo type has a very important role. In these forums, the principle topics of discussion are generally attempts by individuals to cause other persons to become interested in their own particular problem, position, or idea – usually ideas, postulations, or theories which are in development at the time. People often use such mediums as a sounding board and in hopes of pollenization to better form their ideas.

Where such ideas are critical of government or powerful, vested groups (especially if their criminality is the topic), the disinfo artist has yet another role – the role of nipping it in the bud. They also seek to stage the concept, the presenter, and any supporters as less than credible should any possible future confrontation in more public forums result due to successes in seeking a final truth.

You can often spot the disinfo types at work here by the unique application of “higher standards” of discussion than necessarily warranted. They will demand that those presenting arguments or concepts back everything up with the same level of expertise as a professor, researcher, or investigative writer. Anything less renders any discussion meaningless and unworthy in their opinion, and anyone who disagrees is obviously stupid.

So, as you read here in the NGs the various discussions on various matters, decide for yourself when a rational argument is being applied and when disinformation, psyops (psychological warfare operations) or trickery is the tool. Accuse those guilty of the later freely. They (both those deliberately seeking to lead you astray, and those who are simply foolish or misguided thinkers) generally run for cover when thus illuminated, or – put in other terms, they put up or shut up (a perfectly acceptable outcome either way, since truth is the goal).

Here are the twenty-five methods and six traits, some of which don’t apply directly to NG application. Each contains a simple example in the form of actual paraphrases form NG comments or commonly known historical events, and a proper response. Accusations should not be overused – reserve for repeat offenders and those who use multiple tactics.

Responses should avoid falling into emotional traps or informational sidetracks, unless it is feared that some observers will be easily dissuaded by the trickery. Consider quoting the complete rule rather than simply citing it, as others will not have reference.

Offer to provide a complete copy of the rule set upon request (see permissions statement at end):

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

  1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it – especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

    Example: Media was present in the courtroom when in Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby when CIA agent Marita Lorenz “confession” testimony regarding CIA direct participation in the planning and assassination of John Kennedy was revealed. All media reported is that E. Howard Hunt lost his liable case against Liberty Lobby (Spotlight had reported he was in Dallas that day and were sued for the story). See Mark Lane’s Plausible Denial for the full confessional transcript.

    Proper response: There is no possible response unless you are aware of the material and can make it public yourself. In any such attempt, be certain to target any known silent party as likely complicit in a cover up.


  2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.

    Example: “How dare you suggest that the Branch Davidians were murdered! the FBI and BATF are made up of America’s finest and best trained law enforcement, operate under the strictest of legal requirements, and are under the finest leadership the President could want to appoint.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the Waco issue with disinformation tactics. Your high opinion of FBI is not founded in fact. All you need do is examine Ruby Ridge and any number of other examples, and you will see a pattern that demands attention to charges against FBI/BATF at Waco.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues with disinformation tactics (rule 2 – become incredulous and indignant)?


  3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable rumors”.

    If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in fact.

    • “You can’t prove his material was legitimately from French Intelligence. Pierre Salinger had a chance to show his ‘proof’ that flight 800 was brought down by friendly fire, and he didn’t. All he really had was the same old baseless rumor that’s been floating around the Internet for months.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. The Internet charge reported widely is based on a single FBI interview statement to media and a supportive statement by a Congressman who has not actually seen Pierre’s document. As the FBI is being accused in participating in a cover up of this matter and Pierre claims his material is not Internet sourced, it is natural that FBI would have reason to paint his material in a negative light.

    For you to assume the FBI to have no bias in the face of Salinger’s credentials and unchanged stance suggests you are biased. At the best you can say the matter is in question. Further, to imply that material found on Internet is worthless is not founded. At best you may say it must be considered carefully before accepting it, which will require addressing the actual issues.

    Why do you refuse to address these issues with disinformation tactics (rule 3 – create rumor mongers)?


  4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

    Example: When trying to defeat reports by the Times of London that spy-sat images reveal an object racing towards and striking flight 800, a straw man is used. “If these exist, the public has not seen them.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You imply deceit and deliberately establish an impossible and unwarranted test. It is perfectly natural that the public has not seen them, nor will they for some considerable time, if ever. To produce them would violate national security with respect to intelligence gathering capabilities and limitations, and you should know this.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues with such disinformation tactics (rule 4 – use a straw man)?


  5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left- wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

    Example: “You believe what you read in the Spotlight? The Publisher, Willis DeCarto, is a well-known right-wing racist. I guess we know your politics – does your Bible have a swastika on it? That certainly explains why you support this wild-eyed, right- wing conspiracy theory.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply guilt by association and attack truth on the basis of the messenger. The Spotlight is well known Populist media source responsible for releasing facts and stories well before mainstream media will discuss the issues through their veil of silence.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 5 – sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule)?


  6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning – simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.

    Example: “This stuff is garbage. Where do you conspiracy lunatics come up with this crap? I hope you all get run over by black helicopters.” Notice it even has a farewell sound to it, so it won’t seem curious if the author is never heard from again.

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your comments or opinions fail to offer any meaningful dialog or information, and are worthless except to pander to emotionalism, and in fact, reveal you to be emotionally insecure with these matters.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 6 – hit and run)?


  7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

    Example: “With the talk-show circuit and the book deal, it looks like you can make a pretty good living spreading lies.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply guilt as a means of attacking the messenger or his credentials, but cowardly fail to offer any concrete evidence that this is so.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 6 – question motives)?


  8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutia” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

    • “You obviously know nothing about either the politics or strategic considerations, much less the technicals of the SR-71. Incidentally, for those who might care, that sleek plane is started with a pair of souped up big-block V-8′s (originally, Buick 454 C.I.D. with dual 450 CFM Holly Carbs and a full-race Isky cams – for 850 combined BHP @ 6,500 RPM) using a dragster-style clutch with direct-drive shaft.

      Anyway, I can tell you with confidence that no Blackbird has ever been flown by Korean nationals have ever been trained to fly it, and have certainly never overflown the Republic of China in a SR or even launched a drone from it that flew over China. I’m not authorized to discuss if there have been overflights by American pilots.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply your own authority and expertise but fail to provide credentials, and you also fail to address issues and cite sources.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 8 – invoke authority)?


  9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

    Example: “Nothing you say makes any sense. Your logic is idiotic. Your facts nonexistent. Better go back to the drawing board and try again.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your evade the issues with your own form of nonsense while others, perhaps more intelligent than you pretend to be, have no trouble with the material.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 9 – play dumb)?


  10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man – usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues – so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

    Example: “Flight 553′s crash was pilot error, according to the NTSB findings. Digging up new witnesses who say the CIA brought it down at a selected spot and were waiting for it with 50 agents won’t revive that old dead horse buried by NTSB more than twenty years ago.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your ignore the issues and imply they are old charges as if new information is irrelevant.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 10 – associate charges with old news)?


  11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made – but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, “just isn’t so.” Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

    Example: “Reno admitted in hindsight she should have taken more time to question the data provided by subordinates on the deadliness of CS-4 and the likely Davidian response to its use, but she was so concerned about the children that she elected, in what she now believes was a sad and terrible mistake, to order the tear gas be used.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your evade the true issue by focusing on a side issue in an attempt to evoke sympathy. Perhaps you did not know that CIA Public Relations expert Mark Richards was called in to help Janet Reno with the Waco aftermath response? How warm and fuzzy feeling it makes us, so much so that we are to ignore more important matters?

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 11 – establish and rely upon fall-back positions)?


  12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

    Example: “I don’t see how you can claim Vince Foster was murdered since you can’t prove a motive. Before you could do that, you would have to completely solve the whole controversy over everything that went on in the White House and Arkansas, and even then, you would have to know a heck of a lot more about what went on within the NSA, the Travel Office, and on, and on, and on. It’s hopeless. Give it up.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your completely evade issues and attempt others from daring to attempt it by making it a much bigger mountain than necessary.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 12 – enigmas have no solution)?


  13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

    Example: “The news media operates in a fiercely competitive market where stories are gold. This means they dig, dig, dig for the story – often doing a better job than law enforcement. If there was any evidence that BATF had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing, they would surely have uncovered it and reported it. They haven’t reported it, so there can’t have been any prior knowledge. Put up or shut up.”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your backwards logic does not work here. Has media reported CIA killed Kennedy when they knew it? No, despite their presence at a courtroom testimony “confession” by CIA operative Marita Lornez in a liable trial between E. Howard Hunt and Liberty Lobby, they only told us the trial verdict.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 13 – Alice in Wonderland logic)?


  14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best items qualifying for rule 10.

    Example: “Since you know so much, if James Earl Ray is innocent as you claim, who really killed Martin Luther King, how was it planned and executed, how did they frame Ray and fool the FBI, and why?”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. It is not necessary to completely resolve any full matter in order to examine any relative attached issue.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 14 – demand complete solutions)?

  15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

    Example: The best definitive example of avoiding issues by this technique is, perhaps, Arlan Specter’s Magic Bullet from the Warren Report.

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imaginative twisting of facts rivals that of Arlan Specter’s Magic Bullet in the Warren Report. We all know why the magic bullet was invented.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 15 – invoke authority)?

  16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.

    Example: “You can’t say Paisley is still alive… that his death was faked and the list of CIA agents found on his boat deliberately placed there to support a purge at CIA. You have no proof. Why can’t you accept the Police reports?” True, since the dental records and autopsy report showing his body was two inches two long and the teeth weren’t his were lost right after his wife demanded inquiry, and since his body was cremated before she could view it – – all that remains are the Police Reports. Handy.

    Proper response: There is no suitable response to actual vanished materials or persons, unless you can shed light on the matter, particularly if you can tie the event to a cover up or other criminality. However, with respect to dialog where it is used against the discussion, you can respond… You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. The best you can say is that the matter is in contention based on highly suspicious matters which themselves tend to support the primary allegation.

    Why do you refuse to address the remaining issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 16 – vanish evidence and witnesses)?

  17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

    Example: “There were no CIA drugs and was no drug money laundering through Mena, Arkansas, and certainly, there was no Bill Clinton knowledge of it because it simply didn’t happen. This is merely an attempt by his opponents to put Clinton off balance and at a disadvantage in the election because Dole is such a weak candidate with nothing to offer that they are desperate to come up with something to swing the polls. Dole simply has no real platform.” Response. “You idiot! Dole has the clearest vision of what’s wrong with Government since McGovern. Clinton is only interested in raping the economy, the environment, and every woman he can get his hands on…” One naturally feels compelled, regardless of party of choice, to jump in defensively on that one…

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your evade discussion of the issues by attempting to sidetrack us with an emotional response – a trap which we will not fall into willingly. If you truly believe such political rhetoric, please drop out of this discussion, as it is not germane unless you can provide concrete facts to support your contentions of relevance.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 17- change the subject)?

  18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism”.

    Example: “You are such an idiot to think that possible – or are you such a paranoid conspiracy buff that you think the ‘gubment’ is cooking your pea-brained skull with microwaves, which is the only justification you might have for dreaming up this drivel.” After a drawing an emotional response: “Ohhh… I do seemed to have touched a sensitive nerve. Tsk, tsk. What’s the matter? The truth too hot for you to handle? Perhaps you should stop relying on the Psychic Friends Network and see a psychiatrist for some real professional help…”

    Proper response: “You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You attempt to draw me into emotional response without discussion of the issues. If you have something useful to contribute which defeats my argument, let’s here it – preferably without snide and unwarranted personal attacks, if you can manage to avoid sinking so low. Your useless rhetoric serves no purpose here if that is all you can manage.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 18 – emotionalize, antagonize, and goad opponents)?

  19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

    Example: “All he’s done is to quote the liberal media and a bunch of witnesses who aren’t qualified. Where’s his proof? Show me wreckage from flight 800 that shows a missile hit it!”

    Proper response: You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. You presume for us not to accept Don Phillips, reporter for the Washington Post, Al Baker, Craig Gordon or Liam Pleven, reporters for Newsday, Matthew Purdy or Matthew L. Wald, Don Van Natta Jr., reporters for the New York Times, or Pat Milton, wire reporter for the Associated Press – as being able to tell us anything useful about the facts in this matter.

     Neither would you allow us to accept Robert E. Francis, Vice Chairman of the NTSB, Joseph Cantamessa Jr., Special Agent In Charge of the New York Office of the F.B.I., Dr. Charles Wetli, Suffolk County Medical Examiner, the Pathologist examining the bodies, nor unnamed Navy divers, crash investigators, or other cited officials, including Boeing Aircraft representatives a part of the crash investigative team – as a qualified party in this matter, and thus, dismisses this material out of hand. Good logic, – about as good as saying 150 eye witnesses aren’t qualified.

    Only YOUR are qualified to tell us what to believe? Witnesses be damned? Radar tracks be damned? Satellite tracks be damned? Reporters be damned? Photographs be damned? Government statements be damned? Is there a pattern here?.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 19 – ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs)?

  20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

    Example: Jack Ruby warned the Warren Commission that the white Russian separatists, the Solidarists, were involved in the assassination. This was a handy “confession”, since Jack and Earl were both on the same team in terms of the cover up, and since it is now known that Jack worked directly with CIA in the assassination.

    Proper response: This one can be difficult to respond to unless you see it clearly, such as in the following example, where more is known today than earlier in time… You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your information is known to have designed to side track this issue. As revealed by CIA operative Marita Lorenz under oath offered in court in E. Howard Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby, CIA operatives met with Jack Ruby in Dallas the night before the assassination of JFK to distribute guns and money. Clearly, Ruby was a coconspirator whose “Solidarist confession” was meant to sidetrack any serious investigation of the murder.

    Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 20 – false evidence)?

  21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

    Example: According to one OK bombing Grand Juror who violated the law to speak the truth, jurors were, contrary to law, denied the power of subpoena of witness of their choosing, denied the power of asking witnesses questions of their choosing, and relegated to hearing only evidence prosecution wished them to hear, evidence which clearly seemed fraudulent and intended to paint conclusions other than facts actually suggested.

    Proper response: There is usually no adequate response to this tactic except to complain loudly at any sign of its application, particularly with respect to any possible cover up.


  22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

    Example: The False Memory Syndrome Foundation and American Family Foundation and American and Canadian Psychiatric Associations fall into this category, as their founding members and/or leadership include key persons associated with CIA Mind Control research. Not so curious, then, that (in a perhaps oversimplified explanation here) these organizations focus on, by means of their own “research findings”, that there is no such thing as Mind Control.

    Proper response: Unless you are in a position to be well versed in the topic and know of the background and relationships involved in the opponent organization, you are well equipped to fight this tactic.


  23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

    Example: To distract the public over the progress of a WTC bombing trial that seems to be uncovering nasty ties to the intelligence community, have an endless discussion of skaters whacking other skaters on the knee. To distract the public over the progress of the Waco trials that have the potential to reveal government sponsored murder, have an O.J. summer. To distract the public over an ever disintegrating McVeigh trial situation and the danger of exposing government involvements, come up with something else (any day now) to talk about – keeping in the sports theme, how about sports fans shooting referees and players during a game and the whole gun control thing?

    Proper response: The best you can do is attempt to keep public debate and interest in the true issues alive and point out that the “news flap” or other evasive tactic serves the interests of your opponents.

  24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

    Example: As experienced by certain proponents of friendly fire theories with respect to flight 800 – send in FBI agents to intimidate and threaten that if they persisted further they would be subject to charges of aiding and abetting Iranian terrorists, of failing to register as a foreign agents, or any other trumped up charges. If this doesn’t work, you can always plant drugs and bust them.

    Proper response: You have three defensive alternatives if you think yourself potential victim of this ploy. One is to stand and fight regardless. Another is to create for yourself an insurance policy which will point to your opponents in the event of any unpleasantness, a matter which requires superior intelligence information on your opponents and great care in execution to avoid dangerous pitfalls (see The Professional Paranoid by this author for suggestions on how this might be done).

    The last alternative is to cave in or run (same thing).


  25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

    Example: Do a Robert Vesco and retire to the Caribbean. If you don’t, somebody in your organization may choose to vanish you the way of Vince Foster or Ron Brown.

    Proper response: You will likely not have a means to attack this method, except to focus on the vanishing in hopes of uncovering it was by foul play as part of a deliberate cover up.

Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven distinct traits:

  1. They never actually discuss issues head on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

  2. They tend to pick and choose their opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

  3. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussion in the particular public arena. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

  4. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

  5. Their disdain for “conspiracy theorists” and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

  6. An odd kind of “artificial” emotionalism and an unusually thick skin – an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive.

    The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their presentation. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the “image” and are hot and cold with respect to emotions they pretend to have and the more calm or normal communications which are not emotional.

    It’s just a job, and they often seem unable to “act their role in type” as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later – an emotional yo-yo.

    With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game – where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth.

  7. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat ‘freudian’, so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within. I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author.

    For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I’m not aware of too many Navy pilots who don’t have a college degree.

    Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

I close with the first paragraph of the introduction to my book, Fatal Rebirth:

Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil.

Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require… or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There you have it folks.  Let nothing hinder you in getting to and sharing the truth!

geoengineeringwatch.org

 

German Police Officers Take Off Helmets & Marched With German Citizens Against Rothschild European Central Bank!


Note: This news is dated 6/2012, even so it’s worthy of another view. Many are just now awakening to the truth about banking and corporate slavery systems, most people are still unaware that governments are LEGAL corporations masquerading as governing systems. Please share freely…

The German police took off their helmets and marched with the protesters- clearing the way for them.

  1. April 30, 2013 ROLLING STONE: “Conspiracy Theorists Of The World, Believers In The Hidden Hands Of The Rothschilds, We Skeptics Owe You An Apology.”

  2. BENGHAZI:*** WHAT YOU’RE NOT BEING TOLD*** [SCG News] [VIDEO]

  3. Greece Military Stands Down In Support Of Their Fellow Citizen: Military High 5s With Citizen Protestors ~ Blackwater Stands Down!

  4. 86% Of U.S. Police Officers Stand With Bill Of Rights & Against Gun Control: Police One’s Gun Control Survey 11 Key Lessons ~ U.S. Police Stand With Their Citizens!

  5. Update April 29, 2013 On West/Waco Texas Fertilizer Plant Missile/Laser Strike: 14 Dead 160 Wounded ~ Government Motives To Destroy It With A Missile!

 

Urgent Action Free Fax: Tell Your Senators That $6.3 Trillion Is Too High A Price To Pay For The Gang Of Eight’s Amnesty!

Blockupy Frankfurt.

Police are escorting.

Reports 20,000+ protesters.

Nice to see their faces…. and their humanity coming through…

HEAD OF THE SNAKE ROTHSCHILD

HEAD OF THE SNAKE ROTHSCHILD

Who Owns The European Central Bank?

These Are The Same Cronies That Usurped The United States Central Bank _ The Federal Reserve And Turned Healthy Capitalism Into Cronie Capitalism By Derivative Fraud!

Here is a picture of Rothschild’s European Central Bank, which is located in Frankfurt, Germany!

Rothschild’s Handbook For Banker’s World Control.

  1. You Think Flooding The U.S. With QE4 Is Bad ~ Well You Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet: Japan & European Central Bank Printed Funny Money Is Coming To America! This “NEXT” Mafia “BUBBLE” Scheme To Usurp The United States Must Be Stopped Now!

German police officers escort an anti- cronie capitalism protest march with some 20,000 people in Frankfurt, Germany, Saturday, May 19, 2012. Protesters peacefully filled the city center of continental Europe’s biggest financial hub in their protest against the dominance of banks and what they perceive to be untamed cronie capitalism, Frankfurt police spokesman Ruediger Regis said.

 

The protest group calling itself Blockupy has called for blocking the access to the European Central Bank, which is located in Frankfurt’s business district. (AP Photo/Michael Probst)

Its Happening In Greece Too!  Greece Military High Fives Fellow Citizen Fighting Banker's Crime Of Austerity.

Its Happening In Greece Too! Greece Military High Fives Fellow Citizen Fighting Banker’s Crime Of Austerity.

Greece Military Stands Down In Support Of Their Fellow Citizen: Military High 5s With Citizen Protestors ~ Blackwater Stands Down!

Nice to see the police give protesters a hand. I think I will plan on my next vacation to visit Germany.

Such friendly people there! 

Democratic Underground

OBAMA COMMUNISM rothschildism

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/06/27/german-police-officers-take-off-helmets-marched-with-german-citizens-against-rothschild-european-central-bank/

Learn How You Can Kick Monsanto & Big Oil Out of Your Neighborhood!


Across the country, people are learning how to protect the health of their communities, and the people who live there. From GMO crops. From fracking. From outside corporations whose only concern is profit.

If you’d like to learn, too, you’re in luck. Because a Democracy School is coming to a community near you soon.

The CELDF Democracy School teaches citizens how to organize to protect community rights. It’s run by the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF), a non-profit, public interest law firm providing free and affordable legal services to communities facing threats to their local environment, local agriculture, the local economy, and quality of life.

I recently attended a Democracy School and then met with local communities in Oregon that are working to pass their own versions of CELDF’s Model Food Bill of Rights. The Food Bill of Rights is a tool for communities to establish the right to locally produced, sustainably grown food, and to ban unsustainable agricultural practices. The bill includes protections for local family farms, the humane treatment of livestock and bans on genetically modified organisms. It also removes legal barriers that stand in the way of community food sustainability, such as corporate “rights” and state preemption.

It was a great experience, which is why I’m letting you know that a Democracy School is coming to a community near you. If you want to learn more about how to fight back against Monsanto and Big Oil, this is a great opportunity.

Kauai, HI — May 3 & 4
To register or for more information, contact Ami Marcus at ami@planetvisionproductions.com.

Greenfield, MA — May 3 & 4
To register or for more information, contact Sandra Boston at bostons@aol.com.

McMinnville, OR — May 10 & 11
For more information, contact Linda Grove at lgrove@onlinenw.com  or 503-472-9213. Click here to register.

Yellow Springs, OH — May 17 & 18
To register or for more information, contact Dimi Reber at dimireber@rocketmail.com or 937-767-1078.

Thanks!
Alexis Baden-Mayer
Political Director

Organic Consumers Association

6771 South Silver Hill Drive – Finland, MN 55603 – Phone: 218-226-4164 – Fax: 218-353-7652

%d bloggers like this: