Friday, December 31, 2010

Gulf Activists Harassed By TSA Agents Who Claim Filming Is Illegal

Friday, December 24, 2010

Osama bin Dead awhile

by Keith Johnson

The next time the CIA comes up with another Osama bin Laden videotape, you might want to compare their images of the alleged al-Qaeda leader to the photograph I’ve provided here. If he looks any healthier than that, then you’re probably looking at an imposter.

Yeah, Osama has definitely seen better days. But give the guy a break, huh? You wouldn’t look much better if you’d been dead for nine years.

Oh, by the way, in case you’ve just joined us? Osama bin Laden is dead.

He died in the Tora Bora Mountains of Afghanistan on December 13, 2001. He was buried in an unmarked grave within 24 hours of his death. Case closed.

But don’t just take my word for it. Top terror experts, intelligence analysts, academics, government officials, and even major political figures around the globe tend to agree that, “All the evidence suggests Elvis Presley is more alive today than Osama Bin Laden.”

I know this is old news to most of you, but I think it’s important to reiterate this fact. Why? Because Christmas season is upon us, and you know what that means: Terrorism!

That’s right! “Tis the season to be frightened,” and what 21st century Christmas would be complete without a holiday greeting from the man often credited with masterminding the attacks behind 9/11?

But wait—it’s already Christmas Eve (at least it was at the time of this writing)—and although our government has been hyping the threat al-Qaeda poses to the American people, one central figure has been conspicuously absent from their conspiracy theories.

Could it be that our government has finally given up on trying to convince the American people that Osama bin Laden is still alive and kicking? There sure is plenty to suggest that their efforts have thus far failed to inspire the kind of fear they need to justify these unpopular wars abroad, and the even more unpopular war on the civil liberties of American citizens here at home.

A CNN poll conducted in September of this year reveals that 67% of Americans believe it is unlikely the U.S. will ever capture or kill Osama bin Laden. That’s a dramatic increase since 2001, when only 20% believed that it would be unlikely that the government would catch him. One thing this poll does not address is why the American people believe it is unlikely that the U.S. will capture or kill Osama bin Laden. But you and I know the answer to that question, right? Right—because he’s dead!

By the time this poll was conducted, the American people had already grown tired of the ad nauseam attempts by our government to breathe life into this long dead villain. Each new audio and videotape purporting to be that of Osama bin Laden failed to stand up to scrutiny. One of the more prominent critics of these tapes is Former U.S. foreign intelligence officer Angelo M. Codevilla, who is now a professor of international relations at Boston University. In March of 2009, Codevilla wrote a damning critique of the countless recordings in an article for American Spectator Magazine.


Jewish Extremism and Its Media Cover Up

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Is Wikileaks Endgame Internet Censorship?

By F. William Engdahl

"A closer look at the details of what has so far been carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international media such as the New York Times reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to North Korea. It is almost too perfectly scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled "computer geek," sifts through classified information at Forward Operating Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga.

In addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan. It is almost too perfectly scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled "computer geek," sifts through classified information at Forward Operating Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan."

"Manning then is supposed to have tracked down a notorious former US computer hacker to get his 250,000 pages of classified US State Department cables out in the Internet for the whole world to see. He allegedly told the US hacker that the documents he had contained "incredible, awful things that belonged in the public domain and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington, DC." The hacker turned him in to US authorities so the story goes. Manning is now incommunicado since months in US military confinement so we cannot ask him, conveniently. The Pentagon routinely hires the best hackers to design their security systems. [Assange] selects as exclusive newspapers to decide what is to be leaked the New York Times which did such service in promoting faked propaganda against Saddam that led to the Iraqi war, the London Guardian and Der Spiegel. Assange claims he had no time to sift through so many pages so handed them to the trusted editors of the establishment media for them to decide what should be released. Very "anti-establishment" that.

The New York Times even assigned one of its top people, David E. Sanger, to control the release of the Wikileaks material. Sanger is no establishment outsider. He sits as a member of the elite Council on Foreign Relations as well as the Aspen Institute Strategy Group together with the likes of Condi Rice, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, former State Department Deputy Secretary and now World Bank head Robert Zoellick among others. Indeed a strange choice of media for a person who claims to be anti-establishment. But then Assange also says he believes the US Government version of 9/11 and calls the Bilderberg Group a normal meeting of people, a very establishment view. Most important, the 250,000 cables are not "top secret" as we might have thought.


Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Monday, December 20, 2010

North Korea 'will not hit back' over Yeonpyeong drills

North Korea says it will not retaliate despite "reckless provocations" from the South, which held live-fire drills on the flashpoint island of Yeonpyeong.

The North shelled the island last month after similar drills and had threatened more retaliation this time.

But state media quoted the army as saying it was "not worth reacting".

Meanwhile US politician Bill Richardson, on a visit to the North, says it has agreed to allow UN inspectors back into the country.

The New Mexico governor, who is in Pyongyang in an unofficial capacity, said he had been told during meetings that members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would be allowed renewed access to a uranium enrichment facility.

There has been no official comment from the North, and it is unclear which facility Mr Richardson was referring to.

Inspectors, who had been monitoring the Yongbyon nuclear plant, were expelled from the country in April 2009.

UN Security Council talks on North Korea ended without a deal at the weekend, reportedly after China refused to agree to a statement critical of its ally.

The South's government has been under huge domestic pressure to take a tough stance towards Pyongyang, in the wake of the 23 November shelling of Yeonpyeong, which killed four people.
'Make dialogue, not war'

The South ordered residents of Yeonpyeong and several other islands to take cover in air-raid shelters early on Monday.

Witnesses said the ground shook from the force of the artillery barrages during 90 minutes of firing.

South Koreans feared a military response from the North, but state news agency KCNA reported that the military was not planning any retaliation.

"The revolutionary armed forces of the DPRK [North Korea] did not feel any need to retaliate against every despicable military provocation," KCNA quoted the the army's Supreme Command as saying.

"The world should properly know who is the true champion of peace and who is the real provocateur of a war."


Historical Revisionism Needs To Focus On The Truth

By Karl Schwarz

In what might first appear a brave act of Historical Revisionism, Germany has endeavored to get the truth on the record regarding the saturation fire-bombing of Dresden Germany.

Or, did they?

They appointed a Historical Commission that purportedly had free license to dig into the matter as deep as they wished. As often happens when 'historical accounts' are looked into the 'Dresden matter' produced a much lower number of casualties and seems to have accomplished nothing but expand the debate.

Although reports have varied wildly about the number killed being anywhere from 35,000, to 100,000 and some statements as high as 500,000, it seems the math was wrong according to the (victimized) Germans that were involved in the Historical Commission investigation. Or, this could just as easily be zionist 'revisionist history' at work again.

The following is a quote from the October 2, 2008 issue of 'Der Spiegel':,1518,581992,00.html

"Dresden Commission of Historians for the Ascertainment of the Number of Victims of the Air Raids on the City of Dresden on 13/14 February 1945" has provisionally estimated the likely death-toll at around 18,000 and definitely no more than 25,000."

Now, this revelation brings up several interesting points.

First, what is the true casualty / death-toll of the fire-bombing of Dresden during World War II? It seems the true number is still an unknown and hotly contested figure, no pun intended.

Second, most people accept that the saturation incendiary bombing of a civilian population in the manner that was done was blatantly wrong. The war was almost over and snuffing out those lives was merely a show of air power, not a military necessity. The US and UK were putting on a 'shock and awe' demonstration for the advancing Russian army.

Yes, they killed a lot of innocent civilians to demonstrate to the Russians that their advancement to the west needed to halt. This Historical Commission says 18,000 to 25,000 and many other accounts state in the 100,000 to 250,000 to 500,000 range. Regardless of the actual figure, it was a war crime and should have never happened.

Third, not enough has been reported about the 1 to 1.5 million German POW soldiers that were literally starved to death or froze to death in the POW camps run by the US after the war ended. It happened but getting at the truth of the matter is difficult to do when so many wish to hide from the issue and the Truth.

There has been some written on that subject, up to and including how appalled the British were at US actions after the war. It seems the British were a little more caring and concerned about proper Hague and Geneva Convention conduct in post-war Germany. Just because an enemy has been defeated and surrendered, it is not a just cause to keep on killing them in inhumane ways as the US forces did to the German POW's after World War II ended. I have even read articles that the Russians were more compassionate in feeding and clothing the German POW's, than were the Americans.

I recently had breakfast with a German who was born in Dresden and survived the fire-bombing. He related to me the horrors of those two days but confessed that no one knows what the actual number of dead was from the fire-bombing of Dresden. It may be that only God knows the real number of dead, and the numbers still vary wildly from the 18,000 to 25,000 up to the much higher 250,000 to 500,000. He was there and thinks the figure was around 40,000 to 50,000 dead.

Which is the truth? That is still hard to ascertain.

The Dresden resident that survived the bombing continued to tell me a story that is not in the history books and was just as interesting to me. The Russian army reached Dresden before the Americans arrived. He reported that there were no problems whatsoever as the Russian army moved towards Berlin and to establish their western front. There was no battle or resistance from the German people.


'I didn't think of Iraqis as humans,' says U.S. soldier who raped 14-year-old girl before killing her and her family

An Iraq War veteran serving five life terms for raping and killing a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and killing her parents and sister says he didn't think of Iraqi civilians as humans after being exposed to extreme warzone violence.

Steven Green, a former 101st Airborne soldier, in his first interview since the 2006 killings, claimed that his crimes were fuelled in part by experiences in Iraq's violent 'Triangle of Death' where two of his sergeants were gunned down.

He also cited a lack of leadership and help from the Army.

'I was crazy,' Green said in the exclusive telephone interview from federal prison in Tucson, Arizona. 'I was just all the way out there. I didn't think I was going to live.'

Green talked about what led up to the March 12, 2006, attack on a family near Mahmoudiya, Iraq, that left him serving five consecutive life sentences.

The former soldier, who apologised at sentencing for his crimes, said he wasn't seeking sympathy nor trying to justify his actions - killings prosecutors described at trial in 2009 as one of the worst crimes of the Iraq war.

But Green said people should know his actions were a consequence of his circumstances in a war zone.

'If I hadn't ever been in Iraq, I wouldn't be in the kind of trouble I'm in now,' Green said. 'I'm not happy about that.'

Green was discharged with a 'personality disorder' before federal charges were brought against him.

Prosecutors sought a death sentence, but a federal jury in Paducah, Kentucky, opted for five life sentences on charges including the rape and murder of 14-year-old Abeer Qassim Al-Janabi and the shooting deaths of her mother, father and younger sister.

Four other soldiers were convicted in military court for various roles in the attack. Three remain in military prison.

Green is challenging the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which allows the federal government to charge an American in civilian court for alleged crimes committed overseas. He was the first former soldier convicted under the statute. The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled arguments for January 21.

Green is challenging the constitutionality of that law, saying it gives the executive branch too much leeway over whom to prosecute. Prosecutors say the law should be upheld.

'I've got some hope, but I'm not delusional about it,' said Green, now 25. 'I hope it works. But, whenever they give you multiple life sentences, they're not planning on letting you out.'

Green didn't testify at trial. During sentencing, he apologized and said he expects to face 'God's justice' when he dies.


Saturday, December 18, 2010

FBI now spying on your garbage

Former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents are helping local authorities turn thousands of garbage collectors into a spy force that reports to the police.

Reports say 100 Waste Management employees have already gone through a training program called Waste Watch, CBS 6 Albany/WRGB reported on Friday.

"Because our job is collecting trash from local neighborhoods and businesses, we are a useful resource to identify illegal activity, or to help prevent a minor mishap from turning into a dangerous situation," said Ken Bevis, district manager of Waste Management in Albany, New York.

Bevis added that all Waste Management drivers, helpers, and repair technicians have been trained to look out for suspicious activities and respond in the event of an emergency.

Officials believe that garbage collectors who go through the same route every day are able to recognize situations that are not normal.

Police hope that they will be able to help keep streets clear of crime as well. But not everyone is sold on the idea.

Waste Watch is already active in 100 communities across the United States. The total figure of informants could already number at least 10,000 nationwide.

Critics say the program is an example of how the United States is turning into an East German-style informant society.


Joe Lieberman, WTC 7 Did Not Occur, “I Do Not Support A New Investigation”

Cool Facts About Israel - Lets Torture & Stone Palestinians

Friday, December 17, 2010

William Cooper: Time For A Reality Check

AIPAC flexes its muscle – who cares?

Congress passes a resolution against Palestinian unilaterlism. Yawn…

Rep. Howard Berman. Not a word of criticism of Israel

Shocking news coming out of D.C.: AIPAC managed to get members of Congress to pass a resolution that’s pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian. Wow. I’m glad I was sitting down when I read the headlines: “House opposes unilateral declaration of Palestine”!

The congressman who pushed the resolution through is Rep. Howard Berman (CA Dem) who told the Forward at the time of his appointment to the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee: “Even before I was a Democrat, I was a Zionist”. According to the Washington Report in Middle East Affairs, Berman has received throughout his congressional career over 115 thousand dollars from pro-Israel PACs.

The fact that this last minute resolution passed so easily was no surprise to columnist M.J. Rosenberg, who predicted its approval hours before it reached the floor:

“Congressman Howard Berman (D-CA), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, is today rushing to the House floor with an AIPAC-drafted resolution condemning the Palestinians for publicly suggesting that, in the wake of Netanyahu’s refusal to freeze settlements and negotiate, they will consider a unilateral declaration of statehood. (As is usual with Berman, his resolution exclusively blames Palestinians for the collapse of peace talks; not a word of criticism of Israel appears.)

The Berman bill, drafted only yesterday, will be voted on today because when it comes to pleasing AIPAC there are simply no limits.”

So, for all you Wild Card supporters out there I say: don’t worry. If anything, you should be proud AIPAC is picking this one up. It means they’re nervous about Palestinian unilateralism. Even better: it means AIPAC believes there just might be a few people in the White House who are thinking about Palestinian unilateralism, too.


Thursday, December 16, 2010

PHILIP GIRALDI : Former top AIPAC official states passing US secrets to Israel is routine for the Israel Lobby

Rosen claimed somewhat ominously that passing classified information obtained from government contacts was business as usual in Washington.

He asked that high level witnesses including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, former Defense Department officials Paul D. Wolfowitz and Douglas J. Feith, and Richard L. Armitage, the former deputy secretary of state all be called on to testify that confidential information was frequently given to AIPAC for discreet passage to the Israeli Embassy.

– Philip Giraldi

Reports of surfing porn sites and frequenting prostitutes is not what one expects to read regarding the leadership of Washington’s most powerful foreign policy lobby.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is embroiled in a court battle with its former Director of Foreign Policy Issues Steven Rosen, who is claiming that AIPAC first unfairly fired then slandered and libeled him, publicly denouncing him for not exhibiting “the conduct that AIPAC expects from its employees.” He is seeking total damages of $20 million.

AIPAC has successfully limited the case to the defamation charge, fearing that it would spill over into other areas, but attempts to have the entire suit dismissed have so far been unsuccessful.

Defeat for AIPAC could have major consequences beyond a sudden shortage of donors, including increasing demands for the group to register as a foreign lobby and even criminal charges relating to the passage of classified information to Israel, an offense under the Espionage Act. Some have even predicted that the trial could spin out of control, with proliferating charges and counter-charges leading to the effective dismantling of AIPAC.

The betting is that Rosen might well be willing to accept an out of court settlement of most of the money he is seeking to make the suit go away and limit the damage to his former employer, but there are also reports that the exchanges have become so poisonous that reconciliation is impossible. AIPAC appears poised to try to discredit Rosen completely and is gathering a defense fund of between $5 and $10 million in an attempt to salvage its reputation among the well heeled Jewish donors who have up until recently provided its annual $70 million budget.

Rosen and his AIPAC colleague Keith Weissman were charged under the Espionage Act in 2003, after the FBI made the case that they had obtained classified information from Pentagon employee Larry Franklin and passed it on to Israeli diplomats and to journalist Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post.

In 2005, the two men were fired by AIPAC in spite of initial pledges of support. The trial, sometimes referred to as AIPACgate, dragged on until May 1, 2009, when it was finally dismissed after the government could not make its case due to adverse decisions by the presiding Judge T. S. Ellis, possibly acting under pressure from the White House to end the proceedings.

At the time, as the centerpiece of his defense, Rosen claimed somewhat ominously that passing classified information obtained from government contacts was business as usual in Washington. He asked that high level witnesses including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, former Defense Department officials Paul D. Wolfowitz and Douglas J. Feith, and Richard L. Armitage, the former deputy secretary of state all be called on to testify that confidential information was frequently given to AIPAC for discreet passage to the Israeli Embassy.


Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Wikileaks Is Zionist Poison II: Deconstruction Of The Myth

by Jonathan Azaziah

Not since Zionist warmonger Barack Obama’s ‘ascension’ to the US presidency, has there been such a hysteria in the anti-war/anti-Zionist community as there is with Julian Assange and his organization, Wikileaks. Just like Obama, whose smooth-talker persona duped millions of awakened individuals, lulling them into a false sense of security with lies and trickery, Wikileaks has pulled the wool over the eyes of average people and distinguished activists and writers alike with its ‘whistleblower’ image. Even after Obama’s Zionist roots were exposed, in which powerful pro-Israel figures like Abner Mikva, Joel Sprayregen, Newton Minow, Bettylu Saltzman of the dynastic Saltzman family, Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, Lester Crown of the vastly wealthy Crown household and Penny Pritzker of the Pritzker dynasty nurtured his rise to political stardom in Chicago (1), the current puppet of the Zionist entity was no less supported and no less loved by his starry-eyed followers.

After Obama was designated the democratic ‘candidate’ for president, he delivered a speech at AIPAC and announced to his masters that the United States has an ‘unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security (2).’ Still, the opinions of his followers remained unchanged. And not even after Obama maintained utter silence during Operation Cast Lead (3), in which the usurping Tel Aviv regime murdered 1,440 innocent Palestinians in illegally besieged and occupied Gaza, including 431 children, did his legions of drones realize that the slogans of hope and change they so vehemently believed in, were really just smoke and mirrors. Only recently, due to Obama spreading the Zionist Bush administration’s ‘Project for a New American Century’ to Yemen, expanding the murderous drone strikes in Pakistan, as well as increasing the genocides in occupied Iraq and occupied Afghanistan, have some of his once seemingly mind-controlled supporters snapped out of their trance. Plenty of them still continue their blindness however.

Assange and Wikileaks make the Zionist-fueled Obama hype look minuscule; like rain drops in an ocean. Wikileaks, touted and fully endorsed by the Zionist media, has become the peak of resistance and dissidence. The greatest whistleblower in the history of whistleblowing. Assange has been elevated to god status, eclipsing rock stars and movie stars. Wikileaks cannot be questioned. Assange cannot be investigated. Everything the organization does is for the good of the people, and everything Assange says is absolute 100% fact.

Though it may come as a shock to those who have bought into the absurdity of Wikileaks, everything aforementioned is a morbid delusion. Wikileaks is no whistleblower. Assange is no hero. And the leaks, which have been hailed across the globe, aren’t even leaks. Wikileaks isn’t just toxic Zionist poison, it is a full-blown US-Zionist intelligence operation.


Defend Jennifer Peto, a Brave Canadian Critic of Zionism

Canada is mostly a diluted version of the USA. But Canadians are justly proud of their country’s resistance to the abrasive style of American politics. In one respect, though, it is more extreme than the United States – it is the only country with a more fanatical Israel Lobby.

When the University of Toronto recently accepted a Master’s thesis critical of Jewish privilege, the Lobby, the media, and politicians, immediately condemned it as ‘hate’. Some of these legislators declared the University should not have awarded the M.A. to Sociology and Equity Studies student Jennifer Peto, an unprecedented interference of the government in academic freedom.

When a Jewish anti-Zionist like Peto is physically threatened by Zionists and denounced by politicians, the first thing is obviously to defend her and her freedom of speech. But there is a danger in giving extra credit to her argument because it has come under such vicious attack from the Lobby.

The extreme reaction of the Lobby to any criticism has the effect of encouraging narcissism in critics, especially Jewish ones – there is nothing like persecution to make people self-righteous, and Zionists know this better than anyone! To be a Jewish critic of Zionism in a Western country today is less risky than to have joined the white anti-apartheid activists in South Africa, who were on the receiving end of letter-bombs as well as abuse. Still, Peto is a brave woman, and her thesis honestly describes her difficult break with her Zionist upbringing.

Her thesis, ‘The Victimhood of the Powerful: White Jews, Zionism and the Racism of Hegemonic Holocaust Education’, is a development of the tradition of left-wing criticism of various kinds of ‘privilege’ – white, male, etc.1 She reviews How Jews Became White Folks.2 She thinks that race is socially constructed: “race, whiteness and ethnicity produce, and are produced by, nationalist discourses.” She uncritically repeats the idea that Israel is a US ‘client state’ but admits “the discourses that are used in defence of Israel are different than those used to excuse or deny American, Canadian and other Western imperial violence.” It’s not that complicated. Never mind ‘discourses.’ Is it in the interests of the other Western capitalist countries to give unconditional support to Israel, or not? In short, she has no critique of Jewish power.

Peto states, “My work is based in the understanding that Zionism – the belief that Jewish people have a right to a nation-state built on top of the ruins of Palestine – is a racist, imperialist ideology that can only effectively be challenged through anti-racist, anti-imperialist theory and activism.” I argue the exact opposite – I want to challenge her and the left in general to ask why this approach was so effective in the case of South Africa, and so ineffective against Israel. She has nothing to say about ‘the chosen people’ and the festivals which celebrate massacres of gentiles – she makes no attempt to answer the question “is Zionism an expression of Judaism”? She explicitly says, “Jews of European descent now enjoy white privilege,” which implies a) they didn’t used to enjoy privilege at all, and b) the privilege they now enjoy is not specifically Jewish. She compares Canada’s history of ethnic cleansing with Israel’s. This is not how to undermine Zionism.

A thesis is not a political manifesto, but obviously, Jennifer Peto is an activist, and her paper’s argument leads to certain conclusions, certain tactics, for the growing campaign to reduce uncritical support for the apartheid state in the rest of the world. Therefore, I think it is appropriate to criticize it from a tactical point of view.

My argument is, quite simply, that left-wing anti-oppression politics is inadequate for combating Zionism. Telling the white European majority of the Western countries that Jewish privilege is essentially a variant of their own is not only false, it leads logically to solidarity with Israel. Surely it would be more effective to point out that most Americans have no interest in supporting Jewish supremacy, rather than telling them they are ‘complicit’ in racism? Concern with the history of white European racism assisted the dismantling of apartheid in Africa, desegregation, affirmative action, busing and African-American studies, but it doesn’t lead to opposing the Jewish apartheid state.


Christian Zionism

“Christian Zionism 2 of 4”

“Christian Zionism 3 of 4”

“Christian Zionism 4 of 4”

Monday, December 13, 2010

30 FACTS Evidencing the Rothschild league of bankers planned the Gulf oil crisis


Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz and Sherri Kane

This article explains what is really happening in the Gulf of Mexico, who is really responsible for the explosion, and how the devastation serves investment bankers who sway stocks, create markets, and planned this crisis, among a series of catastrophies, to advance geopolitical and financial agendas for their New World Order.


WAR has been declared against We The People. Yet, there is no country or military present to defend us.

Covert infiltrations and corruptions in governments by the “Rothschild League” of bankers and “private equity investors” now poison our bodies, minds, and planet. Yet, appropriate military and/or militia defenses are prohibited.

Crisis-capitalists are massacring us and our environment petrochemically. They have deployed propaganda—mass media deception—to camouflage their real intentions and vast destruction.

The air we breathe, food we eat, and water we drink, has been polluted to deliver profitable diseases and depopulation, simulating a “scorched earth policy” of war.

Citizen’s arrests, grand jury investigations, criminal indictments, and war crimes prosecutions are urgently needed, yet forbidden.

Generalized fear, depression, fatigue, and apathy is incapacitating our defenses, aiding the adversaries, and predisposing us to diseases and early deaths.

Based on the following irrefutable facts, the so-called “accidental explosion” in the Gulf is a Transocean/Halliburton/British Petroleum/Goldman-Sachs attack---the latest in a series of unspeakable war crimes perpetrated by Anglo-American State of “Rothschild League” bankers.

The Little-Known Rothschild Banking Dynastry


Saturday, December 11, 2010

Interview With Gordon Duff: Wikileaks Debunked

Friday, December 10, 2010

Wikileaks: A Big Dangerous US Government Con Job

by F. William Engdahl

The story on the surface makes for a script for a new Oliver Stone Hollywood thriller. A 39-year old Australian hacker holds the President of the United States and his State Department hostage to a gigantic cyber “leak,” unless the President leaves Julian Assange and his Wikileaks free to release hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive US Government memos. A closer look at the details, so far carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international media such as the New York Times, reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to Russia to North Korea. The Wikileaks is a big and dangerous US intelligence Con Job which will likely be used to police the Internet.

It is almost too perfectly-scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled “computer geek,” sifts through classified information at Forward Operating Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga. In addition to diplomatic cables, Manning is believed to have provided WikiLeaks with helicopter gun camera video of an errant US attack in Baghdad on unarmed journalists, and with war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Manning then is supposed to have tracked down a notorious former US computer hacker to get his 250,000 pages of classified US State Department cables out in the Internet for the whole world to see. He allegedly told the US hacker that the documents he had contained "incredible, awful things that belonged in the public domain and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington, DC." The hacker turned him in to US authorities so the story goes. Manning is now incommunicado since months in US military confinement so we cannot ask him, conveniently. The Pentagon routinely hires the best hackers to design their security systems.

Then the plot thickens. The 250,000 pages end up at the desk of Julian Assange, the 39-year-old Australian founder of a supposedly anti-establishment website with the cute name Wikileaks. Assange decides to selectively choose several of the world’s most ultra-establishment news media to exclusively handle the leaking job for him as he seems to be on the run from Interpol, not for leaking classified information, but for allegedly having consensual sex with two Swedish women who later decided it was rape.

He selects as exclusive newspapers to decide what is to be leaked the New York Times which did such service in promoting faked propaganda against Saddam that led to the Iraqi war, the London Guardian and Der Spiegel. Assange claims he had no time to sift through so many pages so handed them to the trusted editors of the establishment media for them to decide what should be released. Very “anti-establishment” that. The New York Times even assigned one of its top people, David E. Sanger, to control the release of the Wikileaks material. Sanger is no establishment outsider. He sits as a member of the elite Council on Foreign Relations as well as the Aspen Institute Strategy Group together with the likes of Condi Rice, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, former State Department Deputy Secretary and now World Bank head Robert Zoellick among others.

Indeed a strange choice of media for a person who claims to be anti-establishment. But then Assange also says he believes the US Government version of 9/11 and calls the Bilderberg Group a normal meeting of people, a very establishment view.

Not so secret cables…

The latest sensational Wikileaks documents allegedly from the US State Department embassies around the world to Washington are definitely not as Hillary Clinton claimed "an attack on America's foreign policy interests that have endangered innocent people." And they do not amount to what the Italian foreign minister, called the "September 11 of world diplomacy." The British government calls them a threat to national security and an aide to Canada’s Prime Minister calls on the CIA to assassinate Assange, as does kooky would-be US Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin.

Most important, the 250,000 cables are not "top secret" as we might have thought. Between two and three million US Government employees are cleared to see this level of "secret" document,[1] and some 500,000 people around the world have access to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRnet) where the cables were stored. Siprnet is not recommended for distribution of top-secret information. Only 6% or 15,000 pages of the documents have been classified as even secret, a level below top-secret. Another 40% were the lowest level, "confidential", while the rest were unclassified. In brief, it was not all that secret.[2]

Most of the revelations so far have been unspectacular. In Germany the revelations led to the removal of a prominent young FDP politician close to Guido Westerwelle who apparently liked to talk too much to his counterpart at the US Embassy. The revelations about Russian politics, that a US Embassy official refers to Putin and Medvedev as “Batman and Robin,” tells more about the cultural level of current US State Department personnel than it does about internal Russian politics.

But for anyone who has studied the craft of intelligence and of disinformation, a clear pattern emerges in the Wikileaks drama. The focus is put on select US geopolitical targets, appearing as Hillary Clinton put it “to justify US sanctions against Iran.” They claim North Korea with China’s granting of free passage to Korean ships despite US State Department pleas, send dangerous missiles to Iran. Saudi Arabia’s ailing King Abdullah reportedly called Iran’s President a Hitler.

Excuse to police the Internet?

What is emerging from all the sound and Wikileaks fury in Washington is that the entire scandal is serving to advance a long-standing Obama and Bush agenda of policing the until-now free Internet. Already the US Government has shut the Wikileaks server in the United States though no identifiable US law has been broken.

The process of policing the Web was well underway before the current leaks scandal. In 2009 Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snowe introduced the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (S.773). It would give the President unlimited power to disconnect private-sector computers from the internet. The bill "would allow the president to 'declare a cyber-security emergency' relating to 'non-governmental' computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat." We can expect that now this controversial piece of legislation will get top priority when a new Republican House and the Senate convene in January.

The US Department of Homeland Security, an agency created in the political hysteria following 9/11 2001 that has been compared to the Gestapo, has already begun policing the Internet. They are quietly seizing and shutting down internet websites (web domains) without due process or a proper trial. DHS simply seizes web domains that it wants to and posts an ominous "Department of Justice" logo on the web site. See an example at Over 75 websites were seized and shut in a recent week. Right now, their focus is websites that they claim "violate copyrights," yet the website that was seized by DHS contained no copyrighted content whatsoever. It was merely a search engine website that linked to destinations where people could access copyrighted content. Step by careful step freedom of speech can be taken away. Then what?


1. BBCNews, Siprnet: Where the leaked cables came from, 29 November, 2010, accessed in

2. Ken Dilanian, Inside job: Stolen diplomatic cables show U.S. challenge of stopping authorized users, Los Angeles Times, November 29, 2010, accessed in,0,6716809.story


UK Protesters Attack Car Containing Prince Charles

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Helen Thomas Says Anti-Defamation League is Intimidating Her

Helen Thomas said on a radio show that aired Tuesday that the Anti-Defamation League was intimidating her. The journalist defended comments she made last Thursday in Dearborn.

"I just think that people should be enlightened as to who is in charge of the opinion in this country," Thomas, 90, told the Marion, Ohio, radio station WMRN-AM.

In response, ADL Director Abe Foxman told the Free Press on Wednesday that the group has a right to criticize Thomas, whose comments are "doing body blows to her image."

Thomas had said that Zionists control major U.S. institutions and Foxman, said her comments were "classic ... anti-Semitism." He called on groups to remove honors in her name. Hours later, Wayne State University pulled an award in her name.

Thomas, the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, grew up in Detroit and graduated from WSU.

"I'm going to tell the Anti-Defamation League to back off," Thomas said. "They think they have the right of intimidation." "They already got my job. They want to get my honorary degrees."

But Foxman, known for his work to combat anti-Semitism, said: "It's very sad that a woman of her stature ... just can't stop lashing out in anger."

To hear the interview, click here:

Niraj Warikoo
Detroit Free Press


Who Owns Your Mind? Mind Control and the Media By Christopher Bollyn

Mass media is the most powerful tool used by the ruling class to manipulate the masses. It shapes and molds opinions and attitudes and defines what is normal and acceptable.
- "Mind Control Theories and Techniques used by Mass Media"

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
- Edward Bernays, Propaganda

As a patriotic American who is deeply dismayed by the lack of resistance to the lies of 9/11 and the criminal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, I sometimes ask myself why Americans seem so apathetic in the face of such blatant injustice and evil. Either they don’t care or they are unable to see past the lies is the first logical explanation that comes to mind, but that just doesn’t make sense. Most Americans I know are very patriotic and deeply concerned about their nation. Most are able to discern fact from fiction. So what has hijacked their patriotism, corrupted their thinking, and prevents them from comprehending the outrageous criminal deception of 9/11 -- and standing up against it?

For most Americans, and other people living in modern developed societies, the mass media is the final arbiter of reality. While many Americans may have serious doubts and questions about 9/11, they believe in the “free press” and await the day the mass media will embrace the facts and evidence of what really happened. That day, however, will never come, at least not until the nexus between the military and the mass media is broken. In the absence of this correction most people will remain captive in the media's "Auschwitz of the mind," stupefied by its mind control and unable to resist the bold-faced lies of the government.

When we talk about "mind control," images of drugged and hypnotized assassins like Sirhan Sirhan may come to mind, but the process by which the media controls our minds is really very ordinary; it is as omnipresent and common as the television set in every American home.

Unlike most Americans of my age, I grew up without a television and have never owned one, so I hardly ever watch TV. Prior to my recent visit to Berlin, I hadn’t seen any television since watching the World Cup last summer. Nor do I listen to the radio.

When we visited Berlin in November, I had access to a television and watched the news on CNN and BBC World. With the 600 billion dollar quantitative easing (QE2) announced by the Federal Reserve, and the discovery of terror bombs coming from Yemen, there was certainly no shortage of news. What really disturbed me, however, was the utter shallowness of the discussion and the conspicuous omission of key facts.

On November 4, I bought the Financial Times and New York Times to see how these well-respected newspapers would report the Fed’s creation of 600 billion dollars out of thin air. Both papers simply said that the Fed “would buy an additional $600 billion in long-term Treasuries by the end of June 2011,” but nowhere did they describe how this buying of debt really works. For that, one would have to read The Web of Debt by Ellen Hodgson Brown, or a similar book that discusses how the Fed really works by creating debt to enslave the American people.

The most blatant mind control tactics were seen in the coverage of the Yemeni terror bombs that had supposedly been sent to some unnamed Jewish organization in Chicago. Photographs of the interior of the explosive-laden computer printer revealed the bomber’s return address. The evil genius who made the bomb had left the sticker with the serial number in plain sight, allowing government sleuths to track the bomb to Al Qaida in Yemen. The face of the suspected Arab culprit was then shown on the screen. The mind control exercise was complete. The fanatic Muslim fear button had been pushed once again.

Meanwhile, there were horrendous terror bombings in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, in which hundreds of people were killed, and daily reports of C.I.A. missile strikes in Pakistan. The wicked asymmetry of the War on Terror could not be more obvious. The bombs sent to Islamic countries under U.S. occupation always cause huge numbers of casualties but are never investigated, while the bombs they send to us usually fail to detonate but make the headlines and are used to instill fear in the public. To be exposed to such mind-numbing propaganda was truly disturbing and left me feeling distinctly uneasy.


David Icke Debunked (Full Movie)

This is 2.5 hour film from Chris White takes a very close look at
David Icke's history and beliefs. It reveals the true sources of David
Icke's theories which are often shocking , and should be very
concerning for a genuine seeker of truth. This is a well rounded
expose which is done respectfully, while still attempting to get the
average truther to reevaluate what they really know about the
"endgame" of the Illuminati.


WikiLeaks ‘struck a deal with Israel’ over diplomatic cables leaks

“Assange met with Israeli officials in Geneva earlier this year and struck the secret deal. The Israel government, it seems, had somehow found out or expected that the documents to be leaked contained a large number of documents about the Israeli attacks on Lebanon and Gaza in 2006 and 2008-9 respectively. These documents, which are said to have originated mainly from the Israeli embassies in Tel Aviv and Beirut, where removed and possibly destroyed by Assange, who is the only person who knows the password that can open these documents, the sources added.”

We should obviously all support WikiLeaks and its founder and spokesperson, Julian Assange, who has just been arrested in Britain, in this dirty war by states around the globe against transparency and openness. But in the world of politics, sadly, things are never as innocent as they appear. According to new revelations, Assange had allegedly struck a deal with Israel before the recent ‘cable gate’, which may explain why the leaks “were good for Israel,” as the Israeli prime minister put it.

A number of commentators, particularly in Turkey and Russia, have been wondering why the hundreds of thousands of American classified documents leaked by the website last month did not contain anything that may embarrass the Israeli government, like just about every other state referred to in the documents. The answer appears to be a secret deal struck between the WikiLeaks “heart and soul”, as Assange humbly described himself once [1], with Israeli officials, which ensured that all such documents were ‘removed’ before the rest were made public.

According to an Arabic investigative journalism website [2], Assange had received money from semi-official Israeli sources and promised them, in a “secret, video-recorded agreement,” not to publish any document that may harm Israeli security or diplomatic interests.

The sources of the Al-Haqiqa report are said to be former WikiLeaks volunteers who have left the organisation in the last few months over Assange’s “autocratic leadership” and “lack of transparency.”

In a recent interview with the German daily Die Tageszeitung, former WikiLeaks spokesperson Daniel Domscheit-Berg said he and other WikiLeaks dissidents are planning to launch their own whistleblowers’ platform to fulfil WikiLeaks’s original aim of “limitless file sharing.” [3]


Rense & Jacobson - Mind Control In America

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

The IRS Extortion of the American People

The income tax is a Zionist extortion racket. It is the duty of every American to resist Zionist Power by non-compliance with this anti-American stealing of our wealth by the most treacherous and merciless aliens in history, the Zionists.

The “Internal Revenue Service” is a collection agency for the private, profit-making corporation that calls itself the Federal Reserve System. The fools who still send money to this private company can prove this by examining the backs of their canceled checks to the IRS. It will say “Pay to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.” It doesn’t say, “Pay to the US Treasury Department.” Why do you suppose that is? Your hard-earned money goes to a private company that has never been audited, that was created by foreign Zionists for their own gain. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is a private company, just like Goldman Sachs, both owned by pretty much the same people. See Lewis v. US (1982).

Aaron Russo, a producer of feature films, made a documentary film called “America: Freedom to Fascism.” Russo has since died and his film can be seen online for free. It is based on a simple question: “Is there a law that requires any private American to file a tax return or to pay income taxes?” The answer, as we all know, is no.

But, as we also know, the truth has no place in Zionist thinking. Russo’s legacy is not the Hollywood movies he made but rather the segment in his documentary in which he interviews the Jewish former commissioner of the IRS, Sheldon Cohen. He asks Cohen to name the law that requires an American to file a tax return or pay any money? Cohen is taken aback at his effrontery and says that he didn’t expect such a question. Russo asks it again. Cohen then mutters something unintelligible, which he follows with, “You know Yiddish and you know what that means: There is no hope for you.” Russo later states that Cohen threatened him in Yiddish. For asking a simple question about the legitimacy of the income tax.

Cohen’s reason for his anger and surprise is probably this: The entire Zionist criminal enterprise of fractional reserve banking depends on having the central bank, the ultimate and most lucrative monopoly, in Jewish hands. Its authority must not be questioned! To be most lucrative, it must inflate the currency supply at will and deflate the supply when the owners wish to take over property and businesses and homes. During the inflationary periods, much of the currency has to be recovered from the unaware people through the “income tax,” lest we have too much discretionary money to buy what we need or want. The whole idea is to keep us under control and the best way is to take away our money. That’s all this is about.

Naturally, awareness of the nature of this extortion has increased and millions of Americans don’t bother to file the fake paperwork demanded by the Zionists and their running dogs in the IRS. So the Zionists are getting mad, as we see in this official document from the “Department of Justice” an official statement in the name of a Nathan J. Hochman, the Tax Division’s assistant attorney general. Hochman is, of course, a Zionist. The tone of this official document borders on hysteria:


The Anti-Semitic ADL

by Keith Johnson

George Orwell coined the phrase “double speak” in his science fiction classic “1984.” According to Wikipedia: double speak is language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Some examples from the book are:

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

We certainly have evolved into that kind of society, with organiztions like the ADL operating in much the same way that the Ministry of Truth does in the novel. Both employ double speak as part of its modus operandi to disseminate lies and distort reality.

The latest example of this technique being used comes to us courtesy of ADL head, Abraham Foxman, who recently condemed former White House journalist, Helen Thomas, for statements she made in a speech delivered to a group of Arab American students at the University of Dearborn last Thursday. In that speech, Thomas made this truthful and factual assessment of the political reality dominating our society:

“We are owned by the propagandists against the Arabs. There’s no question about that. Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists. No question in my opinion. They put their money where their mouth is. … We’re being pushed into a wrong direction in every way.”

Foxman responded by stating:

“Helen Thomas has clearly, unequivocally revealed herself as a vulgar anti-Semite. Her suggestion that Zionists control government, finance and Hollywood is nothing less than classic, garden-variety anti-Semitism. This is a sad final chapter to an otherwise illustrious career. Unlike her previous, spontaneous remarks into a camera, these words were carefully thought out and conscious. It shows a prejudice that is deep-seated and obssessive.”


Wikileaks: State Secrets or Clever Tactics

Written by Claude Salhani

Is the US Government Machiavellian enough to orchestrate the recent brouhaha over the so-called website WikiLeaks, is this a real embarrassment, or will it indeed be damaging as some U.S. diplomats claim?

I am not one to support conspiracy theories but when you stop to analyze the content of the information that was leaked it seem that two things emerge: first, the content of the cables were not so earth shattering as to damage national security, or harm Washington’s relations with other countries.

Second, upon further analysis, it would appear that the information revealed instead sends a strong message to America’s foes.

Much of what has been released in those cables is hardly news in any real sense of the word. Take for example the report that the US has been spying on its friends as well as on its foes and that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton ordered diplomats to assemble information on their foreign counterparts. Let’s get real. Friends have been spying on friends ever since man has been involved in conflict.

Espionage between nations -- both friendly and less so -- can probably be traced back to the time when the first group of cavemen realized they could use clubs as weapons. All intelligence services will, as a matter of fact, gather information on whoever and whatever they can. This is what intelligent services do. The trick is not to get caught.

Did Israel not spy on the United States, its staunchest ally, and without whom Israel would have a hard time sustaining itself. The most infamous of Americans spying for Israel is a former US Navy civilian, Jonathan Pollard, who passed classified information to Israel. Pollard is now serving a life sentence for treason. While Pollard may have become the focus point of the US-Israeli espionage dossier, other incidents have gone largely unnoticed.

One report aired by Fox News states that “According to a U.S. intelligence agency, the government of A (Israel) conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the US of any US ally.”

Indeed, since the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained under the new Patriot Act or for immigration violations. Among them were active duty officers in the Israeli army.

All theatrics of embarrassment by the US Department of State aside, the release of such information accomplishes a dual purpose.

Many countries in the Middle East are more concerned about Iran’s nuclear program than they have publically admitted. The information contained in one cable states that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has asked the United States a number of times to “cut the head of the snake,” when talking about Iran and its nuclear program. Other Arab leaders from Jordan, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates had similar concerns.


The Disclosure

Hey! Are your ideas for global takeover falling apart?
Are you losing sleep over humanity's mass awakening?
Is false flag Terrorism fizzling out?
Global warming gone cold on you?
Do you want those Global Warming deniers to just GO AWAY?
Are all your phony economic Crisiseseses being exposed?
Is the price of gold defying all your attempts to fix it?
Isn't killing the Gulf of Mexico and poisoning millions of people reducing the population fast enough for you?
War, famine and GM food not getting it done either??
Well, don't give up, Get Disclosure!
You'll be able to unite mankind with a phony problem and enslave them with a one-world government and taxes.
Yes Disclosure! Your one stop shop for full spectrum dominance...

Tuesday, December 7, 2010



By Gordon Duff

(Media Appearance Note: Senior Editor Gordon Duff will appear on The Hour, the flagship Current Affairs Program of IQRA TV. 8.30 – 9.30 pm BST, on Sundays at Channel 826, on Sky. This program offers a serious analysis of political, social and cultural issues for a mature viewership.)

In a unique interview with an official at the highest policy levels of the Pentagon, White House and, eventually, CIA, we are offered a unique “behind the curtains” look at areas of policy making during the period between 1999 and 2007. Extensive notes have been taken of meetings with President Bush and all his top policy advisers. This is only a teaser.

A highly placed source within the White House and CIA confirmed, in an interview, that the invasion of Iran was scheduled for 2006 but planned in 1999. We have heard some of this before but not with so many pieces and, I am told, more to come. In an interview with a Bush administration policy official:

Q. What is the first thing that comes to mind when you think of your work at the White House? You have read my articles, what do you think of my take on things?

A. You are closer than anyone else in understanding how things worked, the only person willing to simply put it out there. You also come at things like the Pentagon people I have worked with, the ones who stood against Bush, Cheney and the AIPAC gang at the NSC (National Security Council.) I can also see that you don’t have background material that you need. Some of it you have wrong, particularly the motives for Iraq. It was always Iran, Iraq was simply a door.

Q. You talk about journalists. What has your experience been?

A. I have good friends at the New York Times, Time Magazine, the Washington Post and others. They know all of this. They aren’t fooled. They could write anything but it would never hit print.


Monday, December 6, 2010

Crisis as Global Unifying Force

Of Ostriches and Rebels

by Zahir Ebrahim | Project

Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times wrote in his oped almost two years ago:

'I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible. A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force. So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it might. First, it is increasingly clear that the most difficult issues facing national governments are international in nature: there is global warming, a global financial crisis and a “global war on terror”.' ( Gideon Rachman, And now for a world government, Financial Times, December 8 2008 )

Mr. Rachman accurately reflected the immense momentum today towards world government which many a globalist had been working toward across generations rather openly, often boldly proclaiming that:

'We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.' (James Warburg in 1950 to the US Senate, cited in Project Humanbeingsfirst's Monetary Reform Bibliography).

The EU Council President, Herman Van Rompuy, only 59 years later on November 19, 2009, openly admitted in his first press conference in Brussels after being appointed president, that finally, “2009 is also the first year of Global Governance”:

'We are living through exceptionally difficult times. Financial crisis and its dramatic impact on employment and budgets, the climate crisis which threatens our very survival --- a period of anxiety, uncertainty, and lack of confidence. Yet these problems can be overcome, by a joint effort, in and between our countries. 2009 is also the first year of Global Governance with the establishment of the G-20 in the middle of financial crisis. The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the Global Management of our Planet. Our mission, our presidency is one of hope, supported by acts, and by deeds.' (press conference November 19, 2009 )

Mr. Van Rompuy too was accurate in his message of hope that Global Governance is “supported by acts and by deeds”.

But just what might these be?

A Council on Foreign Relations author had rather holistically outlined the underlying character of these supporting “acts” and “deeds” way back in the middle-stages of their planning-execution cycle in April 1974 as follows:

'In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.

Of course, for political as well as administrative reasons, some of these specialized arrangements should be brought into an appropriate relationship with the central institutions of the U.N. system, but the main thing is that the essential functions be performed.

The question is whether this more modest approach can do the job. Can it really bring mankind into the twenty-first century with reasonable prospects for peace, welfare and human dignity? The argument thus far suggests it better had, for there seems to be no alternative. But the evidence also suggests some grounds for cautious optimism.' (Richard N. Gardner, The Hard Road To World Order, Foreign Affairs April 1974 issue, pages 558-559)

Herman Van Rompuy's message of hope at the completion stages decades later was merely the cross-generational echo of Richard N. Gardner's “prospects for peace, welfare and human dignity” that had been long sewn “bottom up, rather than from the top down” such that to the uninformed public, it would always “look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

The blood-drenched transformation stage that we find ourselves in today – the wreckage of civilizations – is truly “Between Two Ages”. That brilliant description is not mine, but the title of Zbigniew Brzezinski's seminally self-serving 1970 book which [presumably] got him appointed as the Executive Director of David Rockefeller's Trilateral Commission. There are more than a dozen Trilateralists and CFRs in President Obama's Administration too, pushing the banksters' globalist agendas finally to fruition across multiple fronts simultaneously. The money behind them, at least in the United States, is primarily the Rockefellers' who own the majority stake in the New York Fed, which in turn largely controls the Federal Reserve System. In Europe, the money is primarily the Rothschilds' who control all the world's private central banks (including America's Federal Reserve and international lending agencies such as the World Bank IMF tag-team) with complex interlocking relationships among a closed-knit tiny fraternity who exercise their will upon international banking and global finance and thus upon all nations of the world, through their largely unknown Bank for International Settlements ( located in Basle, Switzerland.

Entirely coincidentally of course, BIS is located in the same secretive banking capital where Theodor Herzl had earlier made his notorious Jewish manifesto, Der Judenstaat public in the First World Zionist Congress in 1897 to set the public stage for the creation of the exclusively Jewish state of Israel in 1948. Also entirely coincidentally, the British Empire had gratuitously issued its famous 1917 Balfour Declaration in the name of Lord Rothschild, the principal owner and founder of the international financial system who had controlled the Bank of England since Waterloo. And again entirely coincidentally, America's entry into World War I was facilitated after the founding of its own 'Bank of England', i.e., the Federal Reserve System principally by Paul Warburg, the banking fraternal twin of Lord Rothschild in whose palace the Treaty of Versailles was signed after World War I to enable the British Mandate over the lands of historic Palestine.

These remarkable coincidences have today made the Rothschilds the most revered family name in Israel. Some call them the King of the Jews – and to live up to that Solomon-ly title, the Rothschilds have architected, financed and built the Jewish state's principal hall of Justice, the Israeli Supreme Court in Jerusalem. The Jewish State today enjoys the unparalleled privilege of an “Iron Wall” that none can breach. The Rothschild's frankenstein can with brazen impunity exterminate, assassinate, and bomb, to the applause of the world leaders (see 'Pamphlet: How to Return to Palestine'). And yet, strangely, the Rothschild's role in seeding and orchestrating the affairs of the modern world is consistently downplayed almost universally. No media, no academic, no scholar, no historian, no dissent-chief, no corporate executive, no billionaire on Forbes list, the Forbes list itself, and of course no politician and world statesman, dare utter that name publicly – and so long as they don't, they can say anything else they want. Elusive power such as this is not a figment of someone's imagination.

Prof. Carroll Quigley was permitted to openly state the following in his 1966 book Tragedy and Hope, and his controlled revelations which continued that tradition of downplaying the name of the Rothschilds, only came on the heels of the free-wheeling Eustace Mullins' well-documented exposé of how the Federal Reserve System in the United States was conspiringly created by forces representing the same globalist banking elite, and he had not spared the Rothschild name; this was followed by a series of books and documentary films in the 1970s by many others including Gary Allen, W. Cleon Skoussen, G. Edward Griffin, Antony Sutton et. al. These passages from Quigley's 1200 page ode to the International bankers underscores the base axiomatic reality upon which the entire web of control of the globalists is fabricated:

'The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland; a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.' (Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966, Chapter 20, page 324)

'It must not be felt that these heads of the world's chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called “international” or “merchant” bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks. This dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the world.' (Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966, Chapter 20, page 326)

The following observations made in 1970 by W. Cleon Skoussen in his extensive commentary on Tragedy and Hope is entirely empirical today:

'The real value of Tragedy and Hope ... [is the] bold and boastful admission by Dr. Quigley that there actually exists a relatively small but powerful group which has succeeded in acquiring a choke-hold on the affairs of practically the entire human race. Of course we should be quick to recognize that no small group could wield such gigantic power unless millions of people in all walks of life were “in on the take” and were willing to knuckle down to the iron-clad regimentation of the ruthless bosses behind the scenes. As we shall see, the network has succeeded in building its power structure by using tremendous quantities of money (together with the vast influence it buys) to manipulate, intimidate, or corrupt millions of men and women and their institutions on a world-wide basis.' (W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, pg. 6)

Gary Allen argued matters in such an elegant style in 1971 in his short book None Dare Call It Conspiracy, that the logic of the highlighted sentences in the passages quoted below even elicited a long chuckle from a most cynical MIT trained Silicon Valley engineer friend of mine who has designed dozens of microchips and is not easily given to levity on current affairs:

'Most of us have had the experience, either as parents or youngsters, of trying to discover the "hidden picture" within another picture in a children's magazine. Usually you are shown a landscape with trees, bushes, flowers and other bits of nature. The caption reads something like this: "Concealed somewhere in this picture is a donkey pulling a cart with a boy in it. Can you find them?" Try as you might, usually you could not find the hidden picture until you turned to a page farther back in the magazine which would reveal how cleverly the artist had hidden it from us. If we study the landscape we realize that the whole picture was painted in such a way as to conceal the real picture within, and once we see the "real picture," it stands out like the proverbial painful digit.

We believe the picture painters of the mass media are artfully creating landscapes for us which deliberately hide the real picture. In this book we will show you how to discover the "hidden picture" in the landscapes presented to us daily through newspapers, radio and television. Once you can see through the camouflage, you will see the donkey, the cart and the boy who have been there all along. Millions of Americans are concerned and frustrated over mishappenings in our nation. They feel that something is wrong, drastically wrong, but because of the picture painters they can't quite put their fingers on it.

Maybe you are one of those persons. Something is bugging you, but you aren't sure what. We keep electing new Presidents who seemingly promise faithfully to halt the world-wide Communist advance, put the blocks to extravagant government spending, douse the fires of inflation, put the economy on an even keel, reverse the trend which is turning the country into a moral sewer, and toss the criminals into the hoosegow where they belong. Yet, despite high hopes and glittering campaign promises, these problems continue to worsen no matter who is in office. Each new administration, whether it be Republican or Democrat, continues the same basic policies of the previous administration which it had so thoroughly denounced during the election campaign. It is considered poor form to mention this, but it is true nonetheless. Is there a plausible reason to explain why this happens? We are not supposed to think so. We are supposed to think it is all accidental and coincidental and that therefore there is nothing we can do about it.

FDR once said "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." He was in a good position to know. We believe that many of the major world events that are shaping our destinies occur because somebody or somebodies have planned them that way. If we were merely dealing with the law of averages, half of the events affecting our nation's well-being should be good for America. If we were dealing with mere incompetence, our leaders should occasionally make a mistake in our favor. We shall attempt to prove that we are not really dealing with coincidence or stupidity, but with planning and brilliance. This small book deals with that planning and brilliance and how it has shaped the foreign and domestic policies of the last six administrations. We hope it will explain matters which have up to now seemed inexplicable; that it will bring into sharp focus images which have been obscured by the landscape painters of the mass media.

Those who believe that major world events result from planning are laughed at for believing in the "conspiracy theory of history." Of course, no one in this modern day and age really believes in the conspiracy theory of history -except those who have taken the time to study the subject. When you think about it, there are really only two theories of history. Either things happen by accident neither planned nor caused by anybody, or they happen because they are planned and somebody causes them to happen. In reality, it is the "accidental theory of history" preached in the unhallowed Halls of Ivy which should be ridiculed. Otherwise, why does every recent administration make the same mistakes as the previous ones? Why do they repeat the errors of the past which produce inflation, depressions and war? Why does our State Department "stumble" from one Communist-aiding "blunder" to another? If you believe it is all an accident or the result of mysterious and unexplainable tides of history, you will be regarded as an "intellectual" who understands that we live in a complex world. If you believe that something like 32,496 consecutive coincidences over the past forty years stretches the law of averages a bit, you are a kook!' (Gary Allen, None Dare Call it Conspiracy, 1971, Chapter 1)

Can today's handful of rabble-rousing moral activists with their chest-thumping internet-jihad and the occasional street-dance protesting with loud drum-beating, fight such a nemesis that is not only legally endowed with an infinite supply of money conjured out of thin-air, but whose controlling power pervades all public and private institutions from universities to businesses to governments to non-profit supra-organizations like the United Nations and none dare talk about it without being called a 'kook'? To genuinely reverse this unstoppable impetus towards global management surely requires an order of magnitude different strategies and tactics other than blaring into bull-horns and publishing books and eloquent websites don't you think?

To an engineer's eye attuned to building real systems rather than merely talking about their future possibility in glossy brochures, it requires mass mobilizations and the common man's commandeering of structures of power worldwide to shut down the world. No food on the store shelves, no garbage picked up, no containers unloaded, all civic services stopped, etc. A global strike that demands the juridical hanging of the oligarchy, the nationalization of their amassed wealth, and the un-privatization of usurped public commons worldwide.

Apart from the fact that all such effective mobilization requires money, global organizations, time to build them up, labor unions and political institutions which can mobilize the rank and file for common cause, unfettered access to media to carry the message, and intellectual strategies and tactics which can launch a thousand cuts of no less overwhelming convolution than what the oligarchy conjures up to overwhelm the public senses, there are also no masses to mobilize. More importantly, there are no un-compromising leaders to lead them.

With no resources outside of the institutional parameters of the status quo for any emerging leadership to be effective in rebelling against those very institutions, and all legalisms and security apparatuses calculatingly stacked in favor of the establishment's own ruling paradigms – the unfettered promulgation of hegemony of the oligarchy fronted by the 'national security state' with its colossus military-industrial-academe-media-congressional-juridical-executive complex – what can even courageous leaders do when even the brains of the President of United States, the mightiest superpower on earth, is not safe from being blown to smithereens when it becomes a threat to the status quo? (See 'The Eight Bay of Pigs of JFK' in Jim Douglass' November 2009 talk “JFK and the Unspeakable” at COPA Dallas, )

Random public riots in the streets out of individual desperation does not, and will not, cut it. Ineffectual rowdyism is in fact, the calculated tactical plan of the globalists themselves. Because, destructive riots enable them to play their final fait accompli inducing trump card – martial law! And the FEMA detention camps on military sites have already been made ready to welcome many an unwise malcontent! (See 'Why bluff martial law')

Those attempting to uncontrollably rile up the public anger with bull-horns in the style of Television Network's Mad Prophet of the Airwaves (Network, 1976 movie): 'Well, I am not gonna leave you alone. I want you to get mad. I don't want you to protest, I don't want you to write to your congressman because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Islamofascists and the crime in the street. All I know is that first, you've got to get mad. You've got to say “I am a human being god dammit, my life has value”. So, I want you to get up now, and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell: “I am mad as hell and I am not gonna take this anymore”', cannot not know this. While it has today become next to impossible to tell fabricated dissent from manufactured consent, and with reformed cats piously trying to represent the silly mice, the underlying political science basis of the ubiquitous social engineering which employs this “cognitive infiltration” is documented in the two reports 'Manufacturing Dissent: The Master Social Science', and 'Anatomy of Conspiracy Theory'. Also see: 'Did David Ray Griffin and Steve Lendman miss the real purpose of Cass Sunstein's “Conspiracy Theories”?'

As one can glean in these aforementioned analyses, there is effectively no dissent today that can impact the status quo. And establishment's systems are already in place to ensure that it does not happen either. Only narratives are permitted to exist. And the narrators are often generously rewarded too, with many even openly seeking and accepting their harvest of peace prizes and other glamorous accolades, lucrative appointments and tenures, from the same empire which they ostensibly oppose in their prominent dissent! I am told that there is a very generous single Biblical word for them: hypocrite. Not being divinely inspired, mine are of course considerably less generous.

Never mind waking up the sheeples. The genuine “ostrich” activists, the “quite gallant and graceful-looking people” as H. G. Wells described the lot (see quote below), themselves need to wake up to the grotesque reality first, and take accurate cognizance of the battlefield the way it really is.

The way things stand today – see the reality-check in 'Why Not Be An Ostrich?' – without birth-panging radical transformations to dissent-space and the concomitant emergence of a focussed global resistance, Global Governance of the oligarchy is fait accompli. That is simply a factual statement with no emotional syntactic sugaring applied.

The myriad manufactured crises which afflict humanity today, from the riveting Wikileaks intrigues to the perpetual 'War on Terror', from the Financial Crisis to Global Warming and the Carbon Credit scams, and perhaps even Alien landings/sightings and/or intergalactic catastrophes soon if Project Camelot has been accurately primed, are merely the successive Hegelian mind-fcks, ahem the “acts” and “deeds”, of making current affairs “look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality,”.

Each new ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ provides the new enabling pretext for inching the world one baby-step closer towards the Global Governance of the Planet. And all that the “malcontent” and “graceful-looking people” can do, just like the “history's actors” accurately predicted that we shall do, is study it:

'We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.' (Ron Suskind, New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004)

More tragically, our tortuous zeitgeist was also accurately presaged even before most of us were born:

'When the struggle seems to be drifting defiantly towards a world social democracy there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people – will hate the New World Order – and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people.' (H. G. Wells, The New World Order, page 127)

Isn't that where all the world's rebels precisely stand today, blindly and ineffectively resisting a fait accompli in false hopes? With most of the world's 'untermenschen' happy-happy in hope and voluntary servitude waiting for a savior? (See 'Happy-Happy in Hope and Voluntary Servitude')

But perhaps it is not because of false hopes. That is only for ostriches.

Perhaps it is really that elusive spirit of the swashbuckling rebel, Captain Rhett Butler of Gone with the Wind which inspires this lot. At least in so far as his penchant for supporting lost causes after they were truly lost was concerned. “Why?”, said Captain Butler to Mrs. Hamilton as he gallantly abandoned his unrequited love in the middle of the road to go join the Confederate Army after Atlanta had been completely burned to the ground by Sherman and his northern soldiers, “maybe it's because I have always had a weakness for lost causes once they are really lost.”

Admirable, perhaps even heroic by grandmotherly standards. But hardly any cause for indigestion for the henchmen at the CFR and the EU Council who, under the “iron-clad regimentation of the ruthless bosses behind the scenes”, are striving to bring us “reasonable prospects for peace, welfare and human dignity” in the twenty-first century.

Nevertheless, rebels don't necessarily always measure their categorical imperatives in the same way. For many among the 'untermenschen', to simply exist is to resist. And obviously no self-delusion is involved there. For others, to merely survive the daily oppression and daily burials of their loved ones with their dignity and mental faculties intact, is unsurpassed heroism. Such earthly struggles when wholly circumscribed by moral dimensions, even when motivated by narrow existential self-interests such as the self-defense of one's own loved ones, or the safeguarding of one's own sanity, is perhaps best captured by the pithy wisdom from the Islamic tradition narrated in my 'Muslim's Voice: Why we endeavor even when it appears futile!':

'When the Prophet Abraham (in the Orientalist's spelling) was being thrown in the fire by the tyrannical ruler Nimrod, all creation was in tremendous angst. Even the stones spoke out against the tyrant. Every moral creature endeavored to the rescue of Prophet Ibraheem (AS) to put out the fire. To the extent that a tiny bird picked a droplet of water in its minuscule beak and started to fly over the fire.

An Angel of God asked the little bird: “Surely you are not going to put out the fire with that droplet(!), and surely the high flames will consume you! – what do you think you are doing?”

The tiny bird replied: “yes, you are right, and I know that my tiny droplet will not save the Ulul-Azam (Great Prophet) of God. But I bring to the endeavor of standing up to this evil tyrant whatever I am capable of, and this tiny droplet is all I am capable of.”'

The rebel is not an ostrich. He and she is that tiny bird with the tiny droplet in its beak.

References: Facts not cited are either too well known or amply cited in the many works of Project All report titles in the text not explicitly cited are the author's own work – please see index:

Source URL:

Source PDF:

Source Mirror: