Free Your Mind Now TV- live streaming video powered by Livestream
Shared via AddThis
Sunday 13 September 2009
Saturday 12 September 2009
Bank of England, Sterling and Government Treason
Many people believe that the Bank of England is a privately owned corporation. Many people believe that it’s owned by the Rothchilds.
Neither of these beliefs is true.
The truth is much worse.
The story of the Bank of England is the story of the British Empire. The British Empire was never a political empire. It was always a monetary financial empire, as much a parasite on the people of Great Britain as the rest of the world. The idea of the Victorian’s British Empire bringing civilisation to the darkest parts of the world is one that needs real reconsideration by many Britons.
The Bank of England was originally set up as a core part of the British Empire – making huge profits from loans to the British East India Company and other tendrils of the Great British parasite. The mainstays of the trading activities of these companies were drugs, warfare and the looting of raw materials from poverty stricken nations.
As the banker to the Government, the Bank also did quite nicely from lending to the Treasury, thank you very much. In those days, the profits of the Bank went into the hands of the shareholders.
In 1844, the Rothschild inspired desire to take complete control of Britain came true with the Bank Charter Act. This gave the Bank of England the monopoly on the production of Sterling, and control of Britain’s money supply. In Northern Ireland and Scotland, where to this day commercial banks are allowed to print their own money, they must have one Bank of England note in reserve for every note of their own that they issue.
1946 brought the “nationalisation” of the Bank. At the end of WWII, Britain was more or less bankrupt, so it was agreed that instead of paying cash for the shares of the Bank, shareholders would receive 3% Treasury stock instead. With the 1946 Bank of England Act, all the Bank shares were transferred into the possession of the Treasury solicitor, and there they are to this day. It remains a corporation, not a government department.
In 1977, the Bank set up a wholly owned subsidiary called BANK OF ENGLAND NOMINEES LIMITED, (BOEN), a private limited company, no. 1307478, with 2 of its 100 £1 shares issued. According to its Memorandum & Articles of Association, its objectives are;-
“To act as Nominee or agent or attorney either solely or jointly with others, for any person or persons, partnership, company, corporation, government, state, organisation, sovereign, province, authority, or public body, or any group or association of them….”
Bank of England Nominees Limited was granted an exemption by Edmund Dell, Secretary of State for Trade, from the disclosure requirements under Section 27(9) of the Companies Act 1976 , because, “it was considered undesirable that the disclosure requirements should apply to certain categories of shareholders.”
Add that to the fact that the Bank of England is protected from prying eyes by its “Royal Charter” status and the Official Secrets Act. What have we got here?
In 1998, the final piece of the puzzle fell into place. In return for fixing the 1997 elections and getting New Labour into power, the Government enacted the 1998 Bank of England Act, which gave the Bank’s Court of Directors complete independence with regard to monetary policy.
So if we add this all together, we have a nationally owned institution which has the monopoly in the production of the national currency, and has independent control of the country’s monetary policy in the hands of a Court of Directors who serve the private banking system as they have since the Bank was established.
Think about it – private banking control of our currency and monetary policy, fully independent of government. When Gordon Brown signed away government oversight of the Bank, he committed Treason on a scale not seen in Britain since the Heath government took us into what would become the EU.
Since 1998 we have seen the Bank rapidly inflate the money supply, while at the same time relaxing regulation on how banks could lend. No longer were banks required to have cash in reserve for loans they made. Instead the vast majority of currency entering the economy did so as a result of commercial banks entering some numbers into a ledger – money out of thin air, literally.
Working for the private bankers, the Bank of England set things up to maximise the returns for their banking colleagues’ speculative activities, in the full knowledge that as a nationalised institution, it would be the UK taxpayer who was carrying all the risk, and not, as would have been the case before 1946, the shareholders.
The Court of Directors is working for the Anglo/Dutch/Saudi empire – the still-alive-and-kicking hidden hand behind the British Empire of the Victorian age. So it’s no surprise that the solution they provide to today’s manufactured monetary financial collapse is to print more money. Their aim is to destroy the last vestiges of British sovereignty; for a hyper-inflated and hyper-devalued Sterling to be replaced by a single, global, currency, under a single world fascist government.
Gordon Brown announced the new financial infrastructure at the G20. He announced the new global currency – to be issued and managed by the newly reinvigorated IMF.
This has to be stopped. It has to be stopped now. We want our country back, before there’s no country left. We want our country back from the parasites that use one square mile of London as their base of operations. Back in a way it hasn’t been for about 250 years. Join is in this fight – come to the next British Constitution Group conference in London on the 13th June, and find out what you can do.
Tuesday 8 September 2009
Twenty Minutes with the President
Twenty Minutes with the President
Reported by Charlie Sheen
I recently had the pleasure of sitting down with our 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, while he was out promoting his health care reform initiative. I requested 30 minutes given the scope and detail of my inquiry; they said I couldhave 20. Twenty minutes, 1200 seconds, not a lot of time to question the President about one of the most important events in our nation’s history. The following is a transcript of our remarkable discussion.
Charlie Sheen - Good afternoon Mr. President, thank you so much for
taking time out of your demanding schedule.
President Barack Obama - My pleasure, the content of your request
seemed like something I should carve out a few minutes for.
CS - I should point out that I voted for you, as your promises of hope and
change, transparency and accountability, as well as putting
government back into the hands of the American people, struck an
emotional cord in me that I hadn’t felt in quite some time, perhaps
ever.
PBO - And I appreciate that, Charlie. Big fan of the show, by the way.
CS - Sir, I can’t imagine when you might find the time to actually watch
my show given the measure of what you inherited.
PBO - I have it Tivo’d on Air Force One. Nice break from the traveling
press corps. (He glances at his watch) Not to be abrupt or to rush
you, but you have 19 minutes left.
CS - I’ll take that as an invitation to cut to the chase.
PBO - I’m all ears. Or so I’ve been told.
CS - Sir, in the very near future we will be experiencing our first 9/11
anniversary with you as Commander in Chief.
PBO - Yes. A very solemn day for our nation. A day of reflection and yet
a day of historical consciousness as well.
CS - Very much so, sir, very much so indeed…. Now, in researching
your position regarding the events of 9/11 and the subsequent
investigation that followed, am I correct to understand that you
fully support and endorse the findings of the Commission Report
otherwise known as the ‘official story’?
PBO - Do I have any reason not to? Given that most of us are presumably
in touch with similar evidence.
CS - I really wish that were the case, sir. Are you aware, Mr. President,
of the recent stunning revelations that sixty percent of the 9/11
commissioners have publicly stated that the government agreed not
to tell the truth about 9/11 and that the Pentagon was engaged in
deliberate deception about their response to the attack?
PBO - I am aware of certain “in fighting” during the course of their very
thorough and tireless investigative process.
CS - Mr. President, it’s hard to label this type of friction as “in fighting”
or make the irresponsible leap to “thorough,” when the evidence I
insist you examine regarding 6 of the 10 members are statements
of fact.
(At this point one of Obama’s senior aides approaches the
President and whispers into his ear. Obama glances quickly at his
watch and nods as the aide resumes his post at the doorway,
directly behind me.)
PBO - No disrespect, Mr. Sheen, but I have to ask; what is it that you
seem to be implying with the initial direction of this discussion?
CS - I am not implying anything, Mr. President. I am here to present the
facts and see what you plan to do with them.
PBO - Let me guess: your ‘facts,’ allegedly supporting these claims, are
in the folders you brought with you?
CS - Good guess, Mr. President.
(I hand the first folder of documents to the President)
CS - Again sir, these are not my opinions or assumptions. This is all a
matter of public record, reported through mainstream media,
painstakingly fact checked and verified.
(The President glances into the folder I handed him)
CS - You’ll notice, sir, on page one of the dossier dated August of ‘06
from the Washington Post, the statements of John Farmer, Senior
Council to the 9/11 Commission, his quote stating “I was shocked
how different the truth was from the way it was described.”
PBO - (As he glances down at the report, almost inaudible) …. Um
hmm….
CS - He goes on to further state, “The [NORAD Air Defense] tapes told
a radically different story from what had been told to us and the
public for two years….”
(The President continues to view the documents)
CS - On pages two and three, sir, are the statements, as well, from
commission co-chairmen Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton,
commissioners Bob Kerrey, Timothy Roemer and John Lehman, as
well as the statements of commissioner Max Cleland, an ex-
Senator from Georgia , who resigned, stating:
“It is a national scandal. This investigation is now compromised. One of
these days we will have to get the full story because the 9/11 issue
is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it
up.“
He also described President Bush’s desire to delay the process as not to
damage the ‘04 re-election bid. They suspected deception to the
point where they considered referring the matter to the Justice
Department for criminal investigation. Mr. President, this
information alone is unequivocally grounds for a new
investigation!
PBO - Mistakes were clearly made but we as a people and as a country
need to move forward. It is obviously in our best interest as a
democratic society to focus our efforts and our resources on the
future of this great nation and our ability to protect the American
people and our allies from this type of terrorism in the coming
years.
CS - Sir, how can we focus on the future when THE COMMISSION
ITSELF is on record stating that they still do not know the truth??
PBO - Even if what you state might, in some capacity, begin to approach
an open discussion or balanced debate, I can’t speak for, or about,
the decisions certain commission members made during an
extremely difficult period. Perhaps you should be interviewing
them instead of me. Wait, don’t tell me; I was easier to track down
than they were?
CS - Not exactly, sir, but let’s be honest. You’re the President of the
United States, the leader of the free world, the buck stops with you.
9/11 has been the pretext for the systematic dismantling of our
Constitution and Bill of Rights. Your administration is reading
from the same playbook that the Bush administration foisted on
America through documented secrecy and deception.
PBO - Mr. Sheen, I’m having a difficult time sitting here and listening to
you draw distorted parallels between the Bush/Cheney regime and
mine.
CS - Mr. President, the parallels are not distorted just because you say
they are. Let’s stick to the facts. You promised to abolish the
Patriot Act and then voted to re-authorize it. You pledged to end
warrantless wiretapping against the American people and now
energetically defend it. You decried the practice of rendition and
now continue it. You promised over and over again on the
campaign trail that you would end the practice of indefinite
detention and instead, you have expanded it to permanent
detention of “detainees” without trial. This far exceeds the outrages
of the former administration. Call me crazy, Mr. President, but is
this not your record?
PBO - Mr. Sheen, my staff and I authorized this interview based on your
request to discuss 9/11 and deliver some additional information
you’re convinced I’d not previously reviewed. Call me crazy, but it
appears as though you’ve blindly wandered off topic.
CS - Sir, the examples I just illustrated are a direct result of 9/11.
PBO - And I’m telling you that we must move forward, we must endure
through these dangerous and politically challenging years ahead.
CS - Mr. President, we cannot move forward with a bottomless warren
of unanswered questions surrounding that day and it’s aftermath.
PBO - I read the official report. Every word, every page. Perhaps you
should do the same.
CS - I have, sir, and so have thousands of family members of the
victims, and guess what? They have the same questions I do and
probably a lot more. I didn’t lose a loved one on that horrific day,
Mr. President, and neither did you. But since then, I, along with
millions of other Americans, lost something we held true and dear
for most of our lives in this great country of ours-- we lost our
hope.
PBO - And I’d like to believe that I am here to restore that hope. To
restore confidence in your leaders, in the system that the voting
public chose through a peaceful transfer of power.
(An odd moment of silence between us. Precious time ticking
away.)
CS - Mr. President, are you aware of the number of days it took to begin
the investigation into JFK’s assassination?
PBO - If memory serves, I believe it was two weeks.
CS - Close. Seventeen days to be exact. Are you aware sir, how long it
took to begin the investigation into Pearl Harbor?
PBO - I would say again, about….two weeks.
CS - Close again, sir, eleven days to be exact. Are you aware, Mr.
President, how long it took to begin the investigation into 9/11?
PBO - I know it must have seemed like a very long time for all the
grieving families.
CS - It was a very long time, Mr. President – four hundred and forty days.
Roughly 14 months. Does it bother you, Mr. President, that it only
took FIVE HOURS after the initial attack for Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld to recommend and endorse a full scale offensive
against Iraq?
PBO - I am not aware of any such purported claim.
CS - I have the proof, Mr. President, along with scores of documents and
facts I’d like you to take a look at. Here.
(I hand him another file - much thicker than the first)
PBO - I see you came prepared, Charlie.
CS - No other way to show up, Mr. President. When in doubt, over
prepare I always say.
PBO - Now you sound like the First Lady.
CS - That’s quite a compliment, sir.
PBO - As you wish. Please continue.
CS - Sir, I’d like to direct your attention to the stack of documents in the
folder I just handed you. The first in from the top is entitled
“Operation Northwoods,” a declassified Pentagon plan to stage
terror attacks on U.S. soil, to be blamed on Cuba as a pretext for
war.
PBO - And I’d like to direct your attention to the fact that the principle
draftsman of this improbable blueprint was quickly denied a
second term as Joint Chiefs chairman and sent packing to a
European NATO garrison. Thank God his otherworldly ambitions
never saw the light of day.
CS - I wouldn’t be so certain about that, Mr. President.
PBO - I could easily say the same to you, Charlie.
(The President checks his watch)
CS - The next document reads, “Declassified staged provocations.” Now
honestly Mr. President, I wish I was making this stuff up. I’m
certain you are familiar with the USS Maine incident, the sinking
of the Lusitania, which we all now know brought us into WWI,
and of course, the most famous, the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
PBO - Of course I am familiar with these historical events and I’m
aware that there’s a measure of controversy surrounding them. But
to be quite frank with you, this is all ancient history.
CS - Mr. President, it has often been said, “Those who do not know
history are doomed to repeat it.” And I concede to you, sir, these
events are the past.
PBO - A vastly different world, young man, shouldering a radically
disparate state of universal affairs.
CS - No argument, sir, I‘m merely inviting you to acknowledge some
credibility to the pattern or the theme. Case in point, the next
document in your folder. It was published by the think tank,
Project for a New American Century, and it’s entitled “Rebuilding
America’s Defenses,” and was written by Dick Cheney and Jeb
Bush. To quote from the document, sir -(The President interrupts)
PBO - “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings
revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
CS - Touché, sir. Your thoughts on this statement, Mr. President?
PBO - I would call this a blatant case of misjudgment fueled by an
unfortunate milieu of assumption. For some, the uninformed denial
of coincidence.
CS - Interesting angle, sir. Nevertheless, Vice President Cheney didn’t
stop there. In early 2008, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist
Seymour Hersh and MSNBC both reported that Cheney had
proposed to the Pentagon an outrageous plan to have the U.S.
Navy create fake Iranian patrol boats, to be manned by Navy
SEALs, who would then stage an attack on U.S. destroyers in the
Strait of Hormuz. This event was to be blamed on Iran and used as
a pretext for war. Does any of this information worry you, Mr.
President? Should we just ignore it, until these realities can be
dismissed years from now by our children and ancient history as
well?
PBO - Of course this information worries me, yet it’s not nearly as
worrisome as you sitting here today suspiciously implying that
9/11 was somehow allowed to happen or even orchestrated from
the inside.
CS - Mr. President, I am not suspiciously implying anything. I am
merely exposing the documents and asking the questions that
nobody in power will even look at or acknowledge. And as I stated
earlier, I voted for you; I believed in your message of hope and
change. Mr. President, I have come to you specifically hoping for a
change. A change in the fact that our government has not yet made
itself open and accountable to the people. These are your words,
Mr. President, not mine. The lives of thousands who were brutally
cut short and those left behind to suffer in infinite pain are with me
today, Mr. President. They are with me in spirit and flesh, and the
message we carry will not be silenced anymore by media-fueled
mantras insisting how they are supposed to feel. Deciding for
them, for 8 long years, what can be thought, what can be said, what
can be asked.
PBO - And I appreciate your passion; I appreciate your conviction. In
spite of your concerns, in spite of what your data might or might
not reveal, what you and the families must understand and accept
is that we are doing everything we can to protect you.
CS - Mr. President, I realize we’re very short on time, so please allow
me to run down a list of bullet points that might illuminate some
reasons why we don’t embrace the warm hug of Federal
protection.
PBO - We’ve come this far. Fire away.
CS - Please keep in mind, Mr. President, everything I’m about to say is
documented as fact and part of the public record. The information
you are holding in your hands chronicles and verifies each and
every point.
PBO - You have five minutes left. The floor is yours. Brief me.
CS - Thank you, Mr. President. Okay, first: on the F.B.I.’s Most Wanted
list, Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the crimes of 9/11.
When I called the F.B.I. to ask them why this was the case, they
replied: “There’s not enough evidence to link Bin Laden to the
crime scene.” I later discovered he had never even been indicted by
the D.O.J.
CS - Number 2: F.B.I. translator Sibel Edmonds was dismissed and
gagged by the D.O.J. after she revealed that the government had
foreknowledge of plans to attack American cities using planes as
bombs as early as April 2001. In August of ‘09, Mrs. Edmonds
broke the federal gag order and testified under oath that Osama Bin
Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all working for and with the
C.I.A. up until the day of 9/11.
CS - Number 3: The following is a quote from Mayor Giuliani during an
interview on 9/11 with Peter Jennings for ABC News. “I went
down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street,
which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire
Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were
operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade
Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could
actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building
for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked
north, and took a lot of people with us.”
WHO TOLD HIM THIS??? To this day, this question remains
unanswered, completely ignored and emphatically DENIED by
Mayor Giuliani on several public occasions.
CS - Number 4: In April 2004, USA Today reported, "In the two years
before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace
Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White
House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used
as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties." One of
the targets was the World Trade Center.
CS - Number 5: On September 12, 2007, CNN's ‘Anderson Cooper 360’
reported that the mysterious "white plane," spotted and videotaped
by multiple media outlets, flying in restricted airspace over the
White House shortly before 10 a.m. on the morning of 9/11, was in
fact the Air Force's E-4B, a specially modified Boeing 747 with a
communications pod behind the cockpit-- otherwise known as
“The Doomsday Plane.”
Though fully aware of the event, the 9/11 Commission did not
deem the appearance of the military plane to be of any interest and
did not include it in the final 9/11 Commission report.
CS - Number 6: Three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, ten
miles from Washington, DC, are conducting training exercises in
North Carolina 207 miles away as the first plane crashes into the
WTC. Even at significantly less than their top speed of 1500 mph,
they could still have defended the skies over Washington well
before 9 a.m., more than 37 minutes before Flight 77 crashes into
the Pentagon. However, they did not return until after 9:55 a.m.
Andrews AFB had no armed fighters on alert and ready to take off
on the morning of 9/11.
CS - Number 7: WTC Building 7. Watch the video of its collapse.
CS - Number 8: Flight 93 is the fourth plane to crash on 9/11 at 10:03
a.m. V.P. Cheney only gives shoot down orders at 10:10-10:20
a.m. and this is not communicated to NORAD until 28 minutes
after Flight 93 has crashed.
Fueling further suspicion on this front is the fact that three months
before the attacks of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of
NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else on planet Earth, had
the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on
9/11. He did not exercise that power. Three months after 9/11, he
relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military
operation.
CS - Number 9: Scores of mainstream news outlets reported that the
F.B.I. conducted an investigation of at least FIVE of the 9/11
hijackers being trained at U.S. military flight schools. Those
investigations are now sealed and need to be declassified.
CS - Number 10: In 2004, New York firefighters Mike Bellone and
Nicholas DeMasi went public to say they had found the black
boxes at the World Trade Center, but were told to keep their
mouths shut by F.B.I. agents. Nicholas DeMasi said that he
escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001
and helped them locate the devices, a story backed up by rescue
volunteer Mike Bellone.
As the Philadelphia Daily News reported at the time, “Their story
raises the question of whether there was a some type of cover-up at
Ground Zero.”
CS - Number 11: Hundreds of eyewitnesses including first responders,
fire captains, news reporters, and police all described multiple
explosions in both towers before and during the collapse.
CS - Number 12: An astounding video uncovered from the archives
shows BBC News correspondent Jane Standley reporting on the
collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at
5:20 p.m. on the afternoon of 9/11. Tapes from earlier BBC
broadcasts show news anchors discussing the collapse of WTC 7 a
full 26 minutes in advance. The BBC at first claimed that their
tapes from 9/11 had been "lost" before admitting that they made
the "error" of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it happened
without adequately explaining how they could have obtained
advance knowledge of the event.
In addition, over an hour before the collapse of WTC 7, at 4:10pm,
CNN's Aaron Brown reported that the building "has either
collapsed, or is collapsing."
CS - Number 13: Solicitor General Ted Olson's claim that his wife,
Barbara Olson, called him twice from Flight 77, describing
hijackers with box cutters, was a central plank of the official 9/11
story.
However, the credibility of the story was completely undermined
after Olson kept changing his story about whether his wife used
her cell phone or the airplane phone. American Airlines confirmed
that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757 and that this plane did not have
airplane phones on board.
According to the F.B.I., Barbara Olson attempted to call her
husband only once and the call failed to connect, therefore, Olson
must have been lying when he claimed he had spoken to his wife
from Flight 77.
CS - Number 14: The size of a Boeing 757 is approximately 125 ft.
in width and yet images of the impact zone at the Pentagon
supposedly caused by the crash merely show a hole no
more than 16 ft. in diameter. The engines of the 757 would
have punctured a hole bigger than this, never mind the
whole plane. Images before the partial collapse of the impact
zone show little real impact damage and a sparse debris
field completely inconsistent with the crash of a large jetliner,
especially when contrasted with other images showing
airplane crashes into buildings.
CS - Number 15: What is the meaning behind the following quote
attributed to Dick Cheney which came to light during the 9/11
Commission hearings? The passage is taken from testimony given
by then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon,
there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice
President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out."
And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man
also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And
the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said,
"Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the
contrary?"
As the plane was not shot down, in addition to the fact that armed
fighter jets were nowhere near the plane and the Pentagon
defensive system was not activated, are we to take it that the orders
were to let the plane find its target?
CS - Number 16: In May 2003, the Miami Herald reported how the Bush
administration was refusing to release a 900-page Congressional
report on 9/11 because it wanted to "avoid enshrining embarrassing
details in the report," particularly regarding pre-9/11 warnings, as
well as the fact that the hijackers were trained at U.S. flight
schools.
CS - Number 17: Top Pentagon officials canceled their scheduled flights
for September 11th on September 10th. San Francisco Mayor Willie
Brown, following a security warning from the White House,
canceled a flight into New York that was scheduled for the
morning of 9/11.
CS - Number 18: The technology to enable cell phone calls from highaltitude
airline flights was not created until 2004, and even by that
point, it was only in the trial phase. Calls from cell phones, which
formed an integral part of the official government version of
events, were technologically impossible at the time.
CS - Number 19: On April 29, 2004, President Bush and V.P. Cheney
would only meet with the commission under specific clandestine
conditions. They insisted on testifying together and not under oath.
They also demanded that their testimony be treated as a matter of
“state secret.” To date, nothing they spoke of that day exists in the
public domain.
CS - And finally, Mr. President - Number 20: A few days after the
attack, several newspapers, as well as the F.B.I., reported that a
paper passport had been found in the ruins of the WTC. In August
2004, CNN reported that 9/11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah's visa was
found in the remains of Flight 93, which went down in
Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
At least a third of the WTC victims’ bodies were vaporized and
many of the victims of the Pentagon incident were burned beyond
recognition. And yet, visas and paper passports, which identify the
perpetrators and back up the official version of events,
miraculously survive explosions and fires that we are told melted
steel buildings.
(The senior aide appears again beside the President whispering in his
ear. He then quickly moves off.)
PBO - Well Charlie, I can’t say this hasn’t been interesting. As I said
earlier, you’ve showed up today focused and organized.
Regardless of how I feel about the material you’ve presented, I
must commend your dedication and zeal. However, our time here
is up.
(The President rises from his chair; I do the same.)
CS - Mr. President! One more second!
(The President starts towards the door; I follow him quickly, step for
step)
CS - Mr. President, I implore you, based on the evidence you now
possess, to use your Executive Power. Prove to us all, sir, that you
do, in fact, care. Create a truly comprehensive and open
Congressional investigation into 9/11 and its aftermath. The
families deserve the truth; the American people and the rest of the
free world deserve the truth. Mr. President -
(He pauses. We shake hands.)
CS - Make sure you’re on the right side of history.
(The President breaks the handshake.)
PBO - I am on the right side of history. Thank you Charlie, my staff and
I will be in touch.
(I watch as he strides gracefully out of the room; the truth I provided
him held firmly by his side, in the hand of providence.)
End.
Author’s Note: What you have just read didn’t actually happen… yet. This is an open letter to the President requesting a newinvestigation.
Reported by Charlie Sheen
I recently had the pleasure of sitting down with our 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, while he was out promoting his health care reform initiative. I requested 30 minutes given the scope and detail of my inquiry; they said I couldhave 20. Twenty minutes, 1200 seconds, not a lot of time to question the President about one of the most important events in our nation’s history. The following is a transcript of our remarkable discussion.
Charlie Sheen - Good afternoon Mr. President, thank you so much for
taking time out of your demanding schedule.
President Barack Obama - My pleasure, the content of your request
seemed like something I should carve out a few minutes for.
CS - I should point out that I voted for you, as your promises of hope and
change, transparency and accountability, as well as putting
government back into the hands of the American people, struck an
emotional cord in me that I hadn’t felt in quite some time, perhaps
ever.
PBO - And I appreciate that, Charlie. Big fan of the show, by the way.
CS - Sir, I can’t imagine when you might find the time to actually watch
my show given the measure of what you inherited.
PBO - I have it Tivo’d on Air Force One. Nice break from the traveling
press corps. (He glances at his watch) Not to be abrupt or to rush
you, but you have 19 minutes left.
CS - I’ll take that as an invitation to cut to the chase.
PBO - I’m all ears. Or so I’ve been told.
CS - Sir, in the very near future we will be experiencing our first 9/11
anniversary with you as Commander in Chief.
PBO - Yes. A very solemn day for our nation. A day of reflection and yet
a day of historical consciousness as well.
CS - Very much so, sir, very much so indeed…. Now, in researching
your position regarding the events of 9/11 and the subsequent
investigation that followed, am I correct to understand that you
fully support and endorse the findings of the Commission Report
otherwise known as the ‘official story’?
PBO - Do I have any reason not to? Given that most of us are presumably
in touch with similar evidence.
CS - I really wish that were the case, sir. Are you aware, Mr. President,
of the recent stunning revelations that sixty percent of the 9/11
commissioners have publicly stated that the government agreed not
to tell the truth about 9/11 and that the Pentagon was engaged in
deliberate deception about their response to the attack?
PBO - I am aware of certain “in fighting” during the course of their very
thorough and tireless investigative process.
CS - Mr. President, it’s hard to label this type of friction as “in fighting”
or make the irresponsible leap to “thorough,” when the evidence I
insist you examine regarding 6 of the 10 members are statements
of fact.
(At this point one of Obama’s senior aides approaches the
President and whispers into his ear. Obama glances quickly at his
watch and nods as the aide resumes his post at the doorway,
directly behind me.)
PBO - No disrespect, Mr. Sheen, but I have to ask; what is it that you
seem to be implying with the initial direction of this discussion?
CS - I am not implying anything, Mr. President. I am here to present the
facts and see what you plan to do with them.
PBO - Let me guess: your ‘facts,’ allegedly supporting these claims, are
in the folders you brought with you?
CS - Good guess, Mr. President.
(I hand the first folder of documents to the President)
CS - Again sir, these are not my opinions or assumptions. This is all a
matter of public record, reported through mainstream media,
painstakingly fact checked and verified.
(The President glances into the folder I handed him)
CS - You’ll notice, sir, on page one of the dossier dated August of ‘06
from the Washington Post, the statements of John Farmer, Senior
Council to the 9/11 Commission, his quote stating “I was shocked
how different the truth was from the way it was described.”
PBO - (As he glances down at the report, almost inaudible) …. Um
hmm….
CS - He goes on to further state, “The [NORAD Air Defense] tapes told
a radically different story from what had been told to us and the
public for two years….”
(The President continues to view the documents)
CS - On pages two and three, sir, are the statements, as well, from
commission co-chairmen Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton,
commissioners Bob Kerrey, Timothy Roemer and John Lehman, as
well as the statements of commissioner Max Cleland, an ex-
Senator from Georgia , who resigned, stating:
“It is a national scandal. This investigation is now compromised. One of
these days we will have to get the full story because the 9/11 issue
is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it
up.“
He also described President Bush’s desire to delay the process as not to
damage the ‘04 re-election bid. They suspected deception to the
point where they considered referring the matter to the Justice
Department for criminal investigation. Mr. President, this
information alone is unequivocally grounds for a new
investigation!
PBO - Mistakes were clearly made but we as a people and as a country
need to move forward. It is obviously in our best interest as a
democratic society to focus our efforts and our resources on the
future of this great nation and our ability to protect the American
people and our allies from this type of terrorism in the coming
years.
CS - Sir, how can we focus on the future when THE COMMISSION
ITSELF is on record stating that they still do not know the truth??
PBO - Even if what you state might, in some capacity, begin to approach
an open discussion or balanced debate, I can’t speak for, or about,
the decisions certain commission members made during an
extremely difficult period. Perhaps you should be interviewing
them instead of me. Wait, don’t tell me; I was easier to track down
than they were?
CS - Not exactly, sir, but let’s be honest. You’re the President of the
United States, the leader of the free world, the buck stops with you.
9/11 has been the pretext for the systematic dismantling of our
Constitution and Bill of Rights. Your administration is reading
from the same playbook that the Bush administration foisted on
America through documented secrecy and deception.
PBO - Mr. Sheen, I’m having a difficult time sitting here and listening to
you draw distorted parallels between the Bush/Cheney regime and
mine.
CS - Mr. President, the parallels are not distorted just because you say
they are. Let’s stick to the facts. You promised to abolish the
Patriot Act and then voted to re-authorize it. You pledged to end
warrantless wiretapping against the American people and now
energetically defend it. You decried the practice of rendition and
now continue it. You promised over and over again on the
campaign trail that you would end the practice of indefinite
detention and instead, you have expanded it to permanent
detention of “detainees” without trial. This far exceeds the outrages
of the former administration. Call me crazy, Mr. President, but is
this not your record?
PBO - Mr. Sheen, my staff and I authorized this interview based on your
request to discuss 9/11 and deliver some additional information
you’re convinced I’d not previously reviewed. Call me crazy, but it
appears as though you’ve blindly wandered off topic.
CS - Sir, the examples I just illustrated are a direct result of 9/11.
PBO - And I’m telling you that we must move forward, we must endure
through these dangerous and politically challenging years ahead.
CS - Mr. President, we cannot move forward with a bottomless warren
of unanswered questions surrounding that day and it’s aftermath.
PBO - I read the official report. Every word, every page. Perhaps you
should do the same.
CS - I have, sir, and so have thousands of family members of the
victims, and guess what? They have the same questions I do and
probably a lot more. I didn’t lose a loved one on that horrific day,
Mr. President, and neither did you. But since then, I, along with
millions of other Americans, lost something we held true and dear
for most of our lives in this great country of ours-- we lost our
hope.
PBO - And I’d like to believe that I am here to restore that hope. To
restore confidence in your leaders, in the system that the voting
public chose through a peaceful transfer of power.
(An odd moment of silence between us. Precious time ticking
away.)
CS - Mr. President, are you aware of the number of days it took to begin
the investigation into JFK’s assassination?
PBO - If memory serves, I believe it was two weeks.
CS - Close. Seventeen days to be exact. Are you aware sir, how long it
took to begin the investigation into Pearl Harbor?
PBO - I would say again, about….two weeks.
CS - Close again, sir, eleven days to be exact. Are you aware, Mr.
President, how long it took to begin the investigation into 9/11?
PBO - I know it must have seemed like a very long time for all the
grieving families.
CS - It was a very long time, Mr. President – four hundred and forty days.
Roughly 14 months. Does it bother you, Mr. President, that it only
took FIVE HOURS after the initial attack for Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld to recommend and endorse a full scale offensive
against Iraq?
PBO - I am not aware of any such purported claim.
CS - I have the proof, Mr. President, along with scores of documents and
facts I’d like you to take a look at. Here.
(I hand him another file - much thicker than the first)
PBO - I see you came prepared, Charlie.
CS - No other way to show up, Mr. President. When in doubt, over
prepare I always say.
PBO - Now you sound like the First Lady.
CS - That’s quite a compliment, sir.
PBO - As you wish. Please continue.
CS - Sir, I’d like to direct your attention to the stack of documents in the
folder I just handed you. The first in from the top is entitled
“Operation Northwoods,” a declassified Pentagon plan to stage
terror attacks on U.S. soil, to be blamed on Cuba as a pretext for
war.
PBO - And I’d like to direct your attention to the fact that the principle
draftsman of this improbable blueprint was quickly denied a
second term as Joint Chiefs chairman and sent packing to a
European NATO garrison. Thank God his otherworldly ambitions
never saw the light of day.
CS - I wouldn’t be so certain about that, Mr. President.
PBO - I could easily say the same to you, Charlie.
(The President checks his watch)
CS - The next document reads, “Declassified staged provocations.” Now
honestly Mr. President, I wish I was making this stuff up. I’m
certain you are familiar with the USS Maine incident, the sinking
of the Lusitania, which we all now know brought us into WWI,
and of course, the most famous, the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
PBO - Of course I am familiar with these historical events and I’m
aware that there’s a measure of controversy surrounding them. But
to be quite frank with you, this is all ancient history.
CS - Mr. President, it has often been said, “Those who do not know
history are doomed to repeat it.” And I concede to you, sir, these
events are the past.
PBO - A vastly different world, young man, shouldering a radically
disparate state of universal affairs.
CS - No argument, sir, I‘m merely inviting you to acknowledge some
credibility to the pattern or the theme. Case in point, the next
document in your folder. It was published by the think tank,
Project for a New American Century, and it’s entitled “Rebuilding
America’s Defenses,” and was written by Dick Cheney and Jeb
Bush. To quote from the document, sir -(The President interrupts)
PBO - “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings
revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
CS - Touché, sir. Your thoughts on this statement, Mr. President?
PBO - I would call this a blatant case of misjudgment fueled by an
unfortunate milieu of assumption. For some, the uninformed denial
of coincidence.
CS - Interesting angle, sir. Nevertheless, Vice President Cheney didn’t
stop there. In early 2008, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist
Seymour Hersh and MSNBC both reported that Cheney had
proposed to the Pentagon an outrageous plan to have the U.S.
Navy create fake Iranian patrol boats, to be manned by Navy
SEALs, who would then stage an attack on U.S. destroyers in the
Strait of Hormuz. This event was to be blamed on Iran and used as
a pretext for war. Does any of this information worry you, Mr.
President? Should we just ignore it, until these realities can be
dismissed years from now by our children and ancient history as
well?
PBO - Of course this information worries me, yet it’s not nearly as
worrisome as you sitting here today suspiciously implying that
9/11 was somehow allowed to happen or even orchestrated from
the inside.
CS - Mr. President, I am not suspiciously implying anything. I am
merely exposing the documents and asking the questions that
nobody in power will even look at or acknowledge. And as I stated
earlier, I voted for you; I believed in your message of hope and
change. Mr. President, I have come to you specifically hoping for a
change. A change in the fact that our government has not yet made
itself open and accountable to the people. These are your words,
Mr. President, not mine. The lives of thousands who were brutally
cut short and those left behind to suffer in infinite pain are with me
today, Mr. President. They are with me in spirit and flesh, and the
message we carry will not be silenced anymore by media-fueled
mantras insisting how they are supposed to feel. Deciding for
them, for 8 long years, what can be thought, what can be said, what
can be asked.
PBO - And I appreciate your passion; I appreciate your conviction. In
spite of your concerns, in spite of what your data might or might
not reveal, what you and the families must understand and accept
is that we are doing everything we can to protect you.
CS - Mr. President, I realize we’re very short on time, so please allow
me to run down a list of bullet points that might illuminate some
reasons why we don’t embrace the warm hug of Federal
protection.
PBO - We’ve come this far. Fire away.
CS - Please keep in mind, Mr. President, everything I’m about to say is
documented as fact and part of the public record. The information
you are holding in your hands chronicles and verifies each and
every point.
PBO - You have five minutes left. The floor is yours. Brief me.
CS - Thank you, Mr. President. Okay, first: on the F.B.I.’s Most Wanted
list, Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the crimes of 9/11.
When I called the F.B.I. to ask them why this was the case, they
replied: “There’s not enough evidence to link Bin Laden to the
crime scene.” I later discovered he had never even been indicted by
the D.O.J.
CS - Number 2: F.B.I. translator Sibel Edmonds was dismissed and
gagged by the D.O.J. after she revealed that the government had
foreknowledge of plans to attack American cities using planes as
bombs as early as April 2001. In August of ‘09, Mrs. Edmonds
broke the federal gag order and testified under oath that Osama Bin
Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all working for and with the
C.I.A. up until the day of 9/11.
CS - Number 3: The following is a quote from Mayor Giuliani during an
interview on 9/11 with Peter Jennings for ABC News. “I went
down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street,
which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire
Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were
operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade
Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could
actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building
for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked
north, and took a lot of people with us.”
WHO TOLD HIM THIS??? To this day, this question remains
unanswered, completely ignored and emphatically DENIED by
Mayor Giuliani on several public occasions.
CS - Number 4: In April 2004, USA Today reported, "In the two years
before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace
Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White
House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used
as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties." One of
the targets was the World Trade Center.
CS - Number 5: On September 12, 2007, CNN's ‘Anderson Cooper 360’
reported that the mysterious "white plane," spotted and videotaped
by multiple media outlets, flying in restricted airspace over the
White House shortly before 10 a.m. on the morning of 9/11, was in
fact the Air Force's E-4B, a specially modified Boeing 747 with a
communications pod behind the cockpit-- otherwise known as
“The Doomsday Plane.”
Though fully aware of the event, the 9/11 Commission did not
deem the appearance of the military plane to be of any interest and
did not include it in the final 9/11 Commission report.
CS - Number 6: Three F-16s assigned to Andrews Air Force Base, ten
miles from Washington, DC, are conducting training exercises in
North Carolina 207 miles away as the first plane crashes into the
WTC. Even at significantly less than their top speed of 1500 mph,
they could still have defended the skies over Washington well
before 9 a.m., more than 37 minutes before Flight 77 crashes into
the Pentagon. However, they did not return until after 9:55 a.m.
Andrews AFB had no armed fighters on alert and ready to take off
on the morning of 9/11.
CS - Number 7: WTC Building 7. Watch the video of its collapse.
CS - Number 8: Flight 93 is the fourth plane to crash on 9/11 at 10:03
a.m. V.P. Cheney only gives shoot down orders at 10:10-10:20
a.m. and this is not communicated to NORAD until 28 minutes
after Flight 93 has crashed.
Fueling further suspicion on this front is the fact that three months
before the attacks of 9/11, Dick Cheney usurped control of
NORAD, and therefore he, and no one else on planet Earth, had
the power to call for military sorties on the hijacked airliners on
9/11. He did not exercise that power. Three months after 9/11, he
relinquished command of NORAD and returned it to military
operation.
CS - Number 9: Scores of mainstream news outlets reported that the
F.B.I. conducted an investigation of at least FIVE of the 9/11
hijackers being trained at U.S. military flight schools. Those
investigations are now sealed and need to be declassified.
CS - Number 10: In 2004, New York firefighters Mike Bellone and
Nicholas DeMasi went public to say they had found the black
boxes at the World Trade Center, but were told to keep their
mouths shut by F.B.I. agents. Nicholas DeMasi said that he
escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001
and helped them locate the devices, a story backed up by rescue
volunteer Mike Bellone.
As the Philadelphia Daily News reported at the time, “Their story
raises the question of whether there was a some type of cover-up at
Ground Zero.”
CS - Number 11: Hundreds of eyewitnesses including first responders,
fire captains, news reporters, and police all described multiple
explosions in both towers before and during the collapse.
CS - Number 12: An astounding video uncovered from the archives
shows BBC News correspondent Jane Standley reporting on the
collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at
5:20 p.m. on the afternoon of 9/11. Tapes from earlier BBC
broadcasts show news anchors discussing the collapse of WTC 7 a
full 26 minutes in advance. The BBC at first claimed that their
tapes from 9/11 had been "lost" before admitting that they made
the "error" of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it happened
without adequately explaining how they could have obtained
advance knowledge of the event.
In addition, over an hour before the collapse of WTC 7, at 4:10pm,
CNN's Aaron Brown reported that the building "has either
collapsed, or is collapsing."
CS - Number 13: Solicitor General Ted Olson's claim that his wife,
Barbara Olson, called him twice from Flight 77, describing
hijackers with box cutters, was a central plank of the official 9/11
story.
However, the credibility of the story was completely undermined
after Olson kept changing his story about whether his wife used
her cell phone or the airplane phone. American Airlines confirmed
that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757 and that this plane did not have
airplane phones on board.
According to the F.B.I., Barbara Olson attempted to call her
husband only once and the call failed to connect, therefore, Olson
must have been lying when he claimed he had spoken to his wife
from Flight 77.
CS - Number 14: The size of a Boeing 757 is approximately 125 ft.
in width and yet images of the impact zone at the Pentagon
supposedly caused by the crash merely show a hole no
more than 16 ft. in diameter. The engines of the 757 would
have punctured a hole bigger than this, never mind the
whole plane. Images before the partial collapse of the impact
zone show little real impact damage and a sparse debris
field completely inconsistent with the crash of a large jetliner,
especially when contrasted with other images showing
airplane crashes into buildings.
CS - Number 15: What is the meaning behind the following quote
attributed to Dick Cheney which came to light during the 9/11
Commission hearings? The passage is taken from testimony given
by then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.
During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon,
there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice
President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out."
And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man
also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And
the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said,
"Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the
contrary?"
As the plane was not shot down, in addition to the fact that armed
fighter jets were nowhere near the plane and the Pentagon
defensive system was not activated, are we to take it that the orders
were to let the plane find its target?
CS - Number 16: In May 2003, the Miami Herald reported how the Bush
administration was refusing to release a 900-page Congressional
report on 9/11 because it wanted to "avoid enshrining embarrassing
details in the report," particularly regarding pre-9/11 warnings, as
well as the fact that the hijackers were trained at U.S. flight
schools.
CS - Number 17: Top Pentagon officials canceled their scheduled flights
for September 11th on September 10th. San Francisco Mayor Willie
Brown, following a security warning from the White House,
canceled a flight into New York that was scheduled for the
morning of 9/11.
CS - Number 18: The technology to enable cell phone calls from highaltitude
airline flights was not created until 2004, and even by that
point, it was only in the trial phase. Calls from cell phones, which
formed an integral part of the official government version of
events, were technologically impossible at the time.
CS - Number 19: On April 29, 2004, President Bush and V.P. Cheney
would only meet with the commission under specific clandestine
conditions. They insisted on testifying together and not under oath.
They also demanded that their testimony be treated as a matter of
“state secret.” To date, nothing they spoke of that day exists in the
public domain.
CS - And finally, Mr. President - Number 20: A few days after the
attack, several newspapers, as well as the F.B.I., reported that a
paper passport had been found in the ruins of the WTC. In August
2004, CNN reported that 9/11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah's visa was
found in the remains of Flight 93, which went down in
Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
At least a third of the WTC victims’ bodies were vaporized and
many of the victims of the Pentagon incident were burned beyond
recognition. And yet, visas and paper passports, which identify the
perpetrators and back up the official version of events,
miraculously survive explosions and fires that we are told melted
steel buildings.
(The senior aide appears again beside the President whispering in his
ear. He then quickly moves off.)
PBO - Well Charlie, I can’t say this hasn’t been interesting. As I said
earlier, you’ve showed up today focused and organized.
Regardless of how I feel about the material you’ve presented, I
must commend your dedication and zeal. However, our time here
is up.
(The President rises from his chair; I do the same.)
CS - Mr. President! One more second!
(The President starts towards the door; I follow him quickly, step for
step)
CS - Mr. President, I implore you, based on the evidence you now
possess, to use your Executive Power. Prove to us all, sir, that you
do, in fact, care. Create a truly comprehensive and open
Congressional investigation into 9/11 and its aftermath. The
families deserve the truth; the American people and the rest of the
free world deserve the truth. Mr. President -
(He pauses. We shake hands.)
CS - Make sure you’re on the right side of history.
(The President breaks the handshake.)
PBO - I am on the right side of history. Thank you Charlie, my staff and
I will be in touch.
(I watch as he strides gracefully out of the room; the truth I provided
him held firmly by his side, in the hand of providence.)
End.
Author’s Note: What you have just read didn’t actually happen… yet. This is an open letter to the President requesting a newinvestigation.
Friday 4 September 2009
Titanic Conspiracy
Info Warrior – Martin Haywood
I’ll show you the famous shoot of the two ships together in a minute, but first, I was always arrogant, before I started to try and prove the conspiracy was fact.
I always argued that the two ships WERE NOT identical and that they were slightly different.
The picture at the top is a picture of the Olympic, lets note just one thing here, the A deck windows are completely open, if I have confused you, then I also added this picture below of the Titanic, as you can see, the forward part of the A deck windows are different and it was these differences I was so arrogant about, the story of the windows goes like this.
Here is the picture I promised, not even I can tell which ship is which, and that is because, THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.
At this time they are exactly the same, so it’s no trouble really to rub out their names and change them, it’s as simple as that, and the workers will do it if they want to get paid and escape unemployment by White Star. Had repairs went on like on any other ship, the repairs would have been done in two days, but the Olympic was in dry dock for over a week, consistently switching places with the titanic. I recently watched a documentary on the conspiracy on YouTube while doing this information and there is a quote from someone that says “Olympic was looking more and more like the titanic everyday”, and vice versa. A couple of days before the maiden voyage, the titanic (AKA Olympic) went to do her sea trials, and again it’s fishy, a ship’s sea trials should take two days, titanic’s was only one. There was no test of speed or evasive action= yet the board of requirements deemed titanic seaworthy and after collecting passengers, luggage and dozen bags of mail, titanic (aka Olympic) set off and sailed into history. The story from here is that the supposedly new liner would be secretly scuttled at a certain point in mid ocean, with a rescue ship conveniently within reach to rescue everyone on board, everyone would be safe and white star would be given compensation to build a new ship.
What a solid plan, genius, they could get rid of a worthlessly unlucky ship in disguise and claim money for purposely sinking her but it all went horribly wrong when a certain Iceberg loomed out of the night sky, the crew knew that if they hit that iceberg, everyone would know about it and the fault of the sinking could not be blamed on bad craftsmanship.
Evasive action was taken, but the iceberg grazed the ship in an area where due to the accident with the hawk there was weakness. I wonder how white star thought; their unlucky ship had plagued them with more bad luck. Worse, the iceberg had put them on a course that took her out of view from the rescue ship and the rest we know. After the night of April 14/15 1912, the other liner Olympic (AKA Titanic) seemed to be a fortunate and extremely lucky ship, taking hundreds of passengers across the Atlantic safely, during World war one she became a troopship, delivering American soldiers to Europe safely again.
An article of the mysteries and conspiracies of the sinking of three famous ocean liners during a period from 1911 to 1918.
The story of the tragic sinking of the titanic is the most best known story of a ship in all history, everyone knows the story, and you don’t have to live near the sea to have a good knowledge, even if you aren’t even interested, you still known the story to an extent. The Titanic, biggest and most richly decorated ship of her day, even before she sails she is known throughout Britain and possibly the whole world, sets sail for New York city, she is a symbol of mans greatest achievement, man has beaten nature and god himself. Everyone can be heard saying, “she is unsinkable”, or “God himself could not sink this ship. However barely a week in existence she hits an iceberg, on a very strange night, an unusual night, there is no cloud in the sky, so all the stars of the milky way can be seen on her promenade decks, yet despite all the visible stars, there is no moon, if that is strange enough, there is no wind either, just a motionless sky that chills the skin to the bone, this gives me the impression that supernatural powers were at work. After she hits the iceberg she suffers from a 300ft gash on her starboard side (on this present day we now known that such damage was impossible) and within 2 hours mans greatest achievement in history (and to conquer nature and the sea) breaks in two or even three pieces and plummets to the Ocean floor and dies, taking 1508 (no-one knows the precise number) with her.
That’s how the story goes, but is there really more to the story then that, rumours that were kept in the dark for almost a century, are beginning to come to the light, and my task was to see if I could draw a line on what happened in the story leading up to the night the unsinkable sank. The Birth of the Titanic conspiracy began before she was even introduced to floating on the water, in 1907 two new super liners; the Lusitania and the Mauritania were introduced to the world by the White Star lines biggest monopoly rivals the Cunard line. Not wanting to be outdone, white star started designing their own ocean liners, Olympic and Titanic (with a third ship called Gigantic to be added later) But White star was having problems with money and I’m not surprised seeing how no expense was spared in building these bigger, richly decorated ships.
In 1911 Olympic was launched into the sea and began her maiden voyage, it wouldn’t be until next year when Titanic joined her sister on the sea. The Olympic completed her maiden voyage to Newyork safely, but celebrations were slightly offset when suction from the massive liners huge propellers pulled a tugboat into the side of the ship, not damaging the liner but badly damaging the tug. While work continued into building the Titanic, Olympic sailed the sea many times, rivalling Cunards Lusitania and Mauritania on her own.
The story of the tragic sinking of the titanic is the most best known story of a ship in all history, everyone knows the story, and you don’t have to live near the sea to have a good knowledge, even if you aren’t even interested, you still known the story to an extent. The Titanic, biggest and most richly decorated ship of her day, even before she sails she is known throughout Britain and possibly the whole world, sets sail for New York city, she is a symbol of mans greatest achievement, man has beaten nature and god himself. Everyone can be heard saying, “she is unsinkable”, or “God himself could not sink this ship. However barely a week in existence she hits an iceberg, on a very strange night, an unusual night, there is no cloud in the sky, so all the stars of the milky way can be seen on her promenade decks, yet despite all the visible stars, there is no moon, if that is strange enough, there is no wind either, just a motionless sky that chills the skin to the bone, this gives me the impression that supernatural powers were at work. After she hits the iceberg she suffers from a 300ft gash on her starboard side (on this present day we now known that such damage was impossible) and within 2 hours mans greatest achievement in history (and to conquer nature and the sea) breaks in two or even three pieces and plummets to the Ocean floor and dies, taking 1508 (no-one knows the precise number) with her.
That’s how the story goes, but is there really more to the story then that, rumours that were kept in the dark for almost a century, are beginning to come to the light, and my task was to see if I could draw a line on what happened in the story leading up to the night the unsinkable sank. The Birth of the Titanic conspiracy began before she was even introduced to floating on the water, in 1907 two new super liners; the Lusitania and the Mauritania were introduced to the world by the White Star lines biggest monopoly rivals the Cunard line. Not wanting to be outdone, white star started designing their own ocean liners, Olympic and Titanic (with a third ship called Gigantic to be added later) But White star was having problems with money and I’m not surprised seeing how no expense was spared in building these bigger, richly decorated ships.
In 1911 Olympic was launched into the sea and began her maiden voyage, it wouldn’t be until next year when Titanic joined her sister on the sea. The Olympic completed her maiden voyage to Newyork safely, but celebrations were slightly offset when suction from the massive liners huge propellers pulled a tugboat into the side of the ship, not damaging the liner but badly damaging the tug. While work continued into building the Titanic, Olympic sailed the sea many times, rivalling Cunards Lusitania and Mauritania on her own.
Then Titanic was finally launched into the sea at last, but it would take yet more time to fill her hull with the splendour that that made her famous. Meanwhile another accident befell the Olympic, again suction from her propellers was to blame, a battle cruiser, HMS Hawk (a ship that rammed ships to sink them) was caught in the suction and rammed her bow right into the side of the Olympic, causing a mass of damage to her starboard engine and propeller shaft, later damage was found to have broke the ships back, making Olympic worthless and no more than scrap iron, I should add as well that there was damage to her forward compartments that seem to match that of titanic’s iceberg damage.
White star blamed the cruiser for what happened and vice versa, white star Demanded Compensation, but following a court battle, the judges found Olympic to blame and this is where the Titanic conspiracy begins. Olympic sailed back to where she was built and for a brief moment is seen side by side her sister ship and they look exactly the same.
White star blamed the cruiser for what happened and vice versa, white star Demanded Compensation, but following a court battle, the judges found Olympic to blame and this is where the Titanic conspiracy begins. Olympic sailed back to where she was built and for a brief moment is seen side by side her sister ship and they look exactly the same.
I’ll show you the famous shoot of the two ships together in a minute, but first, I was always arrogant, before I started to try and prove the conspiracy was fact.
I always argued that the two ships WERE NOT identical and that they were slightly different.
The picture at the top is a picture of the Olympic, lets note just one thing here, the A deck windows are completely open, if I have confused you, then I also added this picture below of the Titanic, as you can see, the forward part of the A deck windows are different and it was these differences I was so arrogant about, the story of the windows goes like this.
Ismay, owner of White Star made a note of problems on Olympic, one was that, passengers complained about sea spray and wind during bad storms could drench the A deck promenade through those big open windows, so an enclosed area was made to the forward part on Titanic, or was it part of their plan to gain insurance.
Here is the picture I promised, not even I can tell which ship is which, and that is because, THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.At this time they are exactly the same, so it’s no trouble really to rub out their names and change them, it’s as simple as that, and the workers will do it if they want to get paid and escape unemployment by White Star. Had repairs went on like on any other ship, the repairs would have been done in two days, but the Olympic was in dry dock for over a week, consistently switching places with the titanic. I recently watched a documentary on the conspiracy on YouTube while doing this information and there is a quote from someone that says “Olympic was looking more and more like the titanic everyday”, and vice versa. A couple of days before the maiden voyage, the titanic (AKA Olympic) went to do her sea trials, and again it’s fishy, a ship’s sea trials should take two days, titanic’s was only one. There was no test of speed or evasive action= yet the board of requirements deemed titanic seaworthy and after collecting passengers, luggage and dozen bags of mail, titanic (aka Olympic) set off and sailed into history. The story from here is that the supposedly new liner would be secretly scuttled at a certain point in mid ocean, with a rescue ship conveniently within reach to rescue everyone on board, everyone would be safe and white star would be given compensation to build a new ship.
What a solid plan, genius, they could get rid of a worthlessly unlucky ship in disguise and claim money for purposely sinking her but it all went horribly wrong when a certain Iceberg loomed out of the night sky, the crew knew that if they hit that iceberg, everyone would know about it and the fault of the sinking could not be blamed on bad craftsmanship.
Evasive action was taken, but the iceberg grazed the ship in an area where due to the accident with the hawk there was weakness. I wonder how white star thought; their unlucky ship had plagued them with more bad luck. Worse, the iceberg had put them on a course that took her out of view from the rescue ship and the rest we know. After the night of April 14/15 1912, the other liner Olympic (AKA Titanic) seemed to be a fortunate and extremely lucky ship, taking hundreds of passengers across the Atlantic safely, during World war one she became a troopship, delivering American soldiers to Europe safely again.
She is the only (unarmed) ship in history to attack her attacker and win, she became a target for a torpedo, (the cause of what sent her rival Lusitania to the bottom and maybe the Britannic as well) but she took evasive action and avoided it, then she rammed into the U boat that attacked her sending it to the bottom, she was hardly damaged at all. The plan didn’t work, everyone knows that an iceberg sent the ship to the bottom, so again no money was given, maybe this is why white star gave a fine to the families of each crew member lost, a fine for lost uniform, how could they be so cold hearted. Also many saw the ship break in two, but the builders and crew tried to cover this up and they were successful, until the wreck was discovered in 1985 and evidence was examinable, the whole conspiracy goes totally backwards and seems the swapping of ships never happened in the first place.
The whole conspiracy theory gets so confusing, as if the schemers thought of everything to prevent uncovering the truth, many kept their knowledge in the dark and when they died, the critical evidence died with them.
There is only so much evidence we can find and it’s hard to get anywhere without getting seriously confused, happened in the documentary on YouTube, one guy is talking about a possible switch of propellers as the ships numbers were printed on, Olympics’ 400 and titanic’s 401. The number on the propeller at the wreck site clearly says 401, but this guy was arguing that white star would have known this, and swapped them, however one of Olympic propellers was damaged in the incident with the hawk so how could it be swapped, he literally got confused in his own argument. Both the documentary and myself just couldn’t draw a line and give you a simple answer “yes, the conspiracy was fact” or “no the conspiracy was rumour” I just can’t give you an answer. Who knows maybe some critical evidence will turn up in the years to come, but if the conspiracy was fact then I must admire the men behind the plan, they haven’t made it easy, this is almost a 100 years secret and most likely never proven.
In conclusion even if the conspiracy was fact or not, it doesn’t excuse the fact that 1500 people died on this cold April night, strangest of nights, with all the information I have given and there is still more within reach, I still believe that power of a higher sort was at work this night.
The whole conspiracy theory gets so confusing, as if the schemers thought of everything to prevent uncovering the truth, many kept their knowledge in the dark and when they died, the critical evidence died with them.
There is only so much evidence we can find and it’s hard to get anywhere without getting seriously confused, happened in the documentary on YouTube, one guy is talking about a possible switch of propellers as the ships numbers were printed on, Olympics’ 400 and titanic’s 401. The number on the propeller at the wreck site clearly says 401, but this guy was arguing that white star would have known this, and swapped them, however one of Olympic propellers was damaged in the incident with the hawk so how could it be swapped, he literally got confused in his own argument. Both the documentary and myself just couldn’t draw a line and give you a simple answer “yes, the conspiracy was fact” or “no the conspiracy was rumour” I just can’t give you an answer. Who knows maybe some critical evidence will turn up in the years to come, but if the conspiracy was fact then I must admire the men behind the plan, they haven’t made it easy, this is almost a 100 years secret and most likely never proven.
In conclusion even if the conspiracy was fact or not, it doesn’t excuse the fact that 1500 people died on this cold April night, strangest of nights, with all the information I have given and there is still more within reach, I still believe that power of a higher sort was at work this night.
I always believed the ship was the titanic that sank, but after all this research I just don’t know what ship was sunk, but it is clear that it will always be remembered as the night the impossible happened and the unsinkable sank. To this day the Titanic story continues, the chapters to the story aren’t yet finished, we have her construction, sinking, discovery, salvage debates, the latest chapter ending is when the last living survivor died in 2009- what do you think of this for a coincidence......... titanic was launched into the sea on the 31st of may 1912 and the last survivor died on the 31st of may 2009.
In a few years the remains of the great ship will collapse, but the story can only end once every scrap of her id dissolved and GONE.
Until then her story continues, continuing...
In a few years the remains of the great ship will collapse, but the story can only end once every scrap of her id dissolved and GONE.
Until then her story continues, continuing...
Project for the New American Century
Project for the New American Century
Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a conservative think-tank, was established in 1997 as a nonprofit, educational organization whose goal is to promote "American Global Leadership."
In September 2000, PNAC produced a document, "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century." It was kept secret, until a reporter from the the (Irish) Sunday Herald wrote about it on September 15, 2002. The intention of this document was to present the new administration with "a useful road map for the nation's immediate and future defense plans." It encourages the creation of a "global Pax Americana," and was drawn up for vice-president Dick Cheney.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief-of-staff) were contributors to the report. These men form a tight-knit group whose interests transcend administrations. They began the project in the spring of 1998 to "examine the country's defense plans and resource requirements," building upon "the defense strategy outlined by the Cheney Defense Department, in the waning days of the [former] Bush Administration."
In 1992, Cheney drafted a Defense Policy Guidance (DPG) document which proposed maintaining US preeminence, preventing the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests. That document was leaked before it could be approved. Opponents criticized it as an effort by "cold warriors" to keep defense spending high and cuts in forces small despite the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Clinton administration buried Cheney's DPG document, seeking a "peace dividend" instead.
The PNAC document says that the "American grand strategy must be advanced as far into the future as possible." It calls for the US to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars." It describes American armed forces abroad as "the cavalry on the new American frontier," and states that the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role."
The report states there is a need for more American forces for "constabulary" duties. It suggests that using our forces to maintain peace after missions was "running an unacceptable risk in event of war elsewhere and facing the realities of multiple constabulary missions will require a permanent allocation of US armed forces."
According to the report, "The increasing number of constabulary missions for US troops must be considered an integral element in Pentagon force planning," and they expect these operations will remain high over the next 15 to 20 years. "Further, these constabulary missions are far more complex and likely to generate violence than traditional 'peacekeeping' missions. For one, they demand American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations." The US "cannot assume a UN-like stance of neutrality; the preponderance of American power is so great and its global interests so wide that it cannot pretend to be indifferent to political outcomes."
The document states that should "Saddam pass from the scene" bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently, despite the opposition of other Gulf regimes to the stationing of US troops. It says, "Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has." It suggests that it's time to increase the presence of American forces in Southeast Asia which, it says, may lead to "American and allied power providing the spur to the process of democratization in China."
The report calls for the creation of "US Space Forces" to dominate space: "Space control is not an avoidable issue, it is not an optional extra." US space command "must have the ability to assure access to space, freedom of operations within the space medium and an ability to deny others the use of space; this must be an essential element of our military strategy."
The report calls for total control of cyberspace to prevent "enemies" from using the Internet against the US. It says, "New methods of attack, electronic, non-lethal, biological, will be more widely available and combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes." It identifies North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes and says their existence justifies the creation of a "world-wide command-and-control system."
The PNAC wants America, as the world's sole superpower, to take advantage of its position. The document states, "America's strategic goal used to be containment of the Soviet Union; today the task is to preserve an international security environment conducive to American interests and ideals." The military's job has changed since the Cold War, the document says: "Today its task is to secure and expand the zones of democratic peace; to deter the rise of a new greatpower competitor; defend key regions of Europe, East Asia and the Middle East; and to preserve American preeminence through the coming transformation of war made possible by new technologies."
These goals, of course, greatly increase the need for more defense spending. "Use of the post Cold War 'peace dividend' to balance the federal budget has created a 'defense deficit' totaling tens of billions of dollars annually." The authors go on to state, "The program we advocateÑone that would provide America with forces to meet the strategic demands of the world's sole superpowerÑrequires budget levels to be increased to 3.5 to 3.8 percent of the Gross Domestic Product. A sensible plan would add $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually."
The effects will have profound implications for how wars are fought, what weapons dominate and which nations enjoy military preeminence. To preserve American military preeminence, "the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs. The process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing eventÑlike a new Pearl Harbor."
This blueprint for US global domination reveals that Bush, or at least his vice president and cabinet members, were planning an attack on Iraq to secure "regime change" even before they took power in January 2001. The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: "The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."
It seems the Bush administration has taken the PNAC document and made it their political and defense strategy. September 11th provided the "catastrophic and catalyzing event" that was needed to propel America into the "War on Terrorism," a war without end that justifies massive increases in military spending, and decreased domestic spending. It is the excuse they need to "expand the zones of democratic peace."
Paula J. Dobriansky, Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs, wrote in defense of the invasion of Iraq, "Pan-national terrorist groups (such as al Qaeda) and rogue regimes (such as that of the Taliban or of Saddam Hussein) pose grave threats to democratic systems, as do the xenophobic, intolerant ideologies that they espouse. Accordingly, fighting against these forces is both in our national security interest and a key ingredient of democracy promotion. And democracy promotion is the best antidote to terrorism."
The new American in-your-face foreign policy has destabilized the political world, taking problems and turning them into crises. In lockstep force toward world domination, we find ourselves threatening Syria and Iran, and would probably invade them also, except that North Korea has its own stubborn, in-your-face cowboy leader. It's quickly becoming the next war zone, and provides an enemy who will fight back. To stop this juggernaut of imperialism, we must work to end the Bush "Regime of Terror" by the 2004 election.
Thursday 27 August 2009
The Solution
Resource-Based Economy
A Resource-Based Economy is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.
Modern society has access to highly advanced technology and can make available food, clothing, housing and medical care; update our educational system; and develop a limitless supply of renewable, non-contaminating energy. By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society.
A resource-based economy would utilize existing resources from the land and sea, physical equipment, industrial plants, etc. to enhance the lives of the total population. In an economy based on resources rather than money, we could easily produce all of the necessities of life and provide a high standard of living for all.
Consider the following examples: At the beginning of World War II the US had a mere 600 or so first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short supply by turning out more than 90,000 planes a year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was No, we did not have enough money, nor did we have enough gold; but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources that enabled the US to achieve the high production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately this is only considered in times of war.
In a resource-based economy all of the world's resources are held as the common heritage of all of Earth's people, thus eventually outgrowing the need for the artificial boundaries that separate people. This is the unifying imperative.
We must emphasize that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of an elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations at the helm, and the vast majority of the world's population subservient to them. Our vision of globalization empowers each and every person on the planet to be the best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.
Our proposals would not only add to the well being of people, but they would also provide the necessary information that would enable them to participate in any area of their competence. The measure of success would be based on the fulfilment of one's individual pursuits rather than the acquisition of wealth, property and power.
At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth's inhabitants. Only when population exceeds the carrying capacity of the land do many problems such as greed, crime and violence emerge. By overcoming scarcity, most of the crimes and even the prisons of today's society would no longer be necessary.
A resource-based economy would make it possible to use technology to overcome scarce resources by applying renewable sources of energy, computerizing and automating manufacturing and inventory, designing safe energy-efficient cities and advanced transportation systems, providing universal health care and more relevant education, and most of all by generating a new incentive system based on human and environmental concern.
Many people believe that there is too much technology in the world today, and that technology is the major cause of our environmental pollution. This is not the case. It is the abuse and misuse of technology that should be our major concern. In a more humane civilization, instead of machines displacing people they would shorten the workday, increase the availability of goods and services, and lengthen vacation time. If we utilize new technology to raise the standard of living for all people, then the infusion of machine technology would no longer be a threat.
A resource-based world economy would also involve all-out efforts to develop new, clean, and renewable sources of energy: geothermal; controlled fusion; solar; photovoltaic; wind, wave, and tidal power; and even fuel from the oceans. We would eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could propel civilization for thousands of years. A resource-based economy must also be committed to the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants, allowing them to be energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.
What else would a resource-based economy mean? Technology intelligently and efficiently applied, conserves energy, reduces waste, and provides more leisure time. With automated inventory on a global scale, we can maintain a balance between production and distribution. Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.
As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, marketing and advertising personnel, salespersons, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste will be eliminated. Considerable amounts of energy would also be saved by eliminating the duplication of competitive products such as tools, eating utensils, pots, pans and vacuum cleaners. Choice is good. But instead of hundreds of different manufacturing plants and all the paperwork and personnel required to turn out similar products, only a few of the highest quality would be needed to serve the entire population. Our only shortage is the lack of creative thought and intelligence in ourselves and our elected leaders to solve these problems. The most valuable, untapped resource today is human ingenuity.
With the elimination of debt, the fear of losing one's job will no longer be a threat This assurance, combined with education on how to relate to one another in a much more meaningful way, could considerably reduce both mental and physical stress and leave us free to explore and develop our abilities.
If the thought of eliminating money still troubles you, consider this: If a group of people with gold, diamonds and money were stranded on an island that had no resources such as food, clean air and water, their wealth would be irrelevant to their survival. It is only when resources are scarce that money can be used to control their distribution. One could not, for example, sell the air we breathe or water abundantly flowing down from a mountain stream. Although air and water are valuable, in abundance they cannot be sold.
Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such.
Monday 24 August 2009
Global Warming Hoax
Info Warrior – Daniel Aspey-Smith
Essentially after a lot of research and I’m no scientist but I have looked at a lot of scientific studies, think tanks and so on I’ve basically come to the conclusion that man made global warming is a scam, I’m not denying its happening, but what I’m saying is that it’s wrongly interpreted by the main stream media.
If you look at the science behind it you can clearly see there are errors and it is in fact the sun, which is the main driver of the planetary climate, which has been increasing in thermal output and is now the hottest it’s ever been which has resulted in warming not just on Earth but throughout the solar system (NASA), which is why the ice caps on Mars are melting and the moons on Saturn and Jupiter are now liquid seas (now are SUV’s causing that?) And I looked at studies written by scientists with good track records who say where having very serious climate change and that human activity is tiny compared to other inputs like volcanoes etc.
In the last 1000 years there has been a period of warm temperatures where we’ve had periods of high and low sun spot activity and currently we’ve been experiencing a warm episode known as the medieval warm period, just like in the 1600’s when the Earth experienced a cold period (where there was a mini ice age in N Europe where the N sea froze and was filled with ice) which corresponded with an all time minimum of sun spot activity, but where well within the limits of that period and the earth’s warming by about ½ a degree every 100 years, part of this natural cycle. Additionally there is no evidence that the increase in carbon dioxide measured in the last 50 years has anything to do with this, primarily because the warming started before the industrial revolution ever began. People forget plants breathe CO2; they’ve found that life blooms in a CO2 Oxygen rich environment. Everyone knows the ice caps expand and collapse that’s documented fact.
But the other concern is that governments could actually be gobbling up the worlds concern to line their own pockets and bring in global carbon taxes – nothing to do with environment, to tax basically everything from cattle to light bulbs.
So overall man made global warming is not a large contributor to the overall solar cycle, no denying things are shifting and I’m all for renewable energy, but the climate system is very complex and can’t be accurately be modelled which has lead to invalid assumptions and fear mongering through the media, scaring people to the point where saving the planet is now hailed as the planets new religion and that we’ve got to seriously reduce the number of children where having (UK population decline) anyway that’s my hypnosis.
Essentially after a lot of research and I’m no scientist but I have looked at a lot of scientific studies, think tanks and so on I’ve basically come to the conclusion that man made global warming is a scam, I’m not denying its happening, but what I’m saying is that it’s wrongly interpreted by the main stream media.
If you look at the science behind it you can clearly see there are errors and it is in fact the sun, which is the main driver of the planetary climate, which has been increasing in thermal output and is now the hottest it’s ever been which has resulted in warming not just on Earth but throughout the solar system (NASA), which is why the ice caps on Mars are melting and the moons on Saturn and Jupiter are now liquid seas (now are SUV’s causing that?) And I looked at studies written by scientists with good track records who say where having very serious climate change and that human activity is tiny compared to other inputs like volcanoes etc.
In the last 1000 years there has been a period of warm temperatures where we’ve had periods of high and low sun spot activity and currently we’ve been experiencing a warm episode known as the medieval warm period, just like in the 1600’s when the Earth experienced a cold period (where there was a mini ice age in N Europe where the N sea froze and was filled with ice) which corresponded with an all time minimum of sun spot activity, but where well within the limits of that period and the earth’s warming by about ½ a degree every 100 years, part of this natural cycle. Additionally there is no evidence that the increase in carbon dioxide measured in the last 50 years has anything to do with this, primarily because the warming started before the industrial revolution ever began. People forget plants breathe CO2; they’ve found that life blooms in a CO2 Oxygen rich environment. Everyone knows the ice caps expand and collapse that’s documented fact.
But the other concern is that governments could actually be gobbling up the worlds concern to line their own pockets and bring in global carbon taxes – nothing to do with environment, to tax basically everything from cattle to light bulbs.
So overall man made global warming is not a large contributor to the overall solar cycle, no denying things are shifting and I’m all for renewable energy, but the climate system is very complex and can’t be accurately be modelled which has lead to invalid assumptions and fear mongering through the media, scaring people to the point where saving the planet is now hailed as the planets new religion and that we’ve got to seriously reduce the number of children where having (UK population decline) anyway that’s my hypnosis.
Thursday 13 August 2009
A land of liberty destroyed by stealth
Returning to Britain from a summer holiday abroad, you begin to notice things that perhaps escaped your attention before – the huge number of CCTV cameras that infest our public spaces and, much less obviously, the atmosphere of watchfulness and control that has now become a way of life.
This is the regime that 12 years of New Labour have imposed on Britain, a place of unwavering suspicion, paranoia – and obsessive surveillance.
We have become the sort of society that we would unhesitatingly have railed against a few years ago. But, because the change has been brought about with such stealth, we are the very last to see it.
Wednesday 5 August 2009
Chemtrails
For over a year, the military has been spraying the skies throughout America, Canada, and now parts of Europe (including Britain, France, and the Netherlands) with substances that were initially referred to as "mystery contrails" , but later were named "chemtrails" by investigative reporter and author William Thomas. When questioned, military and government officials either deny any knowledge of these sprayings outright or they offer unbelievable and ludicrous explanations that only a moron could believe. Joe Burton has been aggressively investigating and reporting on this story from early on. Apparently he had been too aggressive, because his house had been targeted for direct spraying by low flying, unmarked aircraft. In a story posted Feb. 15, 1999, Joe reports the physical symptoms that his family and his pet have been experiencing from the sprayings. Joe believes that many of these military tankers responsible for the sprayings are remote controlled aircraft, but Al Cuppet (6 years with the US Joint Chiefs of Staff) has told radio talk show host Jeff Rense during interviews on June 1, 1999, May 16, 1999, and May 7, 1999 felt that many of these tanker planes were more likely being flown by foreign pilots, possibly Chinese or Russian.Read More
Tuesday 4 August 2009
Big Brother Alert - Surveillance Cameras In Private Homes
The UK government is about to spend $700 million dollars installing surveillance cameras inside the private homes of citizens to ensure that children go to bed on time, attend school and eat proper meals.
No you aren’t reading a passage from George Orwell’s 1984 or Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, this is Britain in 2009, a country which already has more surveillance cameras watching its population than the whole of Europe put together.
Now the government is embarking on a scheme called “Family Intervention Projects” which will literally create a nanny state on steroids, with social services goons and private security guards given the authority to make regular “home checks” to ensure parents are raising their children correctly.
Telescreens will also be installed so government spies can keep an eye on whether parents are mistreating kids and whether the kids are fulfilling their obligations under a pre-signed contract.
Around 2,000 families have been targeted by this program so far and the government wants to snare 20,000 more within the next two years. The tab will be picked up by the taxpayer, with the “interventions” being funded through local council authorities.
Another key aspect of the program will see parents deemed “responsible” by the government handed the power to denounce and report bad parents who allow their children to engage in bad behavior. Such families will then be targeted for “interventions”.
Both parents and children will also be forced to sign a “behavior contract” with the government known as Home School Agreements before the start of every year, in which the state will dictate obligations that it expects to be met.
The opposition Conservative Party, who are clear favorites to win the next British election, commented that the program does not go far enough and is “too little, too late.”
Respondents to a Daily Express article about the new program expressed their shock at the totalitarian implications of what is unfolding in the United Kingdom under the guise of social services initiatives.
“Sorry, but what the hell? Why are people not up in arms about this?,” writes one, “This is a complete invasion of privacy, and it totally ignores the fact that the state does NOT own kids. It’s not up to them how parents choose to raise their children, as long as the parents do not actively harm them. Why on earth aren’t the public rioting? It’s completely anathema to basic British freedoms.”
“Excuse me!?! What an incredible intrusion into the privacy of a family! George Orwell must be spinning in his grave right now,” writes another.
“I have one comment to make: it completely violates Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Human Rights Act 1998). Has this minister and his lackies even done any basic homework on basic human rights and civil liberties? Or rather they’ve just decided to completely ignore them,” adds another.
The move to install surveillance cameras inside private homes is also on the agenda across the pond. In February 2006, Houston Chief of Police Harold Hurtt said cameras should be placed inside apartments and homes in order to “fight crime” due to there being a shortage of police officers.
“I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?” Chief Hurtt told reporters.
Andy Teas with the Houston Apartment Association supported the proposal, saying privacy concerns would take a back seat to many people who would, “appreciate the thought of extra eyes looking out for them.”
If such programs come to fruition and are implemented on a mass scale then the full scope of George Orwell’s depiction of a totalitarian society is his classic novel 1984 will have been realized.
The following passage is from Orwell’s 1984;
The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.
Monday 3 August 2009
To set the record straight ~ Obama's Alleged Birth Certificate
I was in East Africa many years ago. The Birth Certificate in 1961 would have been a British Protectorate Certificate. In 1965 the Republic of Kenya was in place. It is doubtful that the government would have issued one of their own certificates for a pre-independence birth, especially as the Republic only came into being 10 months after the date of issue. I believe that the information obtained from What Really Happened is correct, after checking using Google, and I thank them both for this.
Obama's "Birth Cerificate"
The above purports to be a 1964 certified copy of the original 1961 birth certificate. Whether Kenya would spend the resources to recopy all the British birth certificates is open to doubt, but there are two other aspects of this certificate which call its authenticity into doubt.
Let us take a closer look at the document.
Note that the document number is given as 47,044. Obama is a 47 year old chief executive and 44th president of the United States. A rather amazing coincidence.
But the really damning part of the document is this. The location of birth is given as Mombasa. But Mombasa was part of the state of Zanzibar* until December of 1963. This certificate is dated February 1964 and carries the name "Republic of Kenya", Kenya did not formally declare itself a Republic until December of 1964. *This is substantially correct. Germany swapped Zanzibar for Heligoland with the British in the 19th Century. It was leased by the Zanzibaris to Britain but legal ownership only took place in 1963. Zanzibar became a part of Tanzania. In 1961 it was still run by the British, so a British Protectorate Certificate would have been issued. Zanzibar was also Administered as a British Colony. The United Republic of Tanzania was formed in 1964 with the union of the mainland country of Tanganyika and the Zanzibar archipelago,
Zanzibar
British and German Era
The 18th century was an era where Europeans were looking for colonies throughout the world and East Africa was not an exception. Upon his death, Sayyid Said had controlled a large empire but his successors did not have a legal claim to the lands they controlled commercially, and did not have the power to keep the Germans and British from annexing them when the European nations began dividing up Africa later in the century. But realizing the extent of Sultan's control, the Germans and later British colonial agents decided to give him a special status on his territories. The partition of Africa following the Berlin Confrence of 1884 offered the Sultan a claim to the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba and a coastal strip of 10 miles on the mainland of East Africa.
The domination of Germans coupled with the abolition of slave trade weakened the Sultan's empire and bit by bit he lost more land to the new European colonizers. The British and Germans came into some agreement with the Sultan to sell his possession on the mainland and by the end of 19th century very little remained in his control. The Germans, who were first in colonizing Tanzania agreed with the British to exchange Zanzibar with Heligoland and though the Sultan was still ruling, it was a de facto British colony. Zanzibar was thus ruled by two colonial masters at the same time, an event political scientists call unique in history. On the one hand there was Sultan and on the other the British colonial agents. Zanzibar of that time included the islands of Zanzibar, Pemba, Latham and surrounding islets and theoretically it included the coastal strip of Kenya. Mombasa and the coastal strip of Kenya was handed to the new independent government of Kenya as late as 1963.
Mombasa
History: post-independence
The British rule on Kenya officially ended when Kenya finally gained its hard-fought independence on the 12th December 1963. The first president of Kenya was Jomo Kenyatta, who was an instrumental figure in the fight to gain independence from the British. His appointment as president led to the creation of a political party known as KANU (Kenya Africa National Union). President Kenyatta died in the August of 1978, and was succeeded by his vice president Daniel Arap Moi who ruled as president until 2002. President Moi stepped down in December of 2002 following fair and peaceful elections. For the first time since 1992 when Kenya’s first multiparty elections were first held, there was a new leader. Mwai Kibaki, running as the candidate of the multiethnic, united opposition group, the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC), defeated KANU candidate
Obama's "Birth Cerificate"
The above purports to be a 1964 certified copy of the original 1961 birth certificate. Whether Kenya would spend the resources to recopy all the British birth certificates is open to doubt, but there are two other aspects of this certificate which call its authenticity into doubt.
Let us take a closer look at the document.
Note that the document number is given as 47,044. Obama is a 47 year old chief executive and 44th president of the United States. A rather amazing coincidence.
But the really damning part of the document is this. The location of birth is given as Mombasa. But Mombasa was part of the state of Zanzibar* until December of 1963. This certificate is dated February 1964 and carries the name "Republic of Kenya", Kenya did not formally declare itself a Republic until December of 1964. *This is substantially correct. Germany swapped Zanzibar for Heligoland with the British in the 19th Century. It was leased by the Zanzibaris to Britain but legal ownership only took place in 1963. Zanzibar became a part of Tanzania. In 1961 it was still run by the British, so a British Protectorate Certificate would have been issued. Zanzibar was also Administered as a British Colony. The United Republic of Tanzania was formed in 1964 with the union of the mainland country of Tanganyika and the Zanzibar archipelago,
Zanzibar
British and German Era
The 18th century was an era where Europeans were looking for colonies throughout the world and East Africa was not an exception. Upon his death, Sayyid Said had controlled a large empire but his successors did not have a legal claim to the lands they controlled commercially, and did not have the power to keep the Germans and British from annexing them when the European nations began dividing up Africa later in the century. But realizing the extent of Sultan's control, the Germans and later British colonial agents decided to give him a special status on his territories. The partition of Africa following the Berlin Confrence of 1884 offered the Sultan a claim to the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba and a coastal strip of 10 miles on the mainland of East Africa.
The domination of Germans coupled with the abolition of slave trade weakened the Sultan's empire and bit by bit he lost more land to the new European colonizers. The British and Germans came into some agreement with the Sultan to sell his possession on the mainland and by the end of 19th century very little remained in his control. The Germans, who were first in colonizing Tanzania agreed with the British to exchange Zanzibar with Heligoland and though the Sultan was still ruling, it was a de facto British colony. Zanzibar was thus ruled by two colonial masters at the same time, an event political scientists call unique in history. On the one hand there was Sultan and on the other the British colonial agents. Zanzibar of that time included the islands of Zanzibar, Pemba, Latham and surrounding islets and theoretically it included the coastal strip of Kenya. Mombasa and the coastal strip of Kenya was handed to the new independent government of Kenya as late as 1963.
Mombasa
History: post-independence
The British rule on Kenya officially ended when Kenya finally gained its hard-fought independence on the 12th December 1963. The first president of Kenya was Jomo Kenyatta, who was an instrumental figure in the fight to gain independence from the British. His appointment as president led to the creation of a political party known as KANU (Kenya Africa National Union). President Kenyatta died in the August of 1978, and was succeeded by his vice president Daniel Arap Moi who ruled as president until 2002. President Moi stepped down in December of 2002 following fair and peaceful elections. For the first time since 1992 when Kenya’s first multiparty elections were first held, there was a new leader. Mwai Kibaki, running as the candidate of the multiethnic, united opposition group, the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC), defeated KANU candidate
Friday 31 July 2009
Read David Icke!
David Icke Newsletter Preview
NAIVETY, DENIAL AND FEAR ...
... LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
The David Icke Newsletter Goes Out On Sunday
I was interviewed a couple of weeks ago at my home by a lovely guy who said the video would be used on a 'young peoples' website'. He warned me that this site ridiculed me on quite a scale and he wanted them to hear what I was really saying.
Okay, no problem. I could have said no, why should I? But the swine flu vaccine story was breaking, among much else, and I wanted to warn as many people as possible of what was going on. It didn't matter if I was ridiculed, because some people with a mind of their own would hear what I said and if only one refused the vaccine as a result it would be time well spent.
Indeed it was, as it has turned out. The swine flu part of the interview was circulated widely across the Internet. The 'young peoples' website', however, refused to host the interview, but asked for a clip so they could ridicule it. The producer said no, and they took the swine flu clip off the Web to do a send up on that. Okay, guys, take the vaccine then, best of luck - you'll need it. A few people can't control the world? It's a doddle.
These are young people who, if nothing is done, are going to have to live out their entire lives in a control system so ruthless and all-consuming that even the very concept of 'freedom' will be lost to the human psyche. They don't even bother to check if the information could be true. David Icke has said it, so it must be crazy, because he talks about reptiles.
You could call them 'stupid' or 'idiots', and they do a wonderful impression of both, I grant you. But what they really are is programmed robots - computer systems that cannot compute beyond their software.
There is no consciousness at work and so, even when the Orwellian state is looking them in the eye, they can't see it. More than that, they ridicule those who can.
What do you mean a hurricane is coming? You are craz ... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
NAIVETY, DENIAL AND FEAR ...
... LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
The David Icke Newsletter Goes Out On Sunday
I was interviewed a couple of weeks ago at my home by a lovely guy who said the video would be used on a 'young peoples' website'. He warned me that this site ridiculed me on quite a scale and he wanted them to hear what I was really saying.
Okay, no problem. I could have said no, why should I? But the swine flu vaccine story was breaking, among much else, and I wanted to warn as many people as possible of what was going on. It didn't matter if I was ridiculed, because some people with a mind of their own would hear what I said and if only one refused the vaccine as a result it would be time well spent.
Indeed it was, as it has turned out. The swine flu part of the interview was circulated widely across the Internet. The 'young peoples' website', however, refused to host the interview, but asked for a clip so they could ridicule it. The producer said no, and they took the swine flu clip off the Web to do a send up on that. Okay, guys, take the vaccine then, best of luck - you'll need it. A few people can't control the world? It's a doddle.
These are young people who, if nothing is done, are going to have to live out their entire lives in a control system so ruthless and all-consuming that even the very concept of 'freedom' will be lost to the human psyche. They don't even bother to check if the information could be true. David Icke has said it, so it must be crazy, because he talks about reptiles.
You could call them 'stupid' or 'idiots', and they do a wonderful impression of both, I grant you. But what they really are is programmed robots - computer systems that cannot compute beyond their software.
There is no consciousness at work and so, even when the Orwellian state is looking them in the eye, they can't see it. More than that, they ridicule those who can.
What do you mean a hurricane is coming? You are craz ... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
We must tell the world...
...about this. It is a straightforward case of genocide. Just a symptom of how the New World Order behave when they have total control. Coming to a neighborhood near you. Don't be fooled by thinking that is America it won't happen here. It will; it already is happening in YOUR country, for you now are no longer a Sovereign State you are merely a Province of Europe.
Watch and weep.
Watch and weep.
Tuesday 28 July 2009
Prison Planet
Info Warrior – Daniel Aspey-Smith
The Terror Storm and Mind Control
There is an ongoing war against the free peoples of the planet, all part of their ‘Terror Storm’.
Pentagon war planners now publicity admits that 90% of their battle plans are psychological
vs. physical. The Information War had taken the place of aircraft carriers, fighter bombers
and tanks, and you the population of the planet are the target; put simply modern warfare is
all about selling the population to love its own enslavement, the elite are waging war on the
people!
Edward Bernays, father of public relations, pioneered the use of psychology and other social
sciences to design public persuasion campaigns. If we understand the mechanism and
motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to
our will without their knowing about it?
The conscious and intelligent manipulations of the organised 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 government. We are governed, our minds moulded, are tastes formed, our ideas
suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.
Since the dawn of man, bullies have attempted to dominate and control the tribe. Human
history has been one long struggle of the independent free human against organised crime
syndicates attempting to enslave him. Brute force has been replaced with intimidation and
propaganda, we are manipulated into enslaving ourselves, we are conned into believing that
the establishment is our loving keeper and not are parasitic master. The NWO architects are
predatory control freaks who have enslaved humanity and are desperate to keep control of
their cattle. The elite is threatened by independent free humans who control their own
destinies, their threatened by intelligence, beauty, honour and family. They seek to control
and steer the destiny of humanity in a direction that secures their power monopoly forever.
They are sadistic by all means; they think nothing of human life. Only control and keeping
that control, the entire world is being engineered, designed to be a ‘Prison Planet’, a control
grid over free humanity. Where no decent is tolerated, once you realise the establishment is
laughing at you can begin to research the truth and start fighting back. Once you understand
their game plan it’s very easy too defeat, knowing who your enemy is, is half the battle,
taking action is the other half. You only have to free your mind and defeating the globalists
will be easy.
‘’In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.’’
George Orwell – 1984
The Terror Storm and Mind Control
There is an ongoing war against the free peoples of the planet, all part of their ‘Terror Storm’.
Pentagon war planners now publicity admits that 90% of their battle plans are psychological
vs. physical. The Information War had taken the place of aircraft carriers, fighter bombers
and tanks, and you the population of the planet are the target; put simply modern warfare is
all about selling the population to love its own enslavement, the elite are waging war on the
people!
Edward Bernays, father of public relations, pioneered the use of psychology and other social
sciences to design public persuasion campaigns. If we understand the mechanism and
motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to
our will without their knowing about it?
The conscious and intelligent manipulations of the organised 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 government. We are governed, our minds moulded, are tastes formed, our ideas
suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.
Since the dawn of man, bullies have attempted to dominate and control the tribe. Human
history has been one long struggle of the independent free human against organised crime
syndicates attempting to enslave him. Brute force has been replaced with intimidation and
propaganda, we are manipulated into enslaving ourselves, we are conned into believing that
the establishment is our loving keeper and not are parasitic master. The NWO architects are
predatory control freaks who have enslaved humanity and are desperate to keep control of
their cattle. The elite is threatened by independent free humans who control their own
destinies, their threatened by intelligence, beauty, honour and family. They seek to control
and steer the destiny of humanity in a direction that secures their power monopoly forever.
They are sadistic by all means; they think nothing of human life. Only control and keeping
that control, the entire world is being engineered, designed to be a ‘Prison Planet’, a control
grid over free humanity. Where no decent is tolerated, once you realise the establishment is
laughing at you can begin to research the truth and start fighting back. Once you understand
their game plan it’s very easy too defeat, knowing who your enemy is, is half the battle,
taking action is the other half. You only have to free your mind and defeating the globalists
will be easy.
‘’In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.’’
George Orwell – 1984
Can we reach a utopian society without the NWO?
Info Warrior – Daniel Aspey-Smith
For a while now I have been turning the question over in my head regarding the New World
Order and its elite. If one is given by chance or through self determination the power which
corresponds to a member of the elite i.e. wealth and power, would one not seek to transform
the world as the elite do i.e. through their regimes of dehumanisation and so on for their own
benefit, or perhaps this corresponds to the nature of the person. What I’m trying to get
across is that whatever the situation it seems based on people conditioning weather imposed
or self imposed there will be leaders and these leaders will want to meet there own selfish
needs not for money but for power/control. Or perhaps if the world’s elite where not so self
seeking and more complacent with being for the people opposed to the people being a vehicle
for his/her own needs then the world would be very difficult, if for example Ron Paul was a
member of the elite then wouldn’t there regimes be very different to a member of the
Rothschild family being a member. This is more a matter of human nature, but if anyone
understand what I’m getting across here any alternatives would be appreciated; I considered
the idea of 'everyone working together' in a resource based economy thus, there would be no
need for government but this may be seen as a form of anarcho anarchism where we would
live in social communes (are we inheritably social creatures?) but doesn't seem practical.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely? As Lord Acton {John
Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902} wrote in a letter to Bishop
Mandell Creighton in 1887.
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men
are almost always bad men."
Another English politician with no shortage of names - William Pitt, the Elder, The Earl of
Chatham and British Prime Minister from 1766 to 1778, is sometimes wrongly attributed as
the source.
He did say something similar, in a speech to the UK House of Lords in 1770: "Unlimited
power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it"
This, I think is the problem. The Buddha said that the only way one can reach enlightenment
is to kill the ego. I think this is impossible for the rich and famous; their ego controls them
and thus they have to have more, be more and finally control everything.
However, those statements say more about governments in the last couple of hundred years
will things always be that case? We need a transformation of society!
Look at the positive sites out there.
For example:
Scouting for Peace: ~ http://scouting4peace.ning.com/ Based in the Philippines this site
is a fellowship "club" for Scouts and ex-Scouts who are interested in helping to achieve
something positive.
The Ringing Cedars of Russia Series: ~ http://www.ringingcedars.co.uk/ This is the
story of Anastasia. In it she explains much of what is happening today and how we can all
save the planet. It is a fascinating study and I have already applied many of her precepts. The
snag is that people actually want to remain the same as they are today, not realising that if
they do they will inevitably ruin the planet. "I am not a bad person. I will be OK." etc. etc.
They want to enjoy their fast cars, their houses, their easy life, alcohol, drugs, binge drinking,
clubbing, TV, Computer games etc. etc. All of them are mind blowing and destroy the id.
Even spectator sports such as (perhaps especially) football are designed to subject the mind
and soul to a numbing down. The way of the world is to get more, do more, spend more,
possess more, have sex more, be less responsible etc.etc. than the neighbours. A complete
change of consciousness is vital. We must ALL become self-reliant and take responsibility for
our own lives and destiny. The NWO and the Governments of the day have carefully deigned
every facet of people's lives to stop them thinking for themselves. Anastasia has shown a
way out but it will take a lot more "agro" to get people to change. There is no secret as to why
it comes out of Russia (notwithstanding Edgar Cayce's prophecy that spiritual enlightenment
will come from Russia) for the privations suffered by the Russian people for many hundreds
of years, especially from 1917 onwards made them want a change. Today, the Dacha
Movement ~ small gardeners on their own plots ~ produce something like 80% of the potato
crop that grows in Russia during the growing season. This is on land that is microscopic
compared to Commercially Farmed land! At the site you get "sweeteners" with downloads of
parts of the books to see what they are about. Take my tip ~ BUY the entire collection. You
will never think the same!
The Friends of Ko'ox Tun ~ http://kooxtun.ning.com/ ~ This site was initiated in Belize
in Central America. Have a look at it ~ become a Friend. See what they are doing by getting
the free books on offer and also visit their Squidoo sites.
Portland Bright Neighbor ~ http://www.brightneighbor.com/ This is an idea that
deserves consideration. It follows the basic premise of "Small is good ~ Think Small." In
other words, Changing the World one Village at a Time. If you are old enough to remember
the 1940's and 1950's you will recall the corner shop and the markets. Fresh vegetables; eggs
from truly free range hens; a bit of barter - if I have a dozen eggs surplus then I can change
for a cabbage and a bunch of onions etc. If you want the garden mowed, then you ask the
neighbour's kids to oblige.
As I have said, a change of consciousness is vital. How would YOU get YOUR
friends to join such a movement?
For a while now I have been turning the question over in my head regarding the New World
Order and its elite. If one is given by chance or through self determination the power which
corresponds to a member of the elite i.e. wealth and power, would one not seek to transform
the world as the elite do i.e. through their regimes of dehumanisation and so on for their own
benefit, or perhaps this corresponds to the nature of the person. What I’m trying to get
across is that whatever the situation it seems based on people conditioning weather imposed
or self imposed there will be leaders and these leaders will want to meet there own selfish
needs not for money but for power/control. Or perhaps if the world’s elite where not so self
seeking and more complacent with being for the people opposed to the people being a vehicle
for his/her own needs then the world would be very difficult, if for example Ron Paul was a
member of the elite then wouldn’t there regimes be very different to a member of the
Rothschild family being a member. This is more a matter of human nature, but if anyone
understand what I’m getting across here any alternatives would be appreciated; I considered
the idea of 'everyone working together' in a resource based economy thus, there would be no
need for government but this may be seen as a form of anarcho anarchism where we would
live in social communes (are we inheritably social creatures?) but doesn't seem practical.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely? As Lord Acton {John
Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902} wrote in a letter to Bishop
Mandell Creighton in 1887.
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men
are almost always bad men."
Another English politician with no shortage of names - William Pitt, the Elder, The Earl of
Chatham and British Prime Minister from 1766 to 1778, is sometimes wrongly attributed as
the source.
He did say something similar, in a speech to the UK House of Lords in 1770: "Unlimited
power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it"
This, I think is the problem. The Buddha said that the only way one can reach enlightenment
is to kill the ego. I think this is impossible for the rich and famous; their ego controls them
and thus they have to have more, be more and finally control everything.
However, those statements say more about governments in the last couple of hundred years
will things always be that case? We need a transformation of society!
Look at the positive sites out there.
For example:
Scouting for Peace: ~ http://scouting4peace.ning.com/ Based in the Philippines this site
is a fellowship "club" for Scouts and ex-Scouts who are interested in helping to achieve
something positive.
The Ringing Cedars of Russia Series: ~ http://www.ringingcedars.co.uk/ This is the
story of Anastasia. In it she explains much of what is happening today and how we can all
save the planet. It is a fascinating study and I have already applied many of her precepts. The
snag is that people actually want to remain the same as they are today, not realising that if
they do they will inevitably ruin the planet. "I am not a bad person. I will be OK." etc. etc.
They want to enjoy their fast cars, their houses, their easy life, alcohol, drugs, binge drinking,
clubbing, TV, Computer games etc. etc. All of them are mind blowing and destroy the id.
Even spectator sports such as (perhaps especially) football are designed to subject the mind
and soul to a numbing down. The way of the world is to get more, do more, spend more,
possess more, have sex more, be less responsible etc.etc. than the neighbours. A complete
change of consciousness is vital. We must ALL become self-reliant and take responsibility for
our own lives and destiny. The NWO and the Governments of the day have carefully deigned
every facet of people's lives to stop them thinking for themselves. Anastasia has shown a
way out but it will take a lot more "agro" to get people to change. There is no secret as to why
it comes out of Russia (notwithstanding Edgar Cayce's prophecy that spiritual enlightenment
will come from Russia) for the privations suffered by the Russian people for many hundreds
of years, especially from 1917 onwards made them want a change. Today, the Dacha
Movement ~ small gardeners on their own plots ~ produce something like 80% of the potato
crop that grows in Russia during the growing season. This is on land that is microscopic
compared to Commercially Farmed land! At the site you get "sweeteners" with downloads of
parts of the books to see what they are about. Take my tip ~ BUY the entire collection. You
will never think the same!
The Friends of Ko'ox Tun ~ http://kooxtun.ning.com/ ~ This site was initiated in Belize
in Central America. Have a look at it ~ become a Friend. See what they are doing by getting
the free books on offer and also visit their Squidoo sites.
Portland Bright Neighbor ~ http://www.brightneighbor.com/ This is an idea that
deserves consideration. It follows the basic premise of "Small is good ~ Think Small." In
other words, Changing the World one Village at a Time. If you are old enough to remember
the 1940's and 1950's you will recall the corner shop and the markets. Fresh vegetables; eggs
from truly free range hens; a bit of barter - if I have a dozen eggs surplus then I can change
for a cabbage and a bunch of onions etc. If you want the garden mowed, then you ask the
neighbour's kids to oblige.
As I have said, a change of consciousness is vital. How would YOU get YOUR
friends to join such a movement?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
