Civil Unrest Makes EU Governments Nervous

And so it damn well should. I'm just a little disappointed only a handful of people in Britain are waking up to the fact they have been screwed by their financial masters yet. But give it time.

(Images: From the World Economic Forum protests, Zurich, 2009. Above Below)

Irish Times: Governments growing nervous at increased social tensions

A continent-wide sense of injustice leaves Europe vulnerable to an explosion of unrest

ONE MILLION workers on the streets of France, wildcat strikes in Britain, rioting in Greece and the Baltic republics and sit-in protests by glass workers in Waterford: social unrest is spreading throughout Europe and no one knows where it is all going to end.

Last week the worst economic recession in at least 30 years claimed its first political victim in Europe when on Monday Iceland’s beleaguered prime minister Geir Haarde tendered his resignation following weeks of street protests. The collapse of the country’s banking system, which has shredded the value of the krona, driven interest rates to 18 per cent and unemployment to 8 per cent, put paid to his Conservative-led coalition.

The only problem is, the blame for the crisis is still put on the free market. On the surface this seems valid; you could blame 'irresponsible' traders. BUT the main responsibility lies with the central banks, Rothschild-operated, who deliberately engineered this crisis by increasing the money supply and rewarding malinvestment with government funding, all of which is borrowed from them with interest attached.

(Image: US Riot Police outside the 2008 Republican National Convention. Methinks if they knew how the Federal Reserve works, they would have tear-gassed and plasticuffed them instead of wasting time with the populace.)

And if all that sounds like I have had some 'space cake', I suggest you watch The Money Masters.

"The CIA owns everyone in major media"

So are you going to ignore former CIA agents, and pretty siginficant ones at that, when they write:

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
- William Colby, former Director of the CIA.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." Almost everything you read or see in your newspaper or on TV is false information, mostly CIA disinformation which is "leaked." You have been conned by professional main stream press and CIA disinformation artists." - again, former CIA director William Colby.

"The CIA is not now nor has it ever been a central intelligence agency. It is the covert action arm of the President's foreign policy advisers. In that capacity it overthrows or supports foreign governments while reporting 'intelligence' justifying those activities. It shapes its intelligence, even in such critical areas as Soviet nuclear weapons capability, to support presidential policy. Disinformation is a large part of its covert action responsibility, and the American people are the primary target of its lies." - Ralph McGehee, former CIA intelligence analyst "Deadly Deceits: My 25 Years in the CIA".

I just happened upon these today, but it isn't too much of a surprise. This is why independent journalism is so important. Stop swallowing what you see on teevee about some CIA report that is being banded about as justification for government or military action (specifically I am thinking about the reports that basically say "OH NO! TERRORISTS UNDER YOUR BED!")

My 9/11 Doubts Laid To Rest

Okay, so I was sure 9/11 was an inside job a year ago (irrespective of HOW the 3 WTC buildings fell), but I still could not fully endorse the controlled demolition hypothesis because of a couple of objections:

- The potential of thermite/thermate as a CD explosive seemed questionable.

- The prescence of the 'thermite fingerprint' in WTC dust seemed to be uncertain; could the chemicals have come from PCs in the office, or the steel cutting done by the cleanup workers.

Alas, now, Debunking the Debunkers has a conclusive solution:



I could go over the other ways in which 9/11 is clearly an inside job. Thankfully, 911truth.org has saved me the trouble.

Thank you for telling me, Lords!

The only problem is, you were the ones who caused 1984 to become semi-reality, and you took 20 years to say anything about it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7872425.stm

(Image: "Stop the Police State". Would be nice if officers would stop obeying orders that breach the rights of the citizenry.)

[Electronic surveillance and collection of personal data are "pervasive" in British society and threaten to undermine democracy, peers have warned.]

Democracy was thoroughly undermined a long, long time ago. In fact, in Britain, since the Bank of England was established before voting rights, it never really existed.

[The government said CCTV and DNA were "essential" to fight crime but campaign group Liberty said abuses of power mean "even the innocent have a lot to fear".]

Same old, same old about 'necessity'. And ESPECIALLY the innocent have a lot to fear. But hopefully, the people will wake up, and then those who are truly guilty will have A LOT to fear.

US Troops asked if they would shoot US Citizens

Straight from the mouth of a US Iraq War veteran.

http://www.infowars.com/us-troops-asked-if-they-would-shoot-american-citizens/

(Quote)
U.S. troops were being quizzed on whether or not they would be prepared to shoot their own friends and family members during a national state of emergency in America.

"I have become very close to this young man and have gained his respect and trust," writes Scott. "I want you to know that he informed me about one particular training exercise his superiors made them perform. It was concerning the rounding up of American citizens that disobey any type of martial law or in other words any type of infringement on our freedoms."

"He was asked if he could shoot his friends or family members if ordered to do so. At the time he said he could," writes Scott.

Scott says that the soldier later "had time to clear his head" and realize the truth, recanting his vow to kill his own countrymen if ordered to do so.
(End Quote)

Whatever happened to the good military commanders who prevented the 1933 Fascist American banker coup, like General Smedley Butler? Hopefully the military will not obey orders to gun-grab or detain en masse the people.

Eco-Children 'Re-Educating' Parents

This is not a green movement. It's a green nightmare.

Just another teeny tiny step on the road to total fascism:

(Quote)
A London Observer article, which all but triumphs children spying on and chastising their parents for claimed “eco-crimes,” betrays the absurdity and mindlessness of how these scenarios are being played out.

Ominously entitled, “Green children re-educate their parents,” the writer describes how his five-year-old daughter was angrily filing through his passport, before issuing a firm rebuke about how many times her father had traveled to America.

“How many times have you been on a plane to America?” asks the child.

“About 40,” her father responds.

“And how many trees have you planted?”

“No trees.”

“I’m going to tell Miss White.”

The absurd irony of course is that the daughter threatens to inform on her father to the teacher for the “eco-crime” of contributing towards CO2 emissions and not planting trees, when in fact trees absorb CO2 and would die out completely if this “poison” was eliminated from the earth.
(End Quote)

It is plain fascism, classic Hitlerjugend style.

More Globalist Nonsense

From the appointed IMF World Bank Wonder Boy currently 'in charge':

Gordon Brown Calls For Global Co-Operation to Beat Economic Slump

I am getting bored of how many times he says 'New World Order' (but apparently that's still a conspiracy theory - have they acheived a real-life version of the Jedi mind trick?).

(Image: "You'll never guess where I have a Rothschild tattoo")

But here is a special treat from Comrade Brown, the Dear Leader of INGSOC. One of the problems, apparently, is 'implicit protectionism' going on at the moment. Double U-Tee-Eff? The problem is protectionism? Because here I thought the problem was the globalists and the bankers who engineered this crisis by deliberate increasing of the money supply.

It's funny...literally the same day, business secretary Peter Mandelson is warning against protectionism, saying that implementing it would worsen the economy. (you and your globalist masters did a good enough job of doing that!)

So in other words, protectionism isn't happening - but it simultaneously is part of the economic problems.

Yet more nonsense spewing from the shapeshifting 'big party' politicians who answer to their banker masters. Globalism is going to make everything OK, right? Maybe I should make it clear...

WE were supposed to be a SOVEREIGN NATION it was YOU who banned the guns YOU who vandalise the currency YOU who neglect our borders and YOU who are setting up the Police State THE PEOPLE will not take this forever be it 2 years or 200 years THEY WILL WAKE UP and THEN the spotlight will be firmly where it should be...ON YOU.

"The world will not accept dictatorship or domination" - Mikhail Gorbachev

It's All Happening Too Fast

For me to blog Big Brother's latest moves.

"School Children Complain of Obama Worship During Lessons"
http://www.prisonplanet.com/school-children-complain-of-obama-worship-during-lessons.html

"Taking Photos of Police Officers Could be Considered a Crime"
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=836646

"Plans Target Digital Britain Push"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7857402.stm

"Every aspect of our lives...will be dependent on the services that the digital network provides" - Gordon [never elected] Brown, PM

Yes he did say 'dependent'.

"Chemicals 'may reduce fertility'"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7855323.stm

What the report doesn't say is that the chemicals in food, water and air, are serving population reductive purposes by sterilising us, giving us cancer and other diseases, and that this is no accident.

URGENT: FEMA Camps, For Real!

HR 645 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 645To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 22, 2009Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

——————————————————————————–

A BILL To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `National Emergency Centers Establishment Act’.

SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure–
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be–
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
This Act does not affect–
(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or
(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the following definitions apply:
(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `closed military installation’ means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:
(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.
(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.
(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.
(2) EMERGENCY- The term `emergency’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term `major disaster’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `military installation’ has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).

-FIN-

Full article by Paul Joseph Watson at Prisonplanet

Did you get all that? Well, you didn't have to. It's pretty clear in the second section that FEMA camps, which have quite obviously existed for a long time (Google REX84), are now legal for any purpose as determined by the Dept of Himeland Security. Including death camps, if the DHS says so!

Combine this with the executive powers created during the Bush administration, and all of the following would be legal:

- Declaring a National Emergency of any kind
- Arresting any American citizen without a warrant, seizing guns, detaining people indefinitely under 'terrorism' charges, which is now defined as, among other things, any act deemed to have the intention of threatening others (ie just about any small-time offence). Read section #802 of the United States Code which was amended by the USA PATRIOT Act.
- Detaining people in FEMA camps 'for their safety' indefinitely
- Declaring the President dictator (which automatically happens in a state of national emergency)
- Even, potentially, killing citizens 'charged' with 'terrorism'.

But most people will, unfortunately, still believe this doesn't exist. It's just a hoax by conspiracy nuts.

Did you know local residents were generally not aware of the Nazi death camps during WW2 that were on their doorstep? Or that most of the Jews, blacks, 'criminals', gypsies, homosexuals, etc. had no idea where the train was taking them? Ignorance is bliss, I guess. That comfortable doubt that government could ever do something so awful. But as the laws stand, they could if they wanted.

Combine this with:

FEMA red/blue/yellow lists, FBI 'terrorist' watch lists

FEMA buys 500,000 plastic coffins, stores them near Atlanta, Georgia

http://www.welfarestate.com/pamphlet/ The infamous FBI terrorism pamphlet. Amongst those who are now terrorists are people concerned with animal rights, people who refer to defending America from the UN, people who refuse to identify themselves (even though they have no constitutional obligation to do so), people with "Christian identity", and "individuals who make numerous references to the US Constitution".

Who is the terrorist? YOU ARE! Now go to the 'love camps' and the 'fun camps' and remember that government still loves you. Lovely lovely gas chamber!

BBC Propaganda: Today's Highlights

We must be dumb here in the UK, because we pay the government to spoon-feed us with propaganda. So, in the spirit of sheepleness, here are some of my favourites from today's BBC reports:


(Image: BBCone's graphic design. They have circles. But if they reported on it, they may try to convince you those were squares)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7852628.stm

Global Warming is Irreversible! Oh no!

Of course it's irreversible, because we cannot have such a great impact on forces, like climate, which are beyond our control! We didn't cause warming, and we definitely can't undo it (but the Sun will).

It's interesting that the study which claims warming is irreversible, was funded by the US Dept of Energy and the Obama administration (cough-the prospect of carbon taxation represents a conflict of interest-cough)

Classic "Problem, Reaction, Solution" in action. In fact all three of these stories are.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7853254.stm

Because profit is indeed a dirty word.

OK, so short selling is hardly a 'moral' way to make money. But the entirety of the stock market and all those abstract 'assets' is one big casino/Ponzi scheme. So, some people win and others lose. Too bad.

But the solution to the problem is...not sound money or getting rid of the central bank...but more government and global financial restrictions! The cause of the problem shall now be the solution!

If you were prescribed drugs and they made you ill, chances are unless the doctor is Dr Mengele, you will not be told to increase the dosage. But that is exactly what we are told about globalism, private central banking and government financial restrictions.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7852640.stm

Yay, parents who don't pay child support will lose their passports! Except, this already happens. Just through proper legal means - you know, a COURT OF LAW. But now, government can remove someone's passport and driver's licence WITHOUT going through legal processes! What a triumph for liberty.

Oh, and I love the justification for this - that this is "faster, simpler and easier for the taxpayer". Simpler in that it gives more power to the authorities. "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a helluva lot easier." - George W Bush

And the horrible irony of Labour party members and their 'quangos' talking about lightening the burden on taxpayers. Priceless.

Trailer for "The Obama Deception"

An Alex Jones film you can watch without being labelled a conspiracy nut!

(Caution: Downside is you will instead be labelled by Obamanoids as a right-wing white-trash racist. Even if you're black.)

Definitely one I am looking forward to. I was a sucker for the Obama-ganda at first, but I woke up pretty sharpish when it was obvious nothing was changing. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

The danger is, this 'new boss' has such a cultish following that fascism and globalism all of a sudden seem so...appealing...must go to sleep and be a sheep...must OBEY.

If you are still on the Kool-Aid. Please do us all a favour and wake up. Now not later, when it's too late and America becomes the HQ of the fascist globalist 'new world order'.

Gearing up for Iran 'Engagement'

What do you think?

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=83397&sectionid=351020104

'an attitude towards engagement [with Iran] that might bear fruit'.

Call me crazy, but doesn't that sound like 'an attitude towards military engagement that might bear profit'? Hopefully, I have read a bit too much between the lines, and they are referring to diplomatic engagement.




(Images: Above, a photoshop satire of Fox's reporting of a future nuclear war on Iran - I presume the author is suggseting Fox would mistranslate Ahmadinejad? Below, graffiti putting it all into perspective. "Remember, it is just as scared of you as you are of it".)

Iran is probably not pursuing nuclear weapons at this time. Or at least, the IAEA doesn't acknowledge any proof of such activity (ie non-civilian nuclear development).

But really, what have you got to fear if Iran does develop muclear weapons? 'Oh no, the TERRORISTS are coming!!!'

Give me a break. This mythical Al-Qaeda have ties to, conveniently, just about every regime that will not comply to the Western-globalist agenda. Coincidence? Nope. In fact, if YOU start saying that war for oil is wrong, and Israel commits genocide, soon enough 'clear evidence' will emerge linking you to Al-Qaeda.

Ok, so it isn't that extreme, but 'Al-Qaeda' appears to be everywhere today - Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sharia councils, Local mosques, Under your bed. Everywhere. Be afraid, be very afraid. And be ready to sacrifice liberty, otherwise the terrorists will win...

More to the point, what if Iran does develop nuclear weapons? Will they use them against Israel or the West? -inhales- NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH. Why? Because nobody would be that stupid. Even Kim-Jong Il, the 'dear leader' of North Korea, has never used his nuclear weapons (you know, if he's still alive).

And to those who may say, "But, Iranians are fanatical extremists!" I would say, "The only fanatics are the ordinary fools who get tricked into being suicide weapons by the politicians, who are much more aware and devious than to destroy their own country and themselves by starting nuclear war".

In fact, the only country to ever have used nuclear weapons in a war was the US. I think it's important to remember that. (But let's be fair, the full effects of nuclear weapons were not at the time known, which lifts some of the moral burden I guess)

Some people have horrendously short memories. All of this baseless fear-mongering is just like the run-up to Iraq. I remember '45 Minutes', and I was 11 at the time ffs!

I would say the best thing for Iran is to develop nukes ASAP before we con ourselves into another mindless elite-manufactured 'regime change'. Then again, if they do (or even if they get close) there might be a nuclear 'false flag' op blamed on them. Aah, the possibilities...

Anyways, time to consider. Is authority the truth? Will we all be a sucker for the next mad rush to war by ruthless elitist powers? Hopefully not, mainly because the American military is at full extent already in the Middle East. But if by some fluke those behind Obama get the draft reinstated over there, who knows?

P-C

Just Watched 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'

Dishing out a few inconvenient truths to those who advocate a carbon tax.



Just to clarify what I think, I am not an anti-environmentalist. In fact I am very much for anything which truly benefits humanity and the world we live in.

I believe we need alternative energy, especially geothermal (and nuclear in the short term), not because fossil fuels are 'warming the planet' but because it is an empirical fact they will run out eventually. I challenge you to google 'peak oil'.

This CO2 nutjob frenzy, however, is not about the environment. The government and scientists have a conflict of interest in skewing the evidence. Carbon taxation would make for even bigger government than we have now, and scientists receive government/UN approval and funding if they toe the line.

And worse, biofuel development done in the name of combating 'climate change' is a disaster for world food production. Food prices up, output down:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3500954.ece
http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID=%7BCEEA783C-6A19-432E-B857-CFD14F2C9452%7D)&language=EN
Food rioting and shortages:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7331921.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1584515/Food-riots-could-spread,-UN-chief-warns.html

I don't like to complain about alarmists. The way I see it, at least some people give a damn about something enough to shout about it. What bothers me more is the vast numbers of people out there who either don't care or understand about anything substantial.

However, the global warming-carbon hypothesis is just as over-extended as the 1960s panic over global cooling being related to coal burning. And the fear-mongering is rife - terrible weather disasters, polar bears getting used to swimming, maybe even the end of humanity.

The persecution of so-called 'deniers' shows the ignorance of the climate change crowd; this 'disdain for intellectualism' is one of the 14 defining characteristics of fascism.

"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority."-G. Massey, Egyptologist

US Bailout = $8.5 TRILLION

That's the bare minimum.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/cost-of-bailout-hits-85-trillion.html



And before you can say 'Weimar', hyperinflation is almost inevitable.
And before you can say 'Amero', the dollar will collapse.

Join Obama's Brownshirts

You heard me. Sieg...

http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/pressdesc.asp?id=974

"In participating Starbucks stores across the nation, the American public will have an opportunity to pledge five hours or more of community service toward a local volunteer opportunity of choice. Starbucks will honor each person who pledges with a free tall brewed coffee beginning Wednesday, Jan. 21 through Sunday, Jan. 25."

(Images: Obama fans above, Nazi supporters at a Nuremburg rally below. This is not a suggestion Obama is like Hitler, that's crazy; however, it is a reminder that we humans can make terrible decisions in crisis times; especially when two awful main choices are presented. McCain/Obama, Nazis/Communists. The lack of real democracy is the comparison.)

Hitler's Sturm-Abteilung (SA), translation Stormtroopers, aka Brownshirts, were a volunteer force which acted as the strong arm of the Nazi party until their 1933 election, and for a short time after, until their leadership's destruction in the Night of the Long Knives.

Is it too much to make a Hitlerian comparison? With all the talk about drafts and national service over in America, along with the Obama-mania and fanaticism, I say nein.

Blasting the Big Brother Apologists

Read 'em and GET ANGRY about something!

Secret CCTV Bunker in London

Big Brother is shouting at you

George Orwell's house is watched by Big Brother

UK has sleepwalked into a surveillance society

Amnesty International advert against the 42 Day Detention Bill, defeated in October 2008:



"If you aren't doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about."

I am so sick of hearing that tired, old excuse for the advances of the spy state. Just think about what that means.

'Wrong' is a loose term. Under post-9/11 terror law, 'wrong' can mean anything from excercising freedom of speech in protest, to just looking something like a terrorist (having a rucksack, or just being a bit brown like Jean Charles de Menezes).

So, what the quotation above implies is that, if you go along with the government, you won't have anything to worry about. What's the problem with doing what government wants, after all?
Well, it doesn't take a historian to think of several governments in recent times who have used this premise to control people and force them to do evil. Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia and Maoist China spring to mind.

"Don't worry Jews, if you're not doing anything wrong you've got nothing to worry about! Now get on the trains like your government says, because Der Fuhrer loves you."

(Image: Mao in the Chinese Cultural Revolution. He was a good man, who had the interests of the people at heart, and...I can't keep that up any longer. So why can people keep repeating the myth that governments care about the people? Why would we be different to any other period in history?)

I can't stress this enough. Government does not love you, it holds power over you and enjoys doing so. Normally governmental power can be kept in check by an informed, determined public. However, what we have today is a herd of millions who repeat the childish fairytale every time government takes their freedoms away!

Government loves me, I'll put down my gun. Government loves me, it will spend the bailout money wisely (US at least $700bn, UK at least £250bn, created from nothing then borrowed from the central banks at interest, which we will pay in tax). Government loves me, and is setting up a police state for my own good! Oh Obama, the messiah, will deliver us from evil! He's not in any way another corporate puppet!

Military on the streets is not good for society. Why is it necessary? Police powers should not be extended by such laws as the Patriot Act (Orwellian doublespeak if I ever heard it). It is never 'for our own good', it's to strip us of our freedoms - realise that now and not later.

Eugenics, anyone?

It's here, it's queer, and you'd better get used to it. That's almost the message of this BBC report about how great it is that embryos were screened for 'breast cancer' genes before conception.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7819651.stm

"The parents will have been spared the risk of inflicting this disease on their daughter", said the doctor who carried out the 'treatment'.

WHAT?!? The parents would have INFLICTED breast cancer on their child? No more than when a child is born, its parents have already inflicted inevitable death on it. It's that ridiculous.

Suggesting having 'bad' genes is the fault of the parents is just as disgusting to me as racism, sexism or any other kind of persecution. What gives you, Mr. Scientist, the privilege to start dictating what is and isn't 'right' about people? Or which aspects of people you'd like to 'change'?

Eugenics has arrived in this 'free' country. Doctors and scientists need to realise their job is not to experiment with the population, and control people; it's to conduct ethical research and TREAT people with the individual soverignty they possess that no-one should ever take away.

Just another example of how authority is drunk on power and wants to control us all. Where's our guns, just incase we need to defend ourselves against authoritarianism? Oh right...the authoritarians took them.

Banking for Dummies...

...well, I could understand it. Want to know how you are being screwed financially?

http://www.michaeljournal.org/myth.htm

There are a lot of reasons for the economic crisis of late, but one fundamental of our money system that no politician talks about, or wants to talk about (except libertarians like Ron Paul) is fractional reserve banking, and central banks.


(Image: Might it be illegal for me to make my own money and then lend it out with interest attached?)

Fallen asleep yet? I wouldn't blame you - but this is boring in an important way, if that makes sense.

The link at the top of this post provides a simple analogy for how fractional reserve banking works. It's a good way to gain a basic understanding of how we are perhaps not as prosperous as we could be - and why.

It's not our irresponsible borrowing, or too much or too little regulation (as the 'wingnuts' always argue over). It's more fundamental. While we argue about socialism and capitalism, or government intervention, we have forgotten to notice who controls the money supply.



(Image: Bank of England, London - to be honest, I didn't know, until recently, that it wasn't part of the government. It has been government-owned since 1946, but the people who create the money and lend it out are not part of the government. In the foreground btw is a memorial to those who died in the Great War.)

The answer? Central banks, which are not operated by the government - they are controlled by private bankers. As the American saying goes, "The Federal Reserve is about as Federal as Federal Express".

If you or I created money from nothing, we would be arrested for counterfeiting. And rightly so. However, in the central bank system, private bankers are given special privilege to not only CREATE money from nothing (most of it is digital, not paper); they then LEND that new money to the government. We then have to pay back the interest through our taxes.

However, due to the interest, we cannot ever pay back the debt we now have with the bankers, because even if we gave them ALL of the money available, it would not cover our debt.

That is part of the reason why the national debt is so high among developed nations. Not so much because we took out too many credit cards and mortgages, and not so much because stock traders were irresponsible; but because of the private banksters who are the hidden leech sucking on the wealth created, through goods and services, by the people.

Look Away, Deniers.

Because here is indisputable evidence that there ARE prominent people who want One World Government. Is that a problem with you? Or will it bring 'world peace'?

http://www.aquarianonline.com/Values/Worldgov.html

http://www.greaterthings.com/WorldGov/ChristianBeast.htm

http://blogs.ft.com/rachmanblog/2008/12/and-now-for-a-world-government/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_government

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/newworldindex.htm

http://mailstar.net/baruch-plan.html

http://www.midnight-emissary.com/belief.htm

I find it quite funny that people doubt the existence of the desire among some of the elite of this world, to establish a World Government. Surely we should be disagreeing as to how this will be formed, and what the end result will be, as opposed to whether it exists.

My concerns are that power would be even more thickly concentrated than it already is, in the hands of banking families and politicians. And that, if we get a rogue, authoritarian leader, who will act as counterbalance to them if there is only one government? Are those issues not legitimate reasons to doubt the Globalist ideal?

Heads out of the sand please.

Blueprint For Global Enslavement

You must see the film Endgame: Blueprint For Global Enslavement, before you dismiss this NWO 'Conspiracy' (which in English, just means 'plan', by the way, not 'crazy nutjob idea').

And yes, it's 2hrs long, if that's a problem then you can use Google video search and there are lots of ~10min sections of the film available.



It documents:
- The Bilderberg Group, who attends, and their influence on our world
- A history of banking cartels, war, and who gained from war
- An insight into the theories of Eugenics that dominate the mindset of the elite
- A background on government endorsed, non-consentual scientific 'research' on the public, which is not confined to history but continues today
- The lies about Global Warming, and how they are exploited
- The use of drugs to control populations
- History and documentation of the North American Union, and comparisons with the European Union
- Details of the alleged plan (or, 'conspiracy theory', if you want to use misleading language) to enslave humanity.

It would be bigoted of me to pass judgement on the validity of this film and its claims; I have not 'done the research', as people constantly tell each other during internet disagreements. But a lot of this does seem to add up, and of course that is extremely concerning. I would urge you to give the film a look, and make of it what you will.