Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Rob Dew interviews Flight 253 whistleblower Kurt Haskell in person.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Not only has Scam Tube deleted over 10 thousand of my subscribers over night, now they are not sending our new videos out to most people that are subscribers! We have also documented that this is all done to force feed establishment partner videos to the You Tube community.
September 6, 2011
Alex Jones will start tonight’s episode of Infowars Nightly News LIVE with breaking information on the fires spreading across central Texas and FEMA’s order to volunteer firefighters and local response units to leave the scene.
This treasonous stand down under President Obama echoes the actions of FEMA under President Bush during Hurricane Katrina, where the devastation of natural events is made dramatically worse by the federal government’s response. In both cases, an even-greater federal power grab is at stake.
Trends Forecaster Gerald Celente and PrisonPlanet.com writer Paul Joseph Watson also join Alex on the Nightly News program for September 6, 2011.
August 20, 2011
Ben Farmer, writing for The Telegraph on Friday, reported that the U.S. and Afghanistan have reached an agreement that would allow American special forces and air force to remain in the country until 2024. The agreement arrives as the United States claims it will pack up and leave by the end of 2014.
In December of 2009, during a speech delivered at West Point, Obama said troops would begin leaving Afghanistan. Prior to the speech, the Pentagon said it would send an additional 30,000 troops as part of a “mini-surge.” NATO was asked to send between 5,000 and 10,000 troops as part of an international force. In early 2010, the Pentagon increased substantially its “new civilian forces” outside of Kabul, according to ABC News.
Afghanistan’s hand-picked president, Hamid Karzai, confirmed earlier this year that the United States plans to establish permanent bases in his country. “Yes they want this (permanent bases) and we have been negotiating with them,” Karzai said at a press conference in his presidential palace in February. “We believe that a long-term relationship with the United States is in the interest of Afghanistan.”
The deal was negotiated without the participation or approval of the Afghan parliament or the grand tribal council known as the Loya Jirga.
The plan announced last week was peddled as part of the effort to train the Afghan military and police. “If [the Americans] provide us weapons and equipment, they need facilities to bring that equipment,” said Rangin Dadfar Spanta, Karzai’s top security adviser. “If they train our police and soldiers, then those trainers will not be 10 or 20, they will be thousands.”
The continued U.S. presence at numerous bases in Afghanistan is central to the generational war planned to fight against so-called international terrorism, itself a creation of U.S. and British intelligence. “We know we will be confronted with international terrorists. 2014, is not the end of international terrorist networks and we have a common commitment to fight them. For this purpose also, the US needs facilities,” said Spanta.
Andrey Avetisyan, Russian ambassador to Kabul, told The Telegraph permanent U.S. bases should not be required. “I don’t understand why such bases are needed. If the job is done, if terrorism is defeated and peace and stability is brought back, then why would you need bases?” he asked. “If the job is not done, then several thousand troops, even special forces, will not be able to do the job that 150,000 troops couldn’t do. It is not possible.”
The deal is designed to continue the engineered conflict in Afghanistan. The Taliban have said they will not negotiate peace with the government in Kabul until all U.S. troops have left the country. According to Abdul Hakim Mujahid, deputy leader of the “peace” council set up by Karzai to seek a settlement with the Taliban, the deal to keep a substantial number of U.S. troops in the country will intensify the insurgency.
In 2010, Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari said the Taliban was created by the CIA and ISI, the Pakistan intelligence agency. He also said the Pentagon is orchestrating Taliban attacks.
Most Afghans believe the U.S. is funding and supporting the Taliban in order to continue the war and occupation of their country. “The US uses Israel to threaten the Arab states, and they want to make Afghanistan into the same thing,” a highly educated Afghan professional told The Guardian in May of 2010. “Whoever controls Asia in the future, controls the world.”
For more detail, see Afghans: U.S. Created and Funds Taliban.
Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser and Rockefeller globalist Zbigniew Brzezinski argued in his book, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, that controlling Eurasia is essential to the global pre-eminence of the elite. “It is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America,” he writes (by “America,” Brzezinski means the global elite represented by the CFR and the Trilateral Commission).
The Taliban originated from from Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-run religious schools for Afghan refugees in Pakistan following the CIA’s war against the Soviet Union. Selig Harrison from the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars has admitted that the CIA created the Taliban. Harrison is an expert on Asian affairs and has had extensive contact with the CIA and political leaders in South Asia. He is closely aligned with the globalists through the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
The anti-Soviet Mujahideen that provided recruits for the Taliban was aided by the CIA, a fact admitted by its former director, Robert Gates. The secret plan to create the Mujahideen prior to the invasion of the country was “was an excellent idea,” according to Brzezinski. “What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?” he told Le Nouvel Observateur in 1998.
The Pentagon will not leave Afghanistan in 2024. It plans to stay there forever and operate as a “muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers,” as former Marine Major General Smedley Butler said in 1933, referring to his work for them in the Philippines, China, and Latin America.
Many people still frown upon the words and phrase of the New Word Order.
But in reality is it really still a conspiracy theory to this day. Or are the power that be really planning something.
Well for my readers we are well aware that the new world order is completely real. There is no denying that! But why do people still frown upon the phrase? Are they scared of the truth in which the system has trained them to be. Or are they scared of change. The fact that the new world order is here and we are currently playing the end game, the media is now pushing us towards complete acceptance on the new world order.
Today I picked up this shirt at Cotton On in Queensteet shopping mall.
Clearly labeling the new world order, selling it as a good thing. However on the sides of the shirt are the words.
“The most we could ever ask for is now long dead and gone”.
Is it clearly stating that our current way of life of freedom is now dead as the new world order emerges?
Let me know what you think.
June 26, 2011
Ask somebody about sunscreen and you’re likely to receive an earful of disinformation from a person who has been repeatedly misinformed by health authorities and the mainstream media. Almost nothing you hear about sunscreen from traditional media channels is accurate. So here’s a quick guide to the 7 most important things you need to know about sunscreen, sunlight and vitamin D:
It’s true: If you create a truly natural sunscreen product using exotic botanicals with powerful sunscreen properties, you will never be able to market it as a “sunscreen” product. That’s because the FDA decides what can be used as sunscreen and what can’t, regardless of what really works in the real world. And there are really only two natural ingredients the FDA has allowed to be sold as sunscreen: Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide.
Any other non-chemical sunscreen ingredients, if sold as “sunscreen,” would be considered mislabeled by the FDA and result in your products being confiscated… even if they offer fantastic sunscreen protection!
Not surprisingly, this whole monopoly over sunscreen chemicals is designed to protect the profits of the chemical companies while marginalizing the natural product companies which could easily formulate far better solutions. I have personally spoken to the founders of several health product companies who have figured out amazing sunscreen formulations using nothing but natural botanicals, butthe FDA won’t let them market their products as sunscreen products!
It’s just another example of the FDA standing in the way of health innovation.
Read the ingredients list of any sunscreen product sold at Wal-Mart, or Walgreens, or any other mainstream store. I dare ya!
You will not be able to pronounce most of the chemicals found in the ingredients list. That’s because most sunscreen products are formulated withcancer-causing fragrance chemicals, parabens, harsh alcohols, toxic chemical solvents and petroleum oils. A typical sunscreen product is actuallya chemical assault on your body. That’s why research shows that using sunscreen actuallycausesmore cancer than it prevents (http://www.naturalnews.com/023317_s…).
Vitamin D deficiency is perhaps the most widespread vitamin deficiency in North America. According to the research, 70 percent of whites are deficient in vitamin D, and up to97 percent of blacksare deficient (http://www.naturalnews.com/030598_v…).
Chronic vitamin D deficiency promotes cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/031560_v…), winter flu and infections, depression, osteoporosis and hormonal imbalances. Depending on whom you believe, vitamin D alone can prevent anywhere from 50% to nearly 80% of all cancers (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html).
By blocking vitamin D production in the skin,sunscreen products actually contribute to cancer-promoting nutritional deficiencies.
This doesn’t mean you should never wear a sunscreen product, of course. If your skin is really pale and you’re planning a day on the beach in Hawaii, you will obviously benefit from some level of sun protection using a truly natural sunscreen product. But an informed health-conscious person would try to allow their skin to achieve a natural, healthy tan (yes, a tan truly is healthy if it’s combined with good nutrition, see below) through sensible exposure levels that activate vitamin D production in the skin.
Here’s the real secret about sun exposure thatno onein conventional medicine is talking about (because, as usual, they are woefully ignorant about nutrition): You canboost your internal sunscreenby eating antioxidant-rich foods and superfoods.
The supplementastaxanthin, for example, is very well known for boosting your skin’s natural resistance to sunburn. Its fat-soluble carotenoids are actually transported to skin cells where they protect those cells from UV exposure.
The more natural antioxidants you have in your diet, the more sunlight your skin will be able to handle without burning. Nearly everyone mistakenly believes that a person’s sunlight burn response is purely a genetic factor. They’re wrong. You canradically improve your resistance to UV exposurethrough radical dietary changes.
I’m a great example of this, actually, as I used to burn in just 20 – 30 minutes of sunlight when I was on a junk food diet years ago. But now, as someone who eats superfoods and high-end nutritional supplements every day, I can spend hours in the sun and will only turn slightly red (which fades a few hours later and does not result in a burn or skin peeling).
Except for one time on an all-day visit to a water park, I have not worn sunscreen in over 8 years. I spend a large amount of time in the sun, and I have absolutely no concerns whatsoever about skin cancer. My skin, most people tell me, looks significantly younger than my biological age. That’s not from sunscreen; it’s from nutrition. Sun exposure does not make your skin “age” if you follow a high-nutritional density diet.
It is a complete medical myth that “UV exposure causes skin cancer.” This false idea is a total fabrication by the ignorant medical community (dermatologists) and the profit-driven sunscreen companies.
The truth is actually more complicated:Skin cancer can only be caused when UV exposure is combined with chronic nutritional deficienciesthat create skin vulnerabilities.
To create skin cancer, in other words, you have to eat a junk food diet, avoid protective antioxidants, and then also experience excessive UV exposure. All three of those elements are required. Conventional medicine completely ignores the dietary influences and focuses entirely on just one factor: Sunscreen vs. no sunscreen. This is a one-dimensional approach to the issue that’s grossly oversimplified to the point of being misleading.
The medical industry, it seems, does not want people to figure out they can literally eat their way to healthier skin. It’s amazing, actually:Your skin is made entirely out of the food you eat, so how could your diet not affect your skin health? Yet no one in conventional medicine — not the dermatologists, not the doctors and not the health regulators — has the intellectual honesty to admit thatwhat you eat largely determines how your skin reacts to UV exposure.
Be careful when shopping for so-called “natural” sunscreen products. While there are some good ones out there, many are just examples ofgreenwashing, where they use terms like “natural” or “organic” but still contain loads of synthetic chemicals anyway.
A good guide for checking on sunscreen products is theEnvironmental Working Groupguide (EWG) at:
Some of the products that aretrulynatural includeLoving Naturals sunscreenandBadger All Natural Sunscreen. Read the ingredients labels to see for yourself. Don’t use any sunscreen product containing ingredients that sound like chemicals:
Always buy unscented sunscreenunless for some reason you just enjoy coating your skin with artificial perfume chemicals. A typical sunscreen product is made with over a dozen cancer-causing fragrance chemicals, and they’re absorbed right through your skin. Most sunscreens, when applied as directed, are really justtoxic chemical bathsthat heavily burden your liver and can give you cancer
Search Amazon.com for “chemical free natural sunscreen” and you’ll see a listing for:
Jason Natural Cosmetics – Earth’s Best Sun Block Chemical Free, 4 oz cream
Click on the product and you’ll find a listing of its ingredients which includes:C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Sorbitan Isostearate, Sorbitan Sesquioleate, Ethylhexyl Palmitate, Ethyl Macadamiate, Calcium Starch Octenylsuccinate, Stearalkonium Hectorite
So how are those not chemicals? Ethylhexyl Palmitate is NOT a chemical? Who are these people kidding? The Amazon.com description (title) of this product is false and misleading. In all fairness, however, this product title looks like it was added into the Amazon.com system by the vendor and not the Jason company itself. But it’s an example of how the information you see from online vendors can often be misleading.
Always read the ingredientsof any sunscreen product before using it. Don’t poison yourself with sunscreen!
Perhaps more with sunscreen than any other personal care product, the “official” information distributed through the mainstream media is hopelessly misleading (if not downright false). Remarkably, no one in the media or the government is even willing to admit that fragrance chemicals are bad for your health. Similarly, no one is willing to admit thatthe chemicals you put on your skin get ABSORBED by your skin.
Without those two truths being acknowledged right up front, the rest of whatever they say about sunscreen is worthless babble. Any honest talk about sunscreen must acknowledge the simple truth that the chemicals you put on your skin get absorbed into your skin, and that most sunscreen products are made out ofa chemical cocktailof cancer-causing substances.
This is the truth about sunscreen that both the sunscreen industry andthe cancer industrydoesn’t want you to hear. It’s the dirty little secret of sunscreen: The more you use, the more you CAUSE cancer in your body! (And the more money the cancer centers make “treating” your cancer with yet more deadly chemicals known aschemotherapy.)
Sobuyer beware. Sunscreen products are a minefield of lies, fraud and disinformation designed to keep you ignorant of the importance of sun exposure as well as the health risks associated with using cancer-causing chemicals on your skin.
Stick with truly natural sunscreen products (when needed) and try to build up a healthy tanwhile consuming large quantities of superfoods and antioxidantsin your diet. Consider taking astaxanthin or other fat-soluble nutrients on a regular basis. Engage in dailyjuicingof fresh fruits and vegetables which are loaded with living nutrients. Time your sun exposure to build up a healthy tan so that you don’t need sunscreen at all. Contrary to all the misinformation we’ve all been fed, a healthy tan is actually a good sign that you’re achieving adequate vitamin D synthesis in your own skin.
Learn more about sunlight and vitamin D with these two resources:
FREE report: The truth about sunlight and vitamin D (http://www.naturalnews.com/rr-sunli…).
FREE video: The Truth About Sunlight, Cancer and Vitamin D
The Economic Collapse
June 27, 2011
Are you familiar with Robert Kiyosaki? He is best known for the “Rich Dad, Poor Dad” series of books. Over 26 million books authored by Kiyosaki have been sold and he is recognized as a financial expert by millions of people across the globe. Well, guess what? Even Robert Kiyosaki is warning that an economic collapse is coming. In fact, Kiyosaki and his team of financial experts are encouraging Americans to stock up on food, guns and precious metals. This is yet another sign of just how close we are to the total collapse of the U.S. Economy. Kiyosaki, who once co-authored a book with Donald Trump entitled “Why We Want You To Be Rich” is now a full-fledged prepper. As even more prominent Americans start warning that an “economic collapse” is coming do you think that the American people will finally wake up and start paying attention?
The statements that Robert Kiyosaki makes in the video posted below are absolutely jaw-dropping. Once upon a time he was all about teaching people how they could get rich, but now he is talking about storing food, buying guns, investing in precious metals and preparing for the coming crash.
The following are 11 of the best Kiyosaki “sound bites” from the video below….
#1 “when the economy crashes as we predict”
#2 “the crowds come rushing in to buy gold and silver”
#3 “we could either go into a depression or we go to hyperinflation”
#4 “or we could also go to war”
#5 “buy a gun”
#6 “I’m preparing”
#7 “I’m prepared for the worst”
#8 “so come to my house and I’m armed and dangerous and I’ll welcome you”
#9 “we have food, we have water, we have guns, gold and silver, and cash”
#10 “the credit card system shuts down, the world shuts down”
#11 “the supermarkets have less than 3 days supply”
If you have not seen this video yet, it is definitely worth the 8 minutes that it takes to watch it. Robert Kiyosaki seems to be extremely alarmed about the future of the U.S. economy….
It certainly seems as though the entire financial culture in America is changing.
Once upon a time everyone wanted to know how to get rich.
Now everyone wants to know how to survive the collapse that is coming.
Economic pessimism is seemingly everywhere and almost every recent survey indicates that the American people are losing faith in the U.S. economy.
For example, in a recent article I noted that 48 percent of Americans believe that it is likely that another great Depression will begin within the next 12 months.
According to Gallup, the percentage of Americans that lack confidence in U.S. banks is now at an all-time high of 36%. Back in 2007, just 14% of Americans lacked confidence in U.S. banks.
In order for society to function correctly, people need to be able to trust each other and they need to be able to trust the major institutions that hold society together.
Once confidence in our major societal institutions is gone, it is going to be incredibly difficult to get it back.
Sadly, the reality is that many of our major financial institutions have been untrustworthy for a very long time. It is just that the American people are only just now starting to wake up to that fact.
For example, the Federal Reserve has been at the heart of our economic problems for decades but most Americans have not realized it.
But now that is starting to change. According to one recent poll, only 30% of Americans currently view Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke favorably.
The American people are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with an economic system where the vast majority of the rewards flow to Wall Street, the big banks, the biggest corporations and the ultra-wealthy.
According to the Washington Post, the top 0.1% of all income earners in the United States took home 2.6% of the nation’s earnings in 1975. By 2008, the top 0.1% were taking home 10.4% of the nation’s earnings.
The Washington Post also says that after adjusting for inflation, the average income of the top 0.1% of all Americans jumped by 385 percent between 1970 and 2008 while the average income for the bottom 90 percent of all Americans actually fell by one percent.
The sad truth is that income inequality in the United States has become a major problem. A very small sliver of the population is reaping almost all of the rewards and the middle class is being ripped to shreds. Conservatives, liberals, Democrats, Republicans and libertarians should all be alarmed by this.
Every single minute we steal another 2 million dollars away from our children and our grandchildren.
But if we stop this theft it would throw the U.S. economy into a horrible economic crisis that would be far worse than what we are experiencing right now.
That is why the vast majority of our politicians do not have the guts to do it.
We truly are caught between a rock and a hard place.
But people like Robert Kiyosaki can see what is coming, and they are getting prepared.
Are you prepared?
Many of our young people have come up with their own versions of an “economic stimulus plan”. In past articles I have documented many of the signs that society is collapsing, including the disturbing rise of the “mob robbery” phenomenon.
Well, just the other day there was another very shocking mob robbery in the city of Philadelphia.
On Thursday, a mob of 40 teens and young adults invaded a Sears department store on 69th Street, grabbed all of the merchandise that they could carry, and stormed right back out again.
We are starting to see these kinds of large scale crimes happen from coast to coast.
So what is going to happen to America if the economy experiences the kind of full out collapse that Robert Kiyosaki is talking about?
We live in very interesting times.
I hope that you are getting prepared.
June 21, 2011
President Barack Obama will move the United States a step closer to ending the war in Afghanistan when he announces plans Wednesday to bring thousands of American troops home, beginning next month.
Administration officials said the president was still in the final phase of a decision-making process that has focused not only on how many troops will come home in July, but also on a broader withdrawal blueprint designed to put the U.S. on a path toward giving Afghans control of their security by 2014.
Obama was given a range of options for the withdrawal last week by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan. The military favors a gradual reduction in troops but other advisers are advocating a significant decrease in the coming months.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Over the past few weeks, the corporate media has buzzed with word that Texas governor Rick Perry will run for president. Although Perry has yet to officially declare his bid, Infowars.com can unequivocally state that he will indeed announce his candidacy.
A Perry run was the plan all along, Perry insiders told Alex Jones. As the so-called dean of Texas writers, Paul Burka, explained in his Texas Monthly article written in February of 2010, during the race for governor Perry had his eye on the White House. “Perry’s inner circle, particularly his consultant Dave Carney, has believed that he has had national potential at least since 2006,” writes Burka.
Perry has held his cards close to the vest in order to create the aura of the reluctant Texan of principle called to serve his country by Republicans and the establishment conservatives, many now professing to be outsiders opposed to politics as usual in Washington.
“You can expect the revived talk of a Rick Perry for president campaign to shift into hyperdrive now that Rush Limbaugh is declaring the Texas governor the best hope Republicans have to bring life to a lackluster presidential field,” the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported on May 18.
Using the bully pulpit of his popular radio show, Limbaugh said the “staunchly anti-Washington Perry has the mix of message and personality and appearance to drive Democrats ‘nuts’ and dispel America of the notion that President Barack Obama is unbeatable in wake of the death of Osama bin Laden.”
Limbaugh and the Republicans, however, do not mention the fact that Perry is a one-time Democrat and the former campaign manager for none other than Al Gore, who is supposedly the polar opposite of the Republicans, at least according to the false right versus left paradigm that drives establishment politics.
Perry, of course, is nothing if not an establishment globalist, as his unswerving support for a NAFTA Superhighway demonstrates. His coy reluctance to serve is merely a cheesy campaign trick designed to provide him the aura of the Texas outsider who loathes business as usual inside the district of criminals.
The establishment is attempting to sell Perry the same way they sold Obama the Man of Change.
Rick Perry is the consummate establishment politician. For a complete run-down on Perry, see 14 Reasons Why Rick Perry Would Be A Really, Really Bad President. (Infowars.com)
June 21, 2011
Obama’s being hassled because he’s dropping bombs and bullets on Libyan targets without Congressional permission, a clear violation of the War Powers Resolution per some Republicans and Democrats. Some estimates say that a year of it will cost $160 B. Obama says it’s within his powers because, though he can’t declare war, this isn’t war; it’s a “kinetic military action,” whatever that means.
He goes on to say that ground troops aren’t exchanging fire, which adds to the non-warishness. But Libyans bombed or rocketed to death from the sky are still dead. It’s not clear that the dead Libyans would appreciate the neat distinction. The Libyans themselves are pretty clearly having a civil war; Obama is killing more of the folks on one side than he is those on the other, though he hasn’t discriminated entirely. Apparently, it can be hard to tell which side he’s shooting at from the air. That they are having a war seems to be clear to the Libyans even if it isn’t clear to Obama.
Many would say that blowing up and killing via your military is making war and that’s the end of it. However, sending the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines against North Koreans plus 2 million Chinese troops wasn’t a war; it was a “police action.” And all those folks killed, wounded, and tortured by the North Vietnamese weren’t war heroes since they weren’t in a war, either. Obviously, this whole thing can be confusing.
Shakespeare said: “A rose by any other name, would smell as sweet.” He doesn’t seem to be much help, but then he wasn’t talking politics at the time. Not exactly. So, let’s go to the sources: The Constitution says the President commands the armed forces and Congress declares war. Simple, and pretty clear. The Prez does the job but he doesn’t issue the contract. Congress said in the 1973 War Powers Resolution that the Prez could act in emergencies when the U.S. was attacked; he didn’t have to wait for Congressional permission to defend the country. Some say Congress lacked authority to pass the Resolution; it amounts to a backdoor Constitutional amendment, so it’s moot. For us now, that’s irrelevant; the Resolution provides a president 60 days from his use of hostilities to get Congress on board but more than that has passed for Libya and Libya hadn’t attacked the U.S. anyway. The Resolution also provides an added 30 days to get things stopped when Congress won’t sign on. That seems irrelevant too; Obama’s made it pretty clear he intends to continue. And anyway, that doesn’t include his time to get permission.
Lately, some House members have spoken of cutting off Obama’s funding for Libya. That’s interesting; the Prez has been using generic Pentagon funds, diverting the money to his Libyan activities since there has been no official Libyan program to fund things done there. (A bit like Congress has done for years with Social Security receipts.) If Congress cuts off money spent on Libya, it will in fact be cutting the amount it has approved for the military.
Libya hasn’t attacked the U.S. that I’ve heard, so that’s no help there. What Truman got away with in Korea and Johnson in Vietnam are history, not law; they don’t help either. The bottom line appears to be that Obama has used his authority as Commander in Chief to intervene in another country’s civil war by using the U.S. military to attack that country’s property and people. Where I come from, that’s making war. He can call it “kinetic military action” or he can call it making love if he wants to, but that doesn’t resurrect any dead Libyans.
Sadly, it could all easily be a waste of lives and treasure since the intervention is so half-hearted; so far it is not only likely illegal but worse, incompetent. It has made dead Libyans without changing the results on the ground.
The most important part of this is what is says about our leading politicians. Congressfolk no less than presidents are sworn to uphold the Constitution. Republicans and Democrats in charge are so far, posturing; giving the Constitution lip service just as much as their President is doing. The inescapable conclusion: the Constitution doesn’t matter to them. If they are returned to Congress in the next election, it will be equally inescapable that the Constitution doesn’t matter to the voters anymore, either. What then?
The Economic Collapse
June 21, 2011
The rest of the world needs to sit up and take notice of what is going on in Greece right now. This is what can happen when you allow government debt to spiral out of control. Once it becomes clear that you can’t pay your debts, a financial collapse can happen very suddenly and you start losing your sovereignty to those that you must turn to for financial help. So is the financial collapse of Greece the “canary in the coal mine” for the global economy? EU finance ministers have given the Greek government two weeks from Monday to approve another round of brutal austerity measures. If the austerity measures are not approved, Greece will not receive the next bailout installment of 12 billion euros. If that happens, the whole globe better buckle up because it is going to get crazy.
July 3rd is the deadline. Basically the EU has put a gun to the head of the Greek government. Without this bailout money, Greece will default and economic hell will break loose all across the country.
It is important to keep in mind that this is just the first Greek bailout that we are talking about. Last year, the EU and the IMF agreed to provide the Greek government with a 110 billion euro bailout. The current 12 billion euro installment is part of that package.
Sadly, it has become apparent that the first bailout is not going to be nearly enough for Greece. A second bailout, which will be the same size or even larger, is already being discussed. This is going to put the Greek people even more under the heel of the money powers in Europe.
Keep in mind that all of these “bailouts” are just more loans. There is no way that the Greeks are ever going to be able to repay all of this money.
But this is what happens when a nation lets debt get out of control. For years and years it can seem like all of that debt does not have any consequences, but then the day of reckoning comes and it is a complete and total nightmare.
In order to get the next installment of 12 billion euros, European finance ministers are insisting that the Greek Parliament approves a package of austerity measures that will be worth approximately 28 billion euros.
At this point, it is uncertain whether those austerity measures will pass.
However, the pressure on the Greek government to get them pushed through is immense.
These austerity measures include tax increases, budget cuts and a “large-scale privatization program”.
This is often what happens to third world nations that cannot pay their debts. Organizations such as the IMF or the World Bank will come in and insist that they tax their people more, cut back on their spending and sell some of their public assets to big corporations.
As we can see from the wild protests that have been taking place in Greece, a significant percentage of the Greek population is not happy with all of these austerity measures.
Unfortunately, the EU and the IMF are able to put a lot more pressure on the Greek government than the Greek people are.
Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou recently gave the following warning to the Greek people about what could happen if this debt crisis ends badly….
The consequences of a violent bankruptcy or exit from the euro would be immediately catastrophic for households, the banks, and the country’s credibility.
Not only would a Greek default be a total disaster for Greece, it would potentially be a total disaster for the entire global financial system.
Sung Won Sohn, an economics professor at California State University,recently made the following statement about the seriousness of the debt crisis in Europe….
“The European debt crisis has the potential to have as big an impact as the subprime mortgage crisis did in the United States”
So will these bailouts solve the problem?
No, giving Greece more loans is only going to kick the can down the road for a little while longer.
The truth is that Greece is bankrupt. Unless huge amounts of Greek debt are forgiven, Greece is going to default sooner or later.
When confidence in the finances of a nation is lost, borrowing costs can go up very quickly. Today, the yield on two year Greek bonds is up to 28.6%.
Anyone that has ever been late on paying their credit cards knows how painful an interest rate like that can be.
So why doesn’t Greece just slash government spending to the bone and get their financial house in order?
Well, it is not that easy. Harsh austerity measures have already been implemented. As a result, unemployment is rampant and there is rioting in the streets.
The truth is that, as an article in The Guardian recently explained, austerity has taken a brutal toll on the Greek economy….
A year of wage and pension cuts, benefit losses and tax increases has taken its toll: almost a quarter of the population now live below the poverty line, unemployment is at a record 16% and, as the economy contracts for a third year, economists estimate that about 100,000 businesses have closed.
As the economy crumbles, Greece has descended into an almost permanent state of civil unrest.
The fact that the EU and the IMF want even more austerity measures has sparked some wild rioting In Greece in recent days. You can see video of the stunning violence going on in Greece right here.
Not all protesters are being violent. Some of them are showing their displeasure in non-violent ways. For example, workers for Greece’s state-owned electric utility are staging 48 hours of rolling strikes that are designed to create blackouts over large areas.
The frightening thing is that Greece is not alone. Ireland has already received a bailout and they are probably going to need another one at some point.
Portugal is a financial basket case and they are probably next in line for a bailout.
The employment situation in Spain is absolutely nightmarish. Spain will probably be able to squeak by without a bailout if the global economy stays stable, but if the dominoes start to fall Spain could be in a massive amount of trouble very quickly.
Not that many people are talking about Italy, but the truth is that Italy has a huge debt problem. On Friday, Moody’s warned that it may downgrade Italy’s Aa2 debt rating at some point within the next 90 days.
Belgium and France also have very substantial debt problems. They probably would not be the first dominoes to fall, but if the “contagion” starts to spread they could certainly have massive problems.
The truth is that Europe’s entire financial system is extremely vulnerable right now. Big banks all over Europe (and especially in Germany) are leveraged to the hilt. All it would take to topple many of them is a stiff breeze.
When Lehman Brothers collapsed, it was leveraged 31 to 1.
Today, German banks are leveraged 32 to 1.
German banks are also holding a massive amount of Greek debt.
That is why there is so much fear that the crisis in Greece could spread across the rest of Europe and start toppling dominoes.
The sovereign debt crisis in Europe did not happen overnight and it is going to be with us for a long, long time even if the global economy remains relatively stable.
At the moment, the best that officials in Europe can seem to come up with is to put off the pain for another day. Pimco’s Mohamed El-Erian told CNBC the following on Monday….
“This problem is not going to go away. It’s going to weigh on markets here and we’re going to see the same set of headlines over and over again. We simply cannot continue to kick the can down the road, because we’re coming to the end of the road in Greece.”
So if Europe starts having major problems will the U.S. step in and help?
Yes, if the crisis in Europe gets worse, the Federal Reserve will probably step in just like they did back in 2008.
But the U.S. is rapidly approaching a day of reckoning like the one that Greece is going through. The U.S. government has piled up the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world and faith in the U.S. dollar is dying.
The economic crisis in the United States gets worse with each passing year. Yes, the Federal Reserve can print up stacks of money and send it over to Europe, but that isn’t going to solve anything in the long run. The truth is that the U.S. is not even going to be able to keep itself from drowning.
The world financial system is far more vulnerable today than it was back in 2008. The next wave of the financial collapse is going to hit at some point, and when it does it is going to probably be even more painful than the last wave.
Our world is becoming an incredibly unstable place.
You better get ready.
Paul Craig Roberts
June 20, 2011
While we were not watching, conspiracy theory has undergone Orwellian redefinition.
A “conspiracy theory” no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy. Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps.
For example, online news broadcasts of RT have been equated with conspiracy theories by the New York Times simply because RT reports news and opinions that the New York Times does not report and the US government does not endorse.
In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.
When piles of carefully researched books, released government documents, and testimony of eye witnesses made it clear that Oswald was not President John F. Kennedy’s assassin, the voluminous research, government documents, and verified testimony was dismissed as “conspiracy theory.”
In other words, the truth of the event was unacceptable to the authorities and to the Ministry of Propaganda that represents the interests of authorities.
The purest example of how Americans are shielded from truth is the media’s (including many Internet sites’) response to the large number of professionals who find the official explanation of September 11, 2001, inconsistent with everything they, as experts, know about physics, chemistry, structural engineering, architecture, fires, structural damage, the piloting of airplanes, the security procedures of the United States, NORAD’s capabilities, air traffic control, airport security, and other matters. These experts, numbering in the thousands, have been shouted down by know-nothings in the media who brand the experts as “conspiracy theorists.”
This despite the fact that the official explanation endorsed by the official media is the most extravagant conspiracy theory in human history.
Let’s take a minute to re-acquaint ourselves with the official explanation, which is not regarded as a conspiracy theory despite the fact that it comprises an amazing conspiracy. The official truth is that a handful of young Muslim Arabs who could not fly airplanes, mainly Saudi Arabians who came neither from Iraq nor from Afghanistan, outwitted not only the CIA and the FBI, but also all 16 US intelligence agencies and all intelligence agencies of US allies including Israel’s Mossad, which is believed to have penetrated every terrorist organization and which carries out assassinations of those whom Mossad marks as terrorists.
In addition to outwitting every intelligence agency of the United States and its allies, the handful of young Saudi Arabians outwitted the National Security Council, the State Department, NORAD, airport security four times in the same hour on the same morning, air traffic control, caused the US Air Force to be unable to launch interceptor aircraft, and caused three well-built steel-structured buildings, including one not hit by an airplane, to fail suddenly in a few seconds as a result of limited structural damage and small, short-lived, low-temperature fires that burned on a few floors.
The Saudi terrorists were even able to confound the laws of physics and cause WTC building seven to collapse at free fall speed for several seconds, a physical impossibility in the absence of explosives used in controlled demolition.
The story that the government and the media have told us amounts to a gigantic conspiracy, really a script for a James Bond film. Yet, anyone who doubts this improbable conspiracy theory is defined into irrelevance by the obedient media.
Anyone who believes an architect, structural engineer, or demolition expert who says that the videos show that the buildings are blowing up, not falling down, anyone who believes a Ph.D. physicist who says that the official explanation is inconsistent with known laws of physics, anyone who believes expert pilots who testify that non-pilots or poorly-qualified pilots cannot fly airplanes in such maneuvers, anyone who believes the 100 or more first responders who testify that they not only heard explosions in the towers but personally experienced explosions, anyone who believes University of Copenhagen nano-chemist Niels Harrit who reports finding unreacted nano-thermite in dust samples from the WTC towers, anyone who is convinced by experts instead of by propaganda is dismissed as a kook.
In America today, and increasingly throughout the Western world, actual facts and true explanations have been relegated to the realm of kookiness. Only people who believe lies are socially approved and accepted as patriotic citizens.
Indeed, a writer or newscaster is not even permitted to report the findings of 9/11 skeptics. In other words, simply to report Professor Harrit’s findings now means that you endorse them or agree with them. Everyone in the US print and TV media knows that he/she will be instantly fired if they report Harrit’s findings, even with a laugh. Thus, although Harrit has reported his findings on European television and has lectured widely on his findings in Canadian universities, the fact that he and the international scientific research team that he led found unreacted nano-thermite in the WTC dust and have offered samples to other scientists to examine has to my knowledge never been reported in the American media.
Even Internet sites on which I am among the readers’ favorites will not allow me to report on Harrit’s findings.
As I reported earlier, I myself had experience with a Huffington Post reporter who was keen to interview a Reagan presidential appointee who was in disagreement with the Republican wars in the Middle East. After he published the interview that I provided at his request, he was terrified to learn that I had reported findings of 9/11 investigators. To protect his career, he quickly inserted on the online interview that my views on the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions could be dismissed as I had reported unacceptable findings about 9/11.
The unwillingness or inability to entertain any view of 9/11 different from the official view dooms to impotence many Internet sites that are opposed to the wars and to the rise of the domestic US police state. These sites, for whatever the reasons, accept the government’s explanation of 9/11; yet, they try to oppose the “war on terror” and the police state which are the consequences of accepting the government’s explanation. Trying to oppose the consequences of an event whose explanation you accept is an impossible task.
If you believe that America was attacked by Muslim terrorists and is susceptible to future attacks, then a “war on terror” and a domestic police state to root out terrorists become necessary to make Americans safe. The idea that a domestic police state and open-ended war might be more dangerous threats to Americans than terrorists is an impermissible thought.
A country whose population has been trained to accept the government’s word and to shun those who question it is a country without liberty in its future.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is the father of Reaganomics and the former head of policy at the Department of Treasury.
Monday, June 20, 2011
On Monday the Supreme Court blocked a federal lawsuit launched by conservation groups to force power plants to reduce so-called greenhouse gases. The ruling was 8-0.
The lawsuit targeted four private companies and the federal Tennessee Valley Authority. The private defendants in the suit are American Electric Power Co. of Ohio, Cinergy Co., now part of Duke Energy Corp. of North Carolina; Southern Co. Inc. of Georgia, and Xcel Energy Inc. of Minnesota, reports the Associated Press.
According to the high court, only the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to mandate a reduction in emissions. In December, the EPA said it will issue new regulations next year on power plants and carbon dioxide.
The court said the states and conservation groups can appeal in federal court under the Clean Air Act if they object to any eventual decision made by the EPA.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court, said the Clean Air Act gives the EPA authority to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants, not the states and the courts. Ginsburg is opposed to “control of greenhouse gas emissions by federal judges.”
In 2007, the court ruled that under the Clean Air Act carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are air pollutants. In a 5-4 vote, the court ruled that the EPA has the authority to regulate emissions from new cars and trucks. The same reasoning, the court argued, applies to power plants.
In 2009, the EPA issued its “endangerment finding” that would allow the federal agency to use the federal Clean Air Act to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions. The EPA ruling and enforcement “could result in a top-down command-and-control regime that will choke off growth by adding new mandates to virtually every major construction and renovation project,” U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue said at the time. “The devil will be in the details, and we look forward to working with the government to ensure we don’t stifle our economic recovery.”
In February, we reported that the Obama administration was targeting the coal industry as a major contributor to the theory of man-made global warming.
“The rolling blackouts now being implemented in Texas and across the country as record cold weather grips the United States are a direct consequence of the Obama administration’s agenda to lay siege to the coal industry, launch a takeover of infrastructure under the contrived global warming scam, and help usher in the post-industrial collapse of America,” Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson wrote in early February.
At the time, local environmental officials in Texas were involved in a fight with the EPA after the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality approved an air permit for the $3.2 billion Las Brisas Energy Center despite a formal EPA request that the commission “delay issuing the permit until EPA’s concerns about the plant’s emissions impacts are fully addressed.”
“The Obama administration is conducting industrial warfare against the United States. Obama’s 2008 promise to ‘bankrupt’ the coal industry by placing suffocating restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions even as China and other countries are given free reign to pollute at will is now coming to fruition,” Jones and Watson wrote. “This is all part of the ‘post-industrial revolution’ that the global elite have promised to enforce as a means of turning the United States into a decaying banana republic.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling on Monday signals a move to give the federal agency more authority to impose restrictions on the states under the guise of global warming.