On April 22, 2012, The Washington Post published an Op-Ed named "Nuclear weapon reductions must be part of strategic analysis," by Henry A Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft. Henry A Kissinger was secretary of state from 1973 to 1977, and national security adviser from 1969 to 1975. Brent Scowcroft was national security adviser from 1975 to 1977 and national security adviser from 1969 to 1975. Brent Scowcroft was national security adviser from 1975 to 1977 and 1989 to 1993. The article analyzed the USA nuclear weapons strategy from a viewpoint that matches President Obama's position: "Regardless of one's vision of the ultimate future of nuclear weapons,the overarching goal of contemporary US nuclear policy must be to ensure that nuclear weapons are never used." The article endorsed the new START treaty between the USA and Russia: "Combined with reductions in the US defense budget, this will bring the number of nuclear weapons in the United States to the lowest overall level since the 1950's. The Obama administration is said to be considering negotiations for a new round of nuclear reductions to bring about ceilings as low as 300 warheads." Kissinger explicitly says in the article that he favors the elimination of nuclear weapons, "albeit with the proviso that a series of verifiable intermediate steps that maintain stability precede such an end point, and that every stage of the process be fully transparent and verifiable." Yet, not everything is rosy in Kissinger's vision of the future. The article defined eight key facts that should govern such a disarmament policy. One of them discloses the extent of the self-deceptive strategic analyses prepared by the top level of the American establishment.
China warned its citizens in the Philippines to "stay indoors" on Thursday as its state media warned of war over a month-long dispute in the South China Sea. Territorial rivalry has escalated throughout the seas around China, as regional and international navies seek to establish rights of passage against an expanding Chinese presence. Chinese and Philippine vessels have been locked in a high seas stand-off since the PLA Navy prevented a Philippine warship from arresting crews of Chinese fishing boats near the Scarborough Shoal on April 8. Both countries claim the fish-rich shoal as their own, and protests by Philippine fishermen over their loss of livelihood have drawn mass support in the south-east Asian country. China International Travel Service, the state-owned tourism operator, yesterday suspended ties with the Philippines, after organizers announced plans to demonstrate outside Chinese embassy buildings and property today. Beijing also issued a travel advisory, warning its citizens to keep a low profile. "Avoid going out at all if possible, and if not, to avoid going out alone," it said. "If you come across any demonstrations, leave the area, do not stay to watch." Reports in Japan said five Chinese warships, including two guided missile destroyers, two frigates and an amphibious landing ship, had passed through waters close to Okinawa moving to Philippine reefs. As the dispute escalated, Leon Panetta, the US defense secretary, met senators in a push to ratify a treaty that would bolster legal backing for US naval patrols in disputed regions such as the South China Sea. Seizing on arnings of the dangers of escalating "gunboat diplomacy" Mr Panetta called on the Senate to ratify the Laws of the Sea, a UN treaty that has been hindered by procedural disputes. "By moving off the sidelines and leading the discussion, we would be ensure that our rights are not whittled away by the excessive claims and erroneous interpretations of others."
Lake sediment proves 'solar minimum' caused 200 years of cooling 2,800 years ago. New minimum due soon, after this year's sunspot activity. Sun's activity CAN cause changes in Earth's climate, claim scientists. May throw predictions of global warming out of whack. When the Greek poet Homer was writing The Odyssey around 2,800 years ago, the Earth went through an abrupt period of cooling, caused by the sun, and the same could happen again soon. Scientists at the GFZ German Research Center for Geo-sciences analyzed lake sediment in Lake Meer-felder Maar, and found direct evidence of a sudden cooling caused by a 'solar minimum'. Some scientists suspect that the current period of high solar activity, including increased sunspots and solar storms this year, will be followed by a 'minimum' period, which could even cause an Ice Age. If the GFZ research is correct, a new 'solar' minimum' could have a direct impact on Earth's climate, cooling our planet drastically, and knocking the predictions of global-warming alarmists out of whack. Dr Achim Brauer of the GFZ said, 'An abrupt cooling in Europe, together with an increase in humidity and particularly in windiness coincided with a sustained reduction in solar activity 2800 years ago.' Brauer's measurements of lake sediments allow 'a precise dating even of short-term climate changes.' The Homeric Minimum', the solar minimum that coincided with the famous poet's lifetime, caused a cool period that lasted 200 years. 'Scientists from the German Research Center for Geo-sciences GFZ in collaboration with Swedish and Dutch colleagues provide evidence for a direct solar-climate linkage on centennial timescales,' say the researchers.
Presidential hopeful Ron Paul condemned a plan being considered in the United States House of Representatives that would allow for the US to continue aiding in the defense of Israel by equipping the Jewish state's military with added weaponry. From Washington, DC on Wednesday, Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) attacked the contents of an act currently up for discussion that. if passed, would reestablish America's major role in Israeli affairs. Rep Paul fears, however, that it would do more harm than good for all nations involved. To House Speaker John Boehner, Paul said that HR 4133, the United States-Israeli Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, "is another piece of one-sided and counter-productive foreign policy legislation.""This bill's real intent seems to be more saber-rattling against Iran and Syria," insisted Paul, "and it undermines US diplomatic efforts by making clear that the US is not an honest broker seeking peace for the Middle East." "The bill calls for the United States to significantly increase our provision of sophisticated weaponry to Israel, and states that it is to be US policy to "help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge in the region," added the congressman. The bill itself was created to affirm America's "commitment to Israel's security as a Jewish state," "among other matters according to the official synapsis included in the legislation. It was introduced in March by Rep Eriv Cantor and discussed for around one hour on Wednesday afternoon before a motion to reconsider was laid on the table and agreed to without objection. Explaining his opposition, Rep Paul told his fellow lawmakers that "While I absolutely believe that Israel, and any other nation, should be free to determine for itself what is necessary for its national security. I do not believe that those decisions should be underwritten by US taxpayers and backed up by the US military."
Wikipedia defines false or black flags as "covert operations designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities." "The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors. That is: flying the flag of a country other than one's own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations and can be used during peace-time." Big lies substitute for truth. Stories are fabricated. Media scoundrels promote them. At issue is heightening fear for planned policies. Pretexts are needed for militarism, imperial wars, and homeland repression. If and when people learn they were duped, it's too late to matter. It's an American tradition! Incidents are strategically timed. Innocent victims suffer. So does everyone living under heightened national security state conditions. Threats are manufactured. States of emergency are declared. Rule of law principles are discarded. Unchallenged dominance alone matters. Wars on humanity follow. Big lies facilitate them. False flags play their part. Here we go again. This one's a sequel. Perhaps Hollywood blockbusters will follow, first the original plot, then the latest. More on the earlier one below. On May 7, AP headlined "US: CIA thwarts new al-Qaida underwear bomb plot," saying: Agents foiled "an ambitious plot by al-Qaida's affiliate in Yemen to destroy a US-bound airliner using a bomb with a sophisticated new design around the one-year anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden, The Associated Press has learned," AP described an upgraded underwear bomb plot. Like the earlier one, it was "designed to be used in a passenger's underwear, but this time" US officials called it "more refined."
Elections in so-called "democratic states" give us the illusion of choice, while maintaining a status quo that sees the rich get richer and the poor scrambling to redefine their definitions of "rock bottom". In fact, the United States of America couldn't be farther from being "the land of milk and honey" as it once proclaimed itself to be, its promise of wealth and stability, the oft-referenced yet seldom seen "American dream", is undeniably buried in the realm of wishful thinking for the majority of people, that is. The good news is, that majority can no longer afford to stay complacent in the face of rampant financial exploitation by a ruling minority that knows no bounds to its power-lust. In his recent article, "Economic Austerity in America: The Portland Community Begins to Fight Austerity", Shamus Cooke provides insight on how citizens are standing up to the hypocrisy and manipulations of America's corporate elite: "Those who caused the recession, Wall Street, the big banks and corporations must be made to pay for it. The broader population can achieve this goal only if it is united and acts collectively. In Portland, the first step was taken in this direction at this recent community meeting, where working people saw each others struggles as their own, understood the necessity of united action by the vast majority towards a common goal, and were inspired by the prospects of working together." And despite the mainstream media's ongoing attempts to stifle news about the massive student protests that have been exploding in Montreal, Canada in recent months, the sheer scale of the actions and the determination of the protesters is only gaining momentum.
You fasten the triggers for others to fire, Then you sit back and watch, When the death count gets higher. You hide in your mansion, As young peoples blood Flows out of their bodies And is buried in mud (Masters of War, Bob Dylan, 1941). Humanitarian Awards are surely taking on a whole new meaning. The end of April brought the obscenity of the announcement that Madeleine Albright, a woman prepared to sacrifice children was to be awarded America's highest honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, for her role as a long time champion of democracy and human rights all over the world. In the same twenty four hours, an announcement was made that Britain's Prince Harry is to receive a special award for his humanitarian work. The Distinguished Humanitarian Leadership award recognizes outstanding achievement and is presented annually by the Atlantic Council. Prince Harry and his brother, Prince William, have been jointly nominated, with Prince Harry traveling to Washington to accept on behalf of both, on 7th May. Madeleine Albright's latest honor for her services to humanity, has been awarded to others who compete admirably with her dedication. They include such peerless war mongers as Henry Kissinger, Donald Rumsfeld, General Colin Powell, whose pack of lies to the United Nations initiated Iraq's destruction, and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, whose offices and officers provided those lies. That human 'dove of peace', Dick Chaney has been a recipient, as has his Israeli counterpart, Shimon Perez and General Norman 'No one left to kill Schartzkopf, to name a few. Fellow recipient of the Award with Albright is Bob Dylan. "Funny World." Prince William and Harry are both in the armed forces, between social engagements. In a career move that has been dubbed by many as a cynical PR stunt, William flies Naval Rescue helicopters. Seemingly it no longer looks good for a future king to kill people!
Only 27 percent of Americans are saying they back the effort, and about half of those who oppose the war are saying the continued presence of American troops in Afghanistan is doing more harm than good, according to an AP-GfK poll. In results released Wednesday, 66 percent opposed the war, with 40 percent saying they were "strongly" opposed. A year ago, 37 percent favored the war, and in the spring of 2010, support was 46 percent. Eight percent strongly supported the war in the new poll. The poll found that far fewer people than last year think the killing of Osama bin Laden by US troops increased the threat of terrorism against Americans. Overall, 27 percent say the al-Qaida leader's death resulted in an increased terror threat. 31 percent believe his death decreased the threat of terrorism and 38 percent say it has no effect. The poll was conducted before the revelation this week of a recent al-Qaida plot to blow up a US bound airliner with an underwear bomb. Chris Solomon, an independent from Fuquay-Varina, NC, is among the respondents who strongly oppose the war. He said the military mission has reached the limits of its ability to help Afghans or make Americans any safer, and he would close down the war immediately, if he could. While the rationale for the war is to fight al-Qaida, most of the day-to-day combat is against an entrenched Taliban insurgency that will outlast the foreign fighters, he said. "What are we really doing there? Whom are we helping?" he said in an interview. Yet nearly half, 48 percent, said the continued presence of US troops in Afghanistan is doing more to help Afghanistan become a stable democracy, while 36 percent said the opposite, and 14 percent said they didn't know. Among those opposed to the war, 49 percent say US troops are hurting more than helping.
The most demolishing article I have seen nowadays about Latin America was written by Renan Vega Cantor, full professor at the National Pedagogical University of Bogota, which was published three days ago by the website 'Rebelion' under the title "Ecos de la Cumbre de las Americas" (Echoes of the Summit of the Americas). It is a brief article and I should make no versions. Those who specialize on the subject can look it up at the aforementioned website. I have referred more than once to the infamous agreement that the United States imposed on Latin American and Caribbean countries when the OAS was founded at the foreign ministers meeting held in the city of Bogota on April 1948. Just by sheer coincidence, I happened to be there on that date, helping to organize the celebration of a Latin American students' congress, whose main goal was to struggle against the European colonies and the bloody tyrannies imposed by the United States in this hemisphere. One of the most brilliant political leaders in Columbia, Jorge Eliecer Gaitan, who had managed to unite, with ever growing strength, the most progressive sectors in Columbia that opposed the Yankees' mis-creation, had offered his support to the celebration of the students' congress. No one doubted he would win during the upcoming elections, but he was treacherously murdered. His death led to a rebellion that has kept alive for more than half a century. Social struggles have been taking place throughout millennia, since human beings, by resorting to wars, were able to take hold of a surplus production to satisfy the essential needs of life. As is known, the years of physical slavery, the most brutal form of exploitation, went on in some countries until a little more than a century ago.
Some readers have come to the erroneous conclusion that the Matrix consists of Republican Party disinformation as if there were no disinformation from the left. Others think that propaganda is the business of Obama and the Democrats. In fact, propaganda from the right, the left and the middle are all part of the disinformation fed to Americans. If I may give some examples: The other day Chuck Colson, one of the Nixon officials imprisoned for Watergate crimes, died. This gave NPR the opportunity to relive the Nixon horror. What precisely was the Nixon horror? Essentially, there was no such thing. Watergate was about President Nixon lying about when he learned about the Watergate burglary. When Nixon learned about the burglary, he did not act on it prior to his reelection, because he reasoned, rightly, that the Washington Post would blame him for the burglary, although he had nothing to do with it, in the hopes of preventing his reelection. By going along with a cover-up, Nixon enabled the Washington Post to make an issue of the precise date on which Nixon learned of the burglary. White House tapes indicated that Nixon had learned of the burglary before he said he learned of it. So Nixon had permitted a cover-up, and had to go, but what was the real reason? What was the Watergate burglary? We don't really know. A group of men, including former CIA operatives were hired by the Committee to Re-elect the President to break into a Democratic campaign office in the Watergate complex. We don't really know. A group of men, including former CIA operatives were hired by the Committee to Re-elect the President to break into a Democratic campaign office in the Watergate complex. We don't know the purpose of the burglary. Some claim it was to wire-tap the telephones in the belief that the Democratic Party was getting re-election money from communists in Cuba or elsewhere.
The Occupy movement has been an extremely exciting development. Unprecedented, in fact. There's never been anything like it that I can think of. If the bonds and associations it has established can be sustained through a long, dark period ahead, because victory won't come quickly, it could prove a significant moment in American history. The fact that the Occupy movement is unprecedented is quite appropriate. After all, it's an unprecedented era, and has been so since the 1970s, which marked a major turning point in American history. For centuries, since the country began, it had been a developing society, and not always in very pretty ways. That's another story, but the general progress was toward wealth, industrialization, development, and hope. There was a pretty constant expectation that it was going to go on like this. That was true even in very dark times. I'm just old enough to remember the Great Depression. After the first few years, by the mid-1930s, although the situation was objectively much harsher than it is today, nevertheless, the spirit was quite different. There was a sense that "we're gonna get out of it," even among unemployed people, including a lot of my relatives, a sense that "it will get better." There was a militant labor union organizing going on, especially from the CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations). It was getting to the point of sit-down strikes, which are frightening to the business world, you see it in the business press at the time, because a sit-down strike is just a step before taking over the factory and running it yourself. The idea of worker takeovers is something which is, incidentally, very much on the agenda today, and we should keep it in mind.
False Flags are a standard stratagem, particularly in democracies, in which it's necessary to create consensus before waging war. Prior to the Spanish-American War in 1898, the explosion of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor propelled the American people into an imperial affrey, much as 9/11 did a century later, instigating invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Half a dozen headlines describe our situation, in which a false flag attack, blamed on Iran, may well pull us into our third post-9/11 Mid East war: 1.) US Military Wanted to Provoke War with Cuba: In 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed a multi-faceted false flag operation to JFK. 2.) New revelations in attack on American spy ship: LBJ helped a 1967 Israeli false flag attack against the USS Liberty, intended to draw the US into its Six-Day War. (Chicago Tribune, 2007) In that particular situation, while I was the Intelligence Operations Officer for the 4th US Armored Division in Goeppingen, Germany, under Colonel Aakkula, I was ordered to immediately bring the news to General Sherrer, the commander of our division. His only comment was: "With friends like Israel, we have no need of enemies." In half a dozen situations a false flag attack may well pull us into our third post-9/11 Mid East War: 1. US Military Wanted to Provoke War with Cuba: In 1962 the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed a multi-faceted false flag operation to JFK. 2. New revelations in attack on American spy ship: LBJ helped a 1967 Israeli false flag attack against the USS Liberty, intended to draw the US into its Six-Day War, according to Jewish writer Ari Shavit. (Haaretz, 2003).
Mitt Romney's "liberty speech" to the National Rifle Association demonstrates how central the Right's false narrative of the nation's founding will be in the November elections, as Republicans depict Barack Obama as alien to the nation's First Principles. Essentially, the Right's narrative holds that the Framers of the Constitution were hostile to a strong central government, for anything but national defense, rejected a federal role in addressing the nation's economic problems, leaving that to the private sector, and supported a system in which the states were very powerful. None of these points are true, of course, at least not for the Constitution. They were true for the Articles of Confederation, which governed the original 13 states from 1777 to 1787. But the Framers, especially James Madison and George Washington, came to view the Articles as ineffectual and dangerous. Madison, Washington and most other Founders recognized that a system of 13 "sovereign" and "independent" states within a weak confederation was a threat to the young nation's commerce, for instance, was viewed as an invitation for rich European countries to lure away a state or even a region by offering commercial advantages. Thus, contrary to the Right's notion that the Framers were government-hating ideologues, akin to today's Tea Partiers, the reality was that most of the Framers were pragmatic individuals dedicated to the nation's political independence and economic success. For that, they realized that the Articles, with their weak central government had to be jettisoned in favor of an entirely new system that granted the central government broad powers to tax, to issue currency, to make treaties, to build a military, and to pass laws to "promote the general Welfare." One of the most important new powers was an unlimited one, authorizing the federal government to regulate interstate commerce.
The president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, has a 32 percentage point advantage over the conservative candidate heading toward elections next October in Zulia state, according to the results of a survey released on Thursday (3rd) in the Venezuelan capital. According to the results of a survey conducted by researchers from the Social Research Group XXI (GIS XXI) of the Venezuelan state, Chavez is the preference of 58 percent of voters for these elections, while Henrique Capriles Radonski is preferred by 26 percent. Governed by Pablo Perez, who competed with presidential candidate Capriles to represent the opposing force, the Zulia state is surrounded by Lake Maracaibo, and is one of the major oil production centers in the country. Zulia is, moreover, one of the most populated states, with 3.8 million inhabitants. Its capital, Maracaibo, is the second-most important city of Venezuela, only surpassed by Caracas. GIS XXI research suggests, moreover, that 68 percent of the population considers the performance of the President last year very good overall, while 44 percent qualifies much of the opposition as very bad in the same period. GIS XXI asked about Governor Pablo Perez and the main leader of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) in the state, Francisco Arias Cardenas, who also aspires to take over the government in regional elections on 16 December. According to the researcher, the socialist leader won 31 percent of electoral preferences, against 24 percent for the current state representative. In the opinion of Jesse Chacon, president of GIS XXI, the fall in the polls by Pablo Perez is due to at least four factors, including the work done so far by Arias Cardenas on behalf of the PSUV in that state.
You will not see an article like this appear in any American mainstream media outlet. Barack Hussein Obama is an illegal President. He is not now, nor has he ever been eligible to be a candidate for or hold that office, because his father was a British subject at the time of his birth. Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the US Constitution requires that all candidates for the Presidency be "natural born citizens." As defined in the binding Supreme Court precedent of Minor v Happerset (1875) and confirmed in the subsequent ruling of US v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) and others, all candidates for the offices of President and Vice President must be second generation Americans, that is, US citizens of citizen parents at the time of birth. President and Vice President are the only US political offices with that requirement. It was the intent of the American Founding Fathers that the chief executive and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces would not have dual allegiance or loyalty to a foreign power. There is no ambiguity, although the Democrat and Republican parties and the media are and have been deliberately trying to confuse the American public as to the true meaning of natural born citizenship. Case in point. On May 1, 2012, Fox News Channel anchor Bret Baier posted an explanation of the term 'natural born citizen' that was so factually incorrect that it must be considered propaganda. It is well beyond the scope of this, or perhaps any single article to document the full extent of the censorship conducted and the amount of disinformation disseminated, which has continued non-stop since the onset of the 2008 election cycle. Why did this happen? The cause stemmed from political expediency and cowardice. Since 1975, there have been numerous attempts by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress to redefine or amend the Article II "natural born citizen" clause.
Fifty years ago this month, the US and USSR came terrifyingly close to full-scale thermonuclear war. I recalled those days of fear while staring at a rusting Soviet medium-ranged SS-4 missile displayed outside La Cabana fortress. Nuclear-armed Soviet SS-4's, secretly brought into Cuba, were ready to destroy Washington and the entire US East Coast. Nuclear war was imminent. US forces were at DEFCON 2, and massed to invade Cuba. Washington was a prime target. As a student there at Georgetown University, I vividly recall how frightened we were, and how helpless we felt. In the end, the Soviets prevailed in the Cuban missile crisis. President John Kennedy backed down, pledging the US would never invade Cuba. US missiles in Italy and Turkey, targeted on the USSR were removed. Moscow took its SS-4's out of Cuba. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev won his goal of saving Cuba and Fidel Castro's Marxist regime from a US invasion. But it was such a terrifying gamble the Soviet Politburo deposed Khrushchev shortly after. Kennedy got far more credit than he deserved for the crisis. In the early 1960's, Communist Cuba was the vanguard of revolution in Latin America, then Africa. Fidel Castro and Che Guevara's Cuba was the only Communist regime outside Mao's China that had romantic appeal to western youth. Fidel's vows to promote education, health care and land distribution sounded revolutionary, when Latin America was mostly ruled by US-backed oligarchs and generals. But that was long ago. The combined pressure of crushing US trade and financial sanctions, and the inherent failures of the Marxist economic system left Cuba isolated, trapped in the past. Today, once picturesque colonial Havana is a Caribbean Pompeii, a museum of the 1950's with its crumbling buildings and magnificent vintage American cars.
Cable network HBO has often portrayed programming too "mature"for the broadcast airwaves, but its latest offering has some critics complaining the company has gone too far. HBO's irreverent mocku-mentary "Angry Boys" is under fire for combining child actors and phallic humor, including one scene in the series' 12th episode, where a little girl drinks from a water bottle shaped like a giant, pink penis. "The incident is meant to be comedic," writes Joe Wilson of the Media Research Center's Culture and Media Institute, or MRC. "But showing a young girl sucking on a penis in a comedic fashion is akin to showing child pornography." He continues in an MRC article on the show, "Penis humor is a major premise of 'Angry Boys.' Out Magazine reported that the show features a Japanese mother exploiting her teenage son 'to create a merchandising empire of cock-shaped products.' "In one episode, according to Out Magazine, the mother, played by a male, the creator and director of the show, Chris Lilley, unscrewed a pink plastic penis and shook it for parmesan cheese." "It's difficult to imagine that HBO would go any lower," the MRC's Dan Gainor told RadarOnline.com. "Oral sex 'humor' involving a young child shows precisely where the left's mind is really at."Gainor links the network to the left, in part, because of the network's only talk show, "Real Time with Bill Maher." "After all, it's already the Bill Maher network," Gainor said, "with all his sleaze and hatred of conservatives." "Angry Boys" is a co-production between HBO, the BBC and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, the brainchild of Australian writer, performer and star of the show Chris Lilley.
Noam Chomsky has not just been watching the Occupy movement. A veteran of the civil rights, anti-war, and anti-intervention movements of the 1960s through the 1980s, he's given lectures at Occupy Boston and talked with occupiers across the US. His new book. Occupy, published in the Occupied Media Pamphlet Series by Zuccotti Park Press brings together several of those lectures, a speech on "occupying foreign policy" and a brief tribute to his friend and co-agitator Howard Zinn. From his speeches, and in this conversation, its's clear that the emeritus MIT professor and author is as impressed by the spontaneous, cooperative communities some Occupy encampments created, as he is by the movement's political impact. We're a nation whose leaders are pursuing policies that amount to economic "suicide" Chomsky says. But there are glimmers of possibility - in worker co-operatives, and other spaces where people get a taste of a different way of living. We talked in his office, for Free Speech TV on April 24: Let's start with the big picture. How do you describe the situation we're in, historically? NC: There is neither a crisis or a return to the norm of stagnation. One view is the norm is stagnation and occasionally you get out of it. The other is that the norm is growth, and occasionally you can get into stagnation. You can debate that, but it's a period of close to global stagnation. In the major state capitalists economies, Europe and the US, it's low growth and stagnation, and a very sharp income differentiation a shift, a striking shift, from production to financialization. The US and Europe are committing suicide in different ways. In Europe it's austerity in the midst of recession, and that's guaranteed to be a disaster. There's some resistance to that now. In the US, it's essentially off-shoring production and financialization and getting rid of superfluous population through incarceration.
We have six levels of government in America: The Bilderberg Society, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Committee of 300 and such other groups are on Level A where all decisions are made. These people have been around for a very long time. Most of the ancestors of the inner circle made their money from the slave trade, colonial exploitation and from the British East India company and opium. The Bilderberg Society has only been meeting since 1954. It has a Steering Committee which decides the agenda for their annual meetings. This year the meeting will be in Virginia. The three founders were Sir Evelyn De Rothschild, David Rockefeller and Prince Bernmhard of the immensely wealthy Dutch royal family. The interests of English, Spanish and other royal families are represented in the Steering Committee, but they never attend. Barry Chamish, who is so Jewish that the Israeli government ran him out of Israel, noticed that western diplomats were making stops in their shuttle diplomacy to see the King of Spain. It seems that he represents the chivalric orders in the Freemasons, who believe they have a prior and more valid claim to Jerusalem than do either the Israelis or the Palestinians. The European nobility is also called the "Black Nobility" and are on the inside of the decision making of the inner circles. They are also called the Black Nobility, because their deeds are evil, and because they often wore the black robes of the Catholic church. The Rothschild family has been bankers to the Vatican since 1827. Many of the Black Nobility can trace their ancestry back to the Byzantine Emperor Leo the Khazar, whose mother was Princess Irene of the Khazars. Others can trace their family fortunes back to Venice: Venice had a gold-based currency that collapsed due to fractional reserve banking. If a man came by and deposited ten gold coins, you could give him a receipt, which would be treated as a 'gold equivalent' by merchants. The bankers soon issued far too many paper gold certificates. The whole scheme collapsed in 1348, but the perpetrators were allowed to flee. Most settled in Holland and took their fractional reserve banking plans with them!!
The Obama administration on Friday issued a proposed rule governing hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas on public lands, that will for the first time require disclosure of the chemicals used in the process. But in a significant concession to the oil industry, companies will have to reveal the composition of fluids only after they have completed drilling, a sharp change from the government's original proposal, which would have required disclosure of the chemicals 30 days before a well could be started. The pullback on the rule followed a series of meetings at the White House after the original regulation was proposed in February. Lobbyists representing oil industry trade associations and individual major producers like Exxon-Mobil, XTO Energy, Apache, Samson Resources and Anadarko Petroleum, met with officials of the Office of Management and Budget, who reworked the rule to address industry concerns about overlapping state regulations and the cost of compliance. Production of domestic oil and natural gas has surged in recent years, as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have opened new fields and allowed renewed production from formations that had seemed depleted. President Obama has strongly endorsed the new production as a boon to the economy and energy security, and the president, under intense criticism of his energy policies from Republicans and oil industry officials as he faces a re-election contest, has recently taken steps to ease government regulation of oil operations. In its original proposal oil companies disclose the chemicals they intend to use in drilling before starting a well, the Interior Department was seeking to address the concerns of landowners and communities about potential pollution of groundwater.
On May 1, 2012, "our Glorious Leader", President Barack Obama, AKA Barry the Rat, signed yet another Executive Order, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation. This 'dictate' is designed to standardize regulations between the United States and its "so-called" trading partners. What is a regulation? A law! So what is actually being attempted here is a standardization of international law. It is an absolute violation of the Constitution for the United States to legislate our law outside of our borders. Considering the many international security agreements the traitors occupying our highest seats of power have entered into, this latest "executive order" can absolutely be used to institute gun confiscation, without any consent by our Congress or our Judicial. Once these foreign laws are brought to the United States under the various security agreements, foreign troops will be brought in to enforce the foreign laws upon the people of the United States. So look at what we have now: The Patriot Act, which allows unlimited spying on the American people by the government. The National Defense Authorization Act with Sections 1021 and 1022 for the military arrests and indefinite detention of American nationals without any due process of the law. HR 347 Trespass Law for the implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act upon any citizen who dares to speak out against the insurgency. Executive Order National Defense Resources Preparedness Act, which allows the "dictator" to confiscate every resource of the United States, including "we the people as conscripts to be put in servitude to the insurgency. This is exactly what the Bolsheviks did to the Russian people in 1917. Now we have this new "executive" order for the implementation of laws not legislated by our Congress!!!
The International Monetary Fund has just reported that India has overtaken Japan as the world's third biggest economy in purchasing power parity (PPP), the measure of the amount of money needed to purchase the same goods and services. Now it is at least semi-official: Japan's economy is on the skids. A report just released by a yjink tank of the Nipppn Keidanren, the country's most powerful business organization, says that by 2050, Japan will no longer be a developed country, predicting years of negative growth from 2030 onward. "Unless something is done, we are afraid that Japan will fall out of the league of advanced nations and again become a tiny country in the Far East," says the report in Japanese by the 21st Century Public Policy Institute (21st CPPI), the research institute of Keidanren. The report should serve as a wake-up call to Japan's economic and political establishment to take radical remedial reforms. The worry must be that there are few people inside Japan Inc, who have a clue about how to remedy the situation, still less the necessary political clout. The 21st CPPI predicts that in the best-case scenario, Japan's gross domestic product in 2050 will only be one-sixth of China's and one third of India's, as the country struggles to stay ahead of Brazil as the world's fourth biggest economy. If Japan does not take remedial measures, it will drop to ninth place in the world, behind France and barely ahead of Indonesia. According to the IMF, the European Union has the largest GDP, worth $15.8 trillion, followed by the United States with $15 trillion. China with $11.3 trillion, and India now narrowly ahead of Japan, with $4.44 trillion. In per capita terms, of course, the US and Japan are far ahead of the two Asian giants: US (sixth in the world) $48,387, Japan (24th), $34,740, China (92nd), $8,382, India (129th), $3,694 (all in PPP).
At times, something seemingly insignificant, when thought about deeply, reveals truths that the establishment seeks to keep hidden, the most important of which is the real purpose of a nation's existence. Most Americans, for instance, believe that America exists for their benefit, and they expect the nation's institutions to serve their needs. But astute observers know that history proves otherwise even though the Constitution clearly states what the nation was established to do: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and to our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Notice that the phrases, "promote business" and "protect property"do not appear in this paragraph, but "promote the general Welfare" does. In fact the Constitution to this day contains nothing about Capitalism or any other economic ideology. The document is completely neutral as Justice Holmes, dissenting in Lochner v New York writes: "A Constitution is not intended to embody a particular economic theory, whether of paternalism and the organic relation of the citizen to the state. It is made for people of fundamentally differing views, and the accident of our finding certain options natural and familiar, or novel, and even shocking, ought not to conclude our judgment upon the question whether statutes embodying them conflict with the Constitution of the United States."
By now, it's already deep election season, the beginning of the culmination of a cycle that commenced the day after the previous presidential election. In the meantime, the endless polls appear -you can check Obama's approval rating or the state of the presidential horse-race any time, night or day, and the media goes ballistic handicapping the odds or discussing the presidential cat fight. Each side's handlers take out after the other's, and increasingly, the corporate dollars pour in. You know the routine. These days, with the election a mere six months away, Romney/Obama "analysis" and prediction is already in the stratosphere and no issue, from war to a blind self-taught Chinese lawyer escaping to the American embassy in Beijing, is election-proof. It's all grist for the mill, and who in Washington isn't reading the polls the way a new Alger might read Tarot cards? So when President Obama suddenly starts talking, quite voluntarily, about global warming as a campaign issue, you know something is up. What's up, it turns out, is public concern over climate change after years of polling in which Americans claimed to be ever less worried about the phenomenon. No one should be surprised, given this overheated year in North America, as Bill McKibben points out in today's post. In fact, in the latest climate-change polling, 63% of respondents believe "the United States should move forward to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of what other countries do." In another recent poll, 65% of Americans backed the idea of "imposing mandatory controls on carbon dioxide emissions/other greenhouse gases" (as 75% now support regulating carbon dioxide as a "pollutant"). This is something new in America. Times, like the weather, are evidently a-changin'.
The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation. The World is at a critical crossroads. The Fukushima disaster in Japan has brought to the forefront the dangers of Worldwide nuclear radiation. The crisis in Japan has been described as "a nuclear war without a war". In the words of renowned novelist Haruki Murakami: "This time no one dropped a bomb on us. We set the stage, we committed the crime with our own hands, we are destroying our own lands, and we are destroying our own lives." Nuclear radiation, which threatens life on planet earth, is not front page news in comparison to the most insignificant issues of public concern, including the local level crime scene or the tabloid gossip reports on Hollywood celebrities. While the long-term repercussions of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster are yet to be fully assessed, they are far more serious than those pertaining to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine, which resulted in almost one million deaths. The Chernobyl death toll, 985,000, mostly from cancer, Global Research, September 10, 2010. See also Matthew Penney and Mark Seiden . Moreover, while all eyes were riveted on the Fukushima Daiichi plant, news coverage both in Japan and internationally failed to fully acknowledge the impacts of a second catastrophe at TEPCO's (Tokyo Electric Power Co Inc) Fukushima Daini nuclear power plant. The shaky political consensus both in Japan,, the US and Western Europe