(RussiaToday) – Russia and the US are holding their first ever joint anti-terror military exercises on American territory. A group of Russian paratroopers has taken off to Fort Carson military base, located in the US state of Colorado.

A special unit of American land forces and a reconnaissance unit of Russian special forces will be taking part in the exercises.
Russian paratroopers will first familiarize themselves with American small arms, military equipage, munitions, communication and reconnaissance equipment, parachute systems and types of landing operations.

In addition, Russian and American servicemen will have joint gun practice, mountain training and will take a course in demolition techniques. They will also have parachute training using American military equipment.

At the end of May the exercises will enter the “active” stage with combat training, in the course of which participants are supposed to find, seize and destroy a large base of international “terrorists”.

Source: RT

Related posts:

1. DoD Confirms Russian Troops To Train On U.S. Soil
2. Russian Anti-Terror Troops Arrive in Syria
3. Amerikan conspiracy: Russian troops to train with Army at Fort Carson

Related posts:

1. Alex Jones from Orlando: The Nanny State is on a Mission to Enslave All
2. Nanny State: Walking Is Dangerous
3. Rand Paul: Fight The Nanny State – Exclusive High Quality

The FT is running a story about how central bankers are now, increasingly discussing it openly.

Bloomberg is also quoting various finance officials around Europe saying the same thing, that a Greece exist is not desirable but possible.

Ekathimerini

The recent cover from Der Spiegel, titled Akropolis Adieu, also shows how the idea of Greece leaving the Euro has permeated mainstream thinking.

Bottom line: Between Greece bickering internally, and serious people in Europe talking about how the Eurozone could handle a Grexit, the country’s position is looking more and more tenuous.

The two main things keeping it in: Eurozone membership is extremely popular in Greece. AND people think that an actual departure would be horrible for Greece and the rest of Europe, possibly leading to the collapse of the Eurozone altogether.

The fact that its departure would be such a nightmare seems to be why people still don’t think it will happen.

Source: Business Insider

Related posts:

1. Biden: ‘Something in the Gulf,’ Eurozone could bring down Obama
2. “Le Snub” – New Cold War In Eurozone Confirmed: Sarkozy Gives Cameron The “Cold Shoulder”
3. Is Germany Secretly Maneuvering To Kick Greece Out Of The Euro?

(LRC) – According to Josh Stieber, who was granted conscientious objector status upon his return from Iraq.

At Camp Pendleton: “One, two, three, four. Every night we pray for war. Five, six, seven, eight. Rape. Kill. Mutilate.” (LA Times, Jan. 3, 1989). – Source: LRC

No related posts.

Who is Jose Rodriguez? He is the criminal who ran the CIA torture program. Most of his victims were not terrorists or even insurgents. Most were hapless individuals kidnapped by warlords and sold to the Americans as “terrorists” for the bounty paid.

If Rodriguez’s identity was previously a secret, it is no more. He has been on CBS “60 Minutes” taking credit for torturing Muslims and using the information allegedly gained to kill leaders of al Qaeda. If terrorists were really the problem that Homeland Security, the FBI and CIA claim, Rodriguez’s name would be a struck through item on the terrorists’ hit list. He would be in his grave.

So, also, would be John Yoo, who wrote the Justice (sic) Department memos giving the green light to torture, despite US and International laws prohibiting torture. Apparently, Yoo, a professor at the Boalt School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, was ignorant of US and international law. And so was the US Department of Justice (sic).

Notice that Rodriguez, “The Torturer of the Muslims,” does’t have to hide. He can go on national television, reveal his identity, and revel in his success in torturing and murdering Muslims. Rodriguez has no Secret Service protection and would be an easy mark for assassination by terrorists so capable as to have, allegedly, pulled off 9/11.

Another easy mark for assassination would be former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who staffed up the Pentagon with neoconservative warmongers such as Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, who in turn concocted the false information used to justify the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Rumsfeld himself declared members of al Qaeda to be the most vicious and dangerous killers on earth. Yet Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Richard Perle, together with neoconservative media propagandists, such as William Kristol and Max Boot, have been walking around safe for years unmolested by terrorists seeking revenge or bringing retribution to those responsible for as many as 1,000,000 Muslim deaths.

Condi Rice, Colin Powell, who delivered the Speech of Lies to the UN inaugurating the invasion of Iraq, and Dick Cheney, whose minimal Secret Service protection could not withstand a determined assassination attempt, also enjoy lives unmolested by terrorists.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Remember the deck of cards that the Bush regime had with Iraqi faces? If terrorists had a similar deck, all of those named above would be “high value targets.” Yet, there has not been a single attempt on any one of them.

Strange, isn’t it, that none of the above are faced with a terrorist threat. Yet, the tough, macho Navy Seals who allegedly killed Osama bin Laden must have their identity kept hidden so that they don’t become terrorist targets. These American supermen, highly trained killers themselves, don’t dare show their faces, but Rodriguez, Rumsfeld, and Condi Rice can walk around unmolested.

Indeed, the Seals’ lives are so endangered that President Obama gave up the enormous public relations political benefit of a White House ceremony with the heroic Navy Seals. Very strange behavior for a politician. A couple of weeks after the alleged bin Laden killing, the Seals unit, or most of it, was wiped out in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

If you were a Muslim terrorist seeking retribution for Washington’s crimes, would you try to smuggle aboard an airliner a bomb in your underwear or shoe in order to blow up people whose only responsibility for Washington’s war against Muslims is that they fell for Washington’s propaganda? If you wanted to blow up the innocent, wouldn’t you instead place your bomb in the middle of the mass of humanity waiting to clear airport security and take out TSA personnel along with passengers? Terrorists could coordinate their attacks, hitting a number of large airports across the US at the same minute. This would be real terror. Moreover, it would present TSA with an insolvable problem: how can people be screened before they are screened?

Or coordinated attacks on shopping malls and sports events?

Why should terrorists, if they exist, bother to kill people when it is easy to cause mayhem by not killing them? There are a large number of unguarded electric power substations. Entire regions of the country could be shut down. The simplest disruptive act would be to release large quantities of roofing nails in the midst of rush hour traffic in Boston, New York, Washington DC, Atlanta, Dallas, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco. You get the picture: thousands and thousands of cars disabled with flat tires blocking the main arteries for days.

Before some reader accuses me of giving terrorists ideas, ask yourself if you really think people so clever as to have allegedly planned and carried out 9/11 couldn’t think of such simple tactics, plots that could be carried out without having to defeat security or kill innocent people? My point isn’t what terrorists, if they exist, should do. The point is that the absence of easy-to-do acts of terrorism suggests that the terrorist threat is more hype than reality. Yet, we have an expensive, intrusive security apparatus that seems to have no real function except to exercise power over American citizens.

In place of real terrorists carrying out easy plots, we have “terrorist” plots dreamed up by FBI and CIA agents, who then recruit some hapless or demented dupes, bribing them with money and heroic images of themselves, and supplying them with the plot and fake explosives. These are called “sting operations,” but they are not. They are orchestrations by our own security agencies that produce fake terrorist plots that are then “foiled” by the security agencies that hatched the plots.

Washington’s announcement is always: “The public was never in danger.” Some terrorist plot! We have never been endangered by one, but the airports have been on orange alert for 11.5 years.

The federal judiciary and brainwashed juries actually treat these concocted plots as real threats to American security despite the government’s announcements that the public was never in danger.

The announcements of the “foiled” plots keep the brainwashed public docile and amenable to intrusive searches, warrantless spying, the growth of an unaccountable police state, and endless wars.

The “War on Terror” is a hoax, one that has been successfully used to destroy the US Constitution and to complete the transformation of law from a shield of the people into a weapon in the hands of the state. By destroying habeas corpus, due process, and the presumption of innocence, the “War on Terror” has destroyed our security.

This article first appeared at Paul Craig Roberts’ new website Institute For Political Economy. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His Internet columns have attracted a worldwide following.

Source: Prison Planet

Related posts:

1. Empires Then and Now – Paul Craig Roberts
2. Drowning In Hypocrisy – Paul Craig Roberts
3. Brewing a Conflict with China – Paul Craig Roberts

Marriage predated the state. It needs no protection, regulation, or monitoring by the state to continue its existence.

Richards is Director and Senior Fellow of the Center on Wealth, Poverty, and Morality at the Discovery Institute, a Visiting Scholar at the Institute for Faith, Work, and Economics, and co-author, with James Robison, of the New York Times bestselling book Indivisible: Restoring Faith, Family, and Freedom Before It’s Too Late (FaithWords, 2012). Richards and I have many common interests: Christianity, theology, economics, politics. He sounds like my kind of guy – except that he’s not.

Richards is your typical “criticize the welfare state while you support the warfare state conservative.” I wasn’t sure at first, but after looking at his new book Indivisible, and especially his remarks in chapter five (“Bearing the Sword”) on pacifism, just war, the war on terror, the military, and defense spending, my suspicions were confirmed.

Richards maintains in his Public Discourse article that libertarians “tend to disagree with conservatives on social issues.” He views the issues of abortion and marriage as “the two greatest sources of conflict between libertarians and conservatives.” He believes that “there is a tacit if inarticulate conservative wisdom that recognizes that the libertarian commitment to free markets and limited government is best preserved within a broader conservative context.” He posits that this “conservative wisdom” should appeal to the “‘everyman libertarian’ who values limited governments, individual rights, and free markets, but is not otherwise committed to a deeply libertarian philosophy.” Richards concludes: “We conservatives need to strengthen our base without alienating our near allies. One way to do that is to show how the central convictions of ‘everyman libertarians’ can find a peaceful repose in a conservative home.”

Baloney.

One does not have to be a conservative to oppose abortion and defend traditional marriage. And one should certainly not be a conservative when it comes to other important issues.

I have argued that because the non-aggression axiom is central to libertarianism, and because force is justified only in self-defense, and because it is wrong to threaten or initiate violence against a person or his property, and because killing is the ultimate form of aggression that, to be consistent, libertarians should be opposed to abortion.

If conservatives are so committed to pro-life principles, then why did they continue to fund Planned Parenthood during the Bush presidency? Why did John McCain and others vote to confirm pro-abortion judges like Stephen Breyer, Ruth Ginsburg, and David Souter to the Supreme Court? Why did George H. W. Bush even nominate Souter?

I agree with Richards that “just as government may not redefine our rights as individuals, it has no authority to redefine marriage.” Marriage has always been and will forever be the union of a man and a woman. God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. Anything else is just cohabitation, fornication, civil union, voluntary contract, or domestic partnership, whether it is called a marriage or not. Same-sex marriage, which is not even supported by some homosexuals, is like a square circle, solid jello, or liquid steel.

But more importantly, and as I have also argued, the state should get out of the marriage business. Why do governments at every level require a license for people to engage in consensual, peaceful activity? And not only that, in some states there is not only a hefty fee to get a marriage license, but a required waiting period or recommended premarital counseling course. Why do two individuals need the state’s permission to get married? Who knows better if two individuals are fit to be married than the two individuals? If they want advice regarding their union, they can consult their pastor, parents, co-workers, and/or friends. It is none of the state’s business.

Marriage predated the state. It needs no protection, regulation, or monitoring by the state to continue its existence.

The real threat to the institution of marriage is not homosexuals wanting heterosexuals to recognize their same-sex marriages, it is Christians standing in a church and saying “for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part” and then getting divorced a few years later. The real assault on marriage is by serial adulterers who preach family values like the thrice-married Newt Gingrich. As Doug Bandow has recently said: “When it comes to sex the Republican Party is divided. A few members actually don’t believe it is the government’s business. However, the GOP is full of leaders with multiple marriages engaging in multiple affairs who lecture everyone else about the importance of sexual morality.”

So, should libertarians be conservatives? Did not Ronald Reagan famously say: “The very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism”? The issues of abortion and same-sex marriage are used by conservatives to sucker pro-life, pro-family libertarians into believing that they should abandon libertarianism for conservatism. This would be a terrible mistake, for there is much more to conservatism than its emphasis on social issues.

There are four areas I would like to briefly mention that show the incontrovertible divide that exists between libertarians and conservatives.

First, the state. As concisely summed up by Mises Institute chairman Lew Rockwell:

The problem with American conservatism is that it hates the left more than the state, loves the past more than liberty, feels a greater attachment to nationalism than to the idea of self-determination, believes brute force is the answer to all social problems, and thinks it is better to impose truth rather than risk losing one soul to heresy. It has never understood the idea of freedom as a self-ordering principle of society. It has never seen the state as the enemy of what conservatives purport to favor. It has always looked to presidential power as the saving grace of what is right and true about America.

Second, the welfare state. As recently explained by Future of Freedom Foundation president Jacob Hornberger:

Conservatives are having a heyday calling President Obama a socialist. What they block out of their minds is that by their own measure, they are socialists too. . . . But while conservatives want to protect the assets of the rich from IRS confiscation and welfare-state redistribution, conservatives cannot deny that they themselves also favor the welfare-state concept of taxing people so that the state can redistribute the money to others. The only thing different between conservatives and liberals is the identity of the people they wish to tax and the identity of people they wish to receive the loot.

Third, war. I have said on more than one occasion that the very heart and soul of conservatism is war. Patriotism, Americanism, and being a real conservative are now equated with support for war, torture, and militarism. I firmly stand by this assertion that I first made in 2009, although it was true long before then.

And fourth, the drug war. Out of one side of their mouth conservatives talk about individual liberty, free markets, limited government, less intrusive government, cutting regulations, personal responsibility, and the Constitution, but at the same time they say out of the other side of their mouth that if you buy, sell, or possess a substance the government doesn’t approve of then we will lock you up in a cage. And if you buy, sell, or possess too much, then we will throw away the key.

Should libertarians be conservatives? To be consistent, must pro-life, pro-family libertarians be conservatives? Absolutely not.

Source: LewRockwell.com

Related posts:

1. Fake Conservatives As Dangerous To Freedom As Obama
2. Mitt Romney Is A Total Disaster And There’s A Simple Explanation Why
3. Newt Gingrich: Serial Hypocrisy

(PaulWatson) – A photo published by French news agency AFP shows a Syrian rebel wearing the Al-Qaeda flag on his arm accompanying UN observers in the village of Azzara, again underscoring the fact that NATO powers are backing terrorists in their bid to topple President Bashar Al-Assad.

The photo appears on the DayLife website with the caption, “A man wearing a black shirt bearing an Al-Qaeda flag (L) speaks with a UN observer as monitors meet with rebels and civilians in the village of Azzara in the province of Homs on May 4, 2012.”

Another Syrian source informed us that the man seen in the image is definitely a foreigner and does not look Syrian.

This is just one of many examples where Syrian rebel fighters and their supporters have openly displayed their identity as Al-Qaeda terrorist sympathizers, begging the question of why the United States and other NATO powers are fighting for the same cause as the group against whom they are supposedly engaged in a global war on terror.

After NATO-backed insurgents with links to Al-Qaeda helped topple Colonel Gaddafi in Libya, they proudly flew the distinctive black Al-Qaeda flag over courthouses in Benghazi and other centers of power.

Now some of the very same rebels, airlifted into Syria by NATO, are once again making it clear that they see the end of Assad’s regime as the next stage of their jihad.

Is it any surprise that Syrian “opposition” forces are now also rallying around the Al-Qaeda flag just as they did in Libya given that Hillary Clinton admitted in a BBC News interview that the US and Al-Qaeda were on the same side in Syria?

This video shows Syrian “activists” flying the Al-Qaeda flag during an anti-Assad protest in the northern Syrian town of Binnish.

In another clip, armed Syrian rebels address the camera standing behind a table draped with the black Al-Qaeda flag.

Meanwhile, a separate video clip leaked to the pro-Assad Truth Syria You Tube channel purports to show an anti-regime rebel being transported by UN observers in trucks bearing the distinctive UN text.

According to the transcript accompanying the video, the “terrorist” traveling in the vehicle is allowed to conduct reconnaissance on where government checkpoints are located for the purpose of planning future attacks.

At the end of the clip, the men in the UN vehicle break out in a spontaneous chant of “Allahu Akbar,” a phrase widely associated with fundamentalist Muslims who are engaged in jihad.

The fact that rebels are being transported by UN observers who are supposed to remain impartial is obviously a damning sign that the UN mission represents little more than a furtherance of the effort to destabilize Assad’s government.

Back in March, leaked emails revealed that the Pentagon is planning to direct terror attacks and assassinations inside Syria in a bid to topple President Bashar al-Assad.

With these attacks now intensifying in brutality, and with their perpetrators openly proclaiming their Al-Qaeda sympathies, NATO’s hubris about “humanitarian corridors” and the United Nations’ rhetoric about “responsibility to protect” has never looked more ridiculous.

Watch the clip below.

Source: Infowars

Related posts:

1. Hillary Clinton Admits US and Al-Qaeda On Same Side in Syria
2. UN to send 300 ceasefire observers to Syria
3. 200 Wounded By Wave of Syria Rebel Bombings In Aleppo

Related posts:

1. Gov. Activates FEMA Camps, Gingrich Loves Torture, TSA Grope Granny & More: Infowars Nightly News
2. The Illuminati are Panicking: David Icke Reports
3. David Icke: This Is Not A Bloody Game

(PaulWatson) – Talking surveillance cameras that bark orders at passers-by and can also record conversations are heading for U.S. streets, with manufacturer Illuminating Concepts announcing the progress of its ‘Intellistreets’ system.

As we first reported last year, high tech street lights with “homeland security applications” are now being installed in major U.S. cities.

The street lights also have loudspeakers that can give audible warnings to individuals, mimicking the talking surveillance cameras in the UK that shout out orders through microphones telling people to pick up litter or leave the area.

A recent press release put out by Amerlux announces the company’s partnership with Illuminating Concepts to further advance the rollout of ‘Intellistreets’. The announcement confirms that the street lights will have a number of “homeland security features” including a loudspeaker system that will be used to “engage captive audiences”.

“The built-in speaker can broadcast emergency information,” states the press release, adding, “SmartSite luminaires can be equipped with a variety of cameras and sensors to ensure real-time 24/7-security coverage. The sensors detect a variety of threats that enable rapid response from emergency personnel or help prevent crime and gain control of the streets.”

The press release adds that the SmartSite system developed to operate the ‘Intellistreets’ surveillance hubs is intended not only for street lighting but also for “retail malls, sports venues, on college campuses, and in new construction,” and “might well become commonplace” in the near future.

Not only can the street lights, now being rolled out in Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh with Department of Energy backing, act as surveillance cameras, Minority Report-style advertising hubs, and Homeland Security alert systems, they are “also capable of recording conversations,” according to a report by ABC 7.

The ABC video clip, featured at the end of this article, includes creepy footage of the street lights being used to transmit Orwellian security alerts, including “pay attention please….please stand by for a public safety announcement,” and “this is a security alert”.

Illuminating Concepts responded to the controversy over ‘Intellistreets’ last year by ludicrously claiming the system did not represent a “big brother” intrusion, as if talking surveillance cameras that also record private conversations are a perfectly normal concept.

The company also denied that it had received funding from the Department of Homeland Security yet subsequent reports confirmed that owner Ron Harwood is now “working with Homeland Security” to implement the high tech network, which is connected via a ubiquitous wi-fi system.

In reality, the system represents Big Brother on steroids – George Orwell’s worst nightmare come to life with interconnected wireless ‘telescreens’ blanketing America, all in the name of safety and security.

Source: Infowars

Related posts:

1. Red Spotlights to Mark ‘Precrime’ Suspects
2. The Big Brother Surveillance Grid Is Already Here: Video
3. Coming Soon to US: Big Brother Barking Orders at You

(DailyMail) – Family of 18-month-old toddler who was kicked off JetBlue flight for being on no-fly list outraged airline STILL hasn’t apologised – Read More Here

Related: TSA Releases Video Of Pat Down Confrontation With Congressman

(KurtNimmo) – Feinstein: Get Ready for More Aggressive Molestation at the Airport – Infowars

(Infowars) – Video: Police Hunt Man for Sport

This video has been blocked. We are embedding it so you can make it go viral.

Video

(KurtNimmo) – FEMA and Pentagon’s National Guard Homeland Response Force Trains in New York

Seven hundred National Guard members from the Northeast and Caribbean will be in central New York this week for disaster preparedness training. They will train for certification as a regional disaster response force capable of assisting responders following a chemical, biological, nuclear or high-explosive incident, according to the Associated Press. –

They are part of the National Guard Homeland Response Force (HRF) controlled by the Department of Defense. There are currently ten HRF units hosted by one state in each FEMA region, according to the Pentagon.

In February, it was reported that FEMA plans to move National Guard troops from one FEMA district to another during natural disasters and other emergencies. FEMA administrator Craig Fugate made the announcement after Obama signed Presidential Policy Directive 8 on March 30, 2011.

“PPD-8 reflects the Obama Administration’s belief that the whole community – including all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and individual citizens – plays a key role in preparedness efforts,” the National Guard website reported.

PPD-8 allows FEMA to “facilitate an integrated, all-of-nation/whole community, capabilities-based approach to preparedness” that involves “federal partners, state, local and tribal leaders, the private sector, non-governmental organizations, faith based and community organizations ─ and most importantly the general public” in the effort, according to the FEMA website.

“HRFs will increase the focus of DoD Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and High explosive (CBRNE) Consequence Management Response forces on life-saving objectives and increase operational flexibility while recognizing the primary role that the governors play in controlling the response to CBRNE incidents that occur in their states,” a DoD PDF explains.

In 2008, it was announced that Northcom 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, at the time recently home from deployment in Iraq, would be assigned within the United States to “deal with catastrophes in the U.S., including terrorist attacks and natural disasters,” CNN reported on October 3, 2008.

Based at Fort Stewart, Georgia, the Army said the combat unit would concentrate “primarily on logistics and support for local police and rescue personnel,” which is a direct violation of the Posse Comtatus Act forbidding collaboration between the U.S. military and domestic law enforcement.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strictly forbids federal troops from being deployed on American soil for the purpose of law enforcement. The one exception is provided by the Insurrection Act of 1807, which lets the president use the military only for the purpose of preventing rebellions.

CNN reported that the plan drew criticism after it was reported that the combat unit had trained with equipment “generally used in law enforcement, including beanbag bullets, Tasers, spike strips and roadblocks… That kind of training seems a bit out of line for the unit’s designated role as Northern Command’s CCMRF (Sea Smurf), or CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force.”

On September 18, 2008, the Army Times reported that the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team had trained how to use “nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them” in the United States and also how to set-up “hasty” roadblocks with “spike strips for slowing, stopping or controlling traffic.”

In 2010, Wikileaks released nearly 400,000 U.S. Army documents on the Iraq War. A number of the documents describe how U.S. troops killed approximately 700 civilians for coming too close to checkpoints, including pregnant women and the mentally ill. At least a half-dozen incidents involved Iraqi men transporting pregnant family members to hospitals.

The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team spent 35 months in a combat role in Iraq.

The National Guard training in New York represents a further blurring of important lines of distinction between the federal government, the Pentagon, state and local government, corporate entities, “and most importantly the general public.”

Since the National Defense Act (or Militia Act) of 1903, the federal government has worked tirelessly to absorb the National Guard and take control of it away from the states. In 2007, the John Warner Defense Authorization Act moved to remove state governors as sole commanders in chief of their state’s National Guard during emergencies within the state, a move that angered a number of state governors.

Source: Infowars

Related posts:

1. Police State 3-10-12
2. Police State 4-18-12
3. Police State 12-24-11

(SteveWatson) – GOP state conventions in Arizona and Oklahoma ended in chaos this past weekend as establishment insiders did everything within and beyond their power to prevent Ron Paul walking away with more delegates to the national convention.

With Paul picking up recent victories at state conventions in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, Louisiana, and Massachusetts, Romney supporters, along with GOP committeemen set out to stop Paul supporters from having any influence over the delegate election process by shutting down the conventions and falsely claiming victories.

In Arizona, Romney supporters accused Paul activists of booing Josh Romney, Mitt Romney’s son, and disrupting his speech. The mainstream media ran with the claim, suggesting that boisterous Paul fans forced Romney to cut short his speech, jeering him off the stage.

In reality, as this video proves, Romney received respectful applause when he ‘officially’ ended the speech, and was only booed when, in blatant violation of party rules, he attempted to return to the podium and promote his father’s officially endorsed slate.

As the convention progressed, the dirty tricks against Paul supporters, who were present in vast numbers, gathered pace.

Paul supporters complained that they were being moved back and forth between convention halls and the main floor in a deliberate attempt to confuse the proceedings. During this confusion, several Paul supporters complained that Romney supporters were engaging in ballot stuffing.

It was also reported that two attendees standing as Ron Paul delegate candidates were physically assaulted by Romney supporters on the convention floor.

As it became more clear that Paul supporters were extremely well organized and prepared to win the day for their candidate, strange occurrences began to happen.

Warren Woodward, an attendee at the convention writes:

I was elected as a delegate. This was surprising since no one, not even me, voted for me.

Another person was also elected for whom no one voted. Leadership was reluctant to do anything about this anomaly at first but enough people yelled. I heard something about how the Republican leadership had cheaped out on the voting tabulating equipment. I don’t know if that’s true but in any case the ballots had been misread and in both cases the election really went to the person below the “winner”. So from there on everything had to be hand counted which took forever and was not performed in plain view.

Woodward also noted that all candidates were listed in alphabetical order except Romney’s slate which always appeared at the top on all ballots.

The establishment backed chairman then decided that enough was enough and shut down the convention altogether before voting had finished, saying that it would be finished at a later date, possibly by mail.

This caused chaos and prompted the remaining attendees to elect a new chairman and hold a new vote outside the building:

Voting from this gathering indicated that Ron Paul won 11 of the 18 available delegate slots, however, no one knows the official results from the Arizona convention, and it is unclear if they ever will.

If you thought it couldn’t get any worse you’d be wrong, as the convention in Oklahoma reached an even more farcical conclusion.

Paul supporters, who made up around 50% of the attendees, complained that entire sections of the convention hall had been walled off and they couldn’t get any access.

Paul campaign senior adviser Doug Wead also noted on his blog that several other dirty tricks against Paul supporters came into play, that eventually caused the convention to adjourn in much the same fashion as the Arizona meeting:

“Frightened that the Ron Paul delegates had become the majority in the convention, the establishment GOP, running the event, used its own errors in the Credentials Report to stall the convention for several hours. On the premise that the time for the convention hall rental was coming to an end they refused to hold a final vote on credentials or to acknowledge the calls for a roll call vote on the Delegates and Alternates as required under the rules.”

The GOP insiders essentially ignored votes from the floor altogether, shut down the convention, and claimed that they had won 96% of the vote, despite the fact that Ron Paul supporters made up around half of the attendees.

“Paul delegates who had give up weeks and months of their lives to get elected as delegates at the precinct and county levels were scandalized… Challenges will surely follow.” Doug Wead wrote.

Just as in Arizona, another symbolic convention was held in the parking lot:

It was also reported that during this time some Romney supporters physically assaulted Ron Paul supporters:

As we reported last week, two separate incidents captured on video revealed desperate attempts by Mitt Romney operatives to divide and disrupt official Ron Paul endorsed delegate slates by handing out fake ballots to attendees at the state conventions in Nevada and Maine.

It is clear that GOP insiders are frightened to death that well organized Ron Paul supporters are operating within the rules to win delegates for their candidate and ultimately influence the national GOP convention.

Source: Infowars

No related posts.

What exactly happened at this event was that while the cameras were rolling a two minute minute speech was made about the whole petition gathering process and then I gave the petition to NC Senator Phil Berger while the cameras where rolling. The two other times Sen. Berger was just given documentation usually after the town council meeting or before but this time it was during the town council meeting so that the cameras and witnesses that attended prove that Sen. Berger received a copy of the Nullify-NDAA petition plus the Report on the NDAA for the state Government and cannot claim that he didn’t get it in the event that the Feds (Federal Government) put behind-the-scenes pressure on him.

Related posts:

1. NDAA and the US Constitution – Part 1: Romney & Gingrich
2. NDAA Public Law 112-81 censored from the public; Is this a Coverup?
3. FDA Discounts More Than a Million Signatures On GMO Labeling Petition

Klein’s book begins with a talisman-like quote uttered by Barack Obama when his recently appointed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to boost Obama’s ego by telling him, “Your legacy is going to be preventing the second Great Depression.”  To which Barack Obama responded, “That’s not enough for me.”

As all of America knows by now, Obama has aggressively sought to “fundamentally transform” America — one of the few promises he has kept from the days of 2008.  Five trillion dollars of borrowing, ObamaCare passed over the objections of the majority of Americans through legislative legerdemain and special deals made with resistant politicians, failed stimulus, green programs failing left and right as taxpayers are left holding the bag, a recovery that is the most anemic on record, an America that has been sundered by the man who promises to unite us, America weaker abroad and at home — yes, America has been fundamentally transformed.  Mission Accomplished.

But how and why did Obama succeed in such a catastrophic way?  That is the question that Klein successfully answers in his extremely readable and enjoyable book, with enough spicy details to satisfy the craving of anyone interested in how President Obama and those closest to him have driven us to the condition we find ourselves in as we approach November.

One of the motifs that runs throughout the book is Barack Obama’s sheer level of incompetency.  He has the fatal conceit of many politicians: an overweening ego.  That may be a prerequisite for politicians and leaders, but when it is unleavened by a willingness to consider the views of others, it becomes a fatal conceit.  And Obama has that trait in abundance.

Stories tumble out that reveal a man who believes he is all but omniscient — unwilling to give any credence to the views of others (especially but not limited to those across the aisle).  Experts in management are interviewed who point out that he lacks essential qualities of leadership.  Indeed, the book gets its title from an outburst from Bill Clinton, who was trying to encourage Hillary to take on Obama in the Democratic primary of 2012:

Obama doesn’t know how to be president. He doesn’t know how the world works. He’s incompetent. He’s…he’s…Barack Obama’s an amateur.

But Klein does not rest there.  He delves into associates from Obama’s career in Cook County politics, his stint as a state senator, and his rise to the United States Senate.  There is a common pattern: Obama likes to campaign, but once he is elected and actually starts working, his interest flags, and he starts looking for the next “big thing” — electorally speaking.  He had few if any accomplishments or professional standing in any of his previous positions.  Even when he served as a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, he avoided any encounters with other faculty who enjoyed discussing the law.  His reluctance to engage them is revealing in and of itself, suggesting he had a reason for his lack of confidence.

His disdain toward working with others is manifest.  He has gained a reputation over the last few years as being cold and distant, refusing to engage, as have other presidents, in the give-and-take of politics, in the social niceties that help grease the wheels in Washington.  Liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen recently advised him to read Robert Caro’s newest volume on the life of Lyndon Johnson as a primer on how to be president.  Johnson, of course, was a master at pulling levers of power, but he also knew how to persuade individual politicians on both sides of the aisle to work with him on legislation.  But, of course, LBJ also had the common touch and, having risen from humble beginnings, never considered it beneath him to work with those underneath him.  Not so Barack Obama.  He complained to foreign leaders that he had to waste time talking with “congressmen from Palookaville.”  At another time, he switched locales and said he was tired of dealing with people from “Podunk.”

His campaign trail comments regarding small-town America as being populated by “bitter” people who cling to guns and Bibles was not a one-off.  They are reflective of his views.

But the high and the mighty also come in for the Obama treatment.  Klein reveals dismay among former Obama supporters who feel they have been mistreated, maligned, and thrown under the bus.  Obama’s most generous early donors have been all but ignored; early mentors in the black business community have been sidelined if not completely ditched; people don’t hear from him or his staff unless a fundraiser is coming up.  But there is more: Caroline Kennedy is angry at the way she and her family were used for campaign purposes in 2008 and then summarily dismissed and stored away like so many movie props have been (the latter is my description).

Even Oprah Winfrey has been stiff-armed by the Obamas.  According to the book, Oprah took a big risk in supporting Obama in 2008 and campaigning for Obama in Iowa, being a big boost in his campaign.  The ratings for her show weakened significantly (and her new network has been a huge disappointment).  But when she has tried to visit the White House, she has been all but treated as persona non grata.  Apparently, Michelle Obama is a possessive person who fears the influence Oprah may have over Barack Obama (more on this below).  Oprah blames it on Michelle’s anti-obesity campaign.  She is quoted as saying, “Michelle hates fat people and doesn’t want me waddling around the White House.”  Klein digs up a quotation of Michelle Obama’s from a White House source that seems to confirm Oprah’s suspicion:

Oprah only wants to cash in using the White House as a backdrop for her show to perk up ratings. Oprah with her yo-yo dieting and huge girth, is a terrible role model. Kids will look at Oprah, who’s rich and famous and huge, and figure it’s okay to be fat.

Oprah, Caroline Kennedy, Pastor Jeremiah Wright (who merits a chapter), and Obama’s former long-time doctor (who feels Obama is distant and lacks feeling, passion, and humanity) all join a long list of people whom the Obamas have used, abused, and then cast aside once they moved into the White House.

A few have survived the winnowing process, of course.  There is Michelle, who might be described as the living and real-life descendant of Lady Macbeth.  The book provides some history of the early days between Barack and Michelle: marked by some tempests, yet also marked by Michelle’s overwhelming push for Barack to win power and wealth.  Insiders are reluctant to tangle with the First Lady, and with good reason.  Michelle, like her husband, has a proclivity to blame others for her husband’s failures.  Former Press Secretary Robert Gibbs felt her sting when it was revealed that Michelle had complained about life in the White House to the then-first lady of France, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy.  Gibbs acted to control the damage by arranging for the Élysée Palace to issue a denial.

But the response did not come quickly enough for Michelle, and she arranged for Valerie Jarrett — close to the Obamas for years, and who has an omnipresence in the White House that makes the unelected and unconfirmed czar issue seem trivial — to deliver a stern rebuke to Gibbs, who counter-attacked.  Anyone heard from Robert Gibbs lately?

The role of Valerie Jarrett has prompted much speculation.  As Edward Klein notes, she has a mouthful of a title —  senior adviser and assistant to the president for intergovernmental affairs and public engagement — that “doesn’t begin to do justice to her unrivaled status in the White House.”  Valerie Jarrett apparently has a role in most major decisions: she often appears in meetings the president has with major political leaders from Capitol Hill and with foreign leaders as well.  She often stays behind to have private discussions with the president.  Obama admitted that he ran every decision by her.

That is worrying since, as Klein notes, Jarrett’s own career is not one that would prepare her to assume such a prominent role.  Hers is no rags-to-riches story that would give her the “chops” to have such a Svengali-like influence over the president of the United States.  She was blessed with a wonderful set of advantages — descended from a highly regarded political family in Chicago.  Jarrett was a force to be reckoned with in the Daley administration and then capitalized on her political connections to land a job heading up a real estate company in Chicago where she oversaw, among other developments, properties that under her company’s management degenerated into slums.  Business leaders are aghast that she has such a powerful role in the White House.  A donor is quoted as saying that not only is Valerie Jarrett a liability, but others in the White House concur with his views.  Jarrett has butted heads with Rahm Emanuel, who felt that it was wrong to focus on passing ObamaCare when the economy and jobs should have been higher priorities.

Who won that match?  Rahm returned to Chicago and became mayor in 2009.

The roles of Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett cannot be overstated.  They are symptomatic of a larger problem in the White House decision-making process (one that I noted in “How Obama Makes Decisions“).

Barack Obama, to a greater extent than any modern president, refuses to listen to the views of others or consult with experts and advisers outside his own tight and constricted circle from Cook County.  There are many revelations of his faulty decision making uncovered by Klein.  Indeed, one of Jarrett’s roles is to shield Obama from dealing with people who don’t agree with him or who may say something that deflates his ego.

When Bill Daley (the chief of staff) realized that the contraception and abortifacient mandates of ObamaCare might offend Catholics, he arranged a meeting without Jarrett’s knowledge between Obama and New York then-Archbishop Timothy Dolan to deal with an issue that would offend many as violating the principle of religious freedom (as well as Catholic beliefs).  Jarrett went to the president and vented her anger.

Anyone seen Bill Daley lately?

On issue after issue, President Obama remains his insular self, refusing to seek counsel or input from others with more experience.

Critics believe he has made a mess of foreign policy precisely because not only does he have a dearth of experience in this area, but because, under our system, foreign policy is one of the few areas where a president enjoys almost unlimited power.  Thus, he is free to formulate his own agenda regardless of the views of others and the damage these policies cause.

When pro-Israel Americans met with Obama to discuss his actions toward Israel (that many, including myself, view as being counterproductive) he dismissed the ideas of Abe Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, with the statement “you are absolutely wrong.”  The president, who has no compunction telling people that they are not only wrong, but “absolutely wrong” in public, needs to start feeling some of the empathy he accuses Republicans of lacking.  According to veteran journalist Richard Chesnoff, quoted in the book, “Obama’s problem in dealing with the Arab-Israeli conundrum” comes “from his one-man style and his inflated view of his own leadership talents[.] … [P]erhaps, even more egregiously, he seems to have an exaggerated sense of his own depth of understanding of the Middle East, which is simply not borne out by his background or experience.”  There may be more to it than that to explain the pressure he has put on our one true ally in the Middle East, Israel.  American Thinker published numerous articles in 2008 covering not only Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Junior’s views of Israel as an apartheid state, but Obama’s associations with anti-Israel Palestinians in Chicago, his own suspect language regarding Israel, and his close relationship with Samantha Power (now playing a key role on his National Security Council), who not only has a long anti-Israel history but also made an anti-Semitic remark that was smothered by the media in 2008.  There were good reasons for the Los Angeles Times to run a column during the campaign that “Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Obama.”

Readers will thoroughly enjoy Klein’s book on Obama.  There are substantive issues raised about Obama’s leadership abilities that are enhanced with interesting digressions regarding life inside ObamaWorld and how those dynamics effect decisions made from the Oval Office.

Klein concludes the book with doubt that Obama could ever change his approach toward governing and suspicion that his agenda is to impose a vast redistribution scheme upon America that has worked so well in the decaying and disintegrating European Union.  He wonders if Republicans are up to the task of pointing out to the public the truth about Obama’s agenda, given the overwhelming media bias in favor of Barack Obama.

Klein’s book could serve as a roadmap for Republicans.

Source: American Thinker

Related posts:

1. Obama White House Helped Cover Up Extent of BP Oil Spill In The Gulf
2. The Royal Decrees…umm…Executive Orders…of Barack Obama
3. NYT Tries to Blame Political Film for White House Shooting

• Eldorado
• HempUSA.org

No related posts.

There are questions surrounding the Conservative government’s Bill C-38, the Budget Implementation Act that also contains changes related to the U.S.-Canada Beyond the Border action plan. This includes ratifying and making the Shiprider a legal and permanent program which will require amending the Criminal Code, along with the RCMP and Customs Act. The joint initiative officially known as the Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations first began as a pilot project. It allows RCMP and U.S. Coast Guard officers to operate vessels together and pursue criminals in the waters of both countries. The Council of Canadians reported that the NDP is demanding that the Shiprider policing program be taken out of budget implementation bill. Brian Masse, the NDP border critic is pushing for separate legislation and pointed out that, “it’s totally irresponsible to have it as part of the Budget Implementation Act.” He added, “There’s significant policing issues that really warrant a standalone bill. If it was so important that they did all the fanfare for it, why doesn’t it warrant its own process?” The proposed changes could have serious sovereignty implications with regards to accountability, due process and civil rights and therefore, need to be fully scrutinized.

The U.S. and Canada are also scheduled to deploy a land-based version of the Shiprider program at some point this summer. As part of the security perimeter deal, both countries will, “implement two Next-Generation pilot projects to create integrated teams in areas such as intelligence and criminal investigations, and an intelligence-led uniformed presence between ports of entry.” In September 2011, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder revealed plans that would allow law enforcement officers to operate on both sides of the border. He announced that, “the creation of ‘NextGen’ teams of cross-designated officers would allow us to more effectively identify, assess, and interdict persons and organizations involved in transnational crime.” Holder went on to say, “In conjunction with the other provisions included in the Beyond the Border Initiative, such a move would enhance our cross-border efforts and advance our information-sharing abilities.” Both countries continue to expand the nature and scope of joint law enforcement operations, along with intelligence collection and sharing.

On April 20 of this year, the Red River Integrated Border Enforcement Team’s (IBET) joint intelligence office was opened in Altona, Manitoba. The facility will house representatives from the RCMP, U.S. Border Patrol, Homeland Security. Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), as well as U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The IBET is a binational partnership designed to, “enhance border integrity and security along the shared Canada/U.S. border through identification, investigation and interdiction of persons, organizations and goods that threaten the national security of both countries or that are involved in organized criminal activity.” The specialized teams have been, “established in strategic regions to ensure more effective border enforcement capability between ports of entry, based on intelligence-led policing.” The new joint headquarters could serve as a model for other IBETs along the northern border.

On May 8, the CBP and the CBSA announced that, “they are delivering on key commitments under the U.S.-Canada Beyond the Border Action Plan for Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness—increasing benefits to NEXUS members, streamlining the NEXUS membership renewal process and launching a plan to increase NEXUS membership.” Under the NEXUS program, pre-screened travelers are granted expedited access across the border, by air, land or sea. Canadian Public Safety Minister Vic Toews explained that, “The Border Action Plan is designed to speed up legitimate trade and travel, and improve security in North America by aligning the entry of people and goods at the perimeter while streamlining processes at the Canada-U.S. border. With these commitments to retain and increase NEXUS membership, Canada and the United States will increase efficiency to better focus their resources and examination efforts on travellers of high or unknown risk.” NEXUS is part of the process of implementing equivalent biometric standards across North America which could be used to restrict, track and trace our movements.

Last month, Canada’s federal privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart, along with her provincial and territorial colleagues urged transparency and respect of Canadian privacy standards with regards to the perimeter security agreement. A joint resolution recommended that, “Any initiatives under the plan that collect personal information should also include appropriate redress and remedy mechanisms to review files for accuracy, correct inaccuracies and restrict disclosures to other countries; Parliament, provincial Privacy Commissioners and civil society should be engaged as initiatives under the plan take shape; Information about Canadians should be stored on Canadian soil whenever feasible or at least be subject to Canadian protection; and Any use of new surveillance technologies within Canada such as unmanned aerial vehicles must be subject to appropriate controls set out in a proper regulatory framework.” According to a self-imposed deadline, the U.S. and Canada are supposed to release privacy provisions associated with the perimeter security deal by May 30.

The perimeter agreement is also getting the attention of provincial and state leaders. B.C. Premier Christy Clark and Washington Governor Chris Gregoire have signed, “a joint letter to President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Stephen Harper commending the U.S.-Canada Beyond the Border Action Plan and committing British Columbia and Washington to support and expedite federal commitments to improve the flow of people, goods and services across the border.” When the perimeter security deal was first released last year, Premier Clark issued a statement which welcomed the announcement. In addition, Washington’s state Legislature passed a joint memorial which also acknowledged its support. The backing of governments at all levels will further assist in implementing some of the Beyond the Border initiatives. Not to mention the fact that state and provincial regional integration is already being achieved in areas of trade, the environment and energy.

As the U.S.-Canada action plan implementation process continues, there still remains many concerns with the further integration and militarization of the northern border. This includes the loss of sovereignty and risks to privacy rights related to more cross-border sharing of personal information. While there have been online consultations surrounding the perimeter security agreement, there has yet to be any open public hearings or congressional and parliamentary debates.

Source: Be Your Own Leader

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com

Related articles by Dana Gabriel

NAFTA Partners Take Steps to Boost Trilateral Relationship
Northern Border Drug Strategy Tied to Perimeter Security Deal
The Transformation of the U.S.-Canada Border
The North American Leaders Summit and Reviving Trilateral Integration

Related posts:

1. Counter-Terrorism and Northern Border Drug Strategy Tied to Perimeter Security Deal – Dana Gabriel
2. The Pretext for a North American Homeland Security Perimeter – Dana Gabriel
3. Strengthening U.S.-Canada Security Interests in North America and Around the Globe – Dana Gabriel

Nuclear scientists assured us this could never happen, of course. Just like they now say “GMOs are perfectly safe” or that Roundup herbicide or medical antibiotics will never cause any unintended negative side effects. (Widespread Roundup use has now resulted in the rise of superweeds, just as medical antibiotics use has resulted in the rise of deadly drug-resistant superbugs.) (http://naturalnews.com/033195_superweeds_farm_equipment.html)

Humanity has reached a tipping point of developing technology so profound that it can destroy the human race; yet this rise of “science” has in no way been matched by a rise in consciousness or ethics. Today, science operates with total disregard for the future of life on Earth, and it scoffs at the idea of balancing scientific “progress” with caution, ethics or reasonable safeguards. Unbridled experiments like GMOs have unleashed self-replicating genetic pollution that now threatens the integrity of food crops around the world, potentially threatening the global food supply.

With the aim of saving humanity from the extreme dangers of runaway science, we here at NaturalNews have launched a new educational campaign called S.O.S. – STOP Out-of-control SCIENCE.

Sending out an S.O.S. for the human race

Our educational S.O.S. infographic is available now at:

http://www.naturalnews.com/Infographic-SOS-Stop-Out-of-Control-Scienc…

It covers:

• The difference between GOOD science and DANGEROUS science.
• The critical importance of the Precautionary Principle.
• The five danger levels of science.
• The top 12 “scientific” projects now threatening the human race.
• Powerful solutions for stopping dangerous science and protecting humanity from “scientific suicide.”

You can also hear my interview about this S.O.S. graphic on the May 11, 2012 broadcast of the Robert Scott Bell Show at:
www.NaturalNewsRadio.com

Technology without wisdom is suicide

In this S.O.S. infographic, I state “Technology without wisdom is suicide.”

By that, I mean suicide for the entire human race. In our modern world, brilliant scientists have obtained remarkable technical mastery but operate as hopeless infants in the realm of philosophy, ethics and wisdom. (This is an apt description of Bill Gates in particular.) Today’s scientists who advocate GMOs, vaccines, nuclear power, bioweapons research and artificial intelligence are like little children with flamethrowers who lack the life experience and wider view needed to understand the long-term implications of their present-day actions.

Time and time again, the very brightest minds in the realm of “science” have proven themselves to be wildly inaccurate at anticipating the consequences of their experiments. When experiments went wrong in, say, the 1870′s, it only destroyed one laboratory or room; but when experiments go wrong in 2012 (and beyond), they have the capability of destroying life as we know it on our planet.

See today’s 12 most dangerous “scientific” technologies at:
http://SOS.naturalnews.com

Examples of catastrophic science failures and crimes against humanity

• Throughout the Nazi-led mass extermination of the Jewish people in World War II, IBM’s top computer scientists provided key technologies that allowed Hitler’s minions to more “efficiently” exterminate prisoners and organize work camps.

• The widespread use of antibiotics in hospitals and animal feed has been such a total failure that recently the World Health Organization declared our world has entered a “post-antibiotics era” where antibiotics are on the verge of being rendered totally useless.

Just weeks ago, WHO famously pronounced, “the end of modern medicine as we know it.” (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9147414/Resistance-to-an…)

This is essentially admitting the total failure of science and all its synthetic, patented chemicals for treating infections. “The era of antibiotics is coming to a close,” wrote The Guardian. “In just a couple of generations, what once appeared to be miracle medicines have been beaten into ineffectiveness by the bacteria they were designed to knock out. Once, scientists hailed the end of infectious diseases. Now, the post-antibiotic apocalypse is within sight.”

(And yet, astonishingly, even in the face of the complete failure of antibiotic drugs, the entire scientific community outright dismisses the powerful bacteria-killing properties of natural substances such as colloidal silver, honey and garlic.)

• The entire history of polio vaccines is one of blatant scientific fraud and misrepresentation: The vaccines were originally contaminated with “stealth” cancer viruses such as SV40, and today’s polio vaccines actually cause paralysis in children (http://www.naturalnews.com/035627_polio_vaccines_paralysis_India.html).

Many polio vaccines don’t even work to stop polio! In Pakistan, 78 percent of children who contracted polio were found to have already been vaccinated against polio. (http://www.naturalnews.com/032587_polio_vaccines_Pakistan.html)

• In 2003, NASA scientists miscalculated mission profile data and caused a MARS orbiter to crash into the red planet. While this did not threaten Earth in any way, it almost certainly contaminated Mars with Earth-based bacteria and DNA fragments. (http://www.naturalnews.com/021452.html) This is just one example of how careless scientists on Earth are already contaminating our solar system and potentially threatening microbial life that may already exist on other planets. In hospitals, doctors fail to wash their hands. In space, NASA fails to fully sterilize its landing craft. It’s the same problem, just on a planetary scale.

• In the last decade, the so-called “scientific” engineering of seeds has resulted in the unleashing of self-replicating genetic pollution across the world known as “GMOs.” Genetically engineered seeds self-replicate in ways that cannot be anticipated by human scientists, and once GMOs are unleashed onto the world, they can never be recalled. Today in 2012, we are all living in a grand genetic engineering experiment that we must simply hope and pray doesn’t somehow go wrong…

Already, the widespread use of GMOs is causing widespread crop failure and the rise of herbicide-resistant superweeds. Farmers around the world are committing suicides in record numbers after suffering crop failures from planting GMOs. (http://www.naturalnews.com/030913_Monsanto_suicides.html)

• Famed physicist Stephen Hawking has wildly discredited the scientific community with his claim that human beings are “biological machines” with no consciousness, no free will, no spirit, no soul and no mind. In his own words:

“It is hard to imagine how free will can operate if our behavior is determined by physical law, so it seems that we are no more than biological machines and that free will is just an illusion.” – Stephen Hawking, the Grand Design

This bizarre, anti-humanistic view of reality runs deep in the scientific community, providing the ambiguous philosophical foundation that justifies the mass murder of people, babies, ecosystems or even entire worlds. If free will is nothing more than an illusion, then you aren’t responsible for your own actions, so committing mass murder carries no moral meaning or karmic consequence. Killing babies is of no consequence, either, which likely explains why cruel medical experiments on children are routinely carried out in the name of science.

For the record, Jonas Salk, the creator of the polio vaccine, conducted inhumane medical experiments on insane asylum prisoners in Michigan. (http://www.naturalnews.com/031564_Jonas_Salk_medical_experiments.html) Such rampant criminality is typical of those engaged in “scientific” pursuits, who routinely justify their torture and murder with the belief that it will “advance scientific knowledge.”

Such rationalizations, of course, are little more than convenient cover stories for the real agenda: The advancement of corporate profits and power at any cost to humanity.

• Today’s pharmaceutical industry is a direct offshoot of the Nazi Germany regime. Bayer, for example, is one of the three companies created from the forced break-up of IG Farben, which was found guilty of engaging in crimes against humanity throughout the Nazi Regime. Bayer’s chairperson, Fritz ter Meer, was found guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity. After serving time in prison as a war criminal, he returned to work at Bayer where he served as Chairman for more than 10 years, until 1961! (http://www.naturalnews.com/024534_Europe_health_WHO.html)

To this day, the top positions at “scientific” organizations such as drug giants, the FDA and the CDC are filled by people with professional and familial ties to convicted war criminals and admitted eugenicists. Many of the top “scientists” at universities and research institutions openly believe in the mass killing of human beings in order to reduce population and thereby “save the planet.”

• The “fluoride” dumped into municipal water supplies across the world has been exhaustively exposed as a neurotoxic chemical concoction containing heavy metals, radioactive elements and industrial waste chemicals, yet it remains heavily pushed by “scientific” doctors and dentists. In their advocacy of mass fluoridation of the public, they only discredit their own reputations and show themselves to be wildly ignorant of fundamental principles of medical safety and patient choice.

Careless science now threatens our very survival as a species

There are seemingly countless other examples of crimes and catastrophes that have been carried out in the name of “science.” While real, authentic science is a benefit to humanity, the kind of corporate-dominated, profit-centered fraudulent science practiced today in the false name of science actually threatens the very existence of humankind.

Spread the word. Share the following URL and send an S.O.S. to help protect the future of the human race:
http://SOS.naturalnews.com

Source: Natural News

Related posts:

1. Ventura County on raw milk rampage: After destroying Rawesome, other raw milk operations now targeted – Mike Adams
2. Europeans warned to avoid drinking milk or eating vegetables due to high radiation levels – Mike Adams
3. U.S. Senator sounds alarm about ‘precarious’ Fukushima situation, warns of imminent release of radiation – Mike Adams

Related posts:

1. Keiser Report: Vampire Banker Hunter
2. Keiser Report: Spiral of debt towards the paranormal
3. Keiser Report: Überdebten

Related posts:

1. Abby Martin on RT: Two Year Anniversary of BP Oil Spill
2. GOP candidates dumbing down America? – Abby Martin
3. Continued Nuclear Arms Race and Nuclear Testing at Lawrence Livermore Lab – Abby Martin

Related posts:

1. Blogger Who Exposed TSA Files More Lawsuits Against Agency
2. Abby Martin on RT TV – TSA: Stripping Away Our Freedoms
3. Abby Martin Interview with Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds

Related posts:

1. Gerald Celente – Tommy Schnurmacher – December 1st, 2011
2. Gerald Celente RT America – April 3rd 2012
3. Gerald Celente – The Corbett Report – April 27th, 2012

Related posts:

1. Marco Rubio’s Liberal Foreign Policy
2. Gundersen: Cesium-134 and -137 detected in Southern California pollen sample
3. ObamaCare and the Imaginary Constitution

Related posts:

1. Down The Rabbit Hole with Popeye – The OKC Bombing Revisited
2. Down The Rabbit Hole with Popeye – What Is The Agenda?
3. Down The Rabbit Hole with Popeye – Kal Molinet, Air Force Veteran Who Burned His Uniform

See Also: Popeye on Free Mind Report w/ James Lane & Holland Vandennieuwenhof (04-23-2012)

No related posts.

To read his article on Fukushima, which was published last year only weeks after the Fukushima disaster began, go here:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/03/28/from-hiroshima-to-fukushima-1945-2011/

To read his articles on election fraud, see these links:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/04/05/fixing-elections-through-fraud/

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/05/08/election-fraud-media-deception-and-th…

Related posts:

1. Fukushima Threatens The Continuation of Life as We Know It
2. Fukushima Radiation News 1-26-12
3. Fukushima Radiation News 4-20-12

Sadly, a lot of mainstream news reports are not even using the word “derivatives” when they discuss what just happened at JP Morgan.  This morning I listened carefully as one reporter described the 2 billion dollar loss as simply a “bad bet”.

And perhaps that is easier for the American people to understand.  JP Morgan made a series of really bad bets and during a conference call last night CEO Jamie Dimon admitted that the strategy was “flawed, complex, poorly reviewed, poorly executed and poorly monitored”.

The funny thing is that JP Morgan is considered to be much more “risk averse” than most other major Wall Street financial institutions are.

So if this kind of stuff is happening at JP Morgan, then what in the world is going on at some of these other places?

That is a really good question.

For those interested in the technical details of the 2 billion dollar loss, an article posted on CNBC described exactly how this loss happened….

The failed hedge likely involved a bet on the flattening of a credit derivative curve, part of the CDX family of investment grade credit indices, said two sources with knowledge of the industry, but not directly involved in the matter. JPMorgan was then caught by sharp moves at the long end of the bet, they said. The CDX index gives traders exposure to credit risk across a range of assets, and gets its value from a basket of individual credit derivatives.

In essence, JP Morgan made a series of bets which turned out very, very badly.  This loss was so huge that it even caused members of Congress to take note.  The following is from a statement that U.S. Senator Carl Levin issued a few hours after this news first broke….

“The enormous loss JPMorgan announced today is just the latest evidence that what banks call ‘hedges’ are often risky bets that so-called ‘too big to fail’ banks have no business making.”

Unfortunately, the losses from this trade may not be over yet.  In fact, if things go very, very badly the losses could end up being much larger as a recent Zero Hedge article detailed….

Simple: because it knew with 100% certainty that if things turn out very, very badly, that the taxpayer, via the Fed, would come to its rescue. Luckily, things turned out only 80% bad. Although it is not over yet: if credit spreads soar, assuming at $200 million DV01, and a 100 bps move, JPM could suffer a $20 billion loss when all is said and done. But hey: at least “net” is not “gross” and we know, just know, that the SEC will get involved and make sure something like this never happens again.

And yes, the SEC has announced an “investigation” into this 2 billion dollar loss.  But we all know that the SEC is basically useless.  In recent years SEC employees have become known more for watching pornography in their Washington D.C. offices than for regulating Wall Street.

But what has become abundantly clear is that Wall Street is completely incapable of policing itself.  This point was underscored in a recent commentary by Henry Blodget of Business Insider….

Wall Street can’t be trusted to manage—or even correctly assess—its own risks.

This is in part because, time and again, Wall Street has demonstrated that it doesn’t even KNOW what risks it is taking.

In short, Wall Street bankers are just a bunch of kids playing with dynamite.

There are two reasons for this, neither of which boil down to “stupidity.”

• The first reason is that the gambling instruments the banks now use are mind-bogglingly complicated. Warren Buffett once described derivatives as “weapons of mass destruction.” And those weapons have gotten a lot more complex in the past few years.

• The second reason is that Wall Street’s incentive structure is fundamentally flawed:Bankers get all of the upside for winning bets, and someone else—the government or shareholders—covers the downside.

The second reason is particularly insidious. The worst thing that can happen to a trader who blows a huge bet and demolishes his firm—literally the worst thing—is that he will get fired. Then he will immediately go get a job at a hedge fund and make more than he was making before he blew up the firm.

We never learned one of the basic lessons that we should have learned from the financial crisis of 2008.

Wall Street bankers take huge risks because the risk/reward ratio is all messed up.

If the bankers make huge bets and they win, then they win big.

If the bankers make huge bets and they lose, then the federal government uses taxpayer money to clean up the mess.

Under those kind of conditions, why not bet the farm?

Sadly, most Americans do not even know what derivatives are.

Most Americans have no idea that we are rapidly approaching a horrific derivatives crisis that is going to make 2008 look like a Sunday picnic.

According to the Comptroller of the Currency, the “too big to fail” banks have exposure to derivatives that is absolutely mind blowing.  Just check out the following numbers from an official U.S. government report….

JPMorgan Chase – $70.1 Trillion

Citibank – $52.1 Trillion

Bank of America – $50.1 Trillion

Goldman Sachs – $44.2 Trillion

So a 2 billion dollar loss for JP Morgan is nothing compared to their total exposure of over 70 trillion dollars.

Overall, the 9 largest U.S. banks have a total of more than 200 trillion dollars of exposure to derivatives.  That is approximately 3 times the size of the entire global economy.

It is hard for the average person on the street to begin to comprehend how immense this derivatives bubble is.

So let’s not make too much out of this 2 billion dollar loss by JP Morgan.

This is just chicken feed.

This is just a preview of coming attractions.

Soon enough the real problems with derivatives will begin, and when that happens it will shake the entire global financial system to the core.

Source: The Economic Collapse

Related posts:

1. The Mother Of All Infographics: Visualizing America’s Derivatives Universe
2. Corzine Ordered $200M Moved to JP Morgan Days Before MF Global Collapse
3. Making Money On Poverty: JP Morgan Makes Bigger Profits When The Number Of Americans On Food Stamps Goes Up