Thursday, 30 July 2009

Beware of the enemy within - Police state USA - Napolitanism :

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df8uH9CE5GQ&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eprisonplanet%2Ecom%2Fnapolitano%2Dreports%2Dto%2Dcfr%2Don%2Dstasi%2Dsnoop%2Dnetwork%2Ehtml&feature=player_embedded

US Democrat BullDyke Janet Napolitano instigates a Stasi like network of informers comprised of citzens.

I found that her voices grates after a while.

She is reporting to her *bosses* in the CFR and is reading a script written by them.

Why is drug trafficking a concern for her when that is the job of the DEA and the FBI ?

Why is it necessary to have travelled 30,000 miles around the planet to discuss internal security ?



The Department of Homeland Security which was set up by the GWBush administration is a Gestapo/Stasi like organisation that is mostly staffed by all the rejects from the CIA and the FBI and the ATF etc.She is trying to link up all of these agencies in an attempt to share their information freely with each other but no doubt the DHS wants to be the organisation that is central to all of them and ultimately make them all answerable to the DHS.She wants to centralise all intelligence agencies into one federal govt organisation.

The DHS is the political intelligence dept of the Federal US Govt.

The Enemy Within as it were justifies the existence of the DHS.

They hate the internet which is why she talks about "Networking" yet anyone with any awareness as to what is going on is never going to transmit sensitive information electronically anyway much less post it on the internet.

They are fighting a losing battle because they admit that they dont know what is going on which is why they are asking for help.

The term "homeland" sounds fascist or Nazi-like to me and she also pays lip service to Sovereignty when she is actually trying to destroy it.

An organisation is only as effective as those who work in it.

This is a key characteristic of a police state which involves intelligence gathering,agent provocateurs,wiretapping of,spying of,persecution,discrediting and the hunting down and silencing of political dissidents that oppose the regime that they are living under.

You are in a police state when the police are answerable to the executives in govt or when they become politicised so that there duty is to protect the interests of the state and maintain its political power.You can be sure that her bosses in the CFR who are economic,social and political terrorists wont be under any scrutiny from the DHS or be arrested by agents of the DHS.

They are not after criminals because if you see criminal activity take place or know of criminal activity you report it to the police.

According to official figures 7.7 percent of the population in East Germany were active informants of the Stasi but in this particular economic climate in the US hte DHS will probably be able to recruit a far higher percentage than that as financial incentives will be offered to recruit potential snitches and snoops plus there is no shortage of unpatriotic Liberals .I dont think coercion will be needed .Most of them are so stupid that they will do it for free pizza or Govt food stamps.


This is the individual who decided that it wasnt necessary to quarantine anyone arriving into the US form Mexico where the H1N1 virus allegedly originated from.

She is out to federalise all law enforcement down to local level and by federalise i mean that they will be controlled and answerable to an unconstitutional - illegal Govt.

In a way this speech is an open admission that there is a threat to the unconstitutional Federal Govt from within and i know only too well what she is talking about here and she openly admits that she is not concerned with border control.

We already have this in the UK already of course and like i said before in a police state most of the action takes place undercover with intelligence gathering and this is why the current UK government is obsessed with the collectioon and storage of information on databases not to mention the most intensive surveillance culture in the world.

Bullshit UK Food Standard Agency research conclusion :



Bullshit FSA biased industry led study report that pimps for intensive farming and big agriculture.

Article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/5932100/Organic-food-has-no-added-nutritional-benefit-says-Food-Standards-Agency.html




Dont eat clean organic food and eat chemical laced/GMO instead as its just as good for you and a lot cheaper too !!

It was only a matter of time before the resurgance of organic farming and small scale farming and farmers markets started to be attacked.

Dig for Victory !!


Its actually quite interesting how the Govts of the UK/US do so very little to support and promote organic and small scale farming and are attacking it instead.Its curious how it doesnt seem to fit into the UK/US Govts enviromental policies and how in the US it is going to be virtually criminalised because of various regulations and legislation.Its interesting how there is such an incestious relationship between the UK/US Govt [the FSA/FDA] and Monsanto.

Fascism = the merger of state and corporation.

How am i not expected to see right through this hypocrisy and how can i be expected to take the Govt seriously when it talks about AGW when its FSA blatantly ignores and is biased against organic farming ?

Another article :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1203343/JOANNA-BLYTHMAN-A-cancerous-conspiracy-poison-faith-organic-food.html

Tuesday, 28 July 2009

Banned EU poster :



Its loaded with esoteric and religious symbolism and is based on the Peter Brueghel the elder painting from 1563.

The reversed Pentagrams should be obvious to anyone.

There were only 11 member states when this poster was designed.

In the poster the tower is under construction which is meant to represent the present Louise weiss building in Strasburg France as a continuation of the work of Nimrod who was building the original Tower Of Babel to defy God.

I just read an article all about that aspect of it but beyond an explanation of the original story and the apparent esoteric beliefs of the elites and the Babylonian Euro
Trash who are behind the EU represented in the LW building and the poster i found myself scrolling down the page without really reading much of it as i just cant accomadate any of it in my mind and it does my head in.I prefer to leave religious discussion to others and i have got enough on my plate as it is anyway.


I couldnt help but notice the ridiculous and absurd looking Lego type people with square heads who are probably meant to meant to represent Europroles and the soviet style figure in the middle with its hammer thats meant to represent a happy and industrious prole working for the collective good in some future Tyrannical collective dystopia.

Its slightly offensive i find.

Just remember that there is always a plus side and a negative side like Yin and Yang and i always find that the philosophy that says that the EU will end conflict in the region is overstated to say the least .

I have seen footage shot outside the Berlaymont building in Brussels of a protest being broken up and quelled eastern european/soviet style and its not a pretty sight but the EEUSSR doesnt respect democracy and Freedom of expression so i wasnt surprised.

Welcome to the post-democratic era.

Intelligence Vs Stupidity and Ignorance:

Stupidity:

http://wonkette.com/410022/whoa-hey-the-freerepublic-website-is-overthrowing-the-us-government.

Wonkette is a Liberal slanted satirical and gossip orientated political blog .

Apparently.

I have visited this blog from time to time and i cant say that i have ever found any evidence of satire.What i have found is that the entire blog has a juvenile and adolescent and pureile sub-standard content and style of writing that one cannot be expected to take seriously.Those that do take it seriously enough to comment on its articles seem to be a perfect example of the kind of shallow fucktarded individuals that are in my opinion irredeemably stupid.Read the quality and the insight and inaneity in the comments section of the article in the link above to see for yourself.

I chose this website as a typical example.

Reading these comments does actully make me quite angry inside not just because of what they do say but more like what they dont.

I dont hate these people but i despise them and i despise them for their stupidity and ignorance and NOT for their political views per se even though they themselves are highly suspect.Ignorance and politics are a very volatile mix.Ignorant proles are usually what enables questionable and corrupt regimes to take over and cause havoc.

The more i read of those comments the more i realise that there is some kind of evidence of either a kind of dumbing down process that these individuals have been affected by or that it is some kind of unspecified mental condition because it is not just the apparent stupidity but an apparent blindness that they have to what is going on around them that seems almost wilful.

Its like their minds have been taken over or are under the influence of something unspecified.

Of course i dont like all of their political views but there is a far bigger problem going on here that is way beyond my own petty indulgences.Its far more important than that and it is of the upmost importance.These idiots are far more interested in celebrity culture and Sarah Palin and that is the greatest tragedy here.

Anyone who supports Infanticide is unfit for political office and they know who they are.

Note the use of the childish term of description "Freepers" used here by the Obamatons in the comments section of the articles.

These people are so stupid thay actually make me feel slightly sick in the stomach.



Intelligence :

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2295624/posts

[proof of intelligence]


What is going on here is a nation that is thoroughly divided down the middle and its going to get nasty unless it is resolved.This is because the constitution of the US is being attacked and undermined by the administration of the current incumbent of the White House.Its fair to point out at this stage that this has been an ongoing systematic process and the GWBush adminstration were just as guilty of the same thing with the Patriot act etc.Its also fair to say that the Patriot Act was widely supported by Republicans and that the Republicans were reacting to the events of 9/11 which as anyone with any reasonable intelligence will realise was a dialectic.Republicans or anyone who supported the actions of the Bush adminstration were led to believe that they were acting in the best interests of their nation when it appeared outwardly that their nation was under attack by Islamic fundamentalists.

In a sense they supported unpatriotic legislation like the Patriot act out of patriotism and extrenuating circumstances.This expains and kills any argument by Libs that Republicans are or were hypocrites.

In any case the Patriot Act was already written in advance and was imposed on the people and was not subject to the usual democratic processes and debate because it itself was a reaction to 9/11 and was the result of extrenuating circumstances.

If they had opoosed or protested against it it would not have made any difference.

That ends that argument.

With a dialectic the end always justifies the means.

I am absolutely without a shadow of any doubt whatsoever convinced that the US has been subject to a hostile takeover by a foreign power base that has a Globalist agenda .This started with the BushCon administration and has culminated with the Obama administration.The GWBush administration was indeed a Fascist govt and the Obama administration is to all intents and purposes exactly the same thing and is a deception and a Trojan Horse.Both administrations while outwardly appearing to continue the same Left/Right dialectic ultimately represent the same interests in the bigger picture.

What is happening now is there is a deliberate and systematic attempt to divide the US.The means to do this or the cause of the division in the US is the outwardly anti - US Constitution Obama adminstration and its publicly stated intent to rewrite it or remodel it.

It is becoming very very blatant.

This is a Dialectic and it achieves 3 main goals:

One is division which in turn if left unchecked will result in another civil war in the US.Definately possible.

Destabilised country + civil unrest = an easy takeover and suspension of all democratic processes.

The second is removing the obstacle that is the US Constitution because it is detrimental to those who wish to remake and remodel the US to assimilate the US into its place in the Globalist agenda as it has now been taken over by anti - American globalist interests rather like the UK.

The third is that the US constitution offers far too much protection for the patriotic US citzen in its legalities and prohibits and forbids the growth of federal govt and its innate tendency to not act in your best interests but to act in its own interests and abuse its given powers.Very important word is given.

The US constitution is a frame work of law that has supremacy over any legislature that is the legal framework of the US as a constitutional republic.

The US is a Federal superstate that works under and is bound by the US Constitution.

Someone recently said to me that the US is moving towards Federalism.That is correct in a way because the constitution is being undermined and if it is removed then you might as well be in the EUSSR or the former Soviet Union.

The US constitution is the common law or law of the land and ultimately no one can be immune to it or circumvent it or remove it.It is sacrosanct if you like.It is the principle as a whole that a nation was founded on.

It is a system of checks and balances put into place to protect you from takeovers by hostile govts foreign or domestic and in this particular case its both.

If the US Constitution is not protected then they will find themselves living under a Totalitarian Unilateral globalist/UN legal framework with no checks and balances.

That is the nightmare scenario.


What is the tragedy here is that you would think that the US Constitution would be something that both sides of the political fence could have a common interest in preserving and could unite over despite differences.Thats not to mention that any govt is sworn into office on the basis that they uphold and preserve and defend its principles.

This is sadly not the case.

Ultimately though anyone who acts in contradiction of the US constitution or supports an adminstration that violates it is by default a traitor and is potentially liable to be dealt with using extreme prejudice.

Thats how these problems are usually solved and thats what the law of the land dictates.

Exactly the same goes for the UK as it is a Constitutional Monarchy.

This has nothing to do with the far right and nationalists or any other kind of extreme politics as anyone on the right side of this has no time for Racism or anything else like that that has no place in its political outlook.I have been on lots of forums regarding this subject and the racists and extremists etc are usually in the minority given all of the comments posted that i have read.Also a lot of the extreme comments that i have read are quite often from trolls.

There is one forum i visit where the US National Socialist Party continually post a link to their website plus various comments that invite or implore you to join them.

Its always the same as whenever there is civil unrest or the political system is unstable you always get a sudden proliferation of various types of political extremists both left and right and all the worst examples of humanity and political garbage and the lunatic fringe all wanting a piece of the action.

Humans are a fucking liability when you look at the state of things today but i refuse to become nihilistic about it.



I just hope that if the worst happens justice will prevail but there is no guarantee of that anymore.

As much as despised the GWBush administration this latest administration is far more sinister and potentially hostile and unpleasent than they were.Personally i get a very bad feeling about them that is partly gut instinct and partly out of what i know and partly the logical conclusion of it all.Its easy to see where all this going.

Outwardly those in power are in opposition when behind the scenes they are all in on it together.Elections [depending on the choice of candidates of course] are just a front that are meant to con you into believing that voting changes things.

Monday, 20 July 2009

Henry Paulsons conflict of interest :


Video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MH_oz9f1E4&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eprisonplanet%2Ecom%2Fstearns%2Dcrucifies%2Dpaulson%2Don%2Dbailout%2Dbait%2Dand%2Dswitch%2Ehtml&feature=player_embedded

Another FED criminal folding under questioning because of the stress that he is under because he is lying and you dont need a lie detector to see that.

This is the individual who threatened the US with economic terrorism last fall if the bailouts were not approved by threatening the US with martial law.

Financial terrorist.

Ugly offensive creepy creature.


Guilty of taking money off taxpayers that was given under good faith and trust that has been systematically abused.

Take the money and run.Not enough accountability.

No tax paid on the profit made from selling 200 million USD worth of shares from Goldman Sachs.

He should have been arrested on the spot and interrogated and when he is interrogated he wont last long and he will rat on all his Bankster friends as well and expose more of the fraud and criminality that has been going on within the FED and other criminal organisations like Goldman Sachs.

It doesnt matter to individuals like this that others are losing their homes when this POS was given the money to secure their homes against foreclosure.


Corruption.

In china 10 percent of the population hold roughly 90 percent of the wealth.

In the US 1 to 3 percent of the population hold 90 percent of the wealth .

Its the reason why Communism and Marxism fails and its the reason why Capitalism in its present incarnation is failing.

The whole political structure here and in the US is one massive conflict of interest with one of the conflicting interests being more important than the other.

The true figure of Bailouts since 2007 amounts to 23.7 Trillion USD.

Every US citzen has a tax bill of 80,000 USD.

Its all virtual FED Mickey Mouse money that never existed in the first place anyway so the IRS tax invoice should be re-adjusted to 0 and sent back .



Simple really.

Sunday, 19 July 2009

Senator Joe Lieberman gets a word of warning from an anonymous US Patriot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjKF5i7Kyb8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Edavidicke%2Ecom%2Fcontent%2Fblogcategory%2F30%2F48%2F&feature=player_embedded

Walter Kronkite :



Walter Kronkite was allegedly the voice in the Bohemian Grove Cremation Of Care ritual in this videoclip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_onaTs3uDeA

Walter Kronkite announces death of Martin Luther King :


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUJkSVLwM3A

[Racism in the US at that point in time is demonstrated then by the use of the term "Negro" in the newsclip.]

The failure of Capitalism:

The reason for this so called failure of capitalism is very simple and its not the fault of Capitalism itself.

If you say it does then you dont understand the bigger picture.

It the end product of a corrupt political system and an elite of Criminal bankster Mafioso who own and control the financial system and investment and money markets.i am of the mind that the current financial crisis was planned and prepared for from the outset by the aforementioned Bankster Mafioso to reach a preconceived outcome which is what we have now.

The money markets and derivatives markets are artificially inflated and deflated and interest rates are artificially low,the financial system has been de-regulated OR has been allowed to be self regulate allowing every possible criminal activity to take place within it not to mention fraudulent and toxic financial products and debt leverage and unprecedented borrowing.

Its a debt based economy and if there is no borrowing then it collapses.

If you want to blame something else in addition to that then blame the ideology of Globalism.

Do your research into that .Read books or go online and read up on it.You could also try looking around yourself to see the evidence that is all around you .

For example the Federal Reserve now holds and controls 96 percent of bank reserves of banks that were recently bailed out using funds that were produced out of nothing by the FED and allocated to Govt bailout plans that are charged to taxpayers.

The Fed give loans to govt to bail out failing institutions and the govt in turn charges YOU the taxpayer for this while at the same time ownership of these institutions is transferred over to the FED because the FED prints the money and the govt is the middleman who just handles the transaction because that is what it is.Its a transaction and its a transfer of ownership .

Ignore all that Crap about about you the taxpayer now owning a stake in these state owned institutions with which you earn a dividend or return on your investment because its fucking bullshit.You will not see a penny in return for your investment of tax dollar or pound because these institutions are now in private hands.

This has to be the case because the FED and the BOE are privately owned institutions.

Get It ??

Its transfer of ownership except you have been charged for it yet it has not cost the FED a cent or at most the cost of printing the hypothetical virtual money that never existed in the first place.

They win and you lose.


Before certain individuals tell me that i dont know what i am talking about they ought to educate themselves insted of parroting "Its the end of Capitalism !" while clutching their copies of Das Kapital and start to understand *exactly* why the financial system of unregulated or self regulating free market Capitalism *within* the banking/investment sector which has in turn affected the outside marketplace.

Spare your explanations about definitions of Socialism for the next SWP meeting no matter how correct they may be because they do not address the problem that is at hand.

Its Capitalism that puts food on your table ultimately wether its state controlled or privatised because its self defeating to argue against it and goes nowhere.

Refine your argument .

Be more specific.

Start talking about the issues i am talking about here.If you want to bash the rich start bashing international banking cartels and corporate elitists.Start bashing your corrupt self serving non representative representatives who kow to tow to big money and who have collectivly sold you all out in return for a Buck.

Politicians for hire.

Politicians for hire to the highest bidder.

Career Politicians who take bribes who are of weak moral fibre who collectivly did nothing or allowed you and i to completely fucked over by Corporate/financial elitists.

Corruption.

Politicians who have aided and abbetted criminals which makes them criminals themselves.

Dont bash me as i am trying to help but to a certain extent i can forgive because the stupid and uneducated know not what they do.

You might or do have a much better understanding of it in academia or textbook [theory] level than i do but you seem to have little or no understanding of current events or the practical.

Cause and effect.

Understand and be very clear that this is not indicative of a failure of Capitalism as a whole but that it has happened because of the mismangement of the financial sector by Govt who failed in their duty to act in our collective best interests and sold us out.

Wall St has been bailed out at the expense of Main St.

Its quite simple.

Corruption has destabilised Capitalism but it hasnt killed it because its not going away wether you like it or not.

Its not the end result of a failed ideology like Communism/Marxism/Socialism or Fascism.

You could also say that these ideologies also failed because of corruption and greed and the actions of mentally ill psychopathic Tyrants and their regime.That is a subject that is open to debate but ultimately they are all flawed and will never succeed.

Nazism or Communism should not be allowed to succeed under any circumstance.

Socialism could easily work with Capitalism in principle.Like i said before there needs to be a fairer system of taxation that involves taxing the super rich to make them pay into and contribute to the system that makes them rich.The problem is is that socialists have no economic sense and think that they can spend and borrow their way out of anything.Its like letting children run the treasury.

There is proof of this with New Liebour monumental mismangement of the economy that has very nearly bankrupted the UK.

We used to live in a meritocracy that was controlled by Oligarchs but now that has changed into a Kleptocracy and when you live in a Kleptocracy you will find that you also live in a Thugocracy with a fake Democracy.

I feel we are heading towards or are already witnessing the beginning of Totalitarianism and another ugly chapter in human history as we see the golden age of freedom and representative democracy under a Capitalist system fast coming to an end if it hasnt done so already.

Do you see anything *changing* within the banking sector because i dont .

However this is in the short term but bear in mind you might be seeing some changes by the end of Sept with a collapse of the US economy that has been widely predicted by many respected individuals.

The economy in the UK and the US is a fake economy that is based on credit and debt and a service industry with very little or no manufacturing base as it has all been moved overseas because of GLOBALISM Get it ?

Globalism moves poverty and economic prosperity around to different places and it the end the only winners are big money men,politicians and big business.

You personally and everyone else gains very little apart from cheaper bits of consumer crap that you buy in shops.

Its about centralisation and consolidation of economic and political power over into the hands of a criminal Corporate/Financial Elite Stupid.

Its all about transfer of ownership to Banksters the same as it is in every depression or downturn.


Educate yourself.

Work it out for yourself.

If you cant work it out and dont understand what is happening then you are talking about something that is way over your head.


Just spare me the student level politics .

Saturday, 18 July 2009

EUSSR:



Totalitarianism '2009 !


Central planning you can trust.

Communism - Socialism - Marxism = Failure and Bankruptcy.

Always has and always will.

That which attempts to unite ultimately divides.

Balkanisation is a tactic of divide and rule commonly used and practised by Hard Left Govts.

Greetings Political Dissidents...

Heres one interesting opinion and outline of the origins of the EU:

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:d35wCYk70psJ:www.unitypublishing.com/Government/EUSSR-US2.htm+EUSSR+the+soviet+roots+of+european+integration.&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a

Another interesting article :

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:ttB2oJDkfYwJ:findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_6_57/ai_n27867968/+EUSSR+the+soviet+roots+of+european+integration.&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a


Heres a review of a book that is essential reading if you are concerned about the rise of the United Federal EUSSR [I cant find an online transcript unfortunately] :EUSSR:The Soviet Roots of European Integration
Vladimir Bukovsky and Pavel Stroilov,Sovereignty Publications,2005,pp 44,ISBN 0 9540231 1 0,£4.95 [available from Amazon]
Reviewed by Oliver Crawley
"E
USSR is not a definitive appraisal of EU
policy towards Russia, nor is it an
examination of the potential success a
Moscow application to join the EU may be,
both of which are perfectly reasonable
prophecies given the title. It is, on the other
hand, a collection of thought provoking
chapters looking at,in albeit skeletal fashion
in 44-pages,the similarities between the EU
and the USSR.
Bukovsky and Stroilov are both informed
and persuasive in their arguments. They
sway one into thinking European socialism
imposed by covert methods is the end goal
of the committed Europhile. Naturally, as
the title suggests, each point is then
paralleled with similar goings on in the
former USSR. The monstrous Constitution
or grossbuch (big book) is considered as
unintelligible and as lengthy as Karl Marx’s
Das Kapital. This particular comparison
seems to have thrown the authors into a
rant:“whydon’t they say,here is a roadmap to
the European Union of the Soviet Socialist
Republics,” they muse.
Indeed, if Euro-bashing is your vocation,
then this pamphlet may serve up further
ammunition to fire at the various European
institutions, from a perspective that is far
from the reported mainstream arguments
surrounding sovereignty and account-
ability. There are some interesting parallels
drawn between the break-up of the Soviet
Union, due to the suppression of ethnicity,
nationality, tradition and even prejudice,
and the potential fate of a more deeply
integrated European Union. One needs to
only look at the fallout arising from Turkey’s
application to the predominately Christian
and Caucasian club to understand what the
authors are talking about.
Furthermore, some of the resemblances
are undeniable. For example, one of the
heaviest criticisms levelled on the Soviet
system was that its citizens could not enjoy
basic human rights,such as the right to elect
by direct ballot those who govern us. The
authors equate this to the phenomenon
whereby “we do not elect those People’s
Commissars who govern the EU.” The
“sinister” Europol is also attacked, with its
European Arrest Warrant, its diplomatic
immunity and the “power to prosecute the
ill-defined ‘crimes’ of ‘racism’ and ‘xeno-
phobia’”. The authors speculate as to how
many former East German Stasi officers will
end up working there: “judging by the
example of the latest Commission, which has
seven former communist apparatchiks out of
25 Commissioners, we might have up to one-
third of them!”
Although light-hearted in parts, I found
myself often won over by the constant
comparisons with the darker forces behind
the USSR. Has there been a KGB style
‘enforcement’ agency covertly operating
from Brussels tasked with weeding out non-
believers? It is also suggested that the Left
had failed in their many years of struggle for
entitled consumers.TheAmerican Dream is
a dying concept; this type of selfishness is
unsustainable in this new age of global-
isation. The European Dream is a much
more accurate portrayal of the new world
order, one that is “focused not on amassing
wealth but, rather, on elevating the human
spirit.”If this were true,why then is the most
successful project within the European
Union – the euro – focused on wealth
accumulation? Yes, war-weary politicians
came together at the end of the Second
World War to create a continent of peace,
but the tool of their successors was
monetary integration. Pooling financial
resources was a way to create inter-
dependence and to remain competitive in
the global economy, not to elevate the
human spirit.
Secondly, the glossy veneer painted over
the European Union does nothing to aid
mutual understanding on either side of the
Atlantic. “Twenty-five nations, representing
455 million people, have joined together to
create a ‘United States’ of Europe. Like the
United States of America, this vast political
entity has its own empowering myth.”
Undergraduate Political Science students
will be the first to tell you that comparing
Europe to the United States is a dangerous
exercise, fraught with false analogy. The
European project fails if you compare it to
any other single nation state, and its
strengths are usually overlooked. The EU
represents a strong economic union; its
political integration is far behind.One need
only look at a lagging Common Foreign &
Security Policy or the recent constitutional
crisis to note these shortcomings. Coping
with enlargement is also a concern for the
EU, a bloc that has yet to navigate its own
best practices, much less be able to export
them to remote regions of the world.
One of the largest misses for this reader
was the lacking role of political will in
Rifkin’s discussion.One of the key elements
of US political strength is its citizens’
undying belief that America and the
American Way are worth defending and
sharing.The United States realises that it is a
leader. Its isolationist tendencies do not
derive from intense belly button staring (for
which the EU is often accused), but rather
the weariness of shouldering many global
security burdens. Europe has yet to prove
that it has the political will to be a
superpower. Its economic sway is daunting,
no doubt. But its refusal to invest in
upgrading its military capabilities is only
one example of the reluctance of this
behemoth. Political will for a strong Europe
is weak. This may certainly change over
time, but the EU is certainly not currently
capable of being a counterweight to US
hegemony.
The old saying – there is more than one
way to skin a cat – highlights an important
point. The American Dream does not have
to be dying for the European Dream to be
thriving. These dreams are not mutually
exclusive. Further, there are a number of
European Dreams in Europe, a Belgian-in-
Europe Dream or a Tuscan-in-Europe
Dream.They all share a number of interests
and ideals,but none of them is more correct
than the other. I would even challenge Mr
Rifkin to walk down the streets of London
and then argue that the pace and intensity
of many offices is not more similar to his
American Dream. I’d venture that many
Europeans are living the American Dream
as I write, and that – albeit fewer –
Americans pursue European Dreams as
well. It is this type of complexity that is
underestimated in The European Dream.
For this reason,this terrific read must carry
with it a warning: filters on,please.
Elizabeth Oakes is a freelance journalist and
currently completing a Master of Arts in
Contemporary European Politics at the
University of Bath.
Page 26
25
June/July 2005
And Finally…
The European Journal
Jump to Contents
power
in
independent
European
countries. The only thing left to do, so the
authors’argument goes,was to try to seize
control over the whole of Europe at once,
and the EEC was the best instrument with
which to do this.
If there is to be a criticism of EUSSR,itis
that it almost leaves you with more
unanswered questions than it answers;but
what else can you expect from a 44-page A5
pamphlet? Expect to find arguments erred
at, but not overtly sounded, and ideas
muted, but never fully explored. This can
lead to a sense of frustration, as one’s
curiosities are not sated. If, however, you
allow yourself to be inspired to explore
these ideas through other media and
sources,then EUSSR may well be for you.
Oliver Crawley is an underwriter of profes-
sional indemnity insurance; his time is split
between Houston,TX and London."

Article that provides background info on Vladimir Bukovsky [co - author]:

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:I7-tmSrYqvsJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Bukovsky+vladimir+bukovsky&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a

Its also interesting to note that certain names are connected with the instigation of the EUSSR project .I wasnt in the least bit surprised to find out that a delegation of Trilateralists [Trilateral commission] like Kissinger,Gerard d'estaing,and David Rockefeller and other geopolitical mafia set up and attended a secret meeting in January 1989 with Mikhail Gorbachov to discuss and propose how the already collapsing Soviet Union was going to integrate with the west instead of being Isolationist and participate and co-operate with globalist organisations like the IMF and the UN which coincidentally are organisations that are partly controlled by Trilateralists like David Rockefeller.The roadmap to a federal EUSSR was predicting that the EUSSR would be in existence by 2004 was more or less correct butAs it is now it is 5 years late but there are only a few loose ends to tie up like *another* Irish referendum and one or 2 other stray nations that havent fully ratified their own treaties.

Not to mention the fact that Russia is unlikely to fully integrate into the EU and surrender its Sovereignty because it is clearly not in their interests to do so plus Russia is not in debt to the IMF.Russia has recovered form bankruptcy without borrowing cash from international bankers.Good for them.

Corruption is rife in the EU political system just as it was in the USSR.

The EU as it is right now IS a Trojan Horse and inside the horse is an awaiting EUSSR.

Because more or less everyone is too preoccupied with watching TV or playing games or chasing pussy or whatever they are all sleepwalking into Tyranny just like the US with the North American Union [NAU].

This might please various disaffected apparatchiks within the EU but there are others like myself who see this as a problem and who will either have to stop it before it happens which is hanging in the balance right now OR we will have to sit through a certain amount of time before its inevitable collapse.It will collapse because it is an abomination which is already out of control and also it does not have the will of the people behind it because if they had the opportunity they would reject it wholesale if only the respective Govts had the decency to put the Lisbon Treaty to the people and let them decide.You cant expect that to happen though when your Govt is full of pro EU Socialist Quislings and Useful Idiots.Traitors.

The EUSSR project is the vanity project of Globalists and Trilateralists.

Its all about control and domination Stupid.

The Majority of the Worker Ants dont realise this of course and they are not meant to either.

EUSSR = Failure and Bankruptcy.

THe EU has not had its books audited in 15 years.

Arrogant Greasball Barosso compares the EU to an Empire :

Watch :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2Ralocq9uE





Listen to and watch this video in 2 parts :


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoUJI07a6GI&feature=channel_page


Subversion and sowing the seeds of dissent has never felt so good.

Friday, 17 July 2009

Full transcript of Hilary Clintons CFR speech:

As i was not going to be outfoxed by the US State Department who i knew would cunningly remove or move ? Hilary Clintons CFR speech from their website/link i provided earlier i cut and pasted it to my desktop so i could reproduce it here :

7/15/09 - Question and Answer Session

Thank you very much, Richard, and I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.

Richard just gave what could be described as a mini version of my remarks in talking about the issues that confront us. But I look out at this audience filled with not only many friends and colleagues, but people who have served in prior administrations. And so there is never a time when the in-box is not full.

Shortly before I started at the State Department, a former Secretary of State called me with this advice: Don’t try to do too much. And it seemed like a wise admonition, if only it were possible. But the international agenda today is unforgiving: two wars, conflict in the Middle East, ongoing threats of violent extremism and nuclear proliferation, global recession, climate change, hunger and disease, and a widening gap between the rich and the poor. All of these challenges affect America’s security and prosperity, and they all threaten global stability and progress.

But they are not reason to despair about the future. The same forces that compound our problems – economic interdependence, open borders, and the speedy movement of information, capital, goods, services and people – are also part of the solution. And with more states facing common challenges, we have the chance, and a profound responsibility, to exercise American leadership to solve problems in concert with others. That is the heart of America’s mission in the world today.

Now, some see the rise of other nations and our economic troubles here at home as signs that American power has waned. Others simply don’t trust us to lead; they view America as an unaccountable power, too quick to impose its will at the expense of their interests and our principles. But they are wrong.

The question is not whether our nation can or should lead, but how it will lead in the 21st century. Rigid ideologies and old formulas don’t apply. We need a new mindset about how America will use its power to safeguard our nation, expand shared prosperity, and help more people in more places live up to their God-given potential.

President Obama has led us to think outside the usual boundaries. He has launched a new era of engagement based on common interests, shared values, and mutual respect. Going forward, capitalizing on America’s unique strengths, we must advance those interests through partnership, and promote universal values through the power of our example and the empowerment of people. In this way, we can forge the global consensus required to defeat the threats, manage the dangers, and seize the opportunities of the 21st century. America will always be a world leader as long as we remain true to our ideals and embrace strategies that match the times. So we will exercise American leadership to build partnerships and solve problems that no nation can solve on its own, and we will pursue policies to mobilize more partners and deliver results.

First, though, let me say that while the ideas that shape our foreign policy are critically important, this, for me, is not simply an intellectual exercise. For over 16 years, I’ve had the chance, the privilege, really, to represent our country overseas as First Lady, as a senator, and now as Secretary of State. I’ve seen the bellies of starving children, girls sold into human trafficking, men dying of treatable diseases, women denied the right to own property or vote, and young people without schooling or jobs gripped by a sense of futility about their futures.

I’ve also seen how hope, hard work, and ingenuity can overcome the longest of odds. And for almost 36 years, I have worked as an advocate for children, women and families here at home. I’ve traveled across our country listening to everyday concerns of our citizens. I’ve met parents struggling to keep their jobs, pay their mortgages, cover their children’s college tuitions, and afford healthcare.

And all that I have done and seen has convinced me that our foreign policy must produce results for people – the laid-off auto worker in Detroit whose future will depend on global economic recovery; the farmer or small business owner in the developing world whose lack of opportunity can drive political instability and economic stagnation; the families whose loved ones are risking their lives for our country in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere; children in every land who deserve a brighter future. These are the people – hundreds of millions of them here in America and billions around the world – whose lives and experiences, hopes and dreams, must inform the decisions we take and the actions that follow. And these are the people who inspire me and my colleagues and the work that we try to do every day.

In approaching our foreign policy priorities, we have to deal with the urgent, the important, and the long-term all at once. But even as we are forced to multi-task – a very gender-related term (laughter) – we must have priorities, which President Obama has outlined in speeches from Prague to Cairo, from Moscow to Accra. We want to reverse the spread of nuclear weapons, prevent their use, and build a world free of their threat. We want to isolate and defeat terrorists and counter violent extremists while reaching out to Muslims around the world. We want to encourage and facilitate the efforts of all parties to pursue and achieve a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. We want to seek global economic recovery and growth by strengthening our own economy, advancing a robust development agenda, expanding trade that is free and fair, and boosting investment that creates decent jobs. We want to combat climate change, increase energy security, and lay the foundation for a prosperous clean-energy future. We want to support and encourage democratic governments that protect the rights and deliver results for their people. And we intend to stand up for human rights everywhere.

Liberty, democracy, justice and opportunity underlie our priorities. Some accuse us of using these ideals to justify actions that contradict their very meaning. Others say we are too often condescending and imperialistic, seeking only to expand our power at the expense of others. And yes, these perceptions have fed anti-Americanism, but they do not reflect who we are. No doubt we lost some ground in recent years, but the damage is temporary. It’s kind of like my elbow – it’s getting better every day. (Laughter.)

Whether in Latin America or Lebanon, Iran or Liberia, those who are inspired by democracy, who understand that democracy is about more than just elections – that it must also protect minority rights and press freedom, develop strong, competent and independent judiciaries, legislatures and executive agencies, and commit for democracy to deliver results – these are the people who will find that Americans are their friends, not adversaries. As President Obama made clear last week in Ghana, this Administration will stand for accountable and transparent governance, and support those who work to build democratic institutions wherever they live.

Our approach to foreign policy must reflect the world as it is, not as it used to be. It does not make sense to adapt a 19th century concert of powers, or a 20th century balance of power strategy. We cannot go back to Cold War containment or to unilateralism.

Today, we must acknowledge two inescapable facts that define our world: First, no nation can meet the world’s challenges alone. The issues are too complex. Too many players are competing for influence, from rising powers to corporations to criminal cartels; from NGOs to al-Qaida; from state-controlled media to individuals using Twitter.

Second, most nations worry about the same global threats, from non-proliferation to fighting disease to counter-terrorism, but also face very real obstacles – for reasons of history, geography, ideology, and inertia. They face these obstacles and they stand in the way of turning commonality of interest into common action.

So these two facts demand a different global architecture – one in which states have clear incentives to cooperate and live up to their responsibilities, as well as strong disincentives to sit on the sidelines or sow discord and division.

So we will exercise American leadership to overcome what foreign policy experts at places like the Council call “collective action problems” and what I call obstacles to cooperation. For just as no nation can meet these challenges alone, no challenge can be met without America.

And here’s how we’ll do it: We’ll work through existing institutions and reform them. But we’ll go further. We’ll use our power to convene, our ability to connect countries around the world, and sound foreign policy strategies to create partnerships aimed at solving problems. We’ll go beyond states to create opportunities for non-state actors and individuals to contribute to solutions.

We believe this approach will advance our interests by uniting diverse partners around common concerns. It will make it more difficult for others to abdicate their responsibilities or abuse their power, but will offer a place at the table to any nation, group, or citizen willing to shoulder a fair share of the burden. In short, we will lead by inducing greater cooperation among a greater number of actors and reducing competition, tilting the balance away from a multi-polar world and toward a multi-partner world.

Now, we know this approach is not a panacea. We will remain clear-eyed about our purpose. Not everybody in the world wishes us well or shares our values and interests. And some will actively seek to undermine our efforts. In those cases, our partnerships can become power coalitions to constrain or deter those negative actions.

And to these foes and would-be foes, let me say our focus on diplomacy and development is not an alternative to our national security arsenal. Our willingness to talk is not a sign of weakness to be exploited. We will not hesitate to defend our friends, our interests, and above all, our people vigorously and when necessary with the world’s strongest military. This is not an option we seek nor is it a threat; it is a promise to all Americans.

Building the architecture of global cooperation requires us to devise the right policies and use the right tools. I speak often of smart power because it is so central to our thinking and our decision-making. It means the intelligent use of all means at our disposal, including our ability to convene and connect. It means our economic and military strength; our capacity for entrepreneurship and innovation; and the ability and credibility of our new President and his team. It also means the application of old-fashioned common sense in policymaking. It’s a blend of principle and pragmatism.

Smart power translates into specific policy approaches in five areas. First, we intend to update and create vehicles for cooperation with our partners; second, we will pursue principled engagement with those who disagree with us; third, we will elevate development as a core pillar of American power; fourth, we will integrate civilian and military action in conflict areas; and fifth, we will leverage key sources of American power, including our economic strength and the power of our example.

Our first approach is to build these stronger mechanisms of cooperation with our historic allies, with emerging powers, and with multilateral institutions, and to pursue that cooperation in, as I said, a pragmatic and principled way. We don’t see those as in opposition, but as complementary.

We have started by reinvigorating our bedrock alliances, which did fray in recent years. In Europe, that means improved bilateral relationships, a more productive partnership with the European Union, and a revitalized NATO. I believe NATO is the greatest alliance in history. But it was built for the Cold War. The new NATO is a democratic community of nearly a billion people stretching from the Baltics in the East to Alaska in the West. We’re working to update its strategic concept so that it is as effective in this century as it was in the last. At the same time, we are working with our key treaty allies Japan and Korea, Australia, Thailand, and the Philippines and other partners to strengthen our bilateral relationships as well as trans-Pacific institutions. We are both a trans-Atlantic and a trans-Pacific nation.

We will also put special emphasis on encouraging major and emerging global powers – China, India, Russia and Brazil, as well as Turkey, Indonesia, and South Africa – to be full partners in tackling the global agenda. I want to underscore the importance of this task, and my personal commitment to it. These states are vital to achieving solutions to the shared problems and advancing our priorities – nonproliferation, counterterrorism, economic growth, climate change, among others. With these states, we will stand firm on our principles even as we seek common ground.

This week, I will travel to India, where External Affairs Minister Krishna and I will lay out a broad-based agenda that calls for a whole-of-government approach to our bilateral relationship. Later this month, Secretary Geithner and I will jointly lead our new strategic and economic dialogue with China. It will cover not just economic issues, but the range of strategic challenges we face together. In the fall, I will travel to Russia to advance the bi-national presidential commission that Foreign Minister Lavrov and I will co-chair.

The fact of these and other meetings does not guarantee results, but they set in motion processes and relationships that will widen our avenues of cooperation and narrow the areas of disagreement without illusion. We know that progress will not likely come quickly, or without bumps in the road, but we are determined to begin and stay on this path.

Now our global and regional institutions were built for a world that has been transformed, so they too must be transformed and reformed. As the President said following the recent G-8 meeting in Italy, we are seeking institutions that “combine the efficiency and capacity for action with inclusiveness.” From the UN to the World Bank, from the IMF to the G-8 and the G-20, from the OAS and the Summit of the Americas to ASEAN and APEC – all of these and other institutions have a role to play, but their continued vitality and relevance depend on their legitimacy and representativeness, and the ability of their members to act swiftly and responsibly when problems arise.

We also will reach out beyond governments, because we believe partnerships with people play a critical role in our 21st century statecraft. President Obama’s Cairo speech is a powerful example of communicating directly with people from the bottom up. And we are following up with a comprehensive agenda of educational exchanges, outreach, and entrepreneurial ventures. In every country I visit, I look for opportunities to bolster civil society and engage with citizens, whether at a town hall in Baghdad – a first in that country; or appearing on local popular television shows that reach a wide and young audience; or meeting with democracy activists, war widows, or students.

I have appointed special envoys to focus on a number of specific challenges, including the first Ambassador for Global Women’s Issues and an ambassador to build new public-private partnerships and to engage Diaspora communities in the United States to increase opportunities in their native lands. And we are working at the State Department to ensure that our government is using the most innovative technologies not only to speak and listen across borders, not only to keep technologies up and going, but to widen opportunities especially for those who are too often left on the margins. We’re taking these steps because reaching out directly to people will encourage them to embrace cooperation with us, making our partnerships with their governments and with them stronger and more durable.

We’ve also begun to adopt a more flexible and pragmatic posture with our partners. We won’t agree on every issue. Standing firm on our principles shouldn’t prevent us from working together where we can. So we will not tell our partners to take it or leave it, nor will we insist that they’re either with us or against us. In today’s world, that’s global malpractice.

Our diplomacy regarding North Korea is a case in point. We have invested a significant amount of diplomatic resources to achieve Security Council consensus in response to North Korea’s provocative actions. I spoke numerous times to my counterparts in Japan, South Korea, Russia and China, drawing out their concerns, making our principles and redlines clear, and seeking a path forward. The short-term results were two unanimous Security Council resolutions with real teeth and consequences for North Korea, and then the follow-on active involvement of China, Russia, and India with us in persuading others to comply with the resolutions. The long-term result, we believe, will be a tougher joint effort toward the complete and verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Cultivating these partnerships and their full range takes time and patience. It also takes persistence. That doesn’t mean procrastinating on urgent issues. Nor is it a justification for delaying efforts that may take years to bear fruit. In one of my favorite observations, Max Weber said, “Politics is the long and slow boring of hard boards. It takes both passion and perspective.” Perspective dictates passion and patience. And of course, passion keeps us from not finding excuses to do nothing.

Now I’m well aware that time alone does not heal all wounds; consider the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. That’s why we wasted no time in starting an intensive effort on day one to realize the rights of Palestinians and Israelis to live in peace and security in two states, which is in America’s interests and the world’s. We’ve been working with the Israelis to deal with the issue of settlements, to ease the living conditions of Palestinians, and create circumstances that can lead to the establishment of a viable Palestinian state. For the last few decades, American administrations have held consistent positions on the settlement issue. And while we expect action from Israel, we recognize that these decisions are politically challenging.

And we know that progress toward peace cannot be the responsibility of the United States – or Israel – alone. Ending the conflict requires action on all sides. The Palestinians have the responsibility to improve and extend the positive actions already taken on security; to act forcefully against incitement; and to refrain from any action that would make meaningful negotiations less likely.

And Arab states have a responsibility to support the Palestinian Authority with words and deeds, to take steps to improve relations with Israel, and to prepare their publics to embrace peace and accept Israel’s place in the region. The Saudi peace proposal, supported by more than twenty nations, was a positive step. But we believe that more is needed. So we are asking those who embrace the proposal to take meaningful steps now. Anwar Sadat and King Hussein crossed important thresholds, and their boldness and vision mobilized peace constituencies in Israel and paved the way for lasting agreements. By providing support to the Palestinians and offering an opening, however modest, to the Israelis, the Arab states could have the same impact. So I say to all sides: Sending messages of peace is not enough. You must also act against the cultures of hate, intolerance and disrespect that perpetuate conflict.

Our second policy approach is to lead with diplomacy, even in the cases of adversaries or nations with whom we disagree. We believe that doing so advances our interests and puts us in a better position to lead with our other partners. We cannot be afraid or unwilling to engage. Yet some suggest that this is a sign of naiveté or acquiescence to these countries’ repression of their own people. I believe that is wrong. As long as engagement might advance our interests and our values, it is unwise to take it off the table. Negotiations can provide insight into regimes’ calculations and the possibility – even if it seems remote – that a regime will eventually alter its behavior in exchange for the benefits of acceptance into the international community. Libya is one such example. Exhausting the option for dialogue is also more likely to make our partners more willing to exert pressure should persuasion fail.

With this in mind, I want to say a few words about Iran. We watched the energy of Iran’s election with great admiration, only to be appalled by the manner in which the government used violence to quell the voices of the Iranian people, and then tried to hide its actions by arresting foreign journalists and nationals, and expelling them, and cutting off access to technology. As we and our G-8 partners have made clear, these actions are deplorable and unacceptable.
We know very well what we inherited with Iran, because we deal with that inheritance every day. We know that refusing to deal with the Islamic Republic has not succeeded in altering the Iranian march toward a nuclear weapon, reducing Iranian support for terror, or improving Iran’s treatment of its citizens.

Neither the President nor I have any illusions that dialogue with the Islamic Republic will guarantee success of any kind, and the prospects have certainly shifted in the weeks following the election. But we also understand the importance of offering to engage Iran and giving its leaders a clear choice: whether to join the international community as a responsible member or to continue down a path to further isolation.

Direct talks provide the best vehicle for presenting and explaining that choice. That is why we offered Iran’s leaders an unmistakable opportunity: Iran does not have a right to nuclear military capacity, and we’re determined to prevent that. But it does have a right to civil nuclear power if it reestablishes the confidence of the international community that it will use its programs exclusively for peaceful purposes.

Iran can become a constructive actor in the region if it stops threatening its neighbors and supporting terrorism. It can assume a responsible position in the international community if it fulfills its obligations on human rights. The choice is clear. We remain ready to engage with Iran, but the time for action is now. The opportunity will not remain open indefinitely.

Our third policy approach, and a personal priority for me as Secretary, is to elevate and integrate development as a core pillar of American power. We advance our security, our prosperity, and our values by improving the material conditions of people’s lives around the world. These efforts also lay the groundwork for greater global cooperation, by building the capacity of new partners and tackling shared problems from the ground up.

A central purpose of the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review that I announced last week is to explore how to effectively design, fund, and implement development and foreign assistance as part of a broader foreign policy. Let’s face it. We have devoted a smaller percentage of our government budget to development than almost any other advanced country. And too little of what we have spent has contributed to genuine and lasting progress. Too much of the money has never reached its intended target, but stayed here in America to pay salaries or fund overhead in contracts. I am committed to more partnerships with NGOs, but I want more of our tax dollars to be used effectively and to deliver tangible results.

As we seek more agile, effective, and creative partnerships for development, we will focus on country-driven solutions, such as those we are launching with Haiti on recovery and sustainable development, and with African states on global hunger. These initiatives must not be designed to help countries scrape by – they are a tool to help countries stand on their own.

Our development agenda will also focus on women as drivers of economic growth and social stability. Women have long comprised the majority of the world’s unhealthy, unschooled, and underfed. They are also the bulk of the world’s poor. The global recession has had a disproportionate effect on women and girls, which in turn has repercussions for families, communities, and even regions. Until women around the world are accorded their rights – and afforded the opportunities of education, health care, and gainful employment – global progress and prosperity will have its own glass ceiling.

Our fourth approach is to ensure that our civilian and military efforts operate in a coordinated and complementary fashion where we are engaged in conflict. This is the core of our strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq, where we are integrating our efforts with international partners.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan, our goal is to disrupt, dismantle, and ultimately defeat al-Qaida and its extremist allies, and to prevent their return to either country. Yet Americans often ask, why do we ask our young men and women to risk their lives in Afghanistan when al-Qaida’s leadership is in neighboring Pakistan? And that question deserves a good answer: We and our allies fight in Afghanistan because the Taliban protects al-Qaida and depends on it for support, sometimes coordinating activities. In other words, to eliminate al-Qaida, we must also fight the Taliban.

Now, we understand that not all those who fight with the Taliban support al-Qaida, or believe in the extremist policies the Taliban pursued when in power. And today we and our Afghan allies stand ready to welcome anyone supporting the Taliban who renounces al-Qaida, lays down their arms, and is willing to participate in the free and open society that is enshrined in the Afghan Constitution.

To achieve our goals, President Obama is sending an additional 17,000 troops and 4,000 military trainers to Afghanistan. Equally important, we are sending hundreds of direct hire American civilians to lead a new effort to strengthen the Afghan Government, help rebuild the once-vibrant agricultural sector, create jobs, encourage the rule of law, expand opportunities for women, and train the Afghan police. No one should doubt our commitment to Afghanistan and its people. But it is the Afghan people themselves who will determine their own future.

As we proceed, we must not forget that success in Afghanistan also requires close cooperation from neighboring Pakistan, which I will visit this fall. Pakistan is itself under intense pressure from extremist groups. Trilateral cooperation among Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the United States has built confidence and yielded progress on a number of policy fronts. Our national security, as well as the future of Afghanistan, depends on a stable, democratic, and economically viable Pakistan. And we applaud the new Pakistani determination to deal with the militants who threaten their democracy and our shared security.

In Iraq, we are bolstering our diplomacy and development programs while we implement a responsible withdrawal of our troops. Last month our combat troops successfully redeployed from towns and cities. Our principal focus is now shifting from security issues to civilian efforts that promote Iraqi capacity – supporting the work of the Iraqi ministries and aiding in their efforts to achieve national unity. And we are developing a long-term economic and political relationship with Iraq as outlined by the US-Iraq Strategic Framework Agreement. This Agreement forms the basis of our future cooperation with Iraq and the Iraqi people, and I look forward to discussing it and its implementation with Prime Minister Maliki when he comes to Washington next week.

Our fifth approach is to shore up traditional sources of our influence, including economic strength and the power of our example. We renewed our own values by prohibiting torture and beginning to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. And we have been straightforward about our own measure of responsibility for problems like drug trafficking in Mexico and global climate change. When I acknowledged the obvious about our role in Mexico’s current conflict with narco-traffickers, some were critical. But they’re missing the point. Our capacity to take responsibility, and our willingness to change, to do the right thing, are themselves hallmarks of our greatness as a nation and strategic assets that can help us forge coalitions in the service of our interests.

That is certainly true when it comes to key priorities like nonproliferation and climate change. President Obama is committed to the vision of a world without nuclear weapons and a series of concrete steps to reduce the threat and spread of these weapons, including working with the Senate to ratify the follow-on START agreement and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, taking on greater responsibility within the Non Proliferation Treaty Framework and convening the world’s leaders here in Washington next year for a nuclear summit. Now we must urge others to take practical steps to advance our shared nonproliferation agenda.

Our Administration is also committed to deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, with a plan that will dramatically change the way we produce, consume and conserve energy, and in the process spark an explosion of new investment, and millions of jobs. Now we must urge every other nation to meet its obligations and seize the opportunities of a clean energy future.

We are restoring our economy at home to enhance our strength and capacity abroad, especially at this time of economic turmoil. Now, this is not a traditional priority for a Secretary of State, but I vigorously support American recovery and growth as a pillar of our global leadership. And I am committed to restoring a significant role for the State Department within a whole-of-government approach to international economic policy-making. We will work to ensure that our economic statecraft – trade and investment, debt forgiveness, loan guarantees, technical assistance, decent work practices – support our foreign policy objectives. When coupled with a sound development effort, our economic outreach can give us a better form of globalization, reducing the bitter opposition of recent years and lifting millions more out of poverty.

And finally, I am determined to ensure that the men and women of our Foreign and Civil Service have the resources they need to implement our priorities effectively and safely. That’s why I appointed for the first time a Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources. It’s why we worked so hard to secure additional funding for State and USAID. It’s why we have put ourselves on a path to double foreign assistance over the next few years. And it’s why we are implementing a plan to dramatically increase the number of diplomats and development experts.

Just as we would never deny ammunition to American troops headed into battle, we cannot send our civilian personnel into the field underequipped. If we don’t invest in diplomacy and development, we will end up paying a lot more for conflicts and their consequences. As Secretary Gates has said, diplomacy is an indispensable instrument of national security, as it has been since Franklin, Jefferson and Adams won foreign support for Washington’s army.

Now all of this adds up to a very ambitious agenda. But the world does not afford us the luxury of choosing or waiting. As I said at the outset, we must tackle the urgent, the important and the long-term all at once.

We are both witness to and makers of significant change. We cannot and should not be passive observers. We are determined to channel the currents of change toward a world free of violent extremism, nuclear weapons, global warming, poverty, and abuses of human rights, and above all, a world in which more people in more places can live up to their God-given potential.

The architecture of cooperation we seek to build will advance all these goals, using our power not to dominate or divide but to solve problems. It is the architecture of progress for America and all nations.

More than 230 years ago, Thomas Paine said, “We have it within our power to start the world over again.” Today, in a new and very different era, we are called upon to use that power. I believe we have the right strategy, the right priorities, the right policies, we have the right President, and we have the American people, diverse, committed, and open to the future.

Crime pays :


Article :

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brown-formally-backs-blair-as-candidate-for-president-of-europe-1748275.html

Read the article and then read the comments before they are deleted.

Empty suit is potential EU President .

Looks like he is ageing rapidly which is a good thing unless the picture is photoshopped.Sort of reminds me of Norman Tebbit.

Thursday, 16 July 2009

Hillary Clinton admits to taking orders from the CFR:


This is big news .

Thanks Hillary for confirming what i already knew anyway !!

Poen admission that US politics is owned and controlled by the CFR [Council Of Foreign Relations].

This is really quite interesting because no one recalls actually voting in the CFR.


"Thank you very much, Richard, and I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future. "


Read the full transcript here :

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/july/126071.htm

Click on this link to watch the video of the speech :

http://www.state.gov/video/?videoid=29636586001

She is standing on the CFR stage and anyway where does anyone think that she takes orders from if it isnt the CFR and its a good thing that she is honest about who she is working for and whos agenda she is being paid to implement.

Traitor goes home to roost:



Article:


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/tony-blair-backed-to-be-europes-first-president-1747248.html


Ex elected non-representative traitor - liar and war criminal is backed by New Liebour to be a candidate to represent the EUSSR as a presidential candidate.

Glenys Kinnock is your EU trough - fed unelected non-representative representative UK European minister.

If you are of a certain age you may recall a big nosed - big mouthed -Blowhard - Bolshevik - Buffoon by the name of Neil Kinnock.

He has shares in the makers of Tamiflu [Gilead].

No one in Govt [elected and non elected non-representative representatives alike] even bother to ask we the people what we think.

Gordon Brown-nose - unelected.

Mandelslime - unelected

Glenys Kinnock - unelected

[I will not refer to her as "Lady" because i do not recognise titles that are given out by New Liebour]

She is so full of Shit.

As i was saying welcome to the Post-Democratic era.


This shit is out of control now.


Who left the gates to the lunatic asylum open and unattended ??

Times Article on Swine flu Vaccinations deletes comments:

Article:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/london-times-censors-mass-opposition-to-mandatory-swine-flu-vaccine.html

Wednesday, 15 July 2009

Disturbing allegation :

I have come across a piece of information that alleges that the 2 murdered French students that were studying for Bio - engineering Masters degrees at Imperial College London were researching the origins of Swine Flu amongst other things.




This is the article or source of their information which as you can see cannot be verified.

[It wasnt a whistleblower unfortunately]

Make of it what you will:

Article 1:



http://ahrcanum.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/tamiflu-linked-to-origins-of-ah1n1-swine-flu-pandemic/


Article 2:


http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:RSdjlsylcrgJ:www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php%3Ff%3D11%26i%3D118027%26t%3D118026%26v%3Df+murdered+french+students+studying+swine+flu&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a


Article 3:


http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bio-chemists_murdered_149.html

Coincidence ??




Just look at that WHO symbolism.If you understand what it means it explains everything about the nature of WHO.

I often wonder if the introduction globally of Codex Alimentarius on December 31st 2009 is coincidence when it happens to be at the same time as an alleged flu pandemic and vaccination programme ?

Codex Alimentarius is not something that you have read about in a Harry Potter book as it has been created in conjunction with International banks,Pharmaceutical giants,the UN, and the WHO.Its primary aim amongst many many many other aims is to outlaw the sale of vitamin supplements,dietary supplements,natural remedies and relevant information that is enforcable by the WTO.

Think of it as food and health Fascism as it is unilateral and centralised regulation and standardisation and control of the food chain and health.

I will quote Dr.Rolf GrossKlaus as saying :"Nutrition is not relevant to health".

Dr.Rolf GrossKlaus is a a Physician who is the head of CA.

Sounds like a Nazi scientist.

Nutrients are now toxins.

Do not eat your 5 daily quota of healthy food as it is now toxic.

Everything you know about nutrition is wrong.



Look it up yourself.


All perfectly reasonable and kind and benevolent people with your best interests at heart i am sure.

Nothing of interest here.

Move along now and continue to take your vaccinations and whatever particular cocktail of chemicals are part of your daily health regime.

Vitamin supplements and dietary supplements can be a waste of time as you can get all the vitamins and nutrients from eating clean healthy food anyway.Eat healthily and eat nuts and seeds and raw food like Alfalfa shoots [a superfood] for example.

Any vitamin deficiency or nutrient deficiency you might have can be corrected by eating the right kind of food that anyone can find on shelves in health food shops and supermarkets and local food producers.

I am never ill [apart from the odd cold virus] and i have never taken a vitamin supplement.

How someone can say that nutrients are toxins is absolutely beyond me.



Learn about nutrition yourself in books or on the Internet.

Learn about "Superfoods".
Learn how to combine foods to make whole proteins like eating potatoes and Cheese together that makes a whole protein.

The Times/Daily Mail UK De-population articles:

READ ALL ABOUT IT !!


Jonathon Porrit advises Govt that UK population is to be reduced by 50 percent to become sustainable.

Times article :

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5950442.ece?Submitted=true

Daily Mail article :


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1199311/Cut-population-say-crowded-Britons.html

No doubt that Jonathon Porritt or any other advocate of this policy is not prepared to lead by example.

Nice knowing you all !!

David Icke on Swine Flu :

Take a look and listen for yourself :


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqMK_yu8APg&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Edavidicke%2Ecom%2Fcontent%2Fblogcategory%2F30%2F48%2F&feature=player_embedded


Its nothing that i havent heard before and in the main i totally agree with what he is saying.

Yes....Reptilians...yeah yeah yeah son of god.....blah blah blah.Forget all that because David Icke has been right on so many points over the years that the list is too extensive to mention and if you read one of his books you will also find that this is true.Also its not a case of "following" David Icke either or hanging on his every word but the information in his books regarding matters like One World currency and centralised One world govt is all right on the money because it is happening right now.

Its crazy shit that you have to actively avoid a Swine flu vaccination for the reasons outlined previously but this is to all intents and purposes exactly what is happening.Personally i have had my suspicions all along for nearly 2 decades now when i consider that i have been actively avoiding food that is contaminated with chemicals and additives like Aspartame and Hydrogenated Fats for example as if i have a instinct for knowing that such substances are detrimental to my health like an aversion.

Gut instinct.

You have to go on natural instinct in the end because it is natural and is the product of millions of years of evolution and is a survival instinct and a defence mechanism.For example i get a very very bad sort of feeling when i listen to announcements from the WHO.I cannot rationalise this in any way but i get a very negative vibration/impression from the WHO which seems to be cold and inhuman.I cannot describe it any other way and i get the same impression from the UN itself and various politicians and i am getting a very strong feeling at the moment that there is something seriously wrong that is like tuning into a very negative frequency.

I cant explain this as it has nothing to do with mental health issues because i dont have any but imagine getting that sick feeling in the pit of your stomach that you get when you are anxious about something.Its alright when you know what is causing it but imagine what it would be like if you didnt ?Thats what i get quite a lot of the time and its a pain but i have to live with it.Its like i can feel that there is something very wrong in the air and that something is building up.

I am now slightly under the influence of Alcohol and Spliff so i am going to not talk bullshit but babble for a bit about whatever i feel like:

Then you get all this new age stuff that this change in vibration is happening and there is some kind of awakening going on and all the rest of it.I tend to avoid the New Age movement for various reasons which i actively avoid as i prefer to deal in reality rather than a load of pseudo-religious blathering from various deluded doom mongerers of god knows how many descriptions plus there are parallels with the New age movement and Nazism and then after that there are the Christians who are all predicting the end times and the emergence of the Anti Christ.I respect their beliefs although largely i dont share their beliefs in the endless quotes and tracts from the bible that i see posted daily on forums but in essence i am on the same side as them really and they are my allies if the shit hits the fan.I would rather side with christians than practicising Satanists any day of the week.I have come into contact with Satanism in the past and i want nothing to do with it.i didnt practise it but i knew others or came into contact with others that did plus i have seen the evidence of satanic ritual . I cant get into the idea of organised religion and worship but i do have some things in common with Christians without actually being a Christian.I think i was baptised but i am not sure but i was brought up in a household that was Liberal at the same time as Conservative in terms of morality and values so really i am a kind of schizophrenic mixture of liberalism and Conservatism with a certain amount of Christian values always being in the background like always having proper family dinners around the table.Christian like family values.Altruism is a Christian value and everyone in my family is Altruistic to some extent and always have been.

I have never ripped off a single client that i have done work for in 20 years partly because it was kind of ingrained in me as an inherited value that if you make a living by ripping off others then you are a failure with a capital F and i simply cannot do it.I guess that is a Christian value to some extent.

My Mum always says i am like a Christian in some ways without being a practising Christian as i am an Agnostic.

You cannot not be an Agnostic because you and i and everyone can not claim that there is no god because you simply cannot know the unknowable.If you are an atheist then you claim that you know the unknowable and if an Atheist can call out Christians and ask them to prove that there is a God then it seems only fair to call out an Atheist and ask them to prove that there is no higher authority.They cant of course and you cannot equate science as being the answer to the unknowable because as far as that is concerned science is only beginning to to explore the metaphysical with quantum physics etc and what exactly constitutes consciousness.



Having said that if i shared some of my own personal views on myself and what i am or believe i am to Christians they would have a fit and say that i am possessed by Satan or under the influence or whatever so i dont.Simple as that.

Yet at the time as far as morality is concerned i think morality is partly inherited or ingrained by upbringing etc but is also something that you choose for yourself like your own personal code of honour that you will not break under any circumstance.


Anyway what i fucking hate about the idea of the NWO and one world religion is it is all about control.It does not respect diversity but it encourages diversity yet at the same time it wants to homogenize everything into a singular mass that actually destroys diversity and culture in the process.the idea is fundamentally flawed on so many levels because it is all about control.If the idea of "Unity" was all about harmonisation then it would respect diversity and culture and allow it to flourish unhindered because diversity and different cultures is all a natural process that cannot be watered down and homogenised and watered down.

You cannot change the nature of people by treaties and the introduction of a failed political ideology and bits of paper and you cannot control it by force.

The idea of "Unity" is fine in principle depending on its aims and desired outcomes but it will fail under NWO Globalist political agenda.You simply cannot change the way that people have evolved by introducing a political ideology and making it one size - fits all.

It will fail i guarantee it and its an idea even more stupid [and evolved from] than Communism as i have said before time and time again.

If this was the case and the UN were impartial then they would not be systematically attacking Christians and the institution of the Family and Christian values every which way they can .

Where ? is the religious freedom in that ?

Where is the tolerance ?

I am going to go off on one now......

This is NOT Unity and it does NOT respect individuality and Diversity and Freedom.

FUCK Globalism and FUCK the NWO and FUCK One World Religion.

FUCK them all .FUCK these Amoral Satanist Greedhead Dysfunctional Socio/Psychopathical CockSuckers.

FUCK them all and i will go down fighting them rather than submit to them.

GGGrrrr... they make me fucking angry thinking about them.If they want to talk about survival of the fittest and Nazism then give me the opportunity and 5 minutes with each of these MFs and i will give them a fucking taste of what fucking pain and suffering is all about i promise but i will exercise leniency on them and just break bones as Death is to good for them and too quick and too final.


GGrrrr... I am all angry thinking about them now but when push comes to shove there is only 130 of these Fucked Up individuals and there are 6 billion of us and these Fuckers are going down if i have my way.

They dont know how to fight as there is always someone else who is expendable who is expected to fight for them.

The days of ruling and manipulating and playing one side off against the other from behind a wall of lies and deception are going to be a thing of the past soon enough as WE are waking up.

They know this as well and WE are starting to win .They are Cowards and they will back down and when they do they had better go to ground and not come up again because WE will be waiting for them.

What goes down has to come up for air eventually and the patient and silent hunter will sit and wait until the time is right.

WE are getting angry and WE will not live with the shadow of Nazism and Totalitarianism breathing down our necks or looming over us like an ominous black cloud that never goes away and if it becomes a reality WE will hunt you down and WE will give you NO quarter.

The determined fighter who has nothing to lose will always be able to stay the course for longer than a Govt Goon squad of Useful Idiots.

Theres always everything to gain if you have nothing to lose.

They have been fucking warned and WE are not Fucking about.

WE are growing stronger by the day.

Keep your hands off our Children.

If they continue to lie and cheat and steal and inflict their murderous political agenda on us then WE will fight back.

They had better fucking back down if they know whats good for them.

WE are NOT their pets.


Fuckers.

****


Its also interesting that since Youtube was taken over by Google that all sorts of untoward things happen to videos and channels and that they constantly fuck about with the viewing figures and ratings so that certain videos that have achieved very very high viewing figures like this video dont appear as most popular:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeYscnFpEyA&feature=channel_page

[We have the exact same problem here as well]


which is at 6 million plus and counting......

Interesting really.

Tuesday, 14 July 2009

Monday, 13 July 2009

George Moonbats smug childish Blog :










http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/jun/29/climate-change-scepticism-heatwave?commentpage=2





Its always worth a read as its entertaining.


Open the link provided and the Blog will open onto this topic by way of an example of the kind of mindset that we are talking about here :


"Have the climate change deniers abandoned us during the heatwave ? "


Think about that post title for a few seconds ....


"Climate change deniers"


This is new terminology that i have come across lately and its use is increasing by the day as people have a habit of picking up and using terminology that they read in articles on websites etc.

"Climate change deniers....."


It must the pro AGW faction moving the goalposts yet again in order to demonise those dastardly AGW sceptics who just wont buy into an unproven pseudo scientific/political hypothesis.

Honestly they are just so stubborn and resistant to change and unwilling to be assimilated into the Borg like hive mind of the church of Al gore and the IPCC/UN.


Before i move on from that pathetic and childish terminology i will just add this:

WTF is a "Climate Change Denier" ???

WTF is it ???

Is he seriously suggesting that there is a section of the populace that dont believe that the climate is changing ???

Personally i have done my "research" and read countless articles and i have read countless comments posted by forum users and Bloggers and i cant say that i have noticed *ANY* comments that indicate that any particular individual is denying that the climate is changing.

Thats not to say that they dont exist [nothing would surprise me] but i have not read any article or comment that is of the opinion that the climate is not changing.

Where are the "climate change deniers"

Dont any of them have a broadband connection or access to a computer ?

Whats going on ???

What am i missing here ?

I will have to do a comprehensive Google search for "Climate Change Denial" and find out what is on offer later.

Is there a subsection of the scientific community that is devoted to researching the subject of a static unchanging climate on earth ?

Where is the evidence that the "climate change deniers" are using to support their claims that the climate never changes ?

It must be backed up by real hard and unbiased and objective and unaltered and unadulterated scientific theory/ fact ?

Does he recognise the difference to the alleged "Climate Deniers" and "Climate Change Deniers" and CO2/Global Warming sceptics ??

Is there anyone around that actually denies that there is a climate ?

"There is no climate !!! Its all a hoax !!!"

Honestly you have to laugh.

Anyway now that amusing childish little bit of nonsense has been dealt with lets move on.

Problem Trolls and Oil Industry Shills posting on George Monbiots Blog post-a-comment section :

What can be done as an effective means of tackling this problem ?

I have a cunning plan .....Well actually its not my plan at all as its George MoonBats plan and i wish to give the author [George Monbiot] himself full credit for his ingenuity and creative thinking in finding a solution.

The solution : Propose to Redefine the parameters of free speech on the internet to curtail dissenting opinions to AGW or at the very least extend it to the interactive sections of The Guardian.

Regulate blogs etc etc etc.


Regulate comments on forums.

Its always alright in George monbiots childish little worldview to let anyone have their say as long as it is what he wants to hear and as long as it doesnt question his own ill thought out opinions and observations.


Read the article here :



http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/jul/08/climate-denial-astroturfers-pseudonyms



Is he proposing some kind of unilateral clampdown on free speech on all Internet forums and blogs as well his own ??

Is this guy for real ??

Has he got any idea about what he is advocating ??

Or is it the reaction of an adult who is like a spoilt child who cant have it all his own way ?

WTF is his problem ??

If he wants to regulate and stifle and curtail free speech on his blog then let him do what he wants as after all its his intellectual property [at least when he is not endlessly quoting others articles as filler or reiterating someone elses opinion] and his own space.

As an alternative to proposing a unilateral regulation of blogs and comments [as that is what he is implying] i propose that George Moonbat could try :

A: Moderating his forum by removing/deleting posts.He could do this himself OR employ a moderator to delete the posts that he cant be bothered to actually read as he claims.If he doesnt read them then why be affected by them ?

B:Introduce or update and aggressively enforce a written and clearly laid out Code Of Conduct.

C:Permanently disable the post-a-comment section of his blog.Take it down.Reduce CO2 that is generated by its very existence.

2 birds with one stone.


D:Introduce via his COC [that wasnt deliberate /Well it was but its also an acronym for Code Of Conduct.I am sure George would appreciate the humor] a strict totally one sided posting policy that involves only one side of the argument like :

"you are so right George and i enjoy your Blog immensely"

"I do agree George with your hypothesis and all your articles and information and "peer reviewed articles" that you present to us that are not biased or slanted to your own political or enviromental ideology at all..."

"I love the way that George encourages such open and unbiased and frank debate to the the articles and topics posted on this blog..."

"You are never wrong George ever..."

E:Dont write and publish contentious articles that by their very nature invite contradiction and debate.

F:Introduce an ignore/file facility.

G:Stop being a hypocrite and apply it to both sides of the debate.



What a fucking useless whining idiot.

Stopping forum users from posting anonymously isnt going to change their opinions.

Idiots on forums are commonplace .

No forum i know stops anonymous posters and i believe its up to the individual to choose wether they are anonymous or not.


Another point he makes is that anyone who opposes his weak flimsy hypothesis must be *by default* be an anonymous shill who is paid off by "big oil" to contradict his own views on climate change.

I dont post on his Blog .

However:

If so i must be either working for them and posting disinfo for *nothing* OR i just happen to have a differing opinion to his own by thinking independently and looking at the evidence and drawing my own conclusions.

I dont publish or post comments anonymously and i get paid Fuck All for doing it and i use my own free time to do it when i could be doing something else.

This logic does not apply to the Green industry of course and those who advocate social and economic and political change that is dressed up as Enviromentalism.


When did science stop being unbiased ?

When did science stop being science ?

When did science stop being objective ?

When did science not involve open and frank debate ?

When did science become pseudo science ?



When it became politicised thats when.

When it turned into a belief system.

When it became fraudulent.

When it became subject to vested commercial and political interests.


Its so childish its pathetic.

"Astrosurfers" !!

Doesnt he understand that so called peer reviewed papers can be biased as well ??

Is he suggesting that scientific disinformation and alarmism that is promulgated by the UN/IPCC that does not or has not even been subjected to scrutiny is not in any way biased or slanted to fit vested interests ?


Without a shadow of a doubt these types are the most awkward , narrow minded,obstinate belligerant individuals you can ever debate with.


No one is denying that the fucking climate has changed or is changing or cooling or warming up but we want to know why and the debate is not closed .


He absolutely will not take into consideration that climate change is being caused even in part by solar activity.

Can we tax the Sun and decrease or increase solar activity please ?

Can we have a taxation levied on Chemtrails please especially since the US Govt acknowledges their existence and admits responsibility for them as very recently announced in the Wall Street Journal :

Article here about proposed Geo-engineering :


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204771304574181522575503150.html


And article here which i believe is the Washington Post article i was looking for:


http://www.chemtrails911.com/docs/2009/Obama%20science%20adviser%20Global%20warming%20so%20dire,%20we%20may%20need%20to%20tinker%20with%20Earth%27s%20atmosphere.htm

The Govt has been openly spraying the upper atmosphere and now admits that the exact same thing is being proposed which is reads like an admission that it is already going on and has been since 1996 as there is physical and photographic evidence that proves it.

You used to get articles and documentaries about the recent topic of Global Dimming which like Chemtrails is an observable phenomena but then the topic dropped off the radar never to be heard from again.

I dont know if the two are linked categorically but i would be very very surprised if there wasnt a link.

So to sum up:

Govts in the US and elsewhere have been interfering with the upper atmosphere by dumping and spraying a cocktail of chemicals in it with unknown or known consequences while at the same time telling everyone that increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is dirupting the natural balance of nature and want to tax you for it.

They want or are spraying chemical/poison shit into the atmosphere and have been for over a decade YET they want to tax us on CO2 ??


Looks like Chemtrails have moved out of the /conspiracy theory league and into Reality.



The Lunatics have taken over the asylum.



More on this as it unfolds but the idea is being proposed by the previously mentioned John Holdren.





You can never ever win with these types.

I have to stop.