Monthly Archives: February, 2011

After touching your junk, TSA now wants to scan and harvest your DNA

As if it’s not enough for the TSA to feel you up at the airport, now they’re experimenting with rapid results DNA scanners that can scan and analyze your DNA using just a drop of saliva. Spit at the TSA agent who is molesting you, in other words, and they can use that saliva to scan your DNA and then store it in a government database

Why would they want to do that? We can only imagine. Remember, it was Alex Jones who broke the story about hospitals secretly taking blood samples of babies and handing them over to the federal government for use in a national genetic database (http://www.prisonplanet.com/newborn…).

The government routinely steals genetic material from people for its own nefarious purposes, as does the pharmaceutical industry.

Continue reading →

The Flood Of Money Drowns Out The Value

February 26 2011: Awash in dollars the value drops, new movement in Gold and Silver, a plan for world government, trillions poured into the economy affects the Dow, forecast for an eventual market correction, break up what is too big to fail, inflation a factor in the middle east, Madoff profit scandals continue, dismal treatment of teachers.

The world is awash in dollars and that is being reflected in the USDX, which are six major currencies versus the dollar. The loss of value is being loudly trumpeted as the IMF says a replacement must be found. This is the same IMF that has been foisting non-gold backed SDRs on us since 1969. Every time they have tried this it has been a failure. We can give the Illuminists an ‘A’ for effort, but what they do not get is that the professionals and investors see right through it. Another batch of fiat currency is not going to solve the world’s currency crisis, which can only be saved by gold backing. Needless to say, the mainstream media will never talk about this in realistic terms, because the elitists control them. The denigration of currencies versus gold and silver are advancing apace, as the elitists day after day try to suppress gold and silver prices.

Continue reading →

Liberty’s Easy Slide into Tyranny

By: Prof John Kozy

The best-laid schemes o’ mice an’ men
Gang aft agley,
An’ lea’e us nought but grief an’ pain,
For promis’d joy!

Robert Burns – 1785

No matter how hard we try, no one can control the future, and we cannot assume the future will be like the present.

Woodrow Wilson signed the law that established the Federal Reserve. He later rightly lamented having done so. He writes, “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” Oh, how right he is, and oh, the mischief the FED has wrought! But establishing the FED must have seemed right to Wilson when he signed the law.

Harry Truman had similar qualms about the CIA.

[I]t has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency. . . .

assuming the President himself possesses a knowledge of our history, a sensitive understanding of our institutions, and an insight into the needs and aspirations of the people, he needs . . . the most accurate and up-to-the-minute information on what is going on everywhere in the world, and particularly of the trends and developments in all the danger spots. . . .

every President has available to him all the information gathered by the many intelligence agencies already in existence. . . .

Continue reading →

Personal Details in U.K Census to be Processed by U.S. Firm Which Stole Obama’s Student Loan Records

Secrets victim: Barack Obama had his student loan records stolen from a US company which will process the national censusPersonal details collected in the 2011 national census will be processed in a plant run by an American firm whose staff were prosecuted for stealing President Obama’s student loan records. 

Every householder in the UK is required to fill out the questionnaire next month, with those failing to comply facing a £1,000 fine or even jail.

Amid concerns over the safety of the data being collected by the Government, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has repeatedly insisted that security is high.

However, The Mail on Sunday has learned that UK Data Capture Ltd, named in ONS reports as the sub-contractor in charge of processing census information, is jointly owned by the examination board Edexcel and the US-owned firm Vangent, which both have a patchy record for data-handling.

Last year, Vangent, a multibillion- pound consultancy with a series of lucrative US government contracts, faced embarrassment when nine of its employees were prosecuted for accessing President Obama’s student loan records.

The employees – all of whom were found guilty – had been working on an IT project at the US Department of Education, although many of the company’s other contracts in America are with the military.

Meanwhile, Edexcel has faced criticism for its alleged ‘dumbing down’ of exams and for losing scripts.

In 2002, a series of errors in Edexcel papers were described by then Prime Minister Tony Blair as ‘sloppy’ and ‘unacceptable’.

Last night, Alex Deane from the think-tank Big Brother Watch concerned by the involvement of the two firms in the handling of sensitive data at the census-processing plant in Trafford, Manchester.

More…

Continue reading →

Ex-BBC Presenter: BBC Became Propaganda Machine for Climate Change

On one occasion, an MP used BBC airtime to link climate change ­doubters with perverts and holocaust deniers, and his famous interviewer didn’t bat an eyelid.

 

Institutionally biased to the Left, politically correct and with a rudderless leadership. This is Peter Sissons’ highly critical view of the BBC in his new memoirs, in which he describes his fascinating career over four decades as a television journalist. Here, in the latest part of our serialisation, he reveals how it was heresy at the BBC to question claims about climate change . . .

The BBC’s editorial policy on ­climate change, however, was spelled out in a report by the BBC Trust — whose job is to oversee the workings of the BBC in the interests of the public — in 2007. This disclosed that the BBC had held ‘a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus’.

The error here, of course, was that the BBC never at any stage gave equal space to the opponents of the consensus.

But the Trust continued its ­pretence that climate change ­dissenters had been, and still would be, heard on its airwaves. ‘Impartiality,’ it said, ‘always requires a breadth of view, for as long as minority ­opinions are coherently and honestly expressed, the BBC must give them appropriate space.’

In reality, the ‘appropriate space’ given to minority views on climate change was practically zero. Moreover, we were allowed to know practically nothing about that top-level seminar mentioned by the BBC Trust at which such momentous conclusions were reached. Despite a Freedom of Information request, they wouldn’t even make the guest list public.

CONTINUE READING
By: Peter Sissons
The Daily Mail, January 25, 2011

The Real Crisis That Will Soon Hit the US

Forget stocks, the real crisis is coming… and it’s coming fast. 

Indeed, it first hit in 2008 though it was almost entirely off the radar of the American public. While all eyes were glued to the carnage in the stock market and brokerage account balances, a far more serious crisis began to unfold rocking 30 countries around the globe.

I’m talking about food shortages.

Aside from a few rice shortages that were induced by export restrictions in Asia, food received little or no coverage from the financial media in 2008. Yet, food shortages started riots in over 30 countries worldwide. In Egypt people were actually stabbing each other while standing in line for bread.

We’re now seeing the second round of this disaster occurring in Egypt and other Arab countries today. Thanks to the Fed’s funny money policies, food prices have hit records. And even the Fed’s phony measures show that vegetable prices are up 13%!.

The developed world, most notably the US, has been relatively immune to these developments… so far. But for much of the developing world, in which food and basic expenses consumer 50% of incomes, any rise in food prices can have catastrophic consequences.

And that’s not to say that food shortages can’t hit the developed world either.

According to Mark McLoran of Agro-Terra, the Earth’s population is currently growing by 70-80 million people per year. Between 2000 and 2012, the earth’s population will jump from six billion to seven billion. We’re expected to add another billion people by 2024. So demanding for food is growing… and it’s growing fast.

However, supply is falling. Up until the 1960s, mankind dealt with increased food demand by increasing farmland. However, starting in the ‘60s we began trying to meet demand by increasing yield via fertilizers, irrigation, and better seed. It worked for a while (McLoran notes that between 1975 and 1986 yields for wheat and rice rose 32% and 51% respectively).

However, in the last two decades, these techniques have stopped producing increased yields due to their deleterious effects: you can’t spray fertilizer and irrigate fields ad infinitum without damaging the land, which reduces yields. McLoran points out that from 1970 to 1990, global average aggregate yield grew by 2.2% a year. It has since declined to only 1.1% a year. And it’s expected to fall even further this decade.

Thus, since the ‘60s we’ve added roughly three billion people to the planet. But we’ve actually seen a decrease in food output. Indeed, worldwide arable land per person has essentially halved from 0.42 hectares per person in 1961 to 0.23 hectares per person in 2002.

It’s also worth noting that diets have changed dramatically in the last 30 years.

For example, in 1985 the average Chinese consumer ate 44 pounds of meat per year. Today, it’s more than doubled to 110 pounds. That in of itself is impressive, but when you consider that it takes 17 pounds of grain to generate one pound of beef, you begin to see how grain demand can rise exponentially to population growth with even modest changes to diet.

Make no mistake, agriculture is at the beginning of a major multi-year bull market. We’ve got rapidly growing demand, reduced production, and decade low inventories.

This is an absolute recipe for disaster.

Good Investing!

Graham Summers

PS. I’ve put together a FREE special report detailing how to play the coming agriculture boom as well as other inflation hedges that can protect your portfolio from the Fed’s money printing. I call it The Inflationary Armageddon Report and its 14 pages contain a literal treasure trove of information on how to take steps to prepare AND profit from what’s to come. And it’s all 100% FREE.

To pick up your copy today, got to http://www.gainspainscapital.com and click on FREE REPORTS.

By: Phoenix Capital Research, Feb 18 2011

Rothschilds Stage Revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt To Kill Islamic Banks In Emerging North African Markets

Background: Tunisia has undergone increasing economic liberalization over the last decade: In the 2010-2011 World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report, it was ranked as the most competitive country in Africa, as well as the 32nd most economically competitive country globally.   North Africa’s large Muslim populations are a vast business opportunity for Islamic banking and other businesses.

Rothschilds Stage Revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt To Kill Islamic Banks In Emerging North African Markets  JacobRothschild7
Jacob Rothschild, senior member of the British branch of the Rothschild dynasty.

Contrary to popular belief, the world’s finances are controlled by privately-owned “central banks” masquerading as federal government banks in nearly every country in the world  [The U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, ruled that The Federal Reserve (U.S.’ central bank) was privately owned in 680 F.2d 1239, LEWIS v. UNITED STATES of America, No. 80-5905].

Though it is a carefully guarded secret, the Rothschilds and their associates own most the shares in the central banks (Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence, Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 1976, Charts 1-5) (Mullins, Eustice  Secrets of the Federal Reserve 1983).   With extremely little government input, the economies of Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, and Algeria are strictly controlled by the Rothschild’s central banks and their International Monetary Fund.

Continue reading →

Time for them to die – Malthusian snobs pray for cure to overpopulation

A misanthropic dinner party elite wants to see the human race decimated by disease – just so long as it doesn’t affect them.“The poisonous notion that the speedily breeding masses are pushing the planet to breaking point has become a casual dinner-party prejudice.” 

You may have missed a scandalous utterance that was made on BBC radio.

On 5 November, the upmarket Nightwaves on BBC Radio 3 aired a discussion about overpopulation between Dr Susan Blackmore (a neuroscientist) and Professor John Gray (of the London School of Economics).

Dr Blackmore said the “fundamental problem” facing the planet today is that “there are too many people”. Professor Gray agreed. Then Dr Blackmore declared: “For the planet’s sake, I hope we have bird flu or some other thing that will reduce the population, because otherwise we’re doomed.”

So, it’s official: at the Beeb it is unacceptable to make crude jokes about having sex with someone’s granddaughter, but it is perfectly OK to wish death upon large swathes of mankind.

Make a rude call to Andrew Sachs’ answerphone and you will be accused of dragging the BBC’s good name through the dirt. Spout misanthropic nonsense about the need for a speedily contagious disease to come and wipe out mankind and nobody will bat an eyelid.

At the Beeb it is perfectly OK to wish death upon large swathes of mankind.

The disparity between the public reaction to Brandgate (wild) and the public reaction to what I think we should call ‘Birdflugate’ (non-existent) reveals a great deal about the warped morality of the cultural elite.

The reason why Dr Blackmore’s remark received no coverage or complaints is because the herbal tea-drinking literati that listens to Radio 3 discussion programmes will secretly share her prejudices about overpopulation.

Malthusianism, the one-eyed belief that all of the Earth’s problems are caused by over-breeding, is making a comeback in polite circles.

Following the discrediting of eugenics during the Second World War, Malthusians had been rather shamefaced about their beliefs. They continually invented new PC terms with which they might dress up their angst about “too many people”.

In Africa in particular, measures to tackle overpopulation were promoted in the deceitful language of “choice” and “autonomy”,

by charities keen to avoid being accused of pursuing that far uglier-sounding goal: population control.

More recently, however, Malthusians have become more strident. The poisonous notion that the speedily breeding masses are pushing the planet to breaking point has become a casual dinner-party prejudice.

Earlier this year Prince Phillip gave a TV interview in which he offered a pat explanation for the food price crisis: “Too many people.” On the other side of the political spectrum, a republican columnist for the Independent fretted about the “swelling billions” (that’s people in the Third World ) who are pushing our planet to extinction.

Professor Gray has referred to humanity as a “plague”. The novelist Lionel Shriver recognises that this is a “racially, religiously and ethnically sticky” issue but says “the threat of overpopulation is back and here to stay”.

by charities keen to avoid being accused of pursuing that far uglier-sounding goal: population control.More recently, however, Malthusians have become more strident. The poisonous notion that the speedily breeding masses are pushing the planet to breaking point has become a casual dinner-party prejudice.

Earlier this year Prince Phillip gave a TV interview in which he offered a pat explanation for the food price crisis: “Too many people.” On the other side of the political spectrum, a republican columnist for the Independent fretted about the “swelling billions” (that’s people in the Third World ) who are pushing our planet to extinction.

Professor Gray has referred to humanity as a “plague”. The novelist Lionel Shriver recognises that this is a “racially, religiously and ethnically sticky” issue but says “the threat of overpopulation is back and here to stay”.

Dr Blackmore was taking these increasingly common prejudices to their
logical conclusion when she wished that bird flu would come and kill some
of us off (the “swelling billions”, preferably, rather than Radio 3 aficionados).

She follows in the tradition of Earth First!, the eco-group which in the early 1990s said that “just as the Plague contributed to the demise of feudalism,
Aids has the potential to end industrialism”.

More recently, the Optimum Population Trust, which counts Prince Charles’s eco-adviser Jonathon Porritt among its directors, said that if we don’t find a way to reduce human numbers then “it will be one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse that bumps us off”.

Enough. If Ross and Brand’s outburst showed that comedians have trouble censoring their inner adolescents, then these middle-class fantasies about human annihilation suggest the cultural elite cannot keep its misanthropy in check.

The neo-Malthusians are as wrong as every population alarmist in history has ever been. Like Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) and his followers, today’s bird flu dreamers make the schoolboy error of treating population growth as the only variant, and everything else – food production, progress, human ingenuity – as fixed entities.

They are motivated by severe pessimism about humanity’s ability to come up with solutions to its problems, and by the base idea that disease is the only thing that can sort us out.

Source: The First Post.co.uk
By: Brendan O’Neill, NOVEMBER 14, 2008

A message to the environmental movement

Transcript: This is James Corbett of corbettreport.com and I come here today with a message for you.

You the environmentalists, you the activists, you the campaigners.

You who have watched with growing concern the ways in which the world around us has been ravaged in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.

You who are concerned with the state of the planet that we are leaving for our children and our grandchildren and those generations yet unborn.

This is not a message of divisiveness, but cooperation.

This is a message of hope and empowerment, but it requires us to look at a hard and uncomfortable truth:

Your movement has been usurped by the very same financial interests you thought you were fighting against.

You have suspected as much for years.

You watched at first with hope and excitement as your movement, your cause, your message began to spread, as it was taken up by the media and given attention, as conferences were organized and as the ideas you had struggled so long and hard to be heard were talked about nationally. Then internationally.

You watched with growing unease as the message was simplified. First it became a slogan. Then it became a brand. Soon it was nothing more than a label and it became attached to products. The ideas you had once fought for were now being sold back to you. For profit.

You watched with growing unease as the message became parroted, not argued, worn like a fashion rather than something that came from the conviction of understanding.

You disagreed when the slogans–and then the science–were dumbed down. When carbon dioxide became the focus and CO2 was taken up as a political cause. Soon it was the only cause.

You knew that Al Gore was not a scientist, that his evidence was factually incorrect, that the movement was being taken over by a cause that was not your own, one that relied on beliefs you did not share to propose a solution you did not want. It began to reach a breaking point when you saw that the solutions being proposed were not solutions at all, when they began to propose new taxes and new markets that would only serve to line their own pockets.

You knew something was wrong when you saw them argue for a cap-and-trade scheme proposed by Ken Lay, when you saw Goldman Sachs position itself to ride the carbon trading bubble, when the whole thrust of the movement became ways to make money or spend money or raise money from this panic.

Your movement had been hijacked.

The realization came the first time you read The Club of Rome’s 1991 book, The First Global Revolution, which says:

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”

And when you looked at the Club of Rome’s elite member roster. And when you learnt about eugenics and the Rockefeller ties to the Kaiser Willhelm Institute and the practice of crypto-eugenics and the rise of overpopulation fearmongering and the call by elitist after elitist after elitist to cull the world population.

Still, you wanted to believe that there was some basis of truth, something real and valuable in the single-minded obsession of this hijacked environmental movement with manmade global warming.

Now, in November 2009, the last traces of doubt have been removed.

Last week, an insider leaked internal documents and emails from the Climate Research Unit of East Anglia University and exposed the lies, manipulation and fraud behind the studies that supposedly show 0.6 degrees Celsius of warming over the last 130 years. And the hockey stick graph that supposedly shows unprecedented warming in our times. And the alarmist warning of impending climate disaster.

We now know that these scientists wrote programming notes in the source code of their own climate models admitting that results were being manually adjusted.

We now know that values were being adjusted to conform to scientists’ wishes, not reality.

We now know that the peer review process itself was being perverted to exclude those scientists whose work criticized their findings.

We now know that these scientists privately expressed doubts about the science that they publicly claimed to be settled.

We now know, in short, that they were lying.

It is unknown as yet what the fallout will be from all of this, but it is evident that the fallout will be substantial.

With this crisis, however, comes an opportunity. An opportunity to recapture the movement that the financiers have stolen from the people.

Together, we can demand a full and independent investigation into all of the researchers whose work was implicated in the CRU affair.

We can demand a full re-evaluation of all those studies whose conclusions have been thrown into question by these revelations, and all of the public policy that has been based on those studies.

We can establish new standards of transparency for scientists whose work is taxpayer funded and/or whose work effects public policy, so that everyone has full and equal access to the data used to calculate results and all of the source code used in all of the programs used to model that data.

In other words, we can reaffirm that no cause is worth supporting that requires deception for its propagation.

Even more importantly, we can take back the environmental movement.

We can begin to concentrate on the serious questions that need to be asked about the genetic engineering technology whereby hybrid organisms and new, never-before-seen proteins that are being released into the biosphere in a giant, uncontrolled experiment that threatens the very genome of life on this planet.

We can look into the environmental causes of the explosion in cancer and the staggering drops in fertility over the last 50 years, including the BPA in our plastics and the anti-androgens in the water.

We can examine regulatory agencies that are controlled by the very corporations they are supposedly watching over.

We can begin focusing on depleted uranium and the dumping of toxic waste into the rivers and all of the issues that we once knew were part of the mandate of the real environmental movement.

Or we can, as some have, descend into petty partisan politics. We can decide that lies are OK if they support ‘our’ side. We can defend the reprehensible actions of the CRU researchers and rally around the green flag that has long since been captured by the enemy.

It is a simple decision to make, but one that we must make quickly, before the argument can be spun away and environmentalism can go back to business as usual.

We are at a crossroads of history. And make no mistake, history will be the final judge of our actions. So I leave you today with a simple question: Which side of history do you want to be on?

For The Corbett Report, this is James Corbett in western Japan.

The Mapmakers of Society

The beginnings of a Scientific Dictatorship

In order to understand our history, the development of our society and political structure, the influence of the large foundations in America is an essential area of research. Their investment into the social sciences and medical establishment shaped their direction for the 20th Century and beyond. Social control and eugenics became a primary directive. These ideas, primarily due to the work of the Rockefeller and Carnegie philanthropies, spread throughout the intelligentsia and elite circles throughout the western world. These ideas spread throughout the intelligentsia and elite circles throughout the western world.

Dr. Lily E. Kay’s 1993 book “The Molecular Vision of Life: Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology” documents much of the early history behind the rise of eugenics and life sciences. Kay demonstrates that the drive for social control and eugenics was largely responsible for the emergence and growth of the science of molecular biology. Dr. Kay is a recipient of the Smithsonian Fellowship at the National Museum of American History, and an assistant professor of history of science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. Kay’s 2001 obituary from MIT describes her as “…one of the outstanding historians of biology of her generation.”

As Dr. Kay documents, large foundations effectively drew the maps for society to follow. The intelligentsia, trained and schooled under the strong influence of the foundations, closely followed the vision of the elite. This vision extended into the realms of education, politics, religion, and the financial world. As Dr. Lily Kay has painstakingly documented, this influential group set out in the United States to engage in a massive research campaign to discover the inner workings of man and in turn to devise methods of social-biological control. The United States, in turn, became the 20th Century progenitor of eugenics.

Dr. Kay paints a clear picture of the massive influence that the wealthy elite in the United States wields, even to the “…development of culture and the production of knowledge in the United States…” Kay writes,

“Thus by the end of the Progressive Era, even before the large-scale commitment to the “advancement of knowledge” spurred by World War I, the human sciences received considerable support from the large foundations. Their numerous projects and the unprecedented scope of their financial and institutional resources shaped the development of culture and the production of knowledge in the United States. Through education, public opinion, stimulation of specific research agenda, and the promotion of selective categories of knowledge and research, the Foundation played a key role in the creation of a hegemonic bloc; the resources and prestige flowing into those fields relevant to problems of social control were instrumental in the formation of consensus between social and political elites, on the one hand, and academic interests on the other.”

Large foundations – primarily Rockefeller and Carnegie – were investigated in 1915 by the United States Congress, which reported nearly identical findings to the later 1953 Reece Committee, dedicated to the same cause. The 1915 U.S. Commission on Industrial Relations reported that:

“The domination by the men in whose hands the final control of a large part of American industry rests is not limited to their employees, but is being rapidly extended to control the education and social survival of the nation. This control is being extended largely through the creation of enormous privately managed funds for indefinite purposes, hereafter designated “foundations”, by the endowment of colleges and universities, by the creation of funds for the pensioning of teachers, by contributions to private charities, as well as through controlling or influencing the public press…

As Dr. Kay documents, many of the original members of the large foundations and their offshoots were driven by the philosophy that they were the chosen elite. In their minds, moral authority was on their side. They sought to guide the direction of the nation and mold mankind’s development. Frederick T. Gates, a Baptist minister who worked closely with the Rockefeller family and its many initiatives, is quoted as saying,

“…when you die and come to approach the judgment of Almighty God what do you think He will demand of you…? Do you think he will inquire into your trivial sins, your paltry values? NO! He will ask you just One Question: ‘What did you do as a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation?’”

Chester Bernard, who served as president of the Rockefeller Foundation from 1948-1952, was unquestionably a member of the establishment. He saw what the Rockefeller Foundation and much of the scientific community was attempting to do and spoke out against it, but couched his criticism with the assumption of pure motives. Bernard writes in the Rockefeller Foundation’s 1948 Annual Report,

“Inherent in our systematic efforts to promote the welfare of mankind there may be an assumption that… by reason and science we may govern the future of unborn generations in ways that we know are right… Do we mean that because we have learned to navigate the tides we shall also control them? … We have already begun the attempts to regulate local weather. Where do we think we shall stop — with the control of the speed of rotation of the earth, of its revolution around the sun?… Pride goeth before a fall.”

Dr. Kay comments on Bernard’s criticism, stating that, “Given this wisdom, it is paradoxical that Barnard did not hear the dissonance between his poignant words and the Rockefeller Foundation’s agenda in biology, where the primary justification for studying the fundamental mechanisms of soma and psyche was the promise of intervening in the course of human behavior on a global scale.”

This original directive has remained unchanged. However, Dr. Kay concludes by stating that “The eugenic goals, which had informed the design of the molecular biology program and had been attenuated by the lessons of the Holocaust, revived by the late 1950′s… a new eugenics… came to rest in safety on the high ground of medical discourse and latter-day rhetoric of population control.”

Today we see this agenda moving full speed ahead. Foundations are acting more and more like governments. In an interview with the Seattle Times, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was asked, “Some say the emergence of super rich philanthropies like the Gates Foundation has undermined the effectiveness of the U.N. and its member organizations, like the WHO.” Moon responded,

“On the contrary that is what we really want — contributions from the business community as well as philanthropies. We need to have political support, but it doesn’t give us all that we need. NGOs and philanthropies and many foundations such as Bill Gates Foundation — they’re taking a very important role.”

In 1996 the Rockefeller Foundation supplied grant money for early research on edible vaccines. The $58,000 grant, given to the Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research at Cornell University, was aimed at developing and transferring edible vaccine technology to developing countries.

Edible vaccines, according to the Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology, will be a more socioculturally acceptable alternative to needles. In other words, people will be less resistant to eating a mundane banana than taking a shot in the arm. The Journal states that new edible vaccine technology may serve a dual purpose of birth control.

As calls are made for lithium to be added to water supplies world-wide and genetically modified organisms spread throughout the ecosystem, the elite agenda of “…intervening in the course of human behavior on a global scale…” is fast becoming reality.

————–

“If the fully planned and conditioned world comes into existence… the restive species [humanity]… will be vexed no longer by its chatter for truth and mercy and beauty and happiness… if the eugenics are efficient enough there will be no second revolt, but all snug beneath the Conditioners, and the Conditioners beneath her, till the moon falls or the sun grows cold.” — C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man, 1944.

Source: Old-Thinker News
By: Daniel Taylor

War, Martial Law and the Economic Crisis

Excerpt from “The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century”

The U.S. Treasury’s Financial Bailout

The bailout measures of late 2008 may have consequences at least as grave for an open society as the response to 9/11 in 2001. Many members of Congress felt coerced at the time into voting against their inclinations, and the normal procedures for orderly consideration of a bill were dispensed with.

The excuse for bypassing normal legislative procedures was the existence of an emergency. But one of the most reprehensible features of the legislation, that allowed Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to permit bailed-out institutions to use public money for exorbitant salaries and bonuses, was inserted by Paulson after the immediate crisis had passed.

According to Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vermont) the bailout bill originally called for a cap on executive salaries, but Paulson changed the requirement at the last minute. Welch and other members of Congress were enraged by “news that banks getting taxpayer-funded bailouts are still paying exorbitant salaries, bonuses, and other benefits.”[1] In addition, as the Associated Press reported in October 2008, “Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. questioned allowing banks that accept bailout bucks to continue paying dividends on their common stock. ‘There are far better uses of taxpayer dollars than continuing dividend payments to shareholders,’ he said.”[2] Continue reading →

Behind the Arab Revolt is a Word We Dare Not Speak

Shortly after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, I interviewed Ray McGovern, one of an elite group of CIA officers who prepared the President’s daily intelligence brief. McGovern was at the apex of the “national security” monolith that is American power and had retired with presidential plaudits. On the eve of the invasion, he and 45 other senior officers of the CIA and other intelligence agencies wrote to President George W. Bush that the “drumbeat for war” was based not on intelligence, but lies. 

“It was 95 per cent charade,” McGovern told me.

“How did they get away with it?”

“The press allowed the crazies to get away with it.”

“Who are the crazies?”

“The people running the [Bush] administration have a set of beliefs a lot like those expressed in Mein Kampf … these are the same people who were referred to in the circles in which I moved, at the top, as ‘the crazies.’”

I said, “Norman Mailer has written that that he believes America has entered a pre-fascist state. What’s your view of that?”

“Well … I hope he’s right, because there are others saying we are already in a fascist mode.”

Continue reading →

%d bloggers like this: