Saturday, March 31, 2007
What is so attractive about this group? Why are so many famous and important men involved? What are the Masons trying to accomplish? Is Christianity truly compatible with Freemasonry? Join the quest for truth in this revealing and factual video. Uncover the spiritual and historical roots of Freemasonry and the truth that is helping thousands to pass "From Darkness to Light."
Friday, March 30, 2007
Jack McLamb Interview Video "The Constitution vs The New World Order"
Officer Jack McLamb (ret.) has the distinction of being the highest decorated police officer in the history of Phoenix, Arizona. Now residing in a Constitutional Community in northern Idaho. Jack is founder of the American Citizen and Lawmens Association (ACLA),and publisher of Aid & Abet Police and Military Newsletter. Jack hopes to awaken all of his brothers in law enforcement to the coming tyranny of the NWO. "The Constitution vs The New World Order" Seminar on November 18-20th 1994 - Las Vegas. Jack McLamb's 2hour Speech now available on DVD & Audio CDs. nwodvd.com
Thursday, March 29, 2007
In this lecture by Michel Chossudovsky, he blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by Islamic terrorists". Through meticulous research, he has uncovered a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration. According to Chossudovsky, the "war on terrorism" is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex. September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington's agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.
By David Carrico featuring Bill Schnoebelen. Proof of Freemasonry's connection with ancient Babylonian mystery religions and the sexual abuse of children and others during rituals; the promotion of human sacrifice as a pact with Satan.
From a web-review: The existence of Satanic Ritual Abuse and Masonic Ritual Abuse are fully supported by facts, dates and court convictions. The video is Christian based with selections from the Bible. S.M.A.R.T. ( http://members.aol.com/SMARTNEWS/index2.html ) has decided to sell this unique video. S.M.A.R.T. is non-sectarian and has no religious affiliation. We highly recommend this video. The information in this video is invaluable in the fight against ritual abuse, the Masons and their ritual abuse and the backlash against the incest movement. It is very well researched and well done
FBI after Halloween Crimes Satanic Cults Babylon Secrets
Dr. Jack Cluney, THD, PHD, is a spirit-filled ordained Baptist minister, authority on Satanism, witchcraft, white supremacy, and other ... all » forms of cult and occult activity. He has been called in to help investigators from the FBI,CIA,OSI, Border Patrol, and dozens of Police and Sheriffs organizations.
In The Dangers of Evolution, Dr. Hovind reveals the terrible effects that evolutionary beliefs have had on societies throughout history. Giving examples of evolution-based philosophies being used to rationalize the brutal acts of rulers, he exposes evolutionary propaganda in its effort toward the "New World Order.
There's a very simple question that the global warming scaremongers don't seem to be able to answer in a straightforward, credible manner.
It has to do with the current refrigeration of much of the United States and the claims of the global warming alarmists which appear to be very much at odds.
According to the propaganda campaign being hammered at the people of the world, the polar ice cap is melting and the polar regions are on the verge of becoming a tropical paradise.
I would like to know how, if the polar regions are warming, they able to bestow Arctic weather upon much of the U.S. as they are currently doing?
If the Arctic is the planet's refrigeration system and if that system is losing its coolant due to global warming, how can it continue to bless the U.S. with cold fronts that continue to break records for their severity?
The lame excuse the alarmists provide is that Oh well, climate is measured over the long term, you see, and over a year's time the climate is seen as getting warmer, despite the frigid temperatures seen in the winter, which are merely temporary.
That's called "begging the question."
In an e-mail promoting a new book, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming" the Conservative Book Updates from Human Events Book Service had the following wisdom to impart: "For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in ways both large and small. It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales! But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to give the sinister prize they want most of all: total control of American politics, economic activity, and even individual behavior. With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems. National sovereignty? Democracy? Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before."
In that book, CBC reports that author Christopher C. Horner explains why, although Al Gore and his cronies among the media elites and UN globalists endlessly bleat that 'global warming' is an unprecedented global crisis, they really think of it as a dream come true.
"Global warming is the ideal scare campaign for those who are doing all they can to secure strict control over society, business, and the minutest details of individual life." As Horner explains, "if global warming really were as bad as the Leftist doomsayers insist it is, then no policy imaginable could 'solve' it … no matter how much we sacrifice there would still be more to do. That makes global warming the bottomless well of excuses for the relentless growth of Big Government."
Writing in Canada's National Post February 5, Timothy Ball addresses the strong-arm tactics employed by the environmentalist left. Dr. Ball, Chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project and a former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg, Canada recalls what happened to him when he spoke out against the global warming hoax.
"What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent."
Dr. Ball recalls that he once got a three page letter from an academic colleague telling him he had no right to say what he was saying, especially in public lectures.
He was also accused by Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki of being in the pay of oil companies. "That is a lie. Apparently he thinks if the fossil fuel companies pay you have an agenda. So if Greenpeace, Sierra Club or governments pay there is no agenda and only truth and enlightenment?
What did Dr. Ball say that got him in such trouble with some of his colleagues?
Just this: " Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and that for 32 years I was a Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg. "
Politicians are being listened to, however wrote Dr. Ball, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet. Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention."
In recent weeks we have seen environmentalist wackos issuing fatwas against any scientist who dares to contradict their propaganda, demanding they be exiled from the scientific community and tried in international courts.
For example, The Weather Channel’s most prominent climatologist Heidi Cullen, advocated that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming.
Appearing on the Larry King Show January 31, MIT's professor of atmospheric science Dr. Richard Lindzen spoke about the widely touted scientific report issued by the UN's Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and allegedly the work of 2,500 scientists insisting that it's 90 percent certain that global warming is man-made.
In fact, Dr. Lindzen explained, all that was issued last Friday was a summary for policymakers that is not prepared by scientists. "It's not 2,500 people offering their consensus, I participated in that. Each person who is an author writes one or two pages in conjunction with someone else. They travel around the world several times a year for several years to write it and the summary for policymakers has the input of about 13 of the scientists, but ultimately, it is written by representatives of governments, of environmental organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, and industrial organizations, each seeking their own benefit."
Added Lindzan about the whole global warming scare "I think it's mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves."
Then there is this juicy story about the lengths to which the globalbaloneyists will go to convince the world it is tottering on the brink of a cataclysm.
The pro-global warming BBC reported that "rising seas, caused by global warming have for the first time washed an inhabited island of the face of the earth". According to BBC "The obliteration of Lohachara island, in India’s part of the Sundarbans where the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers empty into the Bay of Bengal, marks the moment when one of the most apocalyptic predictions of environmentalists and climate scientists has started coming true."
According to TheNewsisNowPublic.com the story was a hoax. BBC didn't bother to mention that Lohachare Island disappeared 22 years ago and that the entire region of The Sundarbans is a river delta or that the disappearance of the island has been attributed to erosion, not global warming.
All of this provides solid evidence that Christopher C. Horner is right on target in his charge that the whole global warming business is nothing but pure politics - a means by which the left can take control of just about every human activity worldwide.
The real purpose behind the Global Warming movement is the establishment of a world socialist order under the control of the United Nations.
Global warming is what I've been saying it is since 1997: a lot of globaloney.
Infowars.net March 28, 2007Steve Watson
A whistleblower that was on a team working for Silverstein Group in 2002 has made public an extensive set of detailed architectural drawings of the World Trade Center, that prove beyond any doubt that the official reports into the collapse of the towers misrepresented their construction.
The documents were passed to physics Professor Steven Jones, formerly of Brigham Young University, who has done extensive research into the collapse of the buildings and contends that explosives were used to bring them down.
Little is known about the identity of the whistleblower at this point, however the blueprints provided consist of 261 drawings included detailed plans for the North Tower (WTC 1), the World Trade Center foundation and basement, and the TV mast on top of the North Tower.
Most of the drawings can be viewed here .
The blueprints, unlike those of any other publicly funded building, have been withheld from public view since the 9/11 attacks without explanation and were even unavailable for viewing by the team of engineers from the American Society of Civil Engineers, who were assembled to investigate the collapses by FEMA, until they had signed legal documents which bound them to secrecy and demanded that they never use the information against the buildings' owners as part of a lawsuit.
The website 911research.wtc7.net , one of the sites at the forefront of independent investigation into 9/11 for years now, states:
The detailed architectural drawings make clear what official reports have apparently attempted to hide: that the Twin Towers had massive core columns, and those columns ran most of the height of each Tower before transitioning to columns with smaller cross-sections.
Both of the government-sponsored engineering studies of the Twin Towers' "collapses" -- FEMA's and NIST's -- are highly misleading about the core structures. Neither Report discloses dimensions for core columns -- dimensions that are clearly evident in the architectural drawings. Both Reports use a variety of techniques seemingly designed to minimize the strength of the cores or to conceal their structural role entirely.
FEMA, in its explanation of the collapses, stated:
As the floors collapsed, this left tall freestanding portions of the exterior wall and possibly central core columns. As the unsupported height of these freestanding exterior wall elements increased, they buckled at the bolted column splice connections, and also collapsed.
The blueprints show that FEMA's report was inaccurate in stating that core columns were "freestanding" when in fact large horizontal beams cross-connected the core columns in a three-dimensional matrix of steel.
The NIST report into the collapses has also been proven inaccurate by the blueprints as it has implied that the only the corner columns were "massive" and that the core columns decreased in size in the higher stories when, in fact, the sixteen columns on the long faces of the cores shared the same dimensions for most of each Tower's height.
These omitted and distorted facts serve to render the official reports extremely questionable. It seems that facts were being tweaked in order to get closer to an explanation for the collapses. Even then the reports both failed to provide adequate explanations of why the buildings fell.
The buildings more or less fell into their own footprints, which is something that normally takes weeks of expert planning when a building is intentionally demolished and there are only a few companies on the planet that can do it.
Professor Steven Jones points out that the total annihilation of the building, core columns and all, defies the laws of physics unless it was artificially exploded: "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum – one of the foundational Laws of Physics? That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors – and intact steel support columns – the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. If the central support columns remained standing, then the effective resistive mass would be less, but this is not the case – somehow the enormous support columns failed/disintegrated along with the falling floor pans."
Below is an examination of the official reports in more detail. The Official Explanation of the collapses of the Trade Towers and Building 7
The official explanation says that the towers collapsed because of the combined effect of the impact of the airplanes and the resulting fires. The report put out by FEMA said: “The structural damage sustained by each tower from the impact, combined with the ensuing fires, resulted in the total collapse of each building".
And building 7's collapse according to FEMA was also due to fire, however FEMA could not give specific details:
"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse [“official theory”] remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis [fire/damage-caused collapse] has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."
FEMA is not an investigative agency, but it was entrusted with the sole responsibility for investigating the collapses. It began to coordinate the destruction of the evidence almost immediately. The structural steel was quickly removed and loaded on ships for transport to blast furnaces in India and China. Meanwhile, FEMA's investigation of the collapses consisted of assembling a group of volunteer investigators from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), dubbed the Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT). The group was headed by W. Gene Corley, a structural engineer from Chicago who led the investigation of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
FEMA's investigation of one of the worst and most pivotal events in history was farcical:
No independent investigation was funded: FEMA allocated $600,000 for the BPAT's study, which included the cost of printing their report.
Except for an early "tourist trip", The BPAT volunteers were barred from Ground Zero.
They did not see a single piece of steel until almost a month after the disaster.
They had to guess the original locations of the few pieces of steel they saw.
They collected 150 pieces of steel for further study (out of millions of pieces).
Their report, which called for "further investigation and analysis", was published after Ground Zero had been scrubbed.
A key facet of the FEMA report on the towers' collapse was the pancaking floors theory, whereby each floor successively gave way due to buckled columns and the weight from above. This theory has since been roundly dismissed as it totally ignores the fact that the building's central core columns even existed and also ignores the toppling effect witnessed during the collapse of the South Tower and the explosive pulverizing of all materials into fine powder.
It was not until long after the Ground Zero clean-up was completed that an investigation with a multi-million dollar budget began: NIST 's 'Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation' was funded with an initial budget of $16 million.
Where as the FEMA investigation in understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center could be chalked up as a farce, the NIST's investigation cannot. NIST's results strongly indicate a cover-up. NIST's Final Report on the Twin Towers shows that:
NIST avoids describing, let alone explaining, the "collapse" of each Tower after they were "poised for collapse." Thus, NIST avoids answering the question their investigation was tasked with answering: how did the Towers collapse?
NIST describes the Twin Towers without reference to the engineering history of steel-framed buildings, and separates its analysis of WTC Building 7 into a separate report. By treating them in isolation, NIST hides just how anomalous the alleged collapses of the buildings are.
NIST avoids disclosing the evidence sulfidation documented in Appendix C of the FEMA's Building Performance Study.This unexplained phenomenon was described by the New York Times as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation."
NIST has refused to publish the computer models that its report imply show how the fires in the Towers led to "collapse initiation".
The report explains the collapse of both towers with the following sentence:
"The change in potential energy due to downward movement of building mass above the buckled columns exceeded the strain energy that could have been absorbed by the structure. Global collapse then ensued."
So NIST promulgates a theory of "progressive collapse" - ie once the top started coming down, the whole lot came down with it, even the undamaged sections of the building. NIST admits that it didn't even attempt to model the undamaged portions of the building and only modeled a portion of each tower in any detail -- its "global floor model" which consisted of "several stories below the impact area to the top of the structure." Thus the structurally intact floors 1-91 of WTC 1 and floors 1-77 of WTC 2 were excluded from the so called "global" models of the towers. NIST provides no evidence that its model even predicted "collapse initiation".
The excellent research website www.911review.com , which everyone should visit, succinctly sums up the cover up perpetrated by the NIST report:
In summary: The reports by NIST say nothing about how -- and if! -- the collapse was able to progress through dozens and dozens of structurally intact floors without being stopped. If no external energy was available e.g. in the form of explosives, this would have been the opportunity to show that no such energy was needed. On the other hand, if some unaccounted-for energy broke the supporting structures enabling the collapse to progress with the speed it did, there would have been many good reasons not to try to model the impossible, ie. a purely gravitation-driven collapse. Stopping the analysis early enough also saves NIST from trying to explain the symmetrically of the collapses (despite non-symmetrical impact damage and fires), the almost complete pulverization of non-metallic materials as well as the extremely hot spots in the rubble. These remain as inexplicable by the official story as they have ever been.
Despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers, and despite the fact that they published models of the plane impacts, NIST has refused to publish visual simulations from its computer models of the collapses.
In an even more startling admission in its own report, NIST reveals that it "adjusted the input" of variables in tests beyond the visual evidence of what actually happened in order to save its own hypothesis:
"The more severe case (which became Case B for WTC 1 and Case D for WTC 2) was used for the global analysis of each tower. Complete sets of simulations were then performed for Cases B and D. To the extent that the simulations deviated from the photographic evidence or eyewitness reports [e.g., complete collapse occurred], the investigators adjusted the input, but only within the range of physical reality. Thus, for instance,…the pulling forces on the perimeter columns by the sagging floors were adjusted..." (NIST, 2005, p. 142)
NIST simply "discarded" realistic tests based on the empirical data because they did not cause the buildings to collapse.
If this is not indicative of a cover up then what is? The investigation is the wrong way round, NIST has already decided what happened and is manufacturing data to prove it!
Monday, March 26, 2007
2) The latest government explanation for the collapse admits that the planes and the fires alone were not enough to bring down the towers.
3) THE OWNER OF THE WTC COMPLEX, LARRY SILVERSTEIN ADMITTED THAT BUILDING 7 WAS PULLED (THE INDUSTRY TERM FOR DEMOLISHING BY MEANS OF EXPLOSIVES)
4) Frank A. DeMartini, Manager, WTC Construction and Project Management, stated that the WTC towers were designed to take multiple hits from airliners and not collapse, comparing it to poking a pencil through fly netting, DeMartini was adamant that the towers would not collapse.
5) Firefighters, chiefs of safety, reporters, rescue workers and dozens of others all reported bombs going off before the towers collapsed.
I've been thinking it was high time I stirred up a scandal.
A day or so ago, I posted a response to a Centcom agent's comment on Digg, and linked to it, to show everyone the way you're supposed to deal with the bastards. In response to the Centcom agent calling me a 'liberal who is supposed to defend the rights of women to dress how they want', I said:
This "freeing" of "oppressed women" and the like is a concept so haughty and self-righteous as to make Lord Rothschild himself blush. What this actually is a campaign of Americanization. Personally, I am sickened to my very core by the way women behave in this country, and strongly support the ideal of a "patriarchal society", where women play the role they were designed by God to play (raising children, which is the most import role of all), rather than the role that a bunch of sycophant social engineers have brainwashed them to believe makes them powerful.
In response to this, a reader said:
While I applaud you for setting this guy straight, I must say I am amazed by what you said about women! While it is extremely important for women to care for and nuture their children, is it not also true that they should be true to themselves have have the freedom to pursue a career instead of being denied that right and enslaved by their husbands? Please sir, you seem to be level-headed, do not disappoint me by continuing to act like a iron-fisted bigot!! Is it not also true that fathers need to take a more nuturing and involved role in their childrens life? Actually it is more disturbing the way that it is socially exceptable for fathers to take a backseat to parenting. Why don't you examine the degridation of the american father, instead of trying to suppress women.
The following is a brief response to this criticism. Before you start reading, fasten your thinking caps.
The Oppression of Women is a Stupid Myth
It's certainly a complicated issue, or so we are told, but don't you think the fact that people did the same thing for hundreds of thousands of years (or millions or billions, no one knows or does research), and all of the sudden everything changed and our lives are now domesticated-prison-hell, indicates that the change is all connected, and thus all bad?
I am not one to support severe alterations to what human beings are as a species, and I don't think people are capable of effectively weathering such alterations, especially when they take place at a scientifically calculated rate.
Equal or the same?
So, I shall start out by making clear that I do not see either male or female as lesser or greater. I think to even suggest that someone believes such a thing is retarded. "If you think men and women were obviously designed to play differing, complementary roles in society, you're an iron-fisted bigot" is the likeness of saying "if you're against Israel killing babies, you're a racist." The program dictates that anyone who is against Israel is for some reason somehow racist; there is no logic, no explanation, no questions.
You say "denied their rights and enslaved by their husbands", and that I'm "trying to suppress women". These are unfounded allegations that you've thrown at me because I triggered an emotional response mechanism; that is to say, I did not in any way hint at slavery or suppression, but based on social conditioning (programming) you automatically read these things whenever someone suggests that women should raise children.
Does this make any sense? Is not a woman who screams injustice when told her place is in the home directly implying that to have a 'career' is more noble than to raise children?
It is a scientific fact (as well as apparent upon visual inspection) that men and women are inherently different. Their bodies are designed for different things, and their minds and emotions are as well. There is not going to be a point at which this changes, no matter how 'liberal and enlightened' (oxymoron) we think we may be.
There is a balance of energy in everything that must be maintained. Masculinity and femininity, as inlet/outlet, positive/negative, create a balance of energies. When women begin to believe they have a right to dispossess men of their natural duties, disunity, and ultimately chaos, must ensue. Sadly, there is no other way to interpret women all the sudden up and deciding that they want to have 'careers'.
Careers and work
With regards to women's 'careers', I cannot think of a single possible benefit of any kind to man, woman or child that this could even have, in any real or theoretical scenario. It is completely unnatural, and though most devastating to children, it is more of a curse upon the woman than the man. A woman cannot find peace in the man's world, just as a man cannot find peace in hers; nature dictates this, not I.
Basically, we live in a false reality, where work consists of sitting at a desk - beforehand, when real work was done, it would be physically impossible for women to have 'careers'. This drastic change has enabled "women's rights" to come in and destroy the family.
Assuming a woman is married and having children, it would be child abuse for her to also have some 'career'. This is not to say women should not be educated - on the contrary - though I am generally opposed to government schools and college education whether it be for a male or female, I think it is only proper that a woman fill her mind with as much information as will fit.
I would also make a distinction between a 'career' and 'working'. Women have always had jobs that could be done at home. These included, but were not limited to, making baskets, pottery, clothing and preparing food, on top of many, many other jobs that would vary from culture to culture. Today, we buy these sorts of things, or they are done by machines, which I think is retarded, but is something we must all live with for the time being.
There are things that can replace these duties that exist in modern times, such as work on the internet, writing, art, and I would say a great one is education; at home, rather than one of the facilities.
For an unmarried woman, there are various jobs as would be appropriate. Mostly though, I think people should be married and having children at least by the time their 20.
The nature of the sexes and the so-called 'oppression of women'
Because women are designed to play the nurturing role, and take care of their children and men in this way, they are much more emotional, and I would argue they're much more psychic as well. As will any strength, there is a parallel weakness, in that they are much more easily exploited through emotional means. Conversely, a man is logical and physical, making them much more susceptible to greed, lust and other destructive forms of aggression.
Cleverly and disgustingly, women in this society are emotionally and psychologically indoctrinated, beginning at birth, to believe that 'women's rights' are some type of religious sacrament. This is done in ways uncountable, the sickest being the constant comparison of 'women's oppression' to black slavery. Constantly we hear of how we established "women's rights and the freedom of the slaves"; this is roughly comparable to discussing how we "ended nose-picking and stopped sacrificing babies".
Simply, women have been and will be oppressed in societies where evil is wanton, just as children and men will be oppressed in such an place. Other than that, the 'oppression of women', as the term is classically used, is a fiction.
The real crime that has been committed against women is the objectification and dehumanization of the porno-sex culture, which by all accounts was a direct result of so-called 'women's liberation'.
I will probably re-edit this later and turn it into a full article, but to briefly touch on the thing about men playing a nurturing role with their children, I wasn't sure if you were talking about gay adoption or possibly babies sucking the chubby nipples of the slobbish, womanly, fat men who have infested this nation like insects.
Another aspect of utmost importance, which I breeched only in the original comment in question (to the Centcom agent), is the fact that the 'women's liberation movement' was indisputably engineered by the New World Order, as a tactic in their 'quiet war' against the American people. Feminism, followed by the total sexualization of everything, and the homosexual movement (which was society's attempt to restore the balance between the masculine and feminine) has utterly destroyed the family unit. This has made us impotent and weak beyond bounds – an easy mark.
Here are some links regarding this:
How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered WomenGloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize SocietyAmerican Communism and the Making of Women's LiberationThe Dawn of the Feminist Police State
And there is much more @ http://www.savethemales.ca
More links debunking feminism:
lesbianstudies.com The Domain of PatriarchyFeminists myths compared to facts Sommers on Deconstruction, Feminism
Empire In Descent: The Deliberate Destruction Of AmericaWorldwide despise of the United States an intentional pre-cursor for world government takeover
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones December 2 2005
America was once the model of world freedom. Even as recently as the late 1980's, the United States was perceived as a benchmark of how free societies should operate, this despite a slow erosion of respect which began in the Vietnam era.
However, that was a drop in the ocean compared to now. America is universally hated by the population of almost every country on the planet.
Even in my homeland of Britain, America's supposed biggest ally, hatred of all things American, including the American people themselves, is at an all time high. The British hate Americans even more than they do the French or the Germans. In many cases the scope of the resentment is because individuals have difficulty separating the actions of an incumbent government from the real history of a country and its people.Ceaseless warmongering, a worldwide torture policy and scandal after scandal have left America with a soiled global reputation.
America is the new evil empire, the new Soviet Union. Playing the role of the good guys is the EU/UN global government watchdog. This is the landscape of the manufactured multi-polar world. In reality, both entities are working towards the establishment of a unipolar world dictatorship and for that to happen, America has to be brought down from within.
Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, the lies that justified Iraq, indictments of high level Bush administration officials, brazen war profiteering, and the fallen cartoon character image of George W. Bush, all these issues were meant to come out and they were meant to contribute to the world's decaying tolerance of America as a superpower.
The European Union/United Nations global power bloc is waiting in the wings for when nationwide chaos engulfs America and they have to send in their 'peacekeeping' troops to restore order. Far from just being the plot of X Box video games, Republican Congressman Ron Paul recently warned of this outcome.
In a sense, every time we report The gigantic mess in Iraq fits in this same picture. When American troops finally do pull out they will be replaced by NATO forces. Even though, as is the case in Afghanistan, the turmoil will continue just the same, the media will rarely report on it and so the wider world will be hoodwinked into thinking that global government saved the day and cleaned up another filthy American quagmire.
Smaller scale terror attacks, as debated in the recent GOP 'terror memo,' occurring around the world and blamed on America's occupation of Iraq, will have the impact of locking in the domestic police state, while still giving the impression that the Bush administration is incompetent and wayward in prosecuting a 'war on terror' that doesn't even exist in the first place.
This whole unfolding scenario is only going to become clearer as we hurtle towards 2006.
America is meant to lose the war in Iraq. America is meant to lose the war on terror. America is meant to descend into anarchy at home.
The end of the age of American superpower status will be the entree for world government to step across the breach in the name of 'securing the interests of the planet' and any notion of national sovereignty will be cast aside and we will witness the birth of a new world order
Mike WhitneyWednesday, February 7, 2007
The massive equity bubbles which arose from artificially low interest rates and the deliberate destruction of the dollar by reckless increases in the money supply have shifted trillions of dollars from working class Americans to the predatory aristocrats at the top of the economic food chain. The gulf between rich and poor has grown so wide that it now poses a direct threat to our increasingly fragile democracy. “Whatever future developments may prove to be, my best guess is that the US will continue to maintain a façade of Constitutional government and drift along until financial bankruptcy overtakes it.” Chalmers Johnson, “Empire V. Democracy: Why Nemesis is at our Door”
02/06/07 "ICHBlog" -- - Every time a US Dollar is traded, a check is issued on an account that is overdrawn by $8.6 trillion. (That is the present size of the national debt) It is, without question, the biggest swindle in history. Flimsy sheets of faded-green scrip are eagerly exchanged for costly goods and services without any regard for the real value of the currency.
And, the real value of the currency is absolutely nothing!
How is it that this scam persists when people appear to be aware of the massive debt and deficits which underwrite the dollar? Do they still believe in that puerile fairy tale about “the full faith and credit” of the United States backing up every greenback? Or are they pacified by the wizened graybeards, like Alan Greenspan and Hank Paulson, who soothingly bray about the “strong dollar policy”?
In truth, the dollar rests on the crumbling foundation of consumerism and oil. The American consumer’s gluttonous appetite for spending has kept the greenback flying high for decades. Economists marvel at America’s lust for electronic gadgetry, the latest fashions, and useless knick-knacks. They call our profligate spending “the engine for global growth”; and indeed it is. No other country in the world is nearly as addicted to binge-spending as the US consumer. As long as he can beg, borrow or steal his way into the shopping mall; the orgy of spending is bound to continue. (Consumer spending is 70% of GDP)
Regrettably, there are signs that the US consumer is beginning to buckle from the weight of personal debt. The Associated Press reported just this week that “people are saving at the slowest rate since the Great Depression… and the Commerce Dept stated that the nation’s personal savings rate for 2006 was a negative 1%, the worst showing in 73 years.”
Additionally, credit card debt has skyrocketed, which is an indication that homeowners are no longer able to siphon easy-money from their home-equity. The nose-diving real estate market has slowed refinancing to a dribble; cutting off the additional $825 billion of cash which was extracted from home-equity just last year.
Clearly, the well is running dry; the housing bubble is hang-gliding into the abyss and there’s nothing Fed-master Bernanke can do to save it from its inevitable crash-landing.
The central banks around the world are now watching for any sign that the American consumer is about to give up the ghost. As soon as that happens, bank managers everywhere will swing into action, ditch their U.S.Dollars and head for the exits. When the “global engine” sputters to a halt; it’ll be curtains for the greenback.
The Oil-extortion Racket
The dollar’s link to oil has helped to keep it afloat but, in truth, it’s just another dismal rip-off. More than 70% of the world’s oil is denominated in USD; a virtual monopoly for the USA. Until last year, even Russia was using dollars in its oil transactions with Germany. Imagine a comparable deal, like the US purchasing oil from Canada in rubles?!?
It’s lunacy; and yet this is the system the US hopes to preserve so it can maintain its unique status as the world’s “reserve currency” and keep expanding its debt into perpetuity. It explains why the Federal Reserve has been able to increase the money supply by a whopping 15% for the last 6 years! Trillions of dollars are now circulating in the oil trade keeping the value of the dollar high by creating artificial demand.
The other reason the dollar hasn’t succumbed to hyperinflation is because the current account deficit is running at roughly $800 billion per year. The Asian giants (China and Japan) and the oil exporting countries are mopping up more than $700 billion of our red ink every year!
The dollar’s link to oil forces central banks to maintain humongous stockpiles of USD to pay the steadily rising price of oil that keeps their industries and vehicles running. Otherwise they would have chucked the flaccid greenback years ago and converted to the more steadfast euro.
The so-called ‘global economic system’ has nothing to do with competition, free markets or private enterprise; that’s just public relations gobbledygook. In practice, it is the world’s biggest extortion racket, wherein, the “Godfather”-- Uncle Sam-- holds a gun to the heads of his subjects and forces them to use our fiat-paper to purchase the oil that lubricates their economies.
Why would anyone accept a personal check from a nation that owes the bank more than $8.6 trillion dollars?
It’s blackmail, pure and simple; and yet, the Chinese, Japanese etc. continue to play along knowing full-well that we neither have the inclination nor the resources to pay them back in kind?
Every so often, a rebel nation will try to break the shackle of greenback-tyranny and operate outside the US-run system?
For example, Saddam Hussein switched to euros 6 months before he was carpet-bombed in Shock and Awe. His defiance only hastened his ultimate downfall.
Now Iran and Venezuela are threatening to convert to euros. Is it any surprise that they are both on Bush’s axis-of-evil hit list?
Russia has already made the conversion to euros and rubles (and has considerably depleted his supplies of USD) but, of course, regime change is more difficult when a state has nuclear weapons. Instead, the mainstream media is conducting an impressive “Swift Boat” campaign against Putin, smearing him as a “Russian autocrat” who is “rolling back democracy”. At the same time, the Bush administration is threatening to deploy missile systems in Eastern Europe and ratcheting up the pressure in the former Soviet republics.
Bush would rather restart the Cold War than abandon the supremacy of the greenback.
But, why? Is Dollar-primacy really that crucial to our economy?
The greenback is the baling wire that keeps the global economy in the hands of the doddering old misers at the Federal Reserve. It’s the cornerstone of the whole wretched system; a system which now includes torture, extraordinary rendition, and myriad other war crimes.
The young Muslim men who are abducted off the streets of Europe and Asia and taken to CIA Black Sites where they are waterboarded or stacked in naked pyramids; are tortured in defense of the crumpled piece of green paper we carry in our pants pockets.
Think I’m kidding?
Just look at Bush’s budget for 2007-2008; $700 billion for foreign wars?!? There’s no way the US can pay off that debt through the normal means of increasing exports. In fact, Bush has already said that he plans to preserve his unfunded tax cuts whether they produce massive deficits or not.
What Bush plans to do is force the foreign central banks to hold more dollar-based assets, thus, thrusting our gigantic debt onto our trading partners. According to Bob Chapman of The International Forecaster, “US debt was up 10.1% to $4.085 trillion and accounts for 58.8% OF ALL THE CREDIT ISSUED GLOBALLY LAST YEAR. The US is producing more debt than the rest of the world combined.
As long as foreign lenders are willing to take our paper, Bush will keep expanding our debt. As Chalmers Johnson opined, “We are dependent on ‘the kindness of strangers’”. (The Blanche Dubois economy)
Of course, if the central banks grow tired of this pyramid-scheme and dump the dollar; the world can get on with the business of addressing global warming, poverty, AIDs, Peak Oil, nuclear proliferation etc. That won’t happen as long as the dollar reigns supreme and a small cadre of unelected racketeers at the Fed continue Gerry-rig the system.
Economic justice and equitable distribution of wealth begin with greater parity among the currencies. That requires “regime change” for the greenback and a loosening of its tyrannical grip on the system.
Sleepwalking in the Weimar U.S.A.
The good news is that the Bush administration is pushing the dollar towards extinction anyway. Another few years of $800 billion trade deficits, lavish unfunded tax cuts for the mega-rich, and a Pentagon budget of $700 billion-plus; and the old greenback will be going the way of the Dodo. Jim Willie of GoldenJackass.com summarized it this way:
“Never in the history of central bankers has the hidden coordination, influenced pressure, gargantuan money creation, doctored statistics, and interference with financial markets been so broad, so deep, and so profound. My allegation is clear, that we now live in Weimar times, as has been warned for two years worth of scribbles. Collectively, they have abused the privilege of printing money, and in doing so, have guaranteed a gold bull market. … The more heavily the counterfeit press dispenses electronic dollars, devoted to operations, to credit, to consumer spending, to military adventures, to good old fashioned fraud, the gold bull benefits from ample new oxygen and blood flow”.
Willie is right; the system is rotten to the core. Once the dollar crashes, other currencies rush in to fill the void generating greater competition between the energy and manufacturing giants. A new paradigm will emerge distributing power more equitably among the states. It’s a way to resuscitate a system that is currently held together through force of arms.
Besides, how long will China and Japan continue to abet Washington’s war-mongering adventurism? My guess is that the daggers have already been sharpened in Beijing, Caracas, Delhi and Moscow. Everyone is just waiting for Bush to cross that invisible line in the sand before they fling their greenbacks into the jet-stream and wait for Goliath to tumble.
That “invisible line in the sand” is Iran.
The world is at a crossroads and everyone who can fog a mirror knows it. The superpower model of global governance has failed miserably. We need more responsible stewardship of the planet and its resources.
How can we build our economies when a handful of western plutocrats control the spigot for quickly dwindling oil reserves? How can we attack climate change when those same blinkered reprobates employ pseudo-scientists to dispute global warming? How can we address nuclear proliferation when neocon militarists believe in “useable” low-yield, bunker-busting warheads?
The model is hopelessly shattered. We’d be better off boarding-up the White House and the Federal Reserve and starting from Square One.
The world needs a break from Washington’s wasteful spending and unprovoked wars. At the same time, foreign creditors are increasingly reluctant to keep financing America’s extravagant consumption. And, no one is hoodwinked by Bush’s “war on terror” scam; a conflict that was clearly concocted to assert control over the world’s remaining resources.
The world is realigning according to mutual interests and a shared vision of the future. The rise of energy alliances in Latin America and Asia (particularly the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) which now controls most new oil deposits and output) signals the waning of western influence and the ascendancy of a new energy paradigm. Power is progressively shifting away from Washington.
That’s bad news for the greenback which depends on its linkage to oil to sustain its enormous debt.
The dollar now faces challenges from all directions. Western elites have savaged the country’s economic base by hollowing out our manufacturing base in order to destroy the American labor movement.
Free trade has transformed the US into the biggest creditor nation in history. The country exports nothing but bombs and misery.
Also, as Congressman Ron Paul notes, “Most knowledgeable people assume that inflation of the money supply is not only going to continue, but accelerate. This anticipation, plus the fact that many new dollars have been created over the past 15 years that have not been fully discounted, guarantees the further depreciation of the dollar.”
Eventually, the markets will catch on, foreign lenders will stop buying our Treasuries, and the dollar will fall through the floor.
The laws of gravity apply to economics as well as science.
Red flags are going up everywhere. China’s central bank issued a warning in December about the risks of the weakening dollar:
“If external capital stops flowing into the US, a significant drop in the dollar may occur with consumption and investment shrinking, interest rates rising, and financial markets experiencing turbulence, endangering global financial and economic stability. There could be adjustments to how European private capital, Asian foreign exchange reserves and oil export proceeds are invested.”
Yes, of course, a complete economic meltdown with capital fleeing the United States to foreign countries and the American economy collapsing in a heap.
The Chinese central bank statement adds:
“If the US current account deficit continues to grow faster than GDP, then the investment value of US assets may be subject to doubts and challenges and the willingness of investors to continue holding and buying US financial products may weaken. This could cause changes in capital flows, the exchange rates of major currencies, and the value of foreign exchange assets.”
The Chinese bank is giving the Bush Team a chapter out of Econ. 101: “If you keep spending more than you are taking in; the stock market will fall, the dollar will plummet, and the US economy will tank”.
What could be clearer than that?
The administration, however, chooses to ignore the basic laws of economics and pursue a madcap plan to wage aggressive war across the planet and pilfer the world’s oil reserves.
So far, the results have been less than reassuring.
The Decline of U.S. Sovereignty; blame it on the Fed
The United States set off on the road to perdition when it transferred the power to create money to the privately-owned Federal Reserve. It’s been downhill ever since.
The man who can set interest rates and create money is more powerful than the man who can move armies and change laws. By conferring that authority on the Federal Reserve we have assured that the policies that govern our economy are decided by unelected members of the ruling elite whose choices will naturally reflect the interests of their class.
The wealth gap that has opened up like a yawning chasm between rich and poor in America originated with the class-based policies of the Fed. The massive equity bubbles which arose from artificially low interest rates and the deliberate destruction of the dollar by reckless increases in the money supply have shifted trillions of dollars from working class Americans to the predatory aristocrats at the top of the economic food chain. The gulf between rich and poor has grown so wide that it now poses a direct threat to our increasingly fragile democracy. That’s why Thomas Jefferson said:
“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of our currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing of power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
Free people cannot control their own destiny unless they control their own currency. The Federal Reserve must be abolished. Link to this page: http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/405/2/
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Associated Press March 17, 2007CAROLYN THOMPSON
BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) - When a 60-year-old man spat on the sidewalk, his DNA became as public as if he had been advertising it across his chest.
Police officers secretly following Leon Chatt last August collected the saliva - loaded with Chatt's unique genetic makeup - to compare with DNA evidence from the scene of an old murder they believed he'd committed.
On Feb. 1, Chatt was charged in one of Buffalo's oldest unsolved cases, the 1974 rape and stabbing of his wife's stepsister, Barbara Lloyd.
While secretly collecting a suspect's DNA may be an unorthodox approach to solving crimes, prosecutors say it crosses no legal boundaries - that when someone leaves their DNA in a public place via flakes of skin, strands of hair or saliva, for example, they give up any expectation of privacy.
But the practice has raised questions from Washington state to Florida, where similar collections are under scrutiny.
"If we felt it wasn't proper and we didn't have a strong legal foundation, we wouldn't have done it," Erie County District Attorney Frank Clark said, discussing another recent case involving secretly obtained DNA.
In that case, the smoking gun was tableware the suspect used during a night out with his wife. Undercover investigators had waited out Altemio Sanchez at the bar of a Buffalo restaurant one evening and moved in on his water glass and utensils after he'd gone.
Two days later, the 49-year-old factory worker and father of two was charged with being the elusive "Bike Path Rapist" believed responsible for the deaths of three women and rape of numerous others from the early 1980s through 2006.
Lawyers for Sanchez and Chatt say both men continue to profess their innocence. Both have pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder and their cases are pending in the courts.
DNA, which is unique to every person, has become a cold case squad's best friend. Investigators can re-examine things like hair, blood, semen and carpet fibers from decades-old crime scenes and cross-reference the DNA with ever expanding databases kept by law enforcement.
"It's one of the greatest tools that law enforcement has today," said Dennis Richards, the Buffalo Police Department's chief of detectives.
New York state last year underscored the value of DNA by tripling, to about 46 percent, the number of people convicted of crimes who must submit a sample to the state's database.
To catch up on a backlog, Erie County in January conducted an unusual two-day DNA "blitz." Hundreds of convicts who "owed" a sample were summoned to a downtown courthouse, where an assembly line of sorts was set up to swab their mouths.
But it is the so-called "abandoned" DNA like that collected from Sanchez and Chatt - and suspects elsewhere arrested based on discarded cigarettes or chewing gum - that concerns people like Elizabeth Joh. The University of California law professor believes it is time legislators consider regulating such collections out of concerns for privacy.
Right now, police rely on abandoned DNA when they lack enough evidence to obtain a court-ordered sample.
"If we look at this kind of evidence as abandoned, then it really permits the police to collect DNA from anyone - not just cold case issues - from anyone at any time and really for no good reason or any reason at all," Joh said.
"That's something that maybe sounds like a science fiction scenario - police running after people trying to get their DNA," she said, "but we really don't know where this could lead."
Asked whether there should be boundaries on such collections, Richards said, "That's one for the lawyers to argue in a court of law."
Chatt's attorney, John Jordan, said he would "absolutely" challenge the DNA evidence in his client's case in court but declined to elaborate.
Prosecutors tend to view abandoned DNA as akin to trash, which courts have upheld as fair game for investigators, Joh said.
She pointed to the case of California v. Greenwood, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1988 that police did not need a warrant to search a suspected drug dealer's trash because he should have had no expectation of privacy when he placed it on the curb. Trash, the judges wrote, is "readily accessible to animals, children, scavengers, snoops, and other members of the public."
But Joh argued comparing DNA and trash is a poor analogy.
"Obviously, we might want to discard that cigarette, but do we really mean to give up all kinds of privacy claims in the genetic material that might lie therein?" she asked.
As advances in technology make DNA analysis faster and cheaper, "I think of it really as a kind of frontier issue," she said.
Richards, meanwhile, pointed out that while abandoned DNA can confirm a suspect's identity, it also works to the benefit of someone who is innocent.
"DNA rules people in, but it also rules people out," he said.
That point was not lost on the husband of murder victim Barbara Lloyd, who was questioned for hours after he reported his wife's death from 16 stab wounds in their bedroom that March 1974 morning. Police ruled Galan Lloyd out as a suspect after a few days.
Chatt's arrest, he said, proved that was the right decision.
"If there were people out there who still thought I did it, this should do it," Lloyd, now 59, told The Buffalo News.
Barbara Lloyd was killed as her then-3-year-old son, Joseph, and 14-month-old daughter, Kimberly, slept. The now-grown children recently persuaded police to take another look at the killing, leading police to close in on Chatt.
"We were very fortunate that at that time there was a detective in the evidence collection unit who was able to secure evidence from the scene which was later used for comparison," Richards said. "Here we are 30 years later, able to open up a box and submit some of the items that we found and to have a DNA analysis done."
Joh suggests proceeding with caution.
"My hope is there will be much greater awareness of what this means, not just for these particular cases, but for everyone," she said. "Is DNA sampling going to be ordinary and uncontroversial for the general population, in which case abandoned DNA may not be so alarming, or does it raise a whole host of privacy questions?"
Erasing the Pain of the Past Scientists Are Developing Drugs That Could Eliminate Traumatic Events From Our Memories
ABC News March 20, 2007 RUSSELL GOLDMAN
March 20, 2007 — - "I'd take it in a second," said Sgt. Michael Walcott, an Iraq War veteran, referring to an experimental drug with the potential to target and erase traumatic memories.
Walcott, who served in a Balad-based transportation unit that regularly took mortar fire, now suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. Since returning to the United States two years ago, he has been on antidepressants and in group therapy as he tries to put his life back together and heal from the psychological scars of war. "There are moments," he said, "when you just want be alone and don't want to deal with everyone telling you that you've changed."
There are many others like Walcott. The Army estimates that one in eight soldiers returning home from Iraq suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. Symptoms of the disorder, once known as shell shock, include flashbacks, nightmares, feelings of detachment, irritability, trouble concentrating and sleeplessness.
Much about why painful memories come back to haunt soldiers and those who live through other traumatic experiences remains unknown. Scientists say that is because little is known about how the brain stores and recalls memories.
But in their early efforts to understand the way in which short-term memories become long-term memories, researchers have discovered that certain drugs can interrupt that process. Those same drugs, they believe, can also be applied not just in the immediate aftermath of a traumatic event — like a mortar attack, rape or car accident — but years later, when an individual is still haunted by memories of event.
The hope is that a post-traumatic stress disorder patient can work with a psychiatrist and focus a traumatic event, take one of these drugs and then slowly forget that event. With that hope, however, comes a series of ethical concerns. What makes up our personalities — the essence of who we are as individuals — if not the collected memories of our experiences?
"This is all very preliminary," said Dr. Roger Pitman, a Harvard Medical School psychiatrist. "We're just getting started. There is some promising preliminary data but no conclusions."
Much of the research Pitman is currently conducting on human subjects at Massachusetts General Hospital focuses on altering memories in the immediate aftermath of a specific type of trauma — automobile accidents. Subjects who arrive in the hospital's emergency room are prescribed either the drug propranolol or a placebo.
Propranolol was originally developed to treat high blood pressure, but its effect on the hormone adrenaline has made it popular among actors dealing with severe stage fright, and scientists are now using it in their research on memory.
"There is a period of time after you first learn something before it's retained," Pitman explained. "This is called consolidation."
Some research has shown that stress hormones, particularly adrenaline, make that process faster and more intense.
"That's why you remember what you were doing the morning of Sept. 11, better than August 11," he said.
Some scientists believe that post-traumatic stress disorder is the result of too much adrenaline entering the brain at the moment the memory of a traumatic event is being consolidated, or stored, for the first time.
But "the real hot topic," Pitman said, is not consolidation but reconsolidation, the process by which an old memory is recalled and the same "window of opportunity" to alter it with drugs is opened for a second time.
By getting soldiers, or others who have lived through harrowing experiences, to remember their traumatic experiences through talking therapy, the theory goes, the chance to target and erase those memories presents itself.
Reconsolidation remains a "controversial" theory according to Pitman, but Joseph LeDoux, a psychologist at New York University's Center for Neural Science, said his recent experiments with rats adds to evidence that it's real.
LeDoux is not trying to create a drug to treat humans. For him, the specific drug isn't important. What is important is understanding the process by which memories are retained and altered.
"The idea is that memories are vulnerable. They can be improved or weakened. The main point is that we're trying to understand how this all works rather than come up with a drug."
An Ethical Firestorm -- 'A Genie in the Bottle'
But the idea of improving or weakening people's memories gives many medical ethicists pause. The President's Council on Bioethics has condemned memory-altering research. The National Institutes of Health, however, has funded some experiments that use propranalol for post-traumatic stress disorder treatment, and Pitman said he has received a grant from the Army to begin conducting similar research with Iraq veterans.
"There are several major concerns" about creating these kinds of drugs, said Felicia Cohn, a medical ethicist at University of California at Irvine's School of Medicine. "Is the act of altering memories even an appropriate medical intervention?" she asked.
Another set of "issues is related to consequences. What are the effects of altering a particular person's memory but not changing the context the person is living in. We might erase a young girl's memory of a rape, but people around her will still know and inadvertently remind her," Cohn said.
"It becomes a genie in the bottle question. Once a drug is available for use, it gets used appropriately and inappropriately. People could start going to physicians to forget they love chocolate. … Is it just for post-traumatic stress disorder and rape victims? Where do we draw the line? Who gets to decide what is horrific enough?"
The Drugging of our Children (Gary Null) (SSRI drug dangers)(Columbine shooting)
In the absence of any objective medical tests to determine who has ADD or ADHD, doctors rely in part on standardized assessments and the ... all » impressions of teachers and guardians while the they administer leave little room for other causes or aggravating factors, such as diet, or environment. Hence, diagnosing a child or adolescent with ADD or ADHD is often the outcome, although no organic basis for either disease has yet to be clinically proven. Psychiatrists may then prescribe psychotropic drugs for the children without first without making it clear to parents that these medications can have severe side-effects including insomnia, loss of appetite, headaches, psychotic symptoms and even potentially fatal adverse reactions, such as cardiac arrhythmia. And yet, despite these dangers, many school systems actually work with government agencies to force parents to drug their children, threatening those who refuse with the prospect of having their children taken from the home unless they cooperate
Stars Cite Movie As Evidence Of Government Conspiracy
CBS News March 22, 2007 Andrew Kirtzman
(CBS) NEW YORK
A controversial new film about 9/11 is raising eyebrows, not only for its content, but also for the people involved in the project: Rosie O'Donnell and Charlie Sheen. The sitcom actor and talk show hostess have both become spokespeople for the 9/11 conspiracy movement. "If the government is lying about flight 93, is it hard to believe the rest is a lie?" That line can be heard on the video "Loose Change," which has been floating around the Internet for years, but now Sheen is in talks with Magnolia Pictures to narrate a new version of the video and redistribute it. Sheen believes the government may have been behind the attacks, and said so in a recent interview. "I have a hard time believing a fireball traveled down the elevator over 1100 feet, and still had the explosive energy to destroy the lobby as it was described," Sheen said on "The Alex Jones Show." Meanwhile, O'Donnell has been using her Web site to reprint excerpts from the 9/11 conspiracy site, Whatreallyhappened.com. The conspiracy theorists believe that the government blew up the twin towers and covered up the evidence by making it appear that commercial airplanes flew into the buildings. They also believe al-Qaida had nothing to do with the attacks. "I know it's hard to imagine the government would intentionally murder almost 3000 innocent people, but once you begin to accept that possibility you can never go back to the 19 Arabs," the movie's narrator goes on to say. James Meigs is Editor in Chief of Popular Mechanics magazine, which published a book debunking the conspiracy theories put forth in the film and online. He says "Loose Change" has no merit whatsoever. "It is a brilliantly patched-together stew of all kinds of misconceptions, misquotes and real mistakes about how things really worked on that day," said Meigs. Magnolia Films founder Mark Cuban, who also owns the Dallas Mavericks, said they're also looking for a film telling the other side of the story, saying "we like controversial subjects."
Saturday, March 17, 2007
"There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies....but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known." "The powers of financial capitalism had another farreaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds' central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups."
Top: "kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama"Translation:"With clandestine terrorism we will conduct war"Bottom: "Ha'Mossad Le'modiein"Translation:"The institute for the collection of Information"
The selection of Henry Kissinger by the Bush Administration to oversee the investigation of the events leading up to the September 11th. attacks has done little to allay concerns about what the Administration knew prior to the attacks. To the contrary Kissinger with all his baggage appears to represent an almost desperate desire on the part of the Bush Administration to keep the events leading up to the attacks hidden from public view. Remember as you do the math; this a man who cannot travel freely in Europe and many other parts of the world for fear of being detained by local authorities. Kissinger is a very risky appointment. One cannot help but wonder what would prompt the Bush Administration to take so great a risk. -- ma)
t r u t h o u t Quotation Compilation Quotes from Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger
Sunday, 1 December, 2002
Famous Quotes by Henry Kissinger
"The US must carry out some act somewhere in the world which shows its determination to continue to be a world power." -- Henry Kissinger, post-Vietnam blues, as quoted in The Washington Post, April 1975
"Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government." -- Henry Kissinger speaking at Evian, France, May 21, 1992 Bilderburgers meeting. Unbeknownst to Kissinger, his speech was taped by a Swiss delegate to the meeting.
"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." -- Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State under Richard Nixon, about Chile prior to the CIA overthrow of the democratically elected government of socialist President Salvadore Allende in 1973
"Why should we flagellate ourselves for what the Cambodians did to each other?" -- Henry Kissinger - who (with Richard Nixon) was responsible for the massive bombing of Cambodia in 1973, which killed three-quarters of a million peasants and disrupted Cambodian society, setting the stage for Pol Pot to come to power and ultimately kill another one-and-a-half million people
"Covert action should not be confused with missionary work." -- Henry Kissinger, commenting on the US sellout of the Kurds in Iraq in 1975
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." --Henry Kissinger
Money - David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger & more
Alex Jones NWO Quotes
Vladimir Lenin quotes
“A lie told often enough becomes truth”
“One man with a gun can control 100 without one. ”
“Can a nation be free if it oppresses other nations? It cannot.”
“The goal of socialism is communism.”
“Fascism is capitalism in decay”
“There are no morals in politics; there is only expedience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just because he is a scoundrel.”
"When there is state there can be no freedom, but when there is freedom there will be no state.”
"Oh Mortal Man, is there nothing you cannot be made to believe?" -- Adam Weishaupt
"All warfare is based on deception." -- The Art Of War, Sun Tzu
"I am convinced that those societies (such as the Native American peoples) which live without government enjoy in their general mass an infinitely greater degree of happiness than those who live under the European governments. Among the former, public opinion is in the place of law, & restrains morals as powerfully as laws ever did anywhere. Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves & sheep. I do not exaggerate."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The modern theory of the perpetuation of debt has drenched the earth with blood, and crushed its inhabitants under burdens ever accumulating."
- Thomas Jefferson
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
- Thomas Jefferson
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a moneyed aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The system of banking we have both equally and ever reprobated. I contemplate it as a blot left in all our constitutions, which, if not covered, will end in their destruction. I sincerely believe, with you...that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."
- Thomas Jefferson
"To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition. The incorporation of a bank, and the powers assumed by this bill [chartering the first Bank of the United States] have not, in my opinion, been delegated to the United States by the Constitution. They are not among the powers specially enumerated."
- Thomas Jefferson
"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the Federal government their power of borrowing (from privately-owned corporate banks)."
- Thomas Jefferson
"We are undone, my dear sir, if legislation is still permitted which makes our money, much or little, real or imaginary, as the moneyed interests shall choose to make it."
- Thomas Jefferson
"A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal."
-Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon magazine.
"I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers than it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist.... I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus."
-Prince Philip, in his Foreward to If I Were an Animal; United Kingdom, Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.
"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
-Prince Philip, Reported by Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.
"I don't claim to have any special interest in natural history, but as a boy I was made aware of the annual fluctuations in the number of game animals and the need to adjust the 'cull' to the size of the surplus population."
-Preface to Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988, p.|8.
"Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable."
-Sir Julian Huxley, first Director General of UNESCO, 1946-1948.
"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."
-Margaret Sanger, outspoken atheist and socialist, founder of the Voluntary Parenthood League in 1914, and responsible for opening the first birth control clinic in the United States in New York City.
"It is now apparent that the ecological pragmatism of the so-called pagan religions, such as that of the American Indians, the Polynesians, and the Australian Aborigines, was a great deal more realistic in terms of conservation ethics than the more intellectual monotheistic philosophies of the revealed religions."
-Press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on the occasion of the ``Caring for Creation'' conference of the North American Conference on Religion and Ecology, May 18, 1990.
"To keep global resource use within prudent limits while the poor raise their living standards, affluent societies need to consume less. Population, consumption, technology, development, and the environment are linked in complex relationships that bear closely on human welfare in the global neighbourhood. Their effective and equitable management calls for a systemic, long-term, global approach guided by the principle of sustainable development, which has been the central lesson from the mounting ecological dangers of recent times. Its universal application is a priority among the tasks of global governance."
-United Nations Our Global Neighborhood 1995
"I reject the idea that humans are superior to other life forms. . . Man is just an ape with an overly developed sense of superiority."
-- Paul Watson, director of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and a founder of Greenpeace
"Under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not the character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner. . . ." [This is compassionate liberalism.]
-Fabian Socialist Bernard Shaw in his Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Accepted theories about man causing global warming are "lies" claims a controversial new TV documentary. 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' - backed by eminent scientists - is set to rock the accepted consensus that climate change is being driven by humans. The programme, to be screened on Channel 4 on Thursday March 8, will see a series of respected scientists attack the "propaganda" that they claim is killing the world's poor. Even the co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, is shown, claiming African countries should be encouraged to burn more CO2. Nobody in the documentary defends the greenhouse effect theory, as it claims that climate change is natural, has been occurring for years, and ice falling from glaciers is just the spring break-up and as normal as leaves falling in autumn. A source at Channel 4 said: "It is essentially a polemic and we are expecting it to cause trouble, but this is the controversial programming that Channel 4 is renowned for." Controversial director Martin Durkin said: "You can see the problems with the science of global warming, but people just don't believe you - it's taken 10 years to get this commissioned. "I think it will go down in history as the first chapter in a new era of the relationship between scientists and society. Legitimate scientists - people with qualifications - are the bad guys. "It is a big story that is going to cause controversy. "It's very rare that a film changes history, but I think this is a turning point and in five years the idea that the greenhouse effect is the main reason behind global warming will be seen as total bollocks.
From a Rapt Audience, a Call to Cool the Hype
Al Gore’s film on global warming depicted a bleak future. By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: March 13, 2007
Hollywood has a thing for Al Gore and his three-alarm film on global warming, “An Inconvenient Truth,” which won an Academy Award for best documentary. So do many environmentalists, who praise him as a visionary, and many scientists, who laud him for raising public awareness of climate change.
But part of his scientific audience is uneasy. In talks, articles and blog entries that have appeared since his film and accompanying book came out last year, these scientists argue that some of Mr. Gore’s central points are exaggerated and erroneous. They are alarmed, some say, at what they call his alarmism.
“I don’t want to pick on Al Gore,” Don J. Easterbrook, an emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, told hundreds of experts at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America. “But there are a lot of inaccuracies in the statements we are seeing, and we have to temper that with real data.”
Mr. Gore, in an e-mail exchange about the critics, said his work made “the most important and salient points” about climate change, if not “some nuances and distinctions” scientists might want. “The degree of scientific consensus on global warming has never been stronger,” he said, adding, “I am trying to communicate
Don J. Easterbrook, a geology professor,
has cited “inaccuracies” in
“An Inconvenient Truth.”the essence of it in the lay language that I understand.”
Although Mr. Gore is not a scientist, he does rely heavily on the authority of science in “An Inconvenient Truth,” which is why scientists are sensitive to its details and claims.
Criticisms of Mr. Gore have come not only from conservative groups and prominent skeptics of catastrophic warming, but also from rank-and-file scientists like Dr. Easterbook, who told his peers that he had no political ax to grind. A few see natural variation as more central to global warming than heat-trapping gases. Many appear to occupy a middle ground in the climate debate, seeing human activity as a serious threat but challenging what they call the extremism of both skeptics and zealots.
Kevin Vranes, a climatologist at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said he sensed a growing backlash against exaggeration. While praising Mr. Gore for “getting the message out,” Dr. Vranes questioned whether his presentations were “overselling our certainty about knowing the future.”
Typically, the concern is not over the existence of climate change, or the idea that the human production of heat-trapping gases is partly or largely to blame for the globe’s recent warming. The question is whether Mr. Gore has gone beyond the scientific evidence.
“He’s a very polarizing figure in the science community,” said Roger A. Pielke Jr., an environmental scientist who is a colleague of Dr. Vranes at the University of Colorado center. “Very quickly, these discussions turn from the issue to the person, and become a referendum on Mr. Gore.”
“An Inconvenient Truth,” directed by Davis Guggenheim, was released last May and took in more than $46 million, making it one of the top-grossing documentaries ever. The companion book by Mr. Gore quickly became a best seller, reaching No. 1 on the New York Times list.
Mr. Gore depicted a future in which temperatures soar, ice sheets melt, seas rise, hurricanes batter the coasts and people die en masse. “Unless we act boldly,” he wrote, “our world will undergo a string of terrible catastrophes.”
He clearly has supporters among leading scientists, who commend his popularizations and call his science basically sound. In December, he spoke in San Francisco to the American Geophysical Union and got a reception fit for a rock star from thousands of attendees.
“He has credibility in this community,” said Tim Killeen, the group’s president and director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a top group studying climate change. “There’s no question he’s read a lot and is able to respond in a very effective way.”
Some backers concede minor inaccuracies but see them as reasonable for a politician. James E. Hansen, an environmental scientist, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and a top adviser to Mr. Gore, said, “Al does an exceptionally good job of seeing the forest for the trees,” adding that Mr. Gore often did so “better than scientists.”
Still, Dr. Hansen said, the former vice president’s work may hold “imperfections” and “technical flaws.” He pointed to hurricanes, an icon for Mr. Gore, who highlights the devastation of Hurricane Katrina and cites research suggesting that global warming will cause both storm frequency and deadliness to rise. Yet this past Atlantic season produced fewer hurricanes than forecasters predicted (five versus nine), and none that hit the United States.“We need to be more careful in describing the hurricane story than he is,” Dr. Hansen said of Mr. Gore. “On the other hand,” Dr. Hansen said, “he has the bottom line right: most storms, at least those driven by the latent heat of vaporization, will tend to be stronger, or have the potential to be stronger, in a warmer climate.”
In his e-mail message, Mr. Gore defended his work as fundamentally accurate. “Of course,” he said, “there will always be questions around the edges of the science, and we have to rely upon the scientific community to continue to ask and to challenge and to answer those questions.”
He said “not every single adviser” agreed with him on every point, “but we do agree on the fundamentals” — that warming is real and caused by humans.
Mr. Gore added that he perceived no general backlash among scientists against his work. “I have received a great deal of positive feedback,” he said. “I have also received comments about items that should be changed, and I have updated the book and slideshow to reflect these comments.” He gave no specifics on which points he had revised.
He said that after 30 years of trying to communicate the dangers of global warming, “I think that I’m finally getting a little better at it.”
While reviewers tended to praise the book and movie, vocal skeptics of global warming protested almost immediately. Richard S. Lindzen, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, who has long expressed skepticism about dire climate predictions, accused Mr. Gore in The Wall Street Journal of “shrill alarmism.”
Some of Mr. Gore’s centrist detractors point to a report last month by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that studies global warming. The panel went further than ever before in saying that humans were the main cause of the globe’s warming since 1950, part of Mr. Gore’s message that few scientists dispute. But it also portrayed climate change as a slow-motion process.
It estimated that the world’s seas in this century would rise a maximum of 23 inches — down from earlier estimates. Mr. Gore, citing no particular time frame, envisions rises of up to 20 feet and depicts parts of New York, Florida and other heavily populated areas as sinking beneath the waves, implying, at least visually, that inundation is imminent.
Bjorn Lomborg, a statistician and political scientist in Denmark long skeptical of catastrophic global warming, said in a syndicated article that the panel, unlike Mr. Gore, had refrained from scaremongering. “Climate change is a real and serious problem” that calls for careful analysis and sound policy, Dr. Lomborg said. “The cacophony of screaming,” he added, “does not help.”
So too, a report last June by the National Academies seemed to contradict Mr. Gore’s portrayal of recent temperatures as the highest in the past millennium. Instead, the report said, current highs appeared unrivaled since only 1600, the tail end of a temperature rise known as the medieval warm period.
Roy Spencer, a climatologist at the University of Alabama, Huntsville, said on a blog that Mr. Gore’s film did “indeed do a pretty good job of presenting the most dire scenarios.” But the June report, he added, shows “that all we really know is that we are warmer now than we were during the last 400 years.”
Other critics have zeroed in on Mr. Gore’s claim that the energy industry ran a “disinformation campaign” that produced false discord on global warming. The truth, he said, was that virtually all unbiased scientists agreed that humans were the main culprits. But Benny J. Peiser, a social anthropologist in Britain who runs the Cambridge-Conference Network, or CCNet, an Internet newsletter on climate change and natural disasters, challenged the claim of scientific consensus with examples of pointed disagreement.
“Hardly a week goes by,” Dr. Peiser said, “without a new research paper that questions part or even some basics of climate change theory,” including some reports that offer alternatives to human activity for global warming.
Geologists have documented age upon age of climate swings, and some charge Mr. Gore with ignoring such rhythms.
“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet,” Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.”
In October, Dr. Easterbrook made similar points at the geological society meeting in Philadelphia. He hotly disputed Mr. Gore’s claim that “our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this” threatened change.
Nonsense, Dr. Easterbrook told the crowded session. He flashed a slide that showed temperature trends for the past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10 large swings, including the medieval warm period. These shifts, he said, were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.”
Getting personal, he mocked Mr. Gore’s assertion that scientists agreed on global warming except those industry had corrupted. “I’ve never been paid a nickel by an oil company,” Dr. Easterbrook told the group. “And I’m not a Republican.”
Biologists, too, have gotten into the act. In January, Paul Reiter, an active skeptic of global warming’s effects and director of the insects and infectious diseases unit of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, faulted Mr. Gore for his portrayal of global warming as spreading malaria.
“For 12 years, my colleagues and I have protested against the unsubstantiated claims,” Dr. Reiter wrote in The International Herald Tribune. “We have done the studies and challenged the alarmists, but they continue to ignore the facts.”
Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton who advised Mr. Gore on the book and movie, said that reasonable scientists disagreed on the malaria issue and other points that the critics had raised. In general, he said, Mr. Gore had distinguished himself for integrity.
“On balance, he did quite well — a credible and entertaining job on a difficult subject,” Dr. Oppenheimer said. “For that, he deserves a lot of credit. If you rake him over the coals, you’re going to find people who disagree. But in terms of the big picture, he got it right.”
Another Global Warming Hoax exposed
Alex Jones - The Global Warming Scam
A very informative documentary about the real cause of global warming. It clearly discuss about the fact that CO2 is not cause of global warming. Take a look also at the Great Global Warming Swindle and Green House Conspiracy in google video. This documentary discusses many topics that are not covered in the Swindle such as the hockey stick graph, from the viewpoint of Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas.
SUV's On Jupiter? Are humans responsible for climate change on the outer reaches of the solar system, or is it the sun?
Top Global Warming Advocate: Jupiter & Saturn Closer To Sun Than Earth
Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
Oldest DNA ever recovered shows warmer planet: report
Global Warming on Pluto Puzzles Scientists
The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame
Sun Blamed for Warming of Earth and Other Worlds
IPCC Models Fail to Accurately Predict Climate Change
Powerful Documentary Trounces Man-Made Warming Hoax
Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny
Climate scientist says global warming stopped in 1998
Dimwits: Why 'green' lightbulbs aren't the answer to global warming
Global warming debate 'irrational': scientists
An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change
Global Warming: Not the End of the World as We Know It
Acclaimed French Scientist Has Second Thoughts On Global Warming
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
UC Physics Professor Says Global Warming Not Real
'Global Warming' Not Cause of Hurricanes
German Biologist: Global Warming Is Good For US
Two New Books Confirm Global Warming is Natural; Not Caused By Human Activity
Danish scientist: Global warming is a myth
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
Greenland ice cap thickens slightly
Study: Sun's Changes to Blame for Part of Global Warming
Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions
Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists
Global 'Sunscreen' Has Likely Thinned, Report NASA Scientists
Cosmic rays blamed for global warming
Solar and Celestial Causes of Global Warming
The Live Earth Global Warming Fraud
How Gore's massive energy consumption saves the world
Al Gore’s Personal Energy Use Is His Own “Inconvenient Truth”
Czech President Calls Man-Made Global Warming a Myth
From Papal Indulgences to Carbon Credits: Is Global Warming a Sin?
With five private jets, Travolta still lectures on global warming
Climate change concert star Madonna accused of hypocrisy
Save the planet , but spare us the platitudes of these 'green' politicians
LIES, SMEARS,AND INTIMIDTION
In the 1970's, "Global Cooling" Was The New Threat
Global Warming On The Ropes
The Creeping Fascism of Global Warming Hysteria
As Predicted: Global Warming Skeptics Linked With Holocaust Denial
Not a "Consensus": Three Quarters Believe Global Warming A 'Natural Occurrence'
They call this a consensus?
'The global-warmers were bound to attack, but why are they so feeble'?
I Was On the Global Warming Gravy Train
Not a "Consensus": ABC-TV Meteorologist: I Don't Know A Single Weatherman Who Believes 'Man-Made Global Warming Hype'
Nuremberg-Style Trials Proposed For Global Warming Skeptics
Not a "Consensus": Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics
Climate of Fear
Not a "Consensus": Colorado State professor disputes global warming is human-caused
Not a "Consensus": Indian experts question theory on global warming
Global-warming skeptics cite being 'treated like a pariah'
Global Warming Deniers Are Like Holocaust Deniers
Leading scientific journals 'are censoring debate on global warming'
Not a "Consensus": 'Scepticism' over climate claims
Not a "Consensus": Prominent climate scientist calls warming fears 'absurd'
Scientists threatened for 'climate denial'
Penn And Teller Get Environmentalists To Sign Water Banning Petition
Tuesday July 31, 2007
Penn & Teller conduct an experiment that proves that most environmentalists don't actually care about the issues, they just want to grandstand, placate their ego and pretend they're saving the world.
CNN: An Inconvenient Truth is BIAS