Follow up reports of rebel war crimes & a hypocritical “international community.”
Photo: Libya’s rebels are far from motivated by democratic aspirations. Their grievances lie along ethnic, not political divides. “Gaddafi supporters” is the euphemism being used by the global corporate-media in describing the generally darker skinned and African tribes that form the majority of Western Libya’s demographics and who are bearing the brunt of NATO-backed rebel atrocities.
Bangkok, Thialand July 14, 2011 – Confirming what geopolitical expert Dr. Webster Tarpley had for months been saying about the realities behind the Libyan unrest, often depicted as a “pro-democracy” rebellion by the corporate-owned media, reports are coming in that Libyan rebels are once again targeting rival ethnic tribes within captured towns with beatings, looting, vandalism, and much worse (though conveniently omitted in mainstream reports.) This indicates not “democratic” aspirations, but a conflict divided along ethnic lines, perpetuated by covert and now overt US/UK military support for the Western-favored and long cultivated tribes of Eastern Libyan centered around Benghazi.
CNN reported, “Libyan rebels looted and beat civilians, rights group says,” that Soros-funded Human Rights Watch received reports that, “rebel fighters and supporters have damaged property, burned some homes, looted from hospitals, homes, and shops, and beaten some individuals alleged to have supported government forces.” Mahmoud Jibril, the defacto rebel prime minister who recently pandered before the corporate-funded Brookings Institute claiming his movement was inspired by globalization, confirmed the allegations but suggested they represent only a “few incidents” and that those responsible would be “brought to justice.”
This is however entirely unlikely, because while only a “few incidents” have been highlighted by a clearly biased international media, such atrocities have been reported consitently since the Benghazi tribes launched their foreign-backed offensive against Qaddafi in February this year. In an April 2011 New York Times article titled, “Inferior Arms Hobble Rebels in Libya War,” a weepy narrative is told of under-armed, outclassed rebels who have been compelled by their circumstances to commit horrific atrocities and war crimes. The New York Times describes a “tolerance for at least a small number of child soldiers,” and blamed a lack of command-and-control for “instances of abusive or outright brutal conduct” rather than a lack of ethical principles or their foreign-funded, illegitimate cause.
The New York Times article describes the rebels’ use of Grad rockets often described as indiscriminate war weapons and whose use by Qaddafi’s forces have been cited as a contributing factor for NATO’s intervention. The article also makes mention of the rebels’ use of landmines – also a contributing factor cited by the warmongering criminals of NATO for their intervention in North Africa.
The New York Times article is attempting to excuse and spin a torrent of reports coming out indicating that the Libyan rebels, who themselves admit ties to Al-Qaeda, are reportedly butchering, beheading, and mutilating captured government troops and clearly guilty of employing the same weapons and tactics NATO has baselessly accused Qaddafi of using – the very justification used by NATO to enter the war in the first place. Likewise, the Soros-funded Human Rights Watch report most recently cited, is laced with excuses regarding the civilians’ alleged support for Qaddafi as well as interjections reminding readers of Qaddafi’s alleged abuses. In turn the report is further whitewashed by the corporate-owned media without the colorful interjections that generally accompany similar reports regarding Qaddafi’s alleged atrocities.
A recent Guardian article, titled “Libyan rebels accused of burning homes and looting,” with the subtitle “Human Rights Watch says rebels ransacked medical facilities and torched houses of Gaddafi supporters,” represents a subtle rhetorical mechanism used to once again whitewash the rebels’ crimes. Within the article the term “homes believed to belong to be supporters of Muammar Gaddafi” is used with the final sentence reading, “Gaddafi’s forces in the area have been accused of indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas and laying land mines.”
Other articles, such as Wall Street Journal’s “Libya City Torn by Tribal Feud” represents the corporate media conceding to reality and the beginning of mainstream reports describing the underlying ethnic tensions that serve as the true motivation, not democratic aspirations, behind the continuing violence triggered and continuously stoked by the Washington-based Libyan rebel leadership. However, geopolitical expert Dr. Webster Tarpley had noted as early as April in a report titled, “Al Qaeda: Pawns of CIA Insurrection from Libya to Yemen,” the historical British support for “monarchist and racist Harabi and Obeidat tribes of the Benghazi-Darna-Tobruk corridor.” He correctly diagnosed ethnic tensions as being behind the unfolding atrocities still being obfuscated by the corporate-owned media today, and predicted that atrocities and genocide await cities and towns captured by NATO-backed rebels.
What we are confronted with in Libya is not an oppressed people aspiring for globalization and liberal democracy, but yet another political-ethnic division exploited by the global corportocracy to divide and destroy the sovereignty of an independent nation. If and when Tripoli falls to the hordes of globalists and their witless armies of dupes and mercenaries, unthinkable brutality, discrimination, and atrocities await their ethnic rivals. While NATO’s rhetorical justification for their criminal military intervention centers around protecting civilians, they are clearly and intentionally facilitating the targeting of civilians aligned to Qaddafi not politically, but ethnically.
It is essential that we understand who indeed is truly behind these conflicts including the corporations that set agendas within unelected think tanks, the corporate-owned media that misrepresents and sells these agendas to the public, and the illegitimate politicians carrying these agendas forward against the will of the people they allegedly represent. To counter this, we must continuously work to inform others of the truth being obfuscated by the immense propaganda campaigns that accompany such conflicts and commit ourselves to both boycotting and replacing entirely the corporations promoting and benefiting from such conflicts. While Libya’s plight may seem a far flung and insignificant concern to the average person, a globalist victory in Libya, is a victory against all free and sovereign people.
by Tony Cartalucci
Image via Wikipedia
We are missing the lesson of the current British outrage over Murdoch just as we missed the lesson of the financial crisis in America.
Was the real crime in England that employees of the News of the World illegally hacked the cell phone of a missing girl? Was the real financial crime in America illegal acts such as Ponzi schemes or insider trading? The answer is no in both cases.
The real crime in England was legal, not illegal; it was that one man had the power to influence large parts of the British parliament and was credited with a major influence in electing whichever government he favored. No one in government dared to cross him until an emotion-provoking illegal act unleashed a public outcry. That outcry has, at least temporarily, liberated the members of Parliament from their fear of being smeared by Murdoch’s newspapers if they dared to be hostile to his interests or beliefs.
Was the real crime in America illegal acts? No. Despite the press devoted to Madoff, the real crime, here as in England, was legal. Selling subprime mortgages to people who could never pay them back was legal. Rating agencies certifying to the high quality of the resulting worthless securities was legal. The whole web of interacting CDO’s was legal. It was the legal, though strongly unethical, actions of a powerful Wall Street dedicated to self-enrichment at any price that brought down the U.S. economy. And, though we are still far from recovering from that disaster, the power of money has prevented any fundamental reform of the financial sector.
In both countries, the real crime is the concentration of power that allows these things to happen.
How Power is Used
Power can be exerted through both the stick and the carrot. In England, members of Parliament feared being smeared in the powerful Murdoch newspapers, and they also knew that if they accommodated his views or interests, they could profit from his support.
In the United States, members of Congress understand that Wall Street money and corporate money can either be used to defeat them or to support their campaigns. They also know that if they are sufficiently influential in the right direction, lobbying jobs that are far more financially rewarding than their present occupation await them when they retire from Congress
Money can extend its power to other parts of government, too. In England, part of the police force became a Murdoch ally in ferreting out more news about important stories. In America, regulatory bodies, established to protect the public interest, become blind to risky behavior and kind to the industry. And these examples are some entries in a long list of possibilities.
The Tyranny of Government
It has been common throughout history for the concentration of power to be in governments, often but not always monarchies or dictatorships, and for the leaders of such governments to act to enrich themselves and their friends. In the years preceding the American Revolution, the British government’s restrictions on colonial manufacturing, the Navigation Acts, the tax on stamps, and the tax on tea, brought revenue to the British Crown and profits to British merchants and manufacturers at the expense of the colonies, but also produced a revolution. This tyranny by governments is the type of oppression which the Tea Party is constantly reminding us of, but today’s tyranny is of a different type.
The Tyranny of Wealth
The problem today is not the tyranny of government, but rather the concentration of money, and hence power, in Wall Street and in the largest corporations. And it is clear that enough money can buy political power.
Both Wall Street and the major corporations have added to their strong direct effect on the economy a decisive effect on the actions of governmental bodies. It is their influence on the federal government that caused the regulatory bodies to stand back from regulation and encouraged the excesses of the financial sector in the years leading up to the crash. It was the federal government, led by Wall Street alumni, that rescued the financial institutions so that they are now posting record profits despite having impoverished the nation. It was the overwhelming lobbying power of the financial sector that prevented the passage of meaningful financial reform. The banks that were too big to fail are, with the concurrence of both political parties, now bigger than ever. And the actions of the U.S. Supreme Court, permitting the unrestricted use of corporate and Wall Street money for campaigns, are adding to this effect.
The declared goal of most major U.S. corporations today is to make their stock as valuable as possible. As more than two-thirds of all stock is held by the wealthiest five percent in the country, this corporate goal amounts in practice to simply making the wealthy wealthier and increasing the extreme concentration of wealth and power that already exists in America today. And if making the stock as valuable as possible means sending jobs and technology abroad, while holding down wages at home, so be it.
Yet it is to this same corporate leadership that the government turns for policy advice on how to create jobs and revive the economy.
Today we have a concentration of wealth unmatched since the days immediately preceding the Great Depression in 1929. This wealth and power, concentrated in Wall Street and in the major corporations, is being used for the enrichment of the already wealthy. Unfortunately, that enrichment is one that does not raise all boats. As statistics clearly show, the big boats are rising rapidly and the small boats are not doing well.
After the Great Depression, the U.S. government acted to lessen the power of concentrated wealth. It separated commercial from investment banking, insured bank deposits, enacted social security, and facilitated unions as a counter-force to corporations. It even became to some extent the employer of last resort.
But the power of wealth today over both political parties is now such that new government actions are mainly words that cover real inaction, and even that limited action is often described as the actions of a too large and too powerful government.
Today, the threat of tyranny comes not from the government, but from the concentration of wealth and power outside government, and from the influence on government of that great concentration of wealth and power.
Yugoslavia – 10 billion dinar, 1993
In spite of constant headlines about debts and deficits, most Americans don’t really believe the U.S. dollar will collapse. From knowledgeable investors who study the markets to those seemingly too busy to worry about such things, most dismiss the idea of the dollar actually going to zero.
History has a message for us: No fiat currency has lasted forever. Eventually, they all fail.
BMG BullionBars recently published a poster featuring pictures of numerous currencies that have gone bust. Some got there quickly, while others took a century or more. Regardless of how long it took, though, the seductive temptations allowed under a fiat monetary system eventually caught up with these governments, and their currencies went poof!
You might suspect this happened only to third world countries. You’d be wrong. There was no discrimination as to the size or perceived stability of a nation’s economy; if the leaders abused their currency, the country paid the price.
As you scroll through the currencies below, you’ll see some long-ago casualties. What’s shocking, though, is how many have occurred in our lifetime. You might count how many currencies have failed since you’ve been born.
So what’s the one word for the “thousand pictures” below? Worthless.
Zaire – 5 million zaires, 1992
Venezuela – 10,000 bolívares, 2002
Ukraine – 10,000 karbovantsiv, 1995
Turkey – 5 million lira, 1997
Russia – 10,000 rubles, 1992
Romania – 50,000 lei, 2001
Central Bank of China – 10,000 CGU, 1947
Peru – 100,000 intis, 1989
Nicaragua – 10 million córdobas, 1990
Hungary – 10 million pengo, 1945
Greece – 25,000 drachmas, 1943
Germany – 1 billion mark, 1923
Georgia – 1 million laris, 1994
France – 5 livres, 1793
Chile – 10,000 pesos, 1975
Brazil – 500 cruzeiros reais, 1993
Bosnia – 100 million dinar, 1993
Bolivia – 5 million pesos bolivianos, 1985
Belarus – 100,000 rubles, 1996
Argentina – 10,000 pesos argentinos, 1985
Angola – 500,000 kwanzas reajustados, 1995
Zimbabwe – 100 trillion dollars, 2006
So, will a similar fate befall the U.S. dollar? The common denominator that led to the downfall of each currency above was the two big Ds: Debts and Deficits.
With that in mind, consider the following:
Morgan Stanley reported in 2009 that there’s “no historical precedent” for an economy that exceeds a 250% debt-to-GDP ratio without experiencing some sort of financial crisis or high inflation. Our total debt now exceeds GDP by roughly 400%.
Investment legend Marc Faber reports that once a country’s payments on debt exceed 30% of tax revenue, the currency is “done for.” On our current path, analyst Michael Murphy projects we’ll hit that figure by October.
Peter Bernholz, the leading expert on hyperinflation, states unequivocally that “hyperinflation is caused by government budget deficits.” This year’s U.S. budget deficit will end up being $1.5 trillion, an amount never before seen in history.
Since the Federal Reserve’s creation in 1913, the dollar has lost 95% of its purchasing power. Our government leaders clearly don’t know how – or don’t wish – to keep the currency strong.
Whether the dollar goes to zero or merely becomes a second-class currency in the global arena, the possibility of the greenback being added to the above list grows every day. And this will lead to serious and painful consequences in our standard of living. While money is only one of many problems we’ll have to deal with, you can protect your assets with the one currency that can’t be debased, devalued, or destroyed by irresponsible leaders.
Don’t be the investor who dismisses this message from history. Use gold (and silver) as your savings vehicle. Any excuse you have now will be meaningless and irrelevant when we enter that fateful period. Make sure you own enough precious metals to make a difference in your portfolio.
Because when it comes to money, worthless is not a fun word.
Murdoch´s Media Power. Wagging Politicians and Police – Gagging Mankind – Blacking the Truth by bulletsbombsbanks
Image via Wikipedia
Summary: The scandal about Rupert Murdoch´s media, The News of the World”, has revealed an incredible corruption in the leadership of the UK. British politicians from Tony Blair via Gordon Brown to David Cameron cringed before the Murdoch media (the 2. biggest media corporation in the world). Labour and Tory leaders were invited to “News of the World” parties which were, in effect, a conspiracy between the British media and the political class against the country as a whole. They were the men and women who governed Britain and decided who was up and who was out. Government policy was influenced and sometimes created by them in common. The Murdoch insiders brought about legislation and British policy by influencing the politicians, because the politicians feared the media people´s power over them due to Murdoch insider´s´ knowledge of their sins. They also feared bad headlines should they disagree with the Murdoch media officials. Moreover, of course, there were valuable favours included. Prime Minister David Cameron, e.g., was given a flight in a private jet belonging to Rupert Murdoch´s son-in-law, stated to be worth 30.000 pounds?? to a private meeting and party with Murdoch on non-mentioned topics. In his 14 months in office as prime Minister, David Cameron has had 26 private meetings with Murdoch media officials. It was also reported that Murdoch had given Cameron a personal guarantee that there would be no risk attached to hiring the ex-editor of the News of the World Andy Coulson as the Conservative Party’s communication director in 2007. Cameron took Murdoch´s advise in spite of Coulson having resigned as editor over phone hacking by a reporter and despite warnings from Nick Clegg, Lord Ashdown and The Guardian. Coulson resigned his post in 2011 and was later arrested and questioned on allegations of further criminal activity at “The News of the World”.
Tony Blair held private talks with Berlusconi in favour of Murdoch business in Italy. At the annual Labour Party conferences, Murdoch Internatinal´s leaders participated, sitting immediately behind the cabinet as though they had been coopted there. When murdoch´s favoured ministers left office, they were rewarded. Murdoch´s insiders incl. Rebekah Brooks, who was recently arrested, were always to be found on the side of the stronger party.
The second in command of the London Metropolitan Police has also had to resign over his handling of the phone hacking scandal and his links to Neil Wallis, the former News of the World executive. This came ours after the chief of the Metropolitan Police resigned for not having told Cameron of his appointing Wallis. Although he denied that, many think that his accept of a luxury stay at a wellness spa worth 12.000 pounds was the reason. No less than 10 police officials were on the payroll of the “News of the World”!!
Rupert Murdoch is a member of the US Council on Foreign Relations, the “invisible government”, wanting to rule the world by David Rockefeller´s rules. Hillary Clinton says she takes her orders from that private club! Acc. to former US presidency candidate, Barry Goldwater,the CFR has taken over the US and wants to take over the world, too, in a new World Order. Goldwater demonstrates how they are making it: They control the most important media in the US (and elsewhere by means of Rupert Murdoch and his ilk). The above probably is true in most of the western world.
Declassified documents now show that Israel has bribed the US media to take Israel´s views. No wonder, since the owners of the media are largely the same Jews that own the biggest banks of the world. Rupert Murdoch is said to be a passionate Zionist Jew.
This way, we are being ruled undemocratically by a small globalist clique through politician stooges that we elect. No matter what party we vote for, it is in the grip of this small corporate, super rich elite of the world. You may not know. For you may still believe the corporate media whose task ist to twist lies into truth and vice versa – and in the best case conceal the truth. This is the New World Order.
Rupert Murdoch´s News of the World hacked into the voicemails on the mobile phone of murdered teenager Milly Dowler in 2006. Since then, many more hackings followed – in particular with politicians. This has now started an avalanche whereby the dirt of the British (and international) political and police system was laid bare: corruption, friendly turns, blackmailing of politicians and police through their fear of the black sides of their lives being exposed to the public, and the fear of bad headlines This illustrates the sick media that this blog has warned against time and again – ruled by the New World Order tycoons to enforce their policy towards their one-world governance/government.
1. Murdoch Press effect on government policy was wretched. Decisions were determined by consideration of the following day’s headlines rather than sound analysis.
The Telegraph 14 July 2011, Peter Osborne: The author started working for the House of Commons as a lobby correspondent nearly 20 years ago and saw how the democratic process had stopped functioning. He saw that ministers no longer gave their announcements to the House of Commons – instead they leaked them through the press, i.e. to the correspondents who were treated as though they were the real MPs. The traditional checks and balances thus no longer operated.
In particular, the Rupert Murdoch (left) Press abused their power. Rebekah Brooks (right), the chief executive of News International was just arrested – now released on bail.
She emerged on the scene when New Labour under Tony Blair was on the verge of power.
A version of this process repeated itself when Gordon Brown became prime minister. Gordon Brown, too, was part of the Murdoch system of government.
Rebekah Brooks started as a star in and for the New Labour as it was in ascendance. When its star waned she changed her style to a Tory one – and participated in David Cameron´s 44 birthday last year. She – like all “News of the World” insiders attached like glue to whichever political party in ascendancy.
At exactly the same time that Mrs Brooks was getting on so famously with the most powerful men and women in Britain, the employees of her newspapers were listening in to their voicemails and illicitly gaining access to deeply personal information. One News of the World journalist once told Osborne how this information would be gathered into dossiers; sometimes these dossiers were published, sometimes not. The knowledge that News International held such destructive power must have been at the back of everyone’s minds at the apparently cheerful social events where the company’s executives mingled with their client politicians.
During the Blair years, News International executives would attend the annual Labour Party conference, they were awarded seats just behind the cabinet, as if they had been co-opted into the Government. The first telephone call that Blair made after he had escaped from the conference hall was routinely to Rupert Murdoch himself. When ministers who had been favoured by the Murdoch press left office, they would be rewarded.
When Tessa Jowell was Culture Secretary five years ago, News International hacked into her phone and spied on her in other ways. What was going on amounted to industrial espionage, since Ms Jowell was then charged with the regulation and supervision of News International.
Yet consider this: Ms Jowell was informed of this intrusion at the time and said nothing. More curious still, she retained her friendship with Rebekah Brooks and other News International figures. Indeed, Ms Jowell appears to have been present at the Cotswolds party thrown by Matthew Freud, son-in-law of Rupert Murdoch, only 10 days ago. James Murdoch, heir apparent to the Murdoch empire, was also present.
These parties were, in effect, a conspiracy between the British media and the political class against the country as a whole. They were the men and women who governed Britain and decided who was up and who was out. Government policy was influenced and sometimes created. Osborne doubts very much whether Britain would have invaded Iraq but for the foolhardy support of the Murdoch press.
Furthermore, private favours were dispensed; Blair when prime minister spoke to his Italian counterpart Silvio Berlusconi about one of Murdoch’s business deals in Italy. Of course it was all kept secret, though details did sometimes leak out.
Now the Murdoch scandal is dragging VIPs into free fall: The Telegraph 18 July 2011: The Metropolitan Assistant Commisioner John Yates (left) has resigned over his handling of the phone hacking scandal and his links to Neil Wallis, the former News of the World executive, just hours after Sir Paul Stephenson (right), the Metropolitan Police Commissioner quit as Britain’s top policeman. Acc. to the Danish Newspaper Boersen 20 July 2011, no less than 10 British police officials were on the payroll of Murdoch´s “News of the World”!!
In a carefully worded resignation speech that appeared aimed directly at Downing Street, Sir Paul Stephenson, the commissioner of the Metropolitan police, said the prime minister risked being “compromised” by his closeness to former News of the World editor Andy Coulson. Stephenson denied that he was resigning over allegations that he accepted £12,000 worth of hospitality from Champney’s health spa, focusing instead on his decision not to inform the prime minister that the Met had employed Coulson’s former deputy Neil Wallis as a strategic adviser.
Of course, some now demand the scalp of Prime Minister Cameron. But it seems difficult to prove he has acted in bad faith. Or did he? A spokeswoman for the Prime Minister disclosed that a revised list of Mr Cameron’s contacts with senior media figures is being published, as there had been some “omissions” from the version issued last week.
WHO is Rupert Murdoch
Wikipedia: Keith Rupert Murdoch born 11 March 1931, is an Australian American media mogul. Critics argue that Murdoch simply supports the incumbent parties.
In August 2008 British Conservative leader and future Prime Minister David Cameron accepted free flights to hold private talks and attend private parties with Murdoch on his yacht, the Rosehearty. Cameron has declared in the Commons register of interests he accepted a private plane provided by Murdoch’s son-in-law, public relations guru Matthew FreGulfstream IV private jet was valued at around £30,000??. The Conservatives have not disclosed what was discussed.
In July 2011 it emerged that Cameron met key executives of Murdoch’s News Corporation 26 times during the 14 months that Cameron had served as Prime Minister. It was also reported that Murdoch had given Cameron a personal guarantee that there would be no risk attached to hiring the ex-editor of the News of the World Andy Coulson as the Conservative Party’s communication director in 2007. This was in spite of Coulson having resigned as editor over phone hacking by a reporter. Cameron chose to take Murdoch’s advice, despite warnings from Nick Clegg, Lord Ashdown and The Guardian. Coulson resigned his post in 2011 and was later arrested and questioned on allegations of further criminal activity at The News of the World. Here is a list of Murdoch owned media.
Comment: The whistleblower who informed the public of Coulson´s phone hacking, Sean Hoare, has just been found dead – for reasons unexplained. But he did fear for his life before his death.
Rupert Murdoch´s mother is said to have been Jewish. Murdoch is said to be intimately associated with Zionist organisations such as the ADL.
2. Rupert Murdoch is a member of the US Council on Foreign Relations.
This Council wants to rule the world by means of David Rockefeller´s ideas. So far it is the invisible government of the US – and Hillary Clinton above openly admits to take her foreign political orders from that club.
However, the Council on Foreign Relations also controls the media of the world, Murdoch´s contribution being very considerable. Their strategy is to control all the biggest media and place one of their minions to edit each and every one of them – starting with JP Morgan´s initiative in 1917. See the following video. The CFR members comprise many editors of the US biggest media.
3. Former US presidency candidate, Barry Goldwater´s essay from 1979 on the CFR/Trilateral Commission´s control over the media. He writes: “In September 1939, two members of the Council on Foreign Relations visited the State Department to offer the council’s services. They proposed to do research and make recommendations for the department without formal assignment or responsibility, particularly in four areas – security armaments, economic and financial problems, political problems, and territorial problems. The Rockefeller Foundation agreed to finance the operation of this plan. From that day forward, the Council on Foreign Relations has placed its members in policy-making positions with the State Department and other federal agencies. Almost without exception, its members are united by a congeniality of birth, economic status and educational background.
Their goal is to impose a benign stability on the quarreling family of nations through merger and consolidation. THEY SEE THE ELIMINATION OF NATIONAL BOUNDARIES, THE SUPPRESSION OF RACIAL AND ETHNIC LOYALTIES, as the most expeditious avenue to world peace. They believe economic competition is the root cause of international tension.
Barry Goldwater (right) then brings: Irrefutable evidence of CFR/ Trilateral Commission takeover of America. What was once our country, is now their country -through all the media he lists.
4. Israeli bribery of the US media has been revealed in declassified ocuments
Of course Barry Goldwater lost presidency to the Trilateral Commission (TC) and here stooge, Jimmy Carter, selected by the CFRs and TC founders, David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski. So, you see, our daily news, our policies, our world, are not shaped by our elected politicians – but by powerful media owned by unscrupulous banksters – like Rupert Murdoch – and controlled by the CFR. Our politicians fear the power of these media moguls and love their money to the extent that they cringe to them, consult them on political matters, legislate to please these Illuminati masters of the world. Even Scotland Yard seems deeply infected by Rupert Murdoch´s money and good advise. Even the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, has every reason to fear the avalanche of embarrassing revelations now rolling over the UK. And so it does seem to be.
The German poet, Heinrich Heine, said: “There is only one God – Mammon. And Rothschild is his prophet.” If so, then the centres of power are just the temples of Mammon.
Left: US Senator Dick Durbin: The bankers (the media owners) own the US Senate!
Right: Jugurtha, king of the Numidians, about Rome 110 b.C.: “Woe to the big city which is for sale and is heading for its demise, if it can find a buyer”.
The consequence of this is that we are being manipulated, dumbed down. They tell us that Christian national culture and nationstate are bad, but that Muslim multiculture and immigration is good, as well as that you are a criminal racist to be punished if you don´t like multiculture in your country. They conceal the secret decrees by which the world is ruled by their fawning politician-slaves elected by you, if they think the decrees might make you angry. Day in day out we hear lies and half/twisted truths – thus believing in e.g. the climate lie, the non-existence of chemtrails, the just, humanitarian war in Libya, where plenty of civilians are being kileed by friendly bombs. Believing in the rebels being the good guys – although they are Muslim Brotherhood militia men, incl. so-called Al Qaeda fighters, whom we have been told are the evil fellows behind the complicated 9/11 operations, which no un-schooled Muslim could perform. Al-Qaida fighters were still alive days after 9/11 acc. to the BBC, the London Telegraph – and even FBI boss, Robert Mueller, had no idea about who the highjackers were. Former Pakistani spy chief, Hamed Gul, has declared 9/11 to be an inside job – as all facts indicate. even the explosive, nanthermite, was found all over ground zero.
Did you ever hear about such things in the corporate MSM? Did you ever hear anything but “Pth! Conspiracy theory” when such views were vented? Well – the ABC does have something shocking here: The US NORAD drilled den the 9/11 -2001 attacks with highjacked airliners on the WTC Twin Towers already in 1999!!!
But otherwise, media owners like CFR member Rupert Murdoch are brainwashing you for their specific goal: one-world and one-world governance/government by them and for them. In fact we already have their world governance acc. to EU Pres. van Rompuy.
What they not at all tell us is this: Global Res. 20 July 2011: Rupert Murdoch’s TNTW was only attempting to do in a small way what the governments of the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are doing big time every day. ECHELON is a criminal operation in violation of international law. Like a mammoth vacuum cleaner in the sky, the National Security Agency (NSA) sucks it all up: home phone, office phone, cellular phone, email, fax, telex…satellite transmissions, fiber-optic communications traffic, microwave links, voice, text images (that are) captured by satellites continuously orbiting the earth and then processed by high-powered computers.”
We are already being even dictatorially watched – and Murdoch’s sin is that his media have been caught with its hands in the cake tin. The big thieves hypocritically hang the smaller ones, so as to bee seen as the just ones!
“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it’s profits or so dependant on it’s favors, that there will be no opposition from that class.”
– Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863
Scotts Miracle Gro has applied for and received complete deregulation for genetically engineered Kentucky Bluegrass from the USDA. Scotts “is Monsanto’s exclusive agent for the international marketing and distribution of consumer Roundup®.” The main ingredient in Roundup is glyphosate. This strain of Kentucky Bluegrass will be “herbicide resistant” to Monsanto’s Roundup, and there will be absolutely no oversight of this genetically engineered plant, which can be used as turf or livestock feed. The reason that this was allowed to happen is because actual regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) was designed just for such an opportunity. The program was meant to fail from the very beginning. This is no less than an act of war against the world’s population.
How Scotts GE Kentucky Bluegrass achieved complete deregulation
Scotts’ genetically engineered (GE) Kentucky Bluegrass will not be regulated as either a plant pest or noxious weed, and these are the ONLY two ways that GMOs can be regulated by the USDA. The genetic engineering process itself is not considered a factor in determining if a plant should fall under regulation by the USDA. If a “plant pest” designated by the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is used in the genetic engineering process, then the plant falls under APHIS’ regulatory authority. Also, if a plant is considered a noxious weed by APHIS, then its GMO counterpart can be considered a noxious weed. Conversely, if neither condition exists, then the plant falls through the loophole, and is deregulated completely. No oversight whatsoever. APHIS has no grounds on which to enforce regulations.
Plant pest strategy:
The situation with the Kentucky bluegrass arises because genetically engineered crops are regulated under rules pertaining to plant pests.
The rules are really meant for pathogens and parasites, not corn stalks. Still, they could be stretched to cover the crops because most of them contain a snippet of DNA from a plant virus that functions as a genetic on-switch. And the foreign gene is often inserted using a bacterium that can cause a disease in plants.
But in creating its bluegrass, Scotts deliberately avoided using any material from plant pests. The herbicide resistance gene and the genetic on-switch came from other plants and were fired into the grass’s DNA with a gene gun, rather than being carried in by a bacterium.
Doug Gurian-Sherman, a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said many of the genetically engineered crops now under development did not use viral material so they could conceivably escape regulation. (LINK)
Noxious Weed strategy:
In a 2002 petition from the ICTA and CFS, the organizations asked if APHIS would regulate GE Kentucky bluegrass under its Federal “noxious weed” authority in the Plant Protection Act. In response to the petition, APHIS conducted a risk assessment to determine the level of weed risk posed by Kentucky bluegrass, and subsequently evaluated whether the impacts posed by the plant would warrant it being regulated as a Federal noxious weed. As a result of its assessment, APHIS determined it would not regulate Kentucky bluegrass, GE or traditional, as a Federal noxious weed.(LINK)
It would seem that the ICTA and CFS knew of the problem long before deregulation became a reality. So, why didn’t we hear about it until it was a done deal?
The GMO regulatory fiction
The fiction of GMO oversight created by the USDA to deceive the public was designed to disintegrate over time so that GMOs could be completely deregulated. It is all one big lie – a facade to enable a complete planetary takeover by mega-corporate interests. If the intent was to actually regulate them, then why not create regulations with teeth? Regulations that would address the unique properties of genetically engineered food/feed instead of using already existing “plant pest” and “noxious weed” regulations? All that needs to be done under the current system is to change the manufacturing process slightly, and GMOs drop right off the USDA radar.
The USDA does not recognize the difference between GMOs and traditional plants, based on the “substantial equivalence” doctrine. Therefore, by removing the offending “plant pest” from the manufacturing process, the regulations no longer apply. And if a traditional version of the plant is not considered a noxious weed, then the GMO version will not be considered a noxious weed. See how easy that was?
It is interesting to note that even though Kentucky Bluegrass rates high on establishment/spread potential, the USDA decided that the benefits outweigh the risks, and since traditional Kentucky Bluegrass is not considered a noxious weed, the GE version cannot be either, because the only difference is herbicide tolerance. The genetic engineering process is not a consideration.
Case precedent has been set by Scotts. All that is left now is for Monsanto and its cohorts in crime to invest in this new manufacturing technique to bypass any sort of regulation at all for future GMOs. Since Monsanto was already recently given the green light to do its own Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), it was only a matter of time until complete deregulation was achieved, and Scotts achieved that. So, with no testing required by the USDA, biotech companies such as Monsanto will actually save a bit of time and money in the long run by not even needing to fill out an EIS, or submit any paperwork for approval, because no approval is necessary.
What’s the big deal?
If there are no plant pests used in the creation of a GMO, then it should be okay, right? Wrong. The very act of genetic engineering is dangerous and highly unpredictable. According to Arpad Pusztai, world renown scientist and GMO whistleblower,
… the existing data support our suggestion that the consumption by rats of transgenic potatoes expressing GNA has significant effects on organ development, body metabolism and immune function that is fully in line with the significant compositional differences between transgenic and corresponding parent lines of potatoes. The results also suggest that a major part of these differences was not caused by the expression of the GNA gene in the transgenic potato lines but that these could have been due to the presence of one or more of the other gene(s) in the vector used in the gene transfer or to the possibility of disturbances in the functioning of potatoes’ own genes caused by the random incorporation of the vector in the potato genome (positioning effect). (LINK)
In other words, whatever you insert in the cell is positioned randomly. This affects the way the cell operates, and no one in the industry has studied this. The cell is essentially wounded, and never heals up the same way twice. Yet, the only testing done is to look at the grown plants to see if they are similar in appearance. Cells are not Legos. You cannot simply remove one block and insert another and have the exact same structure as you had when you started. Something, somewhere is going to be different, and we have no idea how that difference will manifest itself. It is a game of Russian roulette, with people as the unwitting participants.
What this means to you
All new genetically modified crops can now be completely deregulated if one processing ingredient is changed (APHIS definitions for plant pests), because they will no longer qualify for regulation under the USDA. This means that there will be absolutely no accountability regarding GMOs at all. The labeling movement that has been growing stronger and stronger, will be a moot point because retailers and manufacturers won’t even know if what they are selling contains GMOs. No regulations, no oversight. Simply thrown into the market without distinction from traditional items, the only way we will be able to tell if something is genetically engineered is if…. well, we won’t. Period. As an official at the USDA told me: “I don’t know why GE Kentucky Bluegrass would be regulated, almost all plants are genetically engineered.” That is the USDA’s attitude.
Enter the Terminator
It seems that the plan all along was to deregulate GMOs completely, but the charade had to be maintained until a prestigious time to avoid public backlash too soon, such as what happened with the Terminator seed moritorium. Public outcry caused this technology to be put on hold, but testing continues to this day. Watch and wait for the Terminator to be released without any regulation or oversight, due to this new deregulation salvo launched on the American public. The stage is set. First take over all plant life with genetically modified plants, then introduce the Terminator to wrap it all up in a pretty package.
But the Terminator has sterile seeds and cannot reproduce you say? Wouldn’t this be a solution to GM contamination? Well, one of the problems with Terminator technology is that it cannot be proven to be 100% reliable, and it is possible that not all seeds will be sterile, and the Terminator gene could be spread to viable plants, thus infecting the entire food chain with plants unable to produce offspring. Not to mention horizontal gene transfer. The norm would become plant sterility, with viable seeds becoming rare. The only way to get viable seeds would be to buy them. No more saving seeds, because the seed you save would be sterile.
If all plant life is owned by mega-corporations due to total contamination by invasive GMOs, and no regulations are in effect that apply to them, then Terminator technology can be instituted at will with no roadblocks. After all, if you own all of the plants, then you can do with them as you like. This may well be part of a well planned strategy for the complete takeover of every living plant on earth by corporate interests. Man the torpedoes, full speed ahead. Maybe we can now get a glimpse of just why the Svalbard Global Seed Vault might have been built, and why it contains only viable, foundation seeds – no GMOs.
The regulations for GMOs contain no teeth and are just there for show – to fool the public into thinking there is real oversight when in actuality, there isn’t. The USDA is a rogue agency of the Federal government that has proven time and time again that its only purpose is to provide a distraction for the American public so that corporate interests are able to completely take over our food supply with little to no interference from the people they are injuring.
This Kentucky Bluegrass case precedent has the potential to be the single biggest food event on the planet. The complete deregulation of all GMOs means that anything goes. As long as there are no plant pests involved in the genetic engineering process that are listed on the APHIS site, then it is possible that just about anything else can be inserted into the plants, including pharmaceuticals, vaccines, psychotropic substances, etc., without our knowledge or consent. Pandora’s box has just been opened, and closing it is quickly becoming ‘not an option.’