PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2020-10-19, 21:46:44
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 100
Author Topic: 9/11 debate - enter at your own risk!  (Read 756406 times)

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Pentagon War Plans in 2001: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, & Iran

http://www.theburningplatform.com/2014/09/29/pentagon-war-plans-in-2001-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/

"Everything is going according to plan. The military industrial complex must feed continuously like a shark, or it will die. When there are no real enemies, we just create them out of thin air (ISIS, Russia). It’s all part of the game plan. We don’t need no stinkin Constitution."

U.S. General Wesley Clark (ret.) revealed that he was informed following 9/11 of a dramatic plan of aggressive war.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
British PM David Cameron: “Non-Violent Extremists” Including “9/11 Truthers” and “Conspiracy Theorists” are Just as Dangerous as ISIL Terrorists

http://www.globalresearch.ca/british-pm-david-cameron-non-violent-extremists-including-911-truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists-are-just-as-dangerous-as-isil-terrorists/5405059

Dear Mr Cameron

I write this open letter to you in response to your recent speech at the United Nations calling for military intervention in Iraq and Syria over the threat of ISIL.  In particular I would like to make mention of your reference to the so called threat to society of what you have termed ‘non-violent extremists’, including those who are attempting to bring forward information and evidence about 9/11 which contradicts the official version of events.

Putting aside the direct issue of ISIL for a moment, I find this position on 9/11 evidence to be quite incredible.  It is a position that is either extremely ignorant, or it is a position that goes against freedom and democracy in British society to such an extent that it is scarcely believable.  Huge numbers of extremely credible and professional people across the world are now bringing forward incontrovertible facts and evidence showing us that the events of 9/11 have been systematically covered up, and that the public has been deceived and manipulated on this issue at a quite incredible level.  Just like the public was deceived and manipulated about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

While you are labelling these people who bring this evidence forward about 9/11 as ‘non-violent extremists’, are you aware of what is currently happening in New York City regarding 9/11?

Are you aware that more than 100,000 New York residents have just signed the petition calling for a new investigation into the collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7 through the ‘High Rise Safety Initiative’?

Are you aware that through the fundraising efforts of public groups in the US, there is currently a massive digital screen in the centre of Times Square showing rolling video footage of the controlled demolition of World Trade Centre Building 7 to three million New Yorkers?  This is footage of a collapse of a massive 47 story building (not hit by a plane) that most people have not even been aware of or seen before now.  How can this level of information cover-up be possible in this day and age?

 Are you aware that many members of US Congress are now demanding that President Obama release the 28 redacted pages of the  9/11 Commission Report because there is information in those pages that will shock the nation, according to the two members of Congress who have been authorised to view the pages?

But yet you have just stated to the world that you consider members of the public to be ‘non-violent extremists’ and a part of the ISIL challenge if they merely wish that these facts, evidence, and information about 9/11 be made available to the wider public and that appropriate investigations are held.

I repeat my previous point.  To make that statement to the world as you did, you are either extremely ignorant about this issue, or you are attempting to take a position which is so at odds with a decent, free society that it beggars belief.  I find it difficult to believe that the Prime Minister of Britain would be unaware of what I have stated here, and therefore I have to believe that it is the latter scenario that is most likely.

Just to reinforce my point here, according to what you have said, because of their views on 9/11, or because of the evidence they have brought forward, you consider the following people to be ‘non-violent extremists’ who are a part of the challenge that society faces with the ISIL threat:

·         Members of US Congress who have called for the 28 redacted pages of the 9/11 Commission Report to be released

·         100,000 members of the New York public for formally supporting and requesting a new investigation into the collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7 on 9/11

·         Dozens of first responder fire fighters who risked their lives on 9/11 and who lost 343 of their colleagues that day, including those who formed the organisation ‘Fire Fighters for 9/11 Truth’

·         More than 2,200 professional architects, engineers, and demolition experts from the organisation ‘Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth’

·         Norman Minneta – US Secretary of Transport during 9/11 who had his formal testimony to the 9/11 investigation panel stricken from the record

·         Richard Clarke – US Head of Counter Terrorism during 9/11

·         Numerous family members of the victims of 9/11

The above list is just a very quick start, but gives a feel for the type of people who you are now labelling as ‘non-violent extremists’ and a part of the battle against ISIL because of their views about 9/11 or the evidence they are bringing forward.  According to your speech to the United Nations, we now need to bring in legislation that will be able to shut down internet sites that bring forward the information and the evidence that the people listed above have been trying to highlight for investigation.  That to me sounds like extremist behaviour.  In fact, that sounds to me like the words of someone who is supporting an attempted cover up of monumental proportions.

It seems that everyone now acknowledges that we were deceived and manipulated on the issue of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in order to take us to war.  It also looks like we have been deceived and manipulated on a grand scale regarding the true facts about 9/11.  So, on this basis, why should you or anyone else believe one word about what the United States is saying about the threat of ISIL?

You have already attempted to take the UK to war in Syria on the basis of alleged evidence against the Assad government that has since proven to be inconclusive at best. Now just a few months later you are once again attempting to take the UK to war with Syria, this time because you now have conclusive evidence of a new and different threat.  Meanwhile, you consider anyone who holds views about 9/11 that are contrary to the official story to be ‘non-violent extremists’.

Putting aside the direct issue of ISIL, which seems to be clouded in uncertainties in terms of exactly who they are, who and how they have been created and supported, and what their wider threat is to the world, I find your comments at the United Nations about the other aspects of this issue to be quite incredible.

9/11 is the event that launched the so called global war on terror and military action in the Middle East.  It is now incontrovertible that we have been deceived and manipulated on a large scale about the true facts of 9/11.  Getting the true facts about 9/11 runs right to the heart of all the issues we currently see in the Middle East and the so called war on terror.  For you to label ordinary, caring, and patriotic members of the public as ‘non-violent extremists’ simply for asking these questions about 9/11 and bringing forward this evidence, and to state that these types of internet sites should be censored, then I have to say that it is you who are the extremist, in the extreme.

The truth facts and evidence about 9/11 are now coming forward and there is a tidal wave of growing awareness as people are now getting to see this information, as shown by what is happening in New York City as we speak.  It cannot be covered up by any crude efforts by the UK government to censor the internet or to give these people an extremist label.  It is far too late for that.  For anyone in office to continue to support the attempted suppression of this information will simply result in them being positioned on the wrong side of history.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Drew – MSc

UK Facilitator – Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Fake Terror Threat Used To Justify Bombing Syria

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/28/u-s-officials-invented-terror-group-justify-bombing-syria/

As the Obama Administration prepared to bomb Syria without congressional or U.N. authorization, it faced two problems. The first was the difficulty of sustaining public support for a new years-long war against ISIS, a group that clearly posed no imminent threat to the “homeland.” A second was the lack of legal justification for launching a new bombing campaign with no viable claim of self-defense or U.N. approval.

The solution to both problems was found in the wholesale concoction of a brand new terror threat that was branded “The Khorasan Group.” After spending weeks depicting ISIS as an unprecedented threat — too radical even for Al Qaeda! — administration officials suddenly began spoon-feeding their favorite media organizations and national security journalists tales of a secret group that was even scarier and more threatening than ISIS, one that posed a direct and immediate threat to the American Homeland. Seemingly out of nowhere, a new terror group was created in media lore.

The unveiling of this new group was performed in a September 13 article by the Associated Press, who cited unnamed U.S. officials to warn of this new shadowy, worse-than-ISIS terror group:

    While the Islamic State group [ISIS] is getting the most attention now, another band of extremists in Syria — a mix of hardened jihadis from Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria and Europe — poses a more direct and imminent threat to the United States, working with Yemeni bomb-makers to target U.S. aviation, American officials say.

    At the center is a cell known as the Khorasan group, a cadre of veteran al-Qaida fighters from Afghanistan and Pakistan who traveled to Syria to link up with the al-Qaida affiliate there, the Nusra Front.

    But the Khorasan militants did not go to Syria principally to fight the government of President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials say. Instead, they were sent by al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri to recruit Europeans and Americans whose passports allow them to board a U.S.-bound airliner with less scrutiny from security officials.

AP warned Americans that “the fear is that the Khorasan militants will provide these sophisticated explosives to their Western recruits who could sneak them onto U.S.-bound flights.” It explained that although ISIS has received most of the attention, the Khorasan Group “is considered the more immediate threat.”

The genesis of the name was itself scary: “Khorasan refers to a province under the Islamic caliphate, or religious empire, of old that included parts of Afghanistan.” AP depicted the U.S. officials who were feeding them the narrative as engaging in some sort of act of brave, unauthorized truth-telling: “Many U.S. officials interviewed for this story would not be quoted by name talking about what they said was highly classified intelligence.”

On the morning of September 18, CBS News broadcast a segment that is as pure war propaganda as it gets: directly linking the soon-to-arrive U.S. bombing campaign in Syria to the need to protect Americans from being exploded in civilian jets by Khorasan. With ominous voice tones, the host narrated:

    This morning we are learning of a new and growing terror threat coming out of Syria. It’s an Al Qaeda cell you probably never heard of. Nearly everything about them is classified. Bob Orr is in Washington with new information on a group some consider more  dangerous than ISIS.

Orr then announced that while ISIS is “dominating headlines and terrorist propaganda,” Orr’s “sources” warn of “a more immediate threat to the U.S. Homeland.” As Orr spoke, CBS flashed alternating video showing scary Muslims in Syria and innocent westerners waiting in line at airports, as he intoned that U.S. officials have ordered “enhanced screening” for “hidden explosives.” This is all coming, Orr explained, from  ”an emerging threat in Syria” where “hardened terrorists” are building “hard to detect bombs.”


The U.S. government, Orr explained, is trying to keep this all a secret; they won’t even mention the group’s name in public out of security concerns! But Orr was there to reveal the truth, as his “sources confirm the Al Qaeda cell goes by the name Khorasan.” And they’re “developing fresh plots to attack U.S. aviation.”

Later that day, Obama administration officials began publicly touting the group, when Director of National Intelligence James Clapper warned starkly: “In terms of threat to the homeland, Khorasan may pose as much of a danger as the Islamic State.” Then followed an avalanche of uncritical media reports detailing this Supreme Threat, excitingly citing anonymous officials as though they had uncovered a big secret the government was trying to conceal.

On September 20, The New York Times devoted a long article to strongly hyping the Khorasan Group. Headlined “U.S. Suspects More Direct Threats Beyond ISIS,” the article began by announcing that U.S. officials believe a different group other than ISIS “posed a more direct threat to America and Europe.” Specifically:

    American officials said that the group called Khorasan had emerged in the past year as the cell in Syria that may be the most intent on hitting the United States or its installations overseas with a terror attack. The officials said that the group is led by Muhsin al-Fadhli, a senior Qaeda operative who, according to the State Department, was so close to Bin Laden that he was among a small group of people who knew about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks before they were launched.

Again, the threat they posed reached all the way to the U.S.: “Members of the cell are said to be particularly interested in devising terror plots using concealed explosives.”

This Khorasan-attacking-Americans alarm spread quickly and explosively in the landscape of U.S. national security reporting. The Daily Beast‘s Eli Lake warned on September 23 — the day after the first U.S. bombs fell in Syria — that “American analysts had pieced together detailed information on a pending attack from an outfit that informally called itself ‘the Khorasan Group’ to use hard-to-detect explosives on American and European airliners.” He added even more ominously: “The planning from the Khorasan Group … suggests at least an aspiration to launch more-coordinated and larger attacks on the West in the style of the 9/11 attacks from 2001″ (days later, Lake, along with Josh Rogin, actually claimed that “Iran has long been harboring senior al Qaeda, al Nusra, and so-called Khorasan Group leaders as part of its complicated strategy to influence the region”).

On the day of the bombing campaign, NBC News’ Richard Engel tweeted this:

That tweet linked to an NBC Nightly News report in which anchor Brian Williams introduced Khorasan with a graphic declaring it “The New Enemy,” and Engel went on to explain that the group is “considered a threat to the U.S. because, U.S. intelligence officials say, it wants to bring down airplanes with explosives.”

Once the bombing campaign was underway, ISIS — the original theme of the attack — largely faded into the background, as Obama officials and media allies aggressively touted attacks on Khorasan leaders and the disruption of its American-targeting plots. On the first day of the bombing, The Washington Post announced that “the United States also pounded a little-known but well-resourced al-Qaeda cell that some American officials fear could pose a direct threat to the United States.” It explained:

    The Pentagon said in a statement early Tuesday that the United States conducted eight strikes west of Aleppo against the cell, called the Khorasan Group, targeting its “training camps, an explosives and munitions production facility, a communications building and command and control facilities.”

The same day, CNN claimed that “among the targets of U.S. strikes across Syria early Tuesday was the Khorasan Group.” The bombing campaign in Syria was thus magically transformed into an act of pure self-defense, given that ”the group was actively plotting against a U.S. homeland target and Western targets, a senior U.S. official told CNN on Tuesday.” The bevy of anonymous sources cited by CNN had a hard time keep their stories straight:

    The official said the group posed an “imminent” threat. Another U.S. official later said the threat was not imminent in the sense that there were no known targets or attacks expected in the next few weeks.

    The plots were believed to be in an advanced stage, the second U.S. official said. There were indications that the militants had obtained materials and were working on new improvised explosive devices that would be hard to detect, including common hand-held electronic devices and airplane carry-on items such as toiletries.

Nonetheless, what was clear was that this group had to be bombed in Syria to save American lives, as the terrorist group even planned to conceal explosive devices in toothpaste or flammable clothing as a means to target U.S. airliners. The day following the first bombings, Attorney General Eric Holder claimed: “We hit them last night out of a concern that they were getting close to an execution date of some of the plans that we have seen.”

CNN’s supremely stenographic Pentagon reporter, Barbara Starr, went on air as videos of shiny new American fighter jets and the Syria bombing were shown and explained that this was all necessary to stop a Khorasan attack very close to being carried out against the west:

    What we are hearing from a senior US official is the reason they struck Khorasan right now is they had intelligence that the group — of Al Qaeda veterans — was in the stages of planning an attack against the US homeland and/or an attack against a target in Europe, and the information indicated Khorasan was well on its way — perhaps in its final stages — of planning that attack.

All of that laid the fear-producing groundwork for President Obama to claim self-defense when he announced the bombing campaign on September 23 with this boast: “Once again, it must be clear to anyone who would plot against America and try to do Americans harm that we will not tolerate safe havens for terrorists who threaten our people.”

The very next day, a Pentagon official claimed a U.S. airstrike killed “the Khorasan leader,” and just a few days after that, U.S. media outlets celebrated what they said was the admission by jihadi social media accounts that “the leader of the al Qaeda-linked Khorasan group was killed in a U.S. air strike in Syria.”

But once it served its purpose of justifying the start of the bombing campaign in Syria, the Khorasan narrative simply evaporated as quickly as it materialized. Foreign Policy‘s Shane Harris, with two other writers, was one of the first to question whether the “threat” was anywhere near what it had been depicted to be:

    But according to the top U.S. counterterrorism official, as well as Obama himself, there is “no credible information” that the militants of the Islamic State were planning to attack inside the United States. Although the group could pose a domestic terrorism threat if left unchecked, any plot it tried launching today would be “limited in scope” and “nothing like a 9/11-scale attack,” Matthew Olsen, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said in remarks at the Brookings Institution earlier this month. That would suggest that Khorasan doesn’t have the capability either, even if it’s working to develop it.

    “Khorasan has the desire to attack, though we’re not sure their capabilities match their desire,” a senior U.S. counterterrorism official told Foreign Policy.

On September 25, The New York Times — just days after hyping the Khorasan threat to the homeland — wrote that “the group’s evolution from obscurity to infamy has been sudden.” And the paper of record began, for the first time, to note how little evidence actually existed for all those claims about the imminent threats posed to the homeland:

    American officials have given differing accounts about just how close the group was to mounting an attack, and about what chance any plot had of success. One senior American official on Wednesday described the Khorasan plotting as “aspirational” and said that there did not yet seem to be a concrete plan in the works.

Literally within a matter of days, we went from “perhaps in its final stages of planning its attack” (CNN) to “plotting as ‘aspirational’” and “there did not yet seem to be a concrete plan in the works” (NYT).

Late last week, Associated Press’ Ken Dilanian — the first to unveil the new Khorasan Product in mid-September — published a new story explaining that just days after bombing “Khorasan” targets in Syria, high-ranking U.S. officials seemingly backed off all their previous claims of an “imminent” threat from the group. Headlined “U.S. Officials Offer More Nuanced Take on Khorasan Threat,” it noted that “several U.S. officials told reporters this week that the group was in the final stages of planning an attack on the West, leaving the impression that such an attack was about to happen.” But now:

    Senior U.S. officials offered a more nuanced picture Thursday of the threat they believe is posed by an al-Qaida cell in Syria targeted in military strikes this week, even as they defended the decision to attack the militants.

    James Comey, the FBI director, and Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon spokesman, each acknowledged that the U.S. did not have precise intelligence about where or when the cell, known as the Khorasan Group, would attempt to strike a Western target. . . .

    Kirby, briefing reporters at the Pentagon, said, “I don’t know that we can pin that down to a day or month or week or six months….We can have this debate about whether it was valid to hit them or not, or whether it was too soon or too late…We hit them. And I don’t think we need to throw up a dossier here to prove that these are bad dudes.”

Regarding claims that an attack was “imminent,” Comey said: “I don’t know exactly what that word means…’imminent’” — a rather consequential admission given that said imminence was used as the justification for launching military action in the first place.

Even more remarkable, it turns out the very existence of an actual “Khorasan Group” was to some degree an invention of the American government. NBC’s Engel, the day after he reported on the U.S. government’s claims about the group for Nightly News, seemed to have serious second thoughts about the group’s existence, tweeting:

Indeed, a Nexis search for the group found almost no mentions of its name prior to the September 13 AP article based on anonymous officials. There was one oblique reference to it in a July 31 CNN op-ed by Peter Bergen. The other mention was an article in the LA Times from two weeks earlier about Pakistan which mentioned the group’s name as something quite different than how it’s being used now: as “the intelligence wing of the powerful Pakistani Taliban faction led by Hafiz Gul Bahadur.” Tim Shorrock noted that the name appears in a 2011 hacked Stratfor email published by WikiLeaks, referencing a Dawn article that depicts them as a Pakistan-based group which was fighting against and “expelled by” (not “led by”) Bahadur.

There are serious questions about whether the Khorasan Group even exists in any meaningful or identifiable manner. Aki Peritz, a CIA counterterrorism official until 2009, told Time: “I’d certainly never heard of this group while working at the agency,” while Obama’s former U.S. ambassador to Syria Robert Ford said: ”We used the term [Khorasan] inside the government, we don’t know where it came from….All I know is that they don’t call themselves that.” As The Intercept was finalizing this article, former terrorism federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy wrote in National Review that the group was a scam: “You haven’t heard of the Khorosan Group because there isn’t one. It is a name the administration came up with, calculating that Khorosan … had sufficient connection to jihadist lore that no one would call the president on it.”

What happened here is all-too-familiar. The Obama administration needed propagandistic and legal rationale for bombing yet another predominantly Muslim country. While emotions over the ISIS beheading videos were high, they were not enough to sustain a lengthy new war.

So after spending weeks promoting ISIS as Worse Than Al Qaeda™, they unveiled a new, never-before-heard-of group that was Worse Than ISIS™. Overnight, as the first bombs on Syria fell, the endlessly helpful U.S. media mindlessly circulated the script they were given: this new group was composed of “hardened terrorists,” posed an “imminent” threat to the U.S. homeland, was in the “final stages” of plots to take down U.S. civilian aircraft, and could “launch more-coordinated and larger attacks on the West in the style of the 9/11 attacks from 2001.”"

As usual, anonymity was granted to U.S. officials to make these claims. As usual, there was almost no evidence for any of this. Nonetheless, American media outlets — eager, as always, to justify American wars — spewed all of this with very little skepticism. Worse, they did it by pretending that the U.S. government was trying not to talk about all of this — too secret! — but they, as intrepid, digging journalists, managed to unearth it from their courageous “sources.” Once the damage was done, the evidence quickly emerged about what a sham this all was. But, as always with these government/media propaganda campaigns, the truth emerges only when it’s impotent.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Blair’s Iraq WMD admission: did he mislead Parliament?

James Cusick, Westminster Editor
Sunday 13 December 2009

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/blair-s-iraq-wmd-admission-did-he-mislead-parliament-1.991811

Tony Blair’s confession that he would have taken Britain to war in Iraq even if he had known Saddam Hussein had no ­weapons of mass destruction leaves him more vulnerable to legal action, a leading international lawyer warned yesterday.

Professor Philippe Sands QC, director of the Centre of International Courts and Tribunals at University College London, and a member of Cherie Blair’s Matrix law chambers, said the former prime minister’s admission that he would have deployed “different arguments” besides the weapons to justify the war and the removal of Saddam, means “he fixed on the policy first and then found the justification”.

Prof Sands, who claims Mr Blair and the former US president George Bush violated international law in the 2003 invasion, said: “The fact that the policy was fixed by Tony Blair irrespective of the facts on the ground, and irrespective of the legality, will now expose him more rather than less to legal difficulties.”

Mr Blair had, until an interview with the BBC to be broadcast today, maintained he waited until almost the eve of the March 2003 invasion before making a final decision to commit British forces to war in Iraq. Only weeks before the invasion, he stated that if Saddam handed over his stock of WMD, there would be no war. ­Critics of the war’s legality, such as Prof Sands, now believe Mr Blair can no longer sustain this assurance.

Hans Blix, who headed the UN inspection team prior to the invasion, said there was a “lack of sincerity” in Mr Blair’s statement.

Mr Blix said the war was “sold” on the issue of WMD, which were not found after the invasion.

He said: “Now we hear it was only a question of deployment of arguments. It sounds a bit like a fig leaf was held up and if that didn’t work they’d put another fig leaf there.”


One of the immediate legal problems for Mr Blair will include his appearance before the Iraq Inquiry early next year.

The inquiry team headed by Sir John Chilcott already has a number of legal documents about the war which have not been disclosed in the public sessions.

Among them is a letter from the then attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, sent in July 2002 to Mr Blair, informing him that deposing Saddam Hussein by force would breach international law.

At that time Mr Blair had already held private discussions with George Bush on “regime change” in Iraq.

Goldsmith’s written advice is believed to point out that military intervention on the grounds of self defence did not apply as the UK was under no imminent threat from Iraq; that humanitarian intervention was irrelevant; and that earlier United Nations resolutions on Saddam did not hold a legal authority beyond the UN itself.

Lord Goldsmith continued to question the legality of the invasion throughout 2002 and early 2003. This eventually led Number 10, close to the invasion date, to seek backing from the international law professor at the London School of Economics, Christopher Greenwood, one of the only lawyers in the UK who felt long-standing UN resolutions against Iraq made invasion legal.

Only a few members of Mr Blair’s so-called war cabinet are said to have known of Goldsmith’s doubts.

However Mr Blair’s confession to the BBC’s Fern Britton – where he says “I would still have thought it right to remove him. Obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments, about the nature of the threat” – means his concern for international law effectively played no part in his decision to send UK forces against Saddam.

For Mr Blair’s critics, there is suspicion that he understands the importance the Goldsmith letter now holds, and how much it can damage his reputation. Prof Sands, however, believes Mr Blair may only have increased the difficulties he faces in front of the inquiry and beyond, by choosing to effectively confess now.

Had Mr Blair been as dismissive about the importance he gave to WMD in the Commons during the pre-invasion debate on Iraq, many MPs now doubt the government would have won. Had he lost, Mr Blair has privately told his closest colleagues he would have immediately resigned as prime minister.

Sir Menzies Campbell said that Mr Blair would not have obtained the support of parliament for the war if he had been so open about his views on the right of regime change.

He added: “I have no doubt whatsoever that if Blair had told his cabinet what he’s saying now, he would have found it difficult to keep all of them.”

Angus Robertson, leader of the SNP in Westminster, said Mr Blair was trying to “rewrite history” ahead of appearing before the Iraq Inquiry.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
If you can stomach listening to Blair making the case for Gulf War 2, pay attention to 1:30 to 1:40 when Blair said:

"We take our freedom for granted, but imagine not to be able to speak, or discuss, or debate or even question the society you live in."

Now fast forward to today and what situation do we find ourselves in?

British PM David Cameron: “Non-Violent Extremists” Including “9/11 Truthers” and “Conspiracy Theorists” are Just as Dangerous as ISIL Terrorists

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1195.msg42224#msg42224


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
http://www.isisnucleariran.org/

Welcome

This website seeks to make available in a single location a broad array of information about Iran's nuclear program, from current news and assessments of this program, to ongoing diplomatic activity aimed at halting its uranium enrichment activity, to commercial satellite imagery and ground photos of nuclear-related sites, and information about Iran's illicit nuclear trade.

This site was made possible by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation.

http://www.carnegie.org/

http://www.isisnucleariran.org/sites/detail/khorasan-metallurgy-industries/

Khorasan is identified in Annex III of UN Security Council Resolution 1803 (2008) as a firm involved in the “production of centrifuge components” and subsidiary of the Ammunition Industries Group (AMIG) and Defense Industries Organization (DIO).

Kaveh Cutting Tools Complex, a part of Khorasan Metallurgy Industries, northeast of Tehran near the city of Mashhad, made the P1 centrifuges scoops, molecular pumps and other components. These are all stationary components in a centrifuge and easier to make than the rotating ones.  For other companies involved in manufacturing centrifuge components, see this page.

Do you believe in coincidence ?

U.S. hits Khorasan Group - A favor to Iran?

http://laymangeopolitics.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/us-hits-khorasan-group-favor-to-iran.html

Khorasan makes Case FOR Iran’s Involvement in 9/11 Attacks Stronger

http://shoebat.com/2014/09/25/khorasiran-911-connection/

Biography of Walid Shoebat

http://shoebat.com/shoebat-foundation/who-is-walid/

‘Biden tries to distance US from the mess in the Mideast’


http://rt.com/op-edge/192908-biden-speech-isis-us-allies/

Twisted Ivy: Harvard students say US bigger threat to world peace than ISIS

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/10/08/twisted-ivy-harvard-students-say-us-bigger-threat-to-world-peace-than-isis/

That fig leaf moving or what ?



---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2160


---------------------------
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth, for being correct. Never apologize for being correct, or for being years ahead of your time. If you're right and you know it, speak your mind. Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth - Ghandi
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Have a look at this article from the New York Times Jan 2012:

Will Israel attack Iran

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/magazine/will-israel-attack-iran.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

It is quite revealing in many ways and even mentions the Mossad assassination team being caught on camera during the assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253437/More-British-passports-used-Mahmoud-al-Mabhouh-Hamas-assassination.html

The recent comments from British Prime Minister Cameron who attempted to portray people who question the official state version of terrorist atrocities as 'extremists', reveals the desperation of the establishment to hide their many crimes.

The Nuremberg Trials 2 is on the horizon and I expect tens of thousands of people globally to be investigated in the coming decades for their link to perpetual terrorism and mass murder, amongst many other serious crimes.

Overt WW3 will probably come first though, as the planned destruction of the dollar via debasing the currency to build a war machine, leaves the warmongers no other options for escape as the economy's of the west will self destruct soon anyway.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
C’est Masterplan: Surreal, Sadistic Syrian Subterfuge

http://21stcenturywire.com/2013/09/03/cest-masterplan-surreal-sadistic-syrian-subterfuge/

Cut and paste from point (3) however the entire article is worth reading for perspective.

3.  Petro-Dollar: During this entire surreal Syrian Sarin spectacle, with all of its grave global implications, one of the most incomprehensible episodes which really set me off, had to be when I watched the entire live debate in the British House of Commons regarding the ratification of the UK’s previously announced military involvement. After a conference call from President Obama, Prime Minister Cameron impulsively made the stunning decision to immediately strike Syria, in response to Assad’s alleged gas attack, even while the uncertain situation was still unfolding on the ground. The whole dreadfully disappointing affair lasted about two and half hours, with one “distinguished honorable gentleman” after another rising up to soundly articulate or in most cases persuasively pontificate their supposedly informed views and opinions on the very serious matter at hand. What both struck me and disgusted me, was that out of all the so called  ”distinguished honorable gentleman and women”, not a bloody single one of these duly elected parliamentarians would level with their citizenry regarding the western powers obvious real and actual aims here. It was as if I were a 2nd grader in a class room, and the terrified principal had told the teachers to keep all the children in the dark about the weirdo with an Uzi stalking the cafeteria.

The entire debate centered around the heavy burden, moral obligation and distinct responsibility which the United Kingdom would shoulder, as a leading, exceptional and exemplary world power, in response to a flagrant violation of the acceptable “rules of war” resulting in crimes against humanity. Some members wanted to strike immediately to send an unequivocally strong message to Assad, others wanted to wait for further clarification of the facts on the ground before commencing military action, and still others insisted that a political solution remained the best option. Not once did the real reasons and goals behind the West’s current and direct involvement in the Syrian conflict come up, not even one time! About hundred of these UK parliamentarian clowns rose up and sat down to spew their moral outrage for the apparent gas attack, yet not one single one of them had the honest integrity to educate the people regarding the West’s obvious geopolitical aims and impending grave risks involved.  Real leaders stand as teachers, not deceptive oligarchs, and rarely do they take on the role without considerable reservations. These petty puffed up pikers were a joke. One would have thought we were in the U.S. Congress. In the end, they ended up making the right decision for all the wrong reasons.

Courtesy of Michael Snyder, below is a sobering litany of crucial circumstances and critical considerations directly involved in the deadly serious Syrian situation, that went completely missing, utterly ignored and categorically disregarded during the pompous House of Commons’ dubious debutante deliberations. Take a hard look:

#1 The UK, France and the United States do not have the approval of the United Nations to attack Syria and it is not going to be getting it.

#2 Syria has said that it will use ”all means available” to defend itself against attacks. Would that include terror attacks in the United States, France and the UK itself?

#3 Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem made the following statement on Tuesday…

“We have two options: either to surrender, or to defend ourselves with the means at our disposal. The second choice is the best: we will defend ourselves”

#4 Russia has just sent their most advanced anti-ship missiles to Syria. What do you think would happen if images of sinking allied naval vessels were to come flashing across our television screens?

#5 When the United States attacks Syria, there is a very good chance that Syria will attack Israel.  Just check out what one Syrian official said recently…

    “A member of the Syrian Ba’ath national council Halef al-Muftah, until recently the Syrian propaganda minister’s aide, said on Monday that Damascus views Israel as “behind the aggression and therefore it will come under fire” should Syria be attacked by the U.S. and its allies

    In an interview for the American radio station Sawa in Arabic, President Bashar Assad’s fellow party member said: “We have strategic weapons and we can retaliate. Essentially, the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel.”

    Al-Muftah stressed that the US’s threats will not influence the Syrain regime and added that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”

#6 If Syria attacks Israel, the consequences could be absolutely catastrophic. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is promising that any attack will be responded to “forcefully“…

“We are not a party to this civil war in Syria but if we identify any attempt to attack us we will respond and we will respond forcefully”  

#7 Hezbollah will likely do whatever it can to fight for the survival of the Assad regime. That could include striking targets inside the United States, UK, France and Israel.

#8 Iran’s closest ally is Syria. Will Iran sit idly by as their closest ally is removed from the chessboard? They have previously stated that they would send Iranian troops into the conflict, and can disrupt the flow of oil tankers through the Straights of Hormuz.

#9 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with Russia.  On Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that the West is acting like a “monkey with a hand grenade“.

#10 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with China.  And what will happen if the Chinese decide to start dumping the massive amount of U.S. debt that it is holding? Interest rates would absolutely skyrocket and we would rapidly be facing a nightmare scenario.

#11 Dr. Jerome Corsi and Walid Shoebat have compiled some startling evidence that it was actually the Syrian rebels that the U.S. is supporting that were responsible for the chemical weapons attack that is being used as justification to go to war with Syria…

“With the assistance of former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat, WND has assembled evidence from various Middle Eastern sources that cast doubt on Obama administration claims the Assad government is responsible for last week’s attack.”  
You can examine the evidence for yourself right here.

#12 As Pat Buchanan recently noted, it would have made absolutely no sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons on defenseless women and children. The only people who would benefit from such an attack would be the rebels…

    “The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?

    To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.

    The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war.”

#13 If the Saudis really want to topple the Assad regime, they should do it themselves. They should not expect the United States, UK and France to do their dirty work for them.

#14 A former commander of U.S. Central Command has said that a U.S. attack on Syria would result in “a full-throated, very, very serious war“.

#15 A war in the Middle East will cause the price of oil to sky rocket. On Tuesday, the price of U.S. oil rose to about $110 a barrel.

#16 A lot of innocent civilians inside Syria will end up getting killed. Already, a lot of Syrians are expressing concern about what “foreign intervention” will mean for them and their families…

“I’ve always been a supporter of foreign intervention, but now that it seems like a reality, I’ve been worrying that my family could be hurt or killed,” said one woman, Zaina, who opposes Assad. “I’m afraid of a military strike now.”

“The big fear is that they’ll make the same mistakes they made in Libya and Iraq,” said Ziyad, a man in his 50s. “They’ll hit civilian targets, and then they’ll cry that it was by mistake, but we’ll get killed in the thousands.”

house-of-commonsNow ask yourselves this; why would one of the worlds most venerable and esteemed political governing bodies, spend two and a half hours debating the moral imperative of a Tomahawk cruise missile strike against another Sovereign Nation for an alleged unconfirmed  gas attack, but not give even a second thought to the grave considerations and ominous consequences directly involved in such a serious military action. To go so far as to not even once outline the extremely perilous dangers that are clearly involved here, to the very people that you supposedly represent,  is an unbelievable outrage of incredulous proportion. I don’t know about you, but my bs antennas have gone up swiftly here. Talk about deliberate misdirection. Lose the disingenuous narrative you duplicitous douche-bags.

Moral imperative my ass!  Where were you for the 1.7 million Cambodians neatly slaughter by Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge. Where were you for the 1/4 million victims of the atrocities in East Timor. Where were you in Darfur for the 1/2 million lives viciously terminated by the PLA. Where were you for the nearly 1 million Tutsis that perished in the overt Rwanda genocide? Where were you in Bosnia Herzegovina when 1/4 million people were brutally butchered? Now You suddenly show moral outrage over a couple of unaccounted for canisters of mustard gas that may simply have gone off in the heat of battle, and you are so morally incensed that your ready to strike the match that could well set the world on fire, because of this mishap????  

Please tell me you have another valid reason for your insane reaction, otherwise I may have to set off some fireworks of my own.  I’m just about ready to get medieval on you lamentable lunatics.

As I stated in my opening remarks, the current leaders of the western world are either grossly incompetent cretins or dangerous duplicitous megalomaniacs. Judging by the deliberate deception being openly displayed throughout this Syrian subterfuge, I fear it’s the later.  My good friends, take a good hard look behind the curtain. We are clearly not in Kansas anymore, in fact, we’re not even in the United States.  Something seriously significant, sinister and sensational is taking hold here. The two elephants in the room are Money and Petroleum! Ignore all else. This is about hard core geopolitics, resource wars and monetary control, period. Those controlling the ultimate levers of power have overtly showed their hand. They are dead set on making a play to defend the Petrodollar hegemony at all costs, and above all else. They must have come to the stark calculated realization that the entire western world’s monetary banking system, which has dominated global trade and finance over the past 100 years, is rapidly coming to a point of critical recognition.

The massive, unsustainable and decidedly unhealthy debt loads, carried both publicly and privately by all our seriously sick western societies (+Japan), will soon metastasize the malignant experiment of free flowing money induced by the carcinogen of incessant debt financing, which we all boorishly feasted and overindulged on, into a colossal carnivorous cancer on mankind,  causing a caustic calamity of epidemic proportions. Make no mistake.  One thing you can count on is that the grand masters playing this global chess game are very well aware of this unequivocal and salient fact. They are well prepared and setting up to make their geopolitical counter moves. The pending tomahawk missile strike at Syria is the most telling, overt and obvious move to date.  Why else would they be prepared to take such an inane, insane and absolutely absurd risk over a couple of opened canisters of bad gas, ask yourselves deep in your psyche. When things make zero sense with this much at stake, you can be sure something else is a foot. Make no mistake! They now have deliberately and boldly showed their hand, and there can no longer be any doubt about their future plans, as to the dangerous destructive direction they have nefariously determined to take us.

First the U.S. dollar was backed by gold, then the U.S. dollar was backed by oil, today, since the greatly increased demands on petroleum and its many derivatives, have become central to the continued expansive growth of the powerful emerging economic challengers to the United Sates, the US has no choice but to play its last remaining trump card. Let us be honest with ourselves, we have already cashed out our gold cards and debt financing cards, the final trump card we have is the most lethal, and we are about to use it to secure all the remaining oil.  Make no mistake.

The previous Petrodollar paradigm we have enjoyed over the past 50 years is in the process of degenerating into the Bombacked Dollar. Keep in mind, that our European partners in crime are are desperately in need of an economic booster shot. Cheap natural gas pumped directly in from Qatar would be a Godsend for them, but China, Iran, Russia and Putin’s client Sate Syria stand firmly in the way. Europe is in the midst of a financially driven depression, their money’s no good, like the U.S., they too must use their final military trump card as well.  As my cousins warned me during my recent visit, why else do you think the major western power which is currently in the most feeble financial condition, namely la belle France, is the one which is most adamantly beating the dreaded dastardly drums of war. The international mega banksters require it!

Our pathetic place holder politicians subservient to the faltering global financial oligarchs and the crony multinational corporate syndicates, are about to command our bought & paid for military industrial complex to launch yet another aggressive assault on a Sovereign State. They are clearly hell bent on taking us to war in order to maintain their flailing global hegemony, whichever way they see fit and no matter what the human costs.  The chaotic catastrophic capital clusterfuck about to be unleashed on the rest of us will be legendary. Whether it happens overtly in a fortnight or covertly down the road, it’s coming.  Make no mistake. God help us all… they will release the Kraken!

Britain and America to hold 'war games' to test reaction to bank collapse

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2788613/britain-america-hold-war-games-test-reaction-bank-crisis-atlantic.html
« Last Edit: 2014-10-13, 00:37:05 by evolvingape »


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
How many $Billions spent on protecting us from imaginary 'imminent threats' ?

How many $Billions spent on protecting the national electricity grid's from attack ?

I told you recently that the electrical grid is the Achilles heal of modern society, and it is... without it virtually all of us will die... this is not fear mongering, it is a fact.

So expect a false flag that is serious at some point within the next year or two, depends how quickly the establishment can kick overt WW3 off.

Highest probability based on current information is a bio-weapon event such as an Ebola pandemic, dirty bombs one each for the major nations of the West, or Nuclear power station meltdowns (ie Fukushima, Stuxnet Iran)

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stuxnet-computer-worm-opens-new-era-of-warfare-04-06-2012/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Martial law will be implemented and the TV will tell you it was Russia, or China, or Iran etc... once you are sure who the enemy is that attacked you, and you 'know' your under Martial Law, they will break the grid...

All the 'wealth' in the digital system will evaporate, the hard assets have already been stolen.

All that remains is to crash the system irrevocably and get away with the crime... ready to birth the 7th iteration of the Matrix... (You probably won't be around for that one, you and most everyone else will be dead within a year of the grid going down)


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Jihadist threat not as big as you think
By Peter Bergen and Emily Schneider
September 29, 2014

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/26/opinion/bergen-schneider-how-many-jihadists/index.html?iref=obnetwork

Editor's note: Peter Bergen is CNN's national security analyst, a director at New America and Professor of Practice at Arizona State University. He is the author of "Manhunt: The Ten-Year Search for bin Laden -- From 9/11 to Abbottabad." Emily Schneider is a research associate at New America.

(CNN) -- Most Americans had never heard of the Khorasan group until this week, when President Barack Obama announced that U.S. airstrikes in Syria had targeted the "seasoned al-Qaeda operatives." U.S. officials said that the Khorasan group was actively plotting to conduct an attack in the United States or Europe.

"We can't say that we definitely disrupted their plots" against the West with the U.S. airstrikes, a senior Obama administration official told one of us, but "there is a decent chance we have" because "their communications are interrupted" and members of the group were killed in the strikes.

The sudden public emergence of the Khorasan group as a threat underlines the fact that the global jihadist movement, which at the time of the 9/11 attacks was largely concentrated in Afghanistan, has morphed and metastasized a great deal since then.

Which raises the question: What are the dimensions of the overall global jihadist threat today?

During the Cold War the U.S. intelligence community knew in detail the size of the Soviet military and the disposition of its forces across Eastern Europe and Russia.

In the long, twilight struggle against al Qaeda, its affiliates, splinter groups, and like-minded organizations -- armed forces that fight without uniforms and often in secret -- such an accounting is harder to do.

A good example of this is the shifting estimates of ISIS's strength. ISIS, which split off from al Qaeda earlier this year, "can muster between 20,000 and 31,500 fighters across Iraq and Syria," a CIA spokesman told CNN last week.

This is as much as three times previous estimate of ISIS's strength; U.S. officials initially estimated ISIS had around 10,000 fighters.

To see if we could come up with some kind of estimate for the total number of militants fighting with jihadist groups around the world, we asked a range of experts to estimate the number of fighters belonging to various al Qaeda-affiliated or like-minded groups. These estimates appear in a report, which we helped to author, that was released this week by the Bipartisan Policy Center's Homeland Security Project, a successor to the 9/11 Commission.

If we tally up the low and high estimates for all these groups, we can begin to have a sense of the total number of jihadist militants that are part of formal organizations around the globe. We found that on the low end, an estimated 85,000 men are fighting in jihadist groups around the world; on the high end, 106,000.

How did we arrive at those numbers?

-- We assess that core al Qaeda, whose members are largely located in the Pakistani tribal regions along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, has been devastated in recent years by CIA drone strikes and now numbers only in the low hundreds of militants.

-- Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which operates out of Yemen, poses perhaps the most immediate threat to the U.S. homeland. AQAP had 300 original members in 2010, expanding to around 1,000 by 2012, and membership has remained steady since then, according to Gregory Johnsen, whose book "The Last Refuge: Yemen, al-Qaeda, and America's War in Arabia," is the authoritative history of AQAP.

-- Jabhat al Nusra, the al Qaeda affiliate operating in Syria and northern Iraq, is estimated to be smaller than ISIS, with which it is presently at war. Aaron Zelin, who tracks Nusra for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, estimates that Nusra has 5,000 to 10,000 fighters. (The Khorasan group is only a small subset of Nusra).

-- Al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda's Somalia affiliate, once controlled much of that country, but it has suffered a number of battlefield losses over the past three years. Ken Munkaus, a professor of political science at Davidson College and a specialist on Somalia, believes that the most reliable estimates for the group put the number of fighters between 3,000 and 5,000.

-- French military intervention in Mali in 2013 largely defeated the forces of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and its splinter groups, which had taken over half of the country, but AQIM countinues to operate in Algeria, Mali, Mauritania and Niger. AQIM's main appeal is its wealth, as its focus on kidnappings for ransom has brought in an estimated $90 million. Hannah Armstrong, who studies North African militant groups for New America's International Security Program, estimates the total number of AQIM-associated fighters in the Sahel region of North Africa at about 3,000.

-- Counterterrorism operations in 2009 and 2010 have reduced Jemaah Islamiya (JI), al Qaeda's Southeast Asian affiliate. In the period after 2010, "JI was severely crippled and could only stage small-scale attacks" according to Zachary Abuza, a leading JI expert at the National Defense University. The U.S. National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) assesses: "Southeast Asian governments since 2002 have arrested more than 300 suspected terrorists, significantly degrading JI's network." About 100 Southeast Asians have reportedly traveled to fight with ISIS, which could reinvigorate Southeast Asian extremist networks.

The threat to Western interests, of course, doesn't just come from those groups that are formally affiliated with al Qaeda.

-- Though the Pakistani Taliban is predominantly focused on fighting in Pakistan, the group has repeatedly threatened the United States. The group was responsible for Faisal Shahzad's failed car bomb attack in Times Square on May 1, 2010. According to National Defense University Professor Hassan Abbas, who has written extensively on the Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban have anywhere from 17,000 to 22,000 foot soldiers.

--The influx of Pakistani Taliban militants into Afghanistan --under the leadership of Pakistani Taliban commander Mullah Maulana Fazullah, who currently resides in Afghanistan --adds more fighters to an already robust Taliban force: U.S. government officials estimate the number of Afghan Taliban members at around 35,000.

-- Since 2011, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) has lost several senior leaders, yet the group continues to pose a threat to Afghanistan and Pakistan. The IMU claimed responsibility for the June 2014 attack on Karachi's Jinnah International Airport, which killed 28 people. The U.S. State Department estimated that as of April 2014, the IMU had about 200 to 300 members and that its splinter, the Islamic Jihad Union, has 100 to 200 members.

-- Since its creation in 2002, Boko Haram has only attacked Western interests once, when it bombed the U.N. office in Abuja, Nigeria, in August 2011. The group has consistently shown little inclination for attacking Western targets and is principally interested in putting Nigeria under its version of Sharia law. Dr. Peter Lewis, the director of African Studies at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies has estimated that Boko Haram had several thousand supporters and at least 300 armed men.

(We excluded from our overall account the armed forces of Hezbollah and Hamas, because these organizations also engage in conventional politics and governing and also do not attack American targets -- all facts that make them at odds with al Qaeda and its affiliates and splinter groups).

The vast majority of the estimated 85,000 to 106,000 militants fighting with militant jihadist groups around the world are fighting for purely local reasons, for instance, trying to install Sharia law in northern Nigeria or trying to impose Taliban rule on Pakistan and Afghanistan, while only a small number of these militants are focused on attacking the West.

By historical standards this is hardly a major threat. At the end of the Cold War, Soviet and other Warsaw Pact countries could muster around 6 million men to fight in a war against the West, a number that is some 60 times greater than the total number of militants estimated to be fighting for jihadist organizations today.

And, of course, the Soviets had a vast supply of nuclear-armed, land-based missiles, nuclear-armed submarines and nuclear-armed bombers and many other highly sophisticated weapons systems that jihadist organizations have never acquired and are quite unlikely to.

The only reasonable conclusion to draw is that the threat posed by jihadist organizations around the globe is quite inconsequential when compared with what the West faced in the past century.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
ISIS, WW3 & THE NWO’S GRAND CHESSBOARD OF LIES — Gerald Celente
October 12th, 2014

http://investmentwatchblog.com/isis-ww3-the-nwos-grand-chessboard-of-lies-gerald-celente/

As the false flag terror sponsor Saudi Arabia threatens the West with the claim that “ISIS Will Be Here Soon” and warns of an “imminent threat” from which the U.S. and Europe “can’t hide”, Gerald Celente of the Trends Journal joins us to dissect the despicable, sinister plans of the New World Order and the madness of the ‘Grand Chessboard’.

The pieces are all lining up to take the world directly in to World War III if the maniacs in power are not stopped.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Putin Makes New Chess-Move

Russia says it's pulling 17,000 troops from near Ukrainian border
From Matthew Chance and Holly Yan, CNN
October 13, 2014

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/12/world/europe/russia-ukraine/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Moscow (CNN) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered 17,600 troops near the Ukrainian border to return to their bases, state-run media reported.

The reason? The Russian troops' training exercises in the southern Rostov region have ended, according to the RIA Novosti news agency.
'The 12 Labors of Putin'
New NATO chief touts Russia relationship

But many did not believe such exercises were taking place. The troop buildup near the Ukrainian border has been widely interpreted as a threat to invade eastern Ukraine.

If the troops do indeed leave the border area, the withdrawal could mark a removal of that threat. So far, NATO has not confirmed whether the troops have actually began to withdraw.

Tensions in the region have flared since April, when separatist leaders in Ukraine declared independence from Kiev and violence broke out in two Ukrainian regions that border Russia.

The conflict between the pro-Russian rebels and the Ukrainian military has cost more than 2,500 lives, according to the United Nations.

War: What is it good for?

Russia's announcement of the troop pullback comes as Putin and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko prepare to meet in Milan on sidelines of the Asia-Europe Meeting later this month.

In another sign that tensions have cooled somewhat, Ukrainian emergency services will be granted passage Monday to the site in rebel-controlled eastern Ukraine where Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 crashed in July.

After negotiations led by the Organization for the Security and Co-operation in Europe, Ukrainian teams will be allowed to gather belongings of crash victims at the site and from locals in the area, Dutch Security and Justice Ministry Spokesman Jean Fransman told CNN.

Ukraine and Russia have been under a shaky cease-fire since last month, when government officials from the two countries as well as rebel leaders from eastern Ukraine hashed out a deal in Belarus.

Yet the bloodshed continued.

Ten civilians were killed when a school in the city of Donetsk was shelled, according to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

And one day later, Swiss Red Cross worker Laurent DuPasquier was killed when a shell landed near an International Committee of the Red Cross building in Donetsk.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats

By NICK HANAUER
July/August 2014
Politco Magazine

http://templetonwatch.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us.html

Memo: From Nick Hanauer
To: My Fellow Zillionaires

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#ixzz35zShPyWX

You probably don’t know me, but like you I am one of those .01%ers, a proud and unapologetic capitalist. I have founded, co-founded and funded more than 30 companies across a range of industries—from itsy-bitsy ones like the night club I started in my 20s to giant ones like Amazon.com, for which I was the first nonfamily investor. Then I founded aQuantive, an Internet advertising company that was sold to Microsoft in 2007 for $6.4 billion. In cash. My friends and I own a bank. I tell you all this to demonstrate that in many ways I’m no different from you. Like you, I have a broad perspective on business and capitalism. And also like you, I have been rewarded obscenely for my success, with a life that the other 99.99 percent of Americans can’t even imagine. Multiple homes, my own plane, etc., etc. You know what I’m talking about. In 1992, I was selling pillows made by my family’s business, Pacific Coast Feather Co., to retail stores across the country, and the Internet was a clunky novelty to which one hooked up with a loud squawk at 300 baud. But I saw pretty quickly, even back then, that many of my customers, the big department store chains, were already doomed. I knew that as soon as the Internet became fast and trustworthy enough—and that time wasn’t far off—people were going to shop online like crazy. Goodbye, Caldor. And Filene’s. And Borders. And on and on.

Realizing that, seeing over the horizon a little faster than the next guy, was the strategic part of my success. The lucky part was that I had two friends, both immensely talented, who also saw a lot of potential in the web. One was a guy you’ve probably never heard of named Jeff Tauber, and the other was a fellow named Jeff Bezos. I was so excited by the potential of the web that I told both Jeffs that I wanted to invest in whatever they launched, big time. It just happened that the second Jeff—Bezos—called me back first to take up my investment offer. So I helped underwrite his tiny start-up bookseller. The other Jeff started a web department store called Cybershop, but at a time when trust in Internet sales was still low, it was too early for his high-end online idea; people just weren’t yet ready to buy expensive goods without personally checking them out (unlike a basic commodity like books, which don’t vary in quality—Bezos’ great insight). Cybershop didn’t make it, just another dot-com bust. Amazon did somewhat better. Now I own a very large yacht.

But let’s speak frankly to each other. I’m not the smartest guy you’ve ever met, or the hardest-working. I was a mediocre student. I’m not technical at all—I can’t write a word of code. What sets me apart, I think, is a tolerance for risk and an intuition about what will happen in the future. Seeing where things are headed is the essence of entrepreneurship. And what do I see in our future now?

I see pitchforks.

At the same time that people like you and me are thriving beyond the dreams of any plutocrats in history, the rest of the country—the 99.99 percent—is lagging far behind. The divide between the haves and have-nots is getting worse really, really fast. In 1980, the top 1 percent controlled about 8 percent of U.S. national income. The bottom 50 percent shared about 18 percent. Today the top 1 percent share about 20 percent; the bottom 50 percent, just 12 percent.

But the problem isn’t that we have inequality. Some inequality is intrinsic to any high-functioning capitalist economy. The problem is that inequality is at historically high levels and getting worse every day. Our country is rapidly becoming less a capitalist society and more a feudal society. Unless our policies change dramatically, the middle class will disappear, and we will be back to late 18th-century France. Before the revolution.

And so I have a message for my fellow filthy rich, for all of us who live in our gated bubble worlds: Wake up, people. It won’t last.

If we don’t do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn’t eventually come out. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It’s not if, it’s when.

Many of us think we’re special because “this is America.” We think we’re immune to the same forces that started the Arab Spring—or the French and Russian revolutions, for that matter. I know you fellow .01%ers tend to dismiss this kind of argument; I’ve had many of you tell me to my face I’m completely bonkers. And yes, I know there are many of you who are convinced that because you saw a poor kid with an iPhone that one time, inequality is a fiction.
 
Here’s what I say to you: You’re living in a dream world. What everyone wants to believe is that when things reach a tipping point and go from being merely crappy for the masses to dangerous and socially destabilizing, that we’re somehow going to know about that shift ahead of time.

Any student of history knows that’s not the way it happens. Revolutions, like bankruptcies, come gradually, and then suddenly. One day, somebody sets himself on fire, then thousands of people are in the streets, and before you know it, the country is burning. And then there’s no time for us to get to the airport and jump on our Gulfstream Vs and fly to New Zealand. That’s the way it always happens. If inequality keeps rising as it has been, eventually it will happen. We will not be able to predict when, and it will be terrible—for everybody. But especially for us.

Any student of history knows that’s not the way it happens. Revolutions, like bankruptcies, come gradually, and then suddenly. One day, somebody sets himself on fire, then thousands of people are in the streets, and before you know it, the country is burning. And then there’s no time for us to get to the airport and jump on our Gulfstream Vs and fly to New Zealand. That’s the way it always happens. If inequality keeps rising as it has been, eventually it will happen. We will not be able to predict when, and it will be terrible—for everybody. But especially for us.

The model for us rich guys here should be Henry Ford, who realized that all his autoworkers in Michigan weren’t only cheap labor to be exploited; they were consumers, too. Ford figured that if he raised their wages, to a then-exorbitant $5 a day, they’d be able to afford his Model Ts.

What a great idea. My suggestion to you is: Let’s do it all over again. We’ve got to try something. These idiotic trickle-down policies are destroying my customer base. And yours too.

It’s when I realized this that I decided I had to leave my insulated world of the super-rich and get involved in politics. Not directly, by running for office or becoming one of the big-money billionaires who back candidates in an election. Instead, I wanted to try to change the conversation with ideas—by advancing what my co-author, Eric Liu, and I call “middle-out” economics. It’s the long-overdue rebuttal to the trickle-down economics worldview that has become economic orthodoxy across party lines—and has so screwed the American middle class and our economy generally. Middle-out economics rejects the old misconception that an economy is a perfectly efficient, mechanistic system and embraces the much more accurate idea of an economy as a complex ecosystem made up of real people who are dependent on one another.

Which is why the fundamental law of capitalism must be: If workers have more money, businesses have more customers. Which makes middle-class consumers, not rich businesspeople like us, the true job creators. Which means a thriving middle class is the source of American prosperity, not a consequence of it. The middle class creates us rich people, not the other way around.

On June 19, 2013, Bloomberg published an article I wrote called “The Capitalist’s Case for a $15 Minimum Wage.” Forbes labeled it “Nick Hanauer’s near insane” proposal. And yet, just weeks after it was published, my friend David Rolf, a Service Employees International Union organizer, roused fast-food workers to go on strike around the country for a $15 living wage. Nearly a year later, the city of Seattle passed a $15 minimum wage. And just 350 days after my article was published, Seattle Mayor Ed Murray signed that ordinance into law. How could this happen, you ask?

It happened because we reminded the masses that they are the source of growth and prosperity, not us rich guys. We reminded them that when workers have more money, businesses have more customers—and need more employees. We reminded them that if businesses paid workers a living wage rather than poverty wages, taxpayers wouldn’t have to make up the difference. And when we got done, 74 percent of likely Seattle voters in a recent poll agreed that a $15 minimum wage was a swell idea.

The standard response in the minimum-wage debate, made by Republicans and their business backers and plenty of Democrats as well, is that raising the minimum wage costs jobs. Businesses will have to lay off workers. This argument reflects the orthodox economics that most people had in college. If you took Econ 101, then you literally were taught that if wages go up, employment must go down. The law of supply and demand and all that. That’s why you’ve got John Boehner and other Republicans in Congress insisting that if you price employment higher, you get less of it. Really?
 
"The thing about us businesspeople is that we love our customers rich and our employees poor. "
 
Because here’s an odd thing. During the past three decades, compensation for CEOs grew 127 times faster than it did for workers. Since 1950, the CEO-to-worker pay ratio has increased 1,000 percent, and that is not a typo. CEOs used to earn 30 times the median wage; now they rake in 500 times. Yet no company I know of has eliminated its senior managers, or outsourced them to China or automated their jobs. Instead, we now have more CEOs and senior executives than ever before. So, too, for financial services workers and technology workers. These folks earn multiples of the median wage, yet we somehow have more and more of them

The thing about us businesspeople is that we love our customers rich and our employees poor. So for as long as there has been capitalism, capitalists have said the same thing about any effort to raise wages. We’ve had 75 years of complaints from big business—when the minimum wage was instituted, when women had to be paid equitable amounts, when child labor laws were created. Every time the capitalists said exactly the same thing in the same way: We’re all going to go bankrupt. I’ll have to close. I’ll have to lay everyone off. It hasn’t happened. In fact, the data show that when workers are better treated, business gets better. The naysayers are just wrong.

Most of you probably think that the $15 minimum wage in Seattle is an insane departure from rational policy that puts our economy at great risk. But in Seattle, our current minimum wage of $9.32 is already nearly 30 percent higher than the federal minimum wage. And has it ruined our economy yet? Well, trickle-downers, look at the data here: The two cities in the nation with the highest rate of job growth by small businesses are San Francisco and Seattle. Guess which cities have the highest minimum wage? San Francisco and Seattle. The fastest-growing big city in America? Seattle. Fifteen dollars isn’t a risky untried policy for us. It’s doubling down on the strategy that’s already allowing our city to kick your city’s ass.

It makes perfect sense if you think about it: If a worker earns $7.25 an hour, which is now the national minimum wage, what proportion of that person’s income do you think ends up in the cash registers of local small businesses? Hardly any. That person is paying rent, ideally going out to get subsistence groceries at Safeway, and, if really lucky, has a bus pass. But she’s not going out to eat at restaurants. Not browsing for new clothes. Not buying flowers on Mother’s Day.

Is this issue more complicated than I’m making out? Of course. Are there many factors at play determining the dynamics of employment? Yup. But please, please stop insisting that if we pay low-wage workers more, unemployment will skyrocket and it will destroy the economy. It’s utter nonsense. The most insidious thing about trickle-down economics isn’t believing that if the rich get richer, it’s good for the economy. It’s believing that if the poor get richer, it’s bad for the economy.

I know that virtually all of you feel that compelling our businesses to pay workers more is somehow unfair, or is too much government interference. Most of you think that we should just let good examples like Costco or Gap lead the way. Or let the market set the price. But here’s the thing. When those who set bad examples, like the owners of Wal-Mart or McDonald’s, pay their workers close to the minimum wage, what they’re really saying is that they’d pay even less if it weren’t illegal. (Thankfully both companies have recently said they would not oppose a hike in the minimum wage.) In any large group, some people absolutely will not do the right thing. That’s why our economy can only be safe and effective if it is governed by the same kinds of rules as, say, the transportation system, with its speed limits and stop signs.

Wal-Mart is our nation’s largest employer with some 1.4 million employees in the United States and more than $25 billion in pre-tax profit. So why are Wal-Mart employees the largest group of Medicaid recipients in many states? Wal-Mart could, say, pay each of its 1 million lowest-paid workers an extra $10,000 per year, raise them all out of poverty and enable them to, of all things, afford to shop at Wal-Mart. Not only would this also save us all the expense of the food stamps, Medicaid and rent assistance that they currently require, but Wal-Mart would still earn more than $15 billion pre-tax per year. Wal-Mart won’t (and shouldn’t) volunteer to pay its workers more than their competitors. In order for us to have an economy that works for everyone, we should compel all retailers to pay living wages—not just ask politely.

We rich people have been falsely persuaded by our schooling and the affirmation of society, and have convinced ourselves, that we are the main job creators. It’s simply not true. There can never be enough super-rich Americans to power a great economy. I earn about 1,000 times the median American annually, but I don’t buy thousands of times more stuff. My family purchased three cars over the past few years, not 3,000. I buy a few pairs of pants and a few shirts a year, just like most American men. I bought two pairs of the fancy wool pants I am wearing as I write, what my partner Mike calls my “manager pants.” I guess I could have bought 1,000 pairs. But why would I? Instead, I sock my extra money away in savings, where it doesn’t do the country much good.

So forget all that rhetoric about how America is great because of people like you and me and Steve Jobs. You know the truth even if you won’t admit it: If any of us had been born in Somalia or the Congo, all we’d be is some guy standing barefoot next to a dirt road selling fruit. It’s not that Somalia and Congo don’t have good entrepreneurs. It’s just that the best ones are selling their wares off crates by the side of the road because that’s all their customers can afford.

So why not talk about a different kind of New Deal for the American people, one that could appeal to the right as well as left—to libertarians as well as liberals? First, I’d ask my Republican friends to get real about reducing the size of government. Yes, yes and yes, you guys are all correct: The federal government is too big in some ways. But no way can you cut government substantially, not the way things are now. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush each had eight years to do it, and they failed miserably.

Republicans and Democrats in Congress can’t shrink government with wishful thinking. The only way to slash government for real is to go back to basic economic principles: You have to reduce the demand for government. If people are getting $15 an hour or more, they don’t need food stamps. They don’t need rent assistance. They don’t need you and me to pay for their medical care. If the consumer middle class is back, buying and shopping, then it stands to reason you won’t need as large a welfare state. And at the same time, revenues from payroll and sales taxes would rise, reducing the deficit.

This is, in other words, an economic approach that can unite left and right. Perhaps that’s one reason the right is beginning, inexorably, to wake up to this reality as well. Even Republicans as diverse as Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum recently came out in favor of raising the minimum wage, in defiance of the Republicans in Congress.

One thing we can agree on—I’m sure of this—is that the change isn’t going to start in Washington. Thinking is stale, arguments even more so. On both sides.

But the way I see it, that’s all right. Most major social movements have seen their earliest victories at the state and municipal levels. The fight over the eight-hour workday, which ended in Washington, D.C., in 1938, began in places like Illinois and Massachusetts in the late 1800s. The movement for social security began in California in the 1930s. Even the Affordable Health Care Act—Obamacare—would have been hard to imagine without Mitt Romney’s model in Massachusetts to lead the way.

Sadly, no Republicans and few Democrats get this. President Obama doesn’t seem to either, though his heart is in the right place. In his State of the Union speech this year, he mentioned the need for a higher minimum wage but failed to make the case that less inequality and a renewed middle class would promote faster economic growth. Instead, the arguments we hear from most Democrats are the same old social-justice claims. The only reason to help workers is because we feel sorry for them. These fairness arguments feed right into every stereotype of Obama and the Democrats as bleeding hearts. Republicans say growth. Democrats say fairness—and lose every time.

But just because the two parties in Washington haven’t figured it out yet doesn’t mean we rich folks can just keep going. The conversation is already changing, even if the billionaires aren’t onto it. I know what you think: You think that Occupy Wall Street and all the other capitalism-is-the-problem protesters disappeared without a trace. But that’s not true. Of course, it’s hard to get people to sleep in a park in the cause of social justice. But the protests we had in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis really did help to change the debate in this country from death panels and debt ceilings to inequality.

It’s just that so many of you plutocrats didn’t get the message.

Dear 1%ers, many of our fellow citizens are starting to believe that capitalism itself is the problem. I disagree, and I’m sure you do too. Capitalism, when well managed, is the greatest social technology ever invented to create prosperity in human societies. But capitalism left unchecked tends toward concentration and collapse. It can be managed either to benefit the few in the near term or the many in the long term. The work of democracies is to bend it to the latter. That is why investments in the middle class work. And tax breaks for rich people like us don’t. Balancing the power of workers and billionaires by raising the minimum wage isn’t bad for capitalism. It’s an indispensable tool smart capitalists use to make capitalism stable and sustainable. And no one has a bigger stake in that than zillionaires like us.

The oldest and most important conflict in human societies is the battle over the concentration of wealth and power. The folks like us at the top have always told those at the bottom that our respective positions are righteous and good for all. Historically, we called that divine right. Today we have trickle-down economics.
 
What nonsense this is. Am I really such a superior person? Do I belong at the center of the moral as well as economic universe? Do you?

My family, the Hanauers, started in Germany selling feathers and pillows. They got chased out of Germany by Hitler and ended up in Seattle owning another pillow company. Three generations later, I benefited from that. Then I got as lucky as a person could possibly get in the Internet age by having a buddy in Seattle named Bezos. I look at the average Joe on the street, and I say, “There but for the grace of Jeff go I.” Even the best of us, in the worst of circumstances, are barefoot, standing by a dirt road, selling fruit. We should never forget that, or forget that the United States of America and its middle class made us, rather than the other way around.

Or we could sit back, do nothing, enjoy our yachts. And wait for the pitchforks.

Nick Hanauer is a Seattle-based entrepreneur.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1476
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Communism.
Raise the wages really raises inflation. The amount of dollars it takes still went up and that is the failure. Because the holder of the bucket would not lower the bucket the donkey in the well has to wait for more dirt to pile up to walk out. The donkey keeps crying for more dirt because the quality of where is at doesn't change.
One big duh. I grew up at the bottom of a very deep well and spent my youth crying out for more dirt. I bided my time as a young adult in work and school. I now own the well.
It doesn't take more 'Give' by the rich and 'Take' by the poor. It takes more application by everybody to create and work an environment to make the machine work smoothly for everybody. The Henry Ford example worked because there was still a large difference between those that worked in that industry and the other citizens else where. Once the ripples smooth out the same old problem arises.

Money plays its own game at it's own speed. It affords isolation. And that is a 2 edged sword of injustice.


---------------------------
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Good comment, like the thinking..

I have previously stated that it is my belief that the Universe (this reality you experience) is a potential difference engine. Any machine or process without a significant potential difference will stall.. if it starts at all..

How we manipulate that potential difference determines the power or velocity or.. etc..

Are any of the possible '..ism's' suitable for a stable global society ?

Must there be different '..ism's' in different locations, that are related through a common energy exchange in order for the machine to work ?

How does a debt based monetary system and a non-debt based monetary system differ in practice for each of the various '..ism's' ?

Do we know ? Have all of the possible combinations been tried already ?

One thing we do know for sure is that if a machine with a huge momentum, and huge potential energy get's out of synchronisation with the feedback mechanism.. it destroys itself very rapidly with a huge release of energy.. devastating to anything within the blast range.

This is what Nick Hanauer has recognised, an imbalance in the system and his own potential exposure to that imbalance. He is trying to raise awareness of the problem and I respect him for that. Will it save him and his fellow Zillionaire's ? I don't have that answer but time will tell.

What is critical at this point in time is to recognise the pure evil that resides at the heart of government in the west, and even more so in the hidden hand that steers it. The human population of this planet, at this time, will no longer accept perpetual terrorism and the brutal murder of innocents by the power structures that believe they control this reality.

Timing is critical in any movement..

How Adolf Hitler changed the economy of Germany in five years

http://lovkap.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/how-adolf-hitler-changed-economy-of.html


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2160
Quote from: EvolvingApe
How does a debt based monetary system and a non-debt based monetary system differ in practice for each of the various '..ism's' ?

Good question.

Think "Usury."  Without "usury" (which amounts to free
energy to the recipient) things would be much different.

But there's more to the story.  Honesty and Ethics are
a necessity.  Our World today is corrupt beyond belief.


---------------------------
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth, for being correct. Never apologize for being correct, or for being years ahead of your time. If you're right and you know it, speak your mind. Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth - Ghandi
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1476
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Quote
Honesty and Ethics are
a necessity.
The wicked believe these are a choice.

Quote
and even more so in the hidden hand that steers it.

'nuff sed...

Jesus stated 'Every eye shall see and every knee shall bow'.
A county sheriff in my church's men group, who is 62, stated ' What used to happen once in a career is not happening multiple times a day.'

I have achieved my life long dreams and at the finish line have seen the futility of the struggle, except for the fact that my wisdom now ring true.

Watch and goodbye. I hope you believe.
http://www.hallindsey.com/


---------------------------
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Firefly Clip: The Negotiator

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPRlHwwVIug

Any questions ?


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1476
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Into the bowels ye will go...
 should thy lips spread open the vacuous orifice.

I know. This sounds really, really bad. But I am in a rank mood and it is my desire to consume servers.


---------------------------
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Is David Cameron The Terrorist? Russell Brand The Trews (E164)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3C2nkGiVytQ

Published on 9 Oct 2014

Russell Brand The Trews (E164).

In this Trews special I'm joined by actor ALEC BALDWIN, plus Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert of 'The Keiser Report', discussing the Ebola crisis and Isis terror threat.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1402
@evolvingape
I see it this way, now let's say we are rats on a ship in the middle of the ocean and the ship is called "Earth". So we as rats knaw on the wood hull to eat and multiply but then the head political rat tells us we must eat more and have more offspring. He explains that this is logical, if we eat more and have more offspring then we will crap more and tree's may grow in our crap giving us more to eat. You see it is all very logical and common sense which is why everyone is so concerned with economic growth. One little problem...tree's don't grow in the middle of the ocean and it should be obvious that the ship must sink at some point.

We truly are rats because the economy is not sustainable, our economic growth is not sustainable nor is the population growth. Which is why the well written article by NICK HANAUER seems very logical and common sense but is absolutely pointless long term. It is like saying yes let's give the middle class more money so they can buy more useless crap from us and consume more resources so we can make more money and do the same only on a larger scale. You see the reason this person and most like him are fools is because in their future we have no future. In their future we will consume everything for profit to impress others with all our possessions and destroy the planet in the process... it is a fools game. No offense but I know many millionares personally and most have an IQ equal to their shoe size and their only purpose in life is to make money which doesn't actually qualify as a purpose. To be honest just listening to these boffoon's talk is comical, imagine looking up into the universe on a clear calm night at the edge of the grand canyon and only one thought occupies your mind...how can I make more money?, lol, that is why they will always be fools no matter how much money they make or what they own... in a nutshell. They are completely lacking in real intelligence and insight in my opinion.

The real problem is that we have replaced intelligence and evolution with a pointless numbers game. Let's put it this way I figured out what the fundamental fields (E,B,G) and inertia are, what they are, why they are, what they do which dictates the actions of the whole damn universe as we know it and I didn't use a single number in the whole process. Nor do I need one single equation to describe it and I simply use words to describe simple known processes...think about that. It is not a matter of numbers, math or equations it is a simple matter of putting what we know and have already proven in the proper context, the problem is the way everyone has been taught to think.

It is no damn wonder nobody can make any headway because the whole of their existence which has no real purpose revolves around simple numbers. How much do I have, How much do I need, How can I get more, Where can I get more, How much does he have relative to me?. Personally one thought occupies my mind 24/7, How can I learn and understand more...period.

@GK
Quote
I have achieved my life long dreams and at the finish line have seen the futility of the struggle, except for the fact that my wisdom now ring true.
Right, join the club
You throw a life line to the people in a sinking ship and they try to eat the rope, such is life

AC
« Last Edit: 2014-10-15, 06:33:10 by Allcanadian »


---------------------------
I don't like morning people... or mornings or people

Be careful when you blindly follow the Masses... sometimes the "M" is silent.
   
Group: Guest
The earths magnetic field has ncreased substantially lately.

If any of you has a neo disk magnet, stand it on edge on a table and notice what happens. Aleady been replicated in NY and im in FL.

Try it.  Look up my vid on yt.   "its a compass"  just a few down on search list.

Mags
   

Group: Renaissance Man
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2221


Buy me a cigar
The earths magnetic field has ncreased substantially lately.

If any of you has a neo disk magnet, stand it on edge on a table and notice what happens. Aleady been replicated in NY and im in FL.

Try it.  Look up my vid on yt.   "its a compass"  just a few down on search list.

Mags

Dear Mag's.

I noticed the very same thing a few weeks back !!  :)

Video proof !!??           https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLkJz-ZUDb4

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Group: Guest
Hey Grum

Thanks for showing.  Ill check the vid when I get home. Shop laptop is acting up with vids and such.

Tk says its always been this way..   He also said that the more powerful mags these days are the reason why.

Well, that disk and a stack of them are from about 10 years ago and they are not the strongest puppys I own over that period. Ace hardware pack.

Back then I was setting them up on end like that many times without this issue. In fact I clearly remember thinking how weak the earths field was as I would have to hang the mag from a thread then to have it go back and forth  slowly till finally resting N n S.   I tried a piece of 42 awg wire taped to the edge yesterday and it definitely turns like there is a local source, or, the earths field is stronger, not like I witnessed back then. Ive never had to recheck other tables, out on the sidewalk, in the middle of a street, the kitchen counter, the bathroom vanity just to have some solid verification. Ive had issues with screws or metal framework under a table top and eliminated them and would have to say, never was there an effect like this that was 'too' noticeable to ignore. Was thinking all last night, wow, this is strong enough to offset things if your a magnet motor experimenter.

Anyway, so far, Dreamthinkbuild verified it in NY, and now you.   Now I want to see what others like Lasersaber and Oldscientist, some that would fully see a possible difference as compared to just some years ago due to their vast experience with mags.

Thanks Grum.  ;)

Mags

   
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 100
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2020-10-19, 21:46:44