- New Tax Proposal Would Abolish IRS in Lieu of ‘Fair Tax' System
- Rothschild Agents Take 10 Key Posts In Administration of Rookie President
- London Banking Center at Core of Financial Crisis
- Investigator Details Bernie Madoff's Relationship With Organized Crime
- White House Will Control Census for First Time in 200 Years
- Congressman Preaches Populist Line: Federal Reserve Isn't ‘Federal' at All
- Shoring Up America's Financial House of Cards (by Ron Paul)
- Russian Jewish Mobsters Wield Global Power
Israel's invasion of Gaza bears a striking resemblance to its ill-fated war in Lebanon in 2006 in which it failed to defeat Hezbollah. This time around, it was unable to destroy Hamas. However, the campaign may well be remembered for the fact that the Israeli Defense Forces experimented with at least one new weapon in an urban setting.
According to doctors, who treated the thousands of injured, and the more than 1,000 dead Palestinians, one of the weapons that figured in the 22-day bombardment of Gaza was the DIME bomb—dense inert metal explosive—which causes horrifying injuries. It is composed of tungsten and high-tensile steel alloys called HTMAs which, according to a 2005 Department of Health report, can cause cancer. The weapon was developed by the U.S. military, which has not tested it on the battlefield and by all accounts regards it as being at the experimental stage.
That did not stop Israel first using it in a limited way in Gaza in the summer of 2006, firing it from drones. However, at that time, the Israeli military denied having it and doctors were unable to prove otherwise even though they noticed patients with severe injuries that had no signs of shrapnel.
Explosives experts say a DIME bomb narrows the range of the explosion it creates and intensifies its impact within a narrow radius. According to Italian investigative reporters, who were first to draw attention to the existence of the weapon, it is a precision device developed in the U.S. in 2005. The U.S. military was keen to have DIME bombs in its arsenal for use in urban areas of Iraq and Afghanistan because they had the potential to limit the kind of collateral damage often caused by conventional explosives.
When a regular bomb explodes in an urban setting the blast extends outward over a wide area, often inflicting unnecessary casualties. For reasons yet unknown, the U.S. military did not do any battlefield tests on DIME in Iraq or Afghanistan and it was left to the Israelis to test its effectiveness. So far, there has been no admission by the U.S. that it supplied Israel with DIME bombs or the technology to build them.
Nevertheless, there is now evidence, gleaned from photographs of wounded civilians in Gaza in 2006, which confirms DIMEs were fired from Israeli drones. In the latest bombardment of Gaza, physicians and surgeons were quickly confronted by wounds they had not seen before.
Eric Fosse, a Norwegian surgeon, who has worked in Gaza for some time, is convinced DIME weapons were used because some of the people he treated had terrible injuries that showed no evidence of shrapnel. He says it was as if tungsten, which explodes like a powder when a DIME weapon hits its target, had "dissolved" into tissue, leaving no obvious trace. There were also signs of intense heat at the site of severe amputations.
There is a possibility DIME bombs were not the only experimental weapons used in Gaza because some surgeons reported seeing injuries that defied explanation and did not appear to have been caused by traditional explosive shells or missiles. For example, in some instances surgeons could not stop the bleeding of wounds. The reaction of the Israeli military to these claims is that it abides by international law.
If the past is anything to go by, calls being made for a UN inquiry into the use of DIME bombs and white phosphorus in Gaza will go unheeded. It is not the first time Israel has knowingly used such weapons in a fashion that contravenes the Geneva Conventions, and it may not be the last. Anytime UN bodies have condemned the IDF Israeli leaders have shrugged off the matter, claiming the UN is anti-Semitic.
Israel also appears immune to world criticism, confident that it has the backing of Washington. It knows the U.S. will always block any attempt by the UN's highest body, the Security Council, to censure it. It is also dismissive of the International Court in The Hague, which may well open an investigation into the latest bombardment of Gaza. Over decades, there have been scores of UN resolutions condemning Israel—65 of them from 1955 through 1992—yet Israel ignored them all.
After the war in Lebanon in 2006, many international groups were disappointed the UN did not launch an inquiry into Israel's use of cluster munitions, which it acquired from the United States. There was clear evidence that Israel deliberately fired 1,800 cluster munitions containing 1.2 million bomblets into Lebanon. After the war, an IDF commander told the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, that "what we did was insane and monstrous. We covered entire towns in cluster bombs."
The problem with cluster munitions is that they are indiscriminate weapons that do not always detonate on impact. The bomblets can lie in the soil for years, only exploding when a child or adult steps on them. Haaretz also carried reports that Israeli soldiers fired phosphorus shells into Lebanon, breaching international laws, which ban the use of that weapon against civilians or military.
One of the big questions arising from the latest invasion of Gaza is what did Israel actually achieve? For 22 days, its military pounded Gaza from land and air without stating its goals. By some accounts, Hamas did not put up much of a fight and therefore kept most of its structure in place. That has left many observers with the feeling that the invasion was an exercise in revenge, designed to hurt the civilian population with the aim of detaching it from Hamas. In other words, the Israelis believed that if Palestinian civilians suffered enough they would be more likely to blame Hamas, thereby weakening its power base.
If that was the strategy, it was a naïve one. The survival of Hamas, allied to unprecedented levels of bitterness throughout the Arab world, can only serve to embolden Hamas the way the invasion of Lebanon in 2006 energized Hezbollah.
Israel's news blackout on its Gaza operation also proved counterproductive, though not in terms of the only audience Israel cared about, namely the American public. By preventing media access to the battlefield Israel knew that American cable channels, unlike their European counterparts, would not use footage from Al Jazeera, the only television network with staff in Gaza.
As a consequence, the American public saw little of the carnage and the killing of civilians. News censorship ensured that while the majority of people across the globe saw only Al Jazeera's coverage of dead and injured Palestinians, exposing Israel as the aggressor, Americans were kept in the dark.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Just before suffering a humiliating defeat in Gaza, the Israeli prime minister boasted publicly of bossing President Bush and humiliating Secretary of State Condi Rice. Just days later Israel called for a cease-fire and the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) said it would stop fighting for a week to let the invaders withdraw. Israel fled in four days.
"We are witnessing a strategic victory that will lead us to liberate al-Aqsa and Jerusalem," Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said.
Just days later, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert boasted publicly of bossing President Bush. "I said, ‘Get me the president on the phone.' They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said, ‘I didn't care. I need to talk to him now. Bush got off the phone and spoke to me." Those attending the speech said Bush never left the podium.
Olmert also boasted of humiliating Secretary of State Condi Rice by ordering Bush to not allow the U.S. to vote in favor of a of a UN cease-fire resolution she had crafted. He gloated that Rice was "left shamed."
On April 15, 1973 Former Sen. J. William Fulbright (D-Ark.) said on CBS Face the Nation: "Israel controls the United States Senate. Around 80 percent are completely in support of Israel; anything Israel wants it gets. Jewish influence in the House of Representatives is even greater."
"We can say we can't possibly get the Congress to support (an Israeli) program like this. And they say don't worry about the Congress. We will take care of the Congress. This is somebody from another country, but they can do it. They own, you know, the banks in this country, the newspapers. Just look at where the Jewish money is."—Gen. George S. Brown, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Los Angeles Times, 1974.
"We will carry out a greater holocaust against the Palestinians." —Matan Vilnai, Israeli deputy defense minister, March 1, 2008
Talmudic Council declares: "In wartime, even enemy children may be exterminated." The website "Ynetnews" stated that "according to Jewish law, during a time of war, there is no such term as ‘innocent civilians' of the enemy."
Nearly two years ago, another group of prominent rabbis urged the Israeli army "not to flinch from killing Palestinian civilians including children." In a letter to Shaul Mofaz, then defense minister, the rabbis, who represent mainstream Orthodox Judaism, wrote that "killing civilians was a normal thing in wartime" and that the Israeli army "should not hesitate to kill non-Jewish civilians to save Jewish lives."
"A thousand non-Jewish lives are not worth a Jew's fingernail." —Dov Lior, rabbi of Kiryat Arba. Lior gave a eulogy at the funeral of that "great saint," Baruch Goldstein, the Jewish mass murderer who gunned down 29 Muslim worshipers at Hebron on Feb. 25, 1994.
"Our race (speaking of the Jews) is the master race, Lior said. "We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our Earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves."
Former President Jimmy Carter wrote that there could have been peace between the Arabs and the Israelis had it not been for the bigoted, Nazi-like racial views of Israeli's Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Carter recalled Begin believed the Jews were a master race. Begin told Carter:
"The body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of members of all other nations of the world," Here's what Begin told Carter. "Bodies of the gentiles are in vain. An even greater difference is in regard to the soul. . . . A non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness."
"Jewish blood is not the same as the blood of a goy (gentile)"—Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, defending several of his students of murdering a teenage Arab girl; "Death to the Arabs."
"Some years ago, when the prominent journalist Russell Warren Howe asked Begin whether he considered himself ‘the father' of terrorism in the Middle East, Begin answered expansively, ‘No, in the entire world' "—The Washington Star, cited in For Fear of the Jews by E. Stanley Rittenhouse.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Bush disappoints gun owners by signing bad firearms bill restricting ownership rights
SHORTLY BEFORE LEAVING OFFICE, President Bush managed to stick it to Americans one more time by signing into law a dangerous measure that makes it tougher for people to exercise their Second Amendment rights without fear of being tracked and monitored.
On Jan. 8, Bush signed the "NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007" (H.R. 2640), which streamlines the process by which information on individuals prohibited from possessing firearms is transmitted by state and local government and federal agencies to the Justice Department-administered National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
Advocates of the bill argued that it would protect Americans by keeping firearms out of the hands of violent lunatics, like the mentally disturbed young man who shot up the university in Blacksburg, Va., in 2007.
But supporters of the Second Amendment counter that the bill creates an atmosphere where Americans are considered guilty and must prove themselves innocent before they can own a firearm. Worse still, according to the bill, a "thought crime" conviction could even threaten your right to purchase or own a firearm. This would all happen administratively without you ever going before a jury of your peers.
At the core of the bill's problem is section 101(c)(1)(C), which makes you a "prohibited person" on the basis of a "medical finding of disability" as a result of some sort of "hearing" before a "lawful authority."
The language is frighteningly vague for a law, which leaves bureaucrats and law enforcement officials with the unchecked power to define a "lawful authority" as anyone from a psychiatrist to a bureaucrat at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Those barred from owning firearms could include children with a past diagnosis for ADHD, people with Alzheimer's, veterans with post traumatic stress disorder, protesters, church members—anyone who is deemed "dangerous" or "mentally disabled" for any reason. Following a judgment, there is no defined process for fighting the ruling. It is clearly intended to be what it is: a backdoor to gun control.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
EARLY FRIDAY MORNING the secretary of state was considering bringing the cease-fire resolution to a UNSC vote and we didn't want her to vote for it," Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said (AFP, Jan. 26, 2009).
"I said, ‘get President Bush on the phone.' They tried and told me he was in the middle of a lecture in Philadelphia. I said ‘I'm not interested. I need to speak to him now.' He [Bush] got down from the podium, went out and took the phone call." [Jerusalem Post, Jan. 12, 2009.—Ed.]
"Let me see if I understand this," wrote a friend in response to news reports that Israeli Prime Minister Olmert ordered President Bush from the podium where he was giving a speech to receive Israel's instructions about how the United States had to vote on the UN resolution.
"On Sept. 11, 2001 President Bush is interrupted while reading a story to school children and told the World Trade Center had been hit—and he went on reading. Now, Olmert calls about a UN resolution when Bush is giving a speech and Bush leaves the stage to take the call. There exists no greater example of a master-servant relationship."
Olmert gloated as he told Israelis how he had shamed U.S. Secretary of State Condi Rice by preventing her from supporting a resolution that she had helped to craft. Olmert proudly related how he had interrupted President Bush's speech in order to give Bush his marching orders on the UN vote.
Israeli politicians have been bragging for decades about the control they exercise over the U.S. government. In his final press conference, President Bush, deluded to the very end, said that the whole world respects America. In fact, when the world looks at America, what it sees is an Israeli colony.
Responding to mounting reports from the Red Cross and human rights organizations of Israel's massive war crimes in Gaza, the UN Human Rights Council voted 33-1 on January 12 to condemn Israel for grave offenses against human rights.
On January 13, the London Times reported that Israelis gathered on a hillside overlooking Gaza to enjoy the slaughter of Palestinians in what the Times calls "the ultimate spectator sport."
It is American-supplied F-16 fighter jets, helicopter gun ships, missiles and bombs that were destroying the civilian infrastructure of Gaza and murdering the Palestinians who have been packed into the tiny strip of land. What is happening to the Palestinians herded into the Gaza ghetto is happening because of American money and weapons. It is just as much an attack by the United States as an attack by Israel. The U.S. government is complicit in the war crimes.
Yet in his farewell press conference on January 12, Bush said that the world respects America for its compassion. The compassion of bombing a UN school for girls? The compassion of herding 100 Palestinians into one house and then shelling it? The compassion of bombing hospitals and mosques? The compassion of depriving 1.5 million Palestinians of food, medicine, and energy? The compassion of violently overthrowing the democratically elected Hamas government? The compassion of blowing up the infrastructure of one of the poorest and most deprived people on Earth? The compassion of abstaining from a Security Council vote condemning these actions?
And this is a repeat of what the Israelis and Americans did to Lebanon in 2006, what the Americans did to Iraqis for six years and are continuing to do to Afghans after seven years. And still hope to do to the Iranians and Syrians.
In 2002 I designated George W. Bush "the White House Moron." If there ever was any doubt about this designation, Bush's final press conference dispelled it. Bush talked about connecting the dots, but Bush has failed to connect any dots for eight solid years. "Our" president was a puppet for a cabal led by Dick Cheney and a handful of Jewish neo-conservatives, who took control of the Pentagon, the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA and "Homeland Security."
From these power positions, the neo-con cabal used lies and deception to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, pointless wars that have cost Americans $3 trillion, while millions of Americans lose their jobs, their pensions and their access to health care.
"These obviously very difficult economic times," Bush said in his press conference, "started before my presidency."
Bush has plenty of liberal company in failing to connect a $3 trillion dollar war with hard times. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities blames Bush's tax cut, not the wars, for "the fiscal deterioration."
Bush told the White House press corps, a useless collection of non-journalists, that the two mistakes of his invasion of Iraq were: (1) Putting up the "mission accomplished" banner on the aircraft carrier, which, he said, "sent the wrong message," and (2) the absence of the alleged weapons of mass destruction that he used to justify the invasion. Although Bush now admits that there were not any such weapons in Iraq, Bush said that the invasion was still the right thing to do.
The deaths of 1.25 million Iraqis, the displacement of 4 million Iraqis, and the destruction of a country's infrastructure and economy are merely the collateral damage associated with "bringing freedom and democracy" to the Middle East.
Unless George W. Bush is the best actor in human history, he truly believes what he told the White House press corps. What Bush did not explain is how America is respected when its people put a moron in charge for eight years.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Judging by the anger in the Jewish community, Bishop Richard Williamson, the spirit of Catholicism past, had committed a very serious thought crime. The bishop just recently expressed his personal opinion on the holocaust:
"I believe that the historical evidence is hugely against 6 million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler."
The German government and courts, the Vatican, and the media were all alerted to the bishop's "transgression." Now, the unexpected Vatican response has outraged Rabbi David Rosen in Jerusalem.
Background: Many of the institutions that were dedicated to the preservation of the traditional values of the Christian West came under malicious attack in the turbulent 1960s, none more so than the Catholic Church. Traditionalists, clergy and laymen alike, who found the "modernization" of the church as prescribed in the Second Vatican Council (1960-1965) destructive of the values they had cherished and believed in, rejected the proposed changes and gradually drifted away from the "Mother Church." Many of these dissidents eventually joined together to form the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) dedicated to preserving the beliefs and traditions of the pre-1965 church.
Members of the SSPX considered themselves to be the only truly genuine Catholics because, in their opinion, heretical leaders were misleading those who remained in the modern, errant church. Headed by strong conservative Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX has today become the world's largest traditionalist Catholic priestly society. SSPX believes that Vatican II was grievously mistaken in its liberal policies of discarding much of the beauty and mystery of the church—the worldwide familiar use of Latin, the ecclesiastical music, the liturgy, the vestments, the rituals, and the Tridentine Mass, all developed and cherished over the centuries.
Before his death in 1991, Lefebvre consecrated Auxiliary Bishop Richard Williamson, a British convert to the church, to carry on the archbishop's work. Williamson has upset the liberal community by admitting that he personally agrees with revisionists in recognizing the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, questioning the holocaust, and sympathizing with imprisoned holocaust revisionist Ernst Zundel.
Bishop Williamson denies that the Society of St. Pius X is a schismatic sect, insisting that he and the Society adhere closely to the New Testament and keep the orthodox faith. He also denies that he is anti-Semitic on the grounds that he openly attacks all "enemies of Christ," including communists and Freemasons.
The bishop's breakaway church considers the Holy See's misguided policy of welcoming ecumenical dialogues with nonbelievers and even with "enemies of Christ" objectionable. The attempted reconciliation with the Jews has, in the opinion of the society, needlessly exposed the church to attacks against core beliefs of the faith and against decisions made by popes past and present.
Williamson argues that, under the broad tolerance engendered by ecumenism, Jews and Freemasons, "enemies of Christ," have contributed to the changes and corruption in the church as well as to the scandals that have surfaced since the implementation of Vatican II. Bishop Williamson feared that the mainstream church had fallen under the "power of Satan," Malachi Martin used the expression other traditionalists have said "the smoke of Satan has entered the sanctuary" to explain the aberrant behavior of clergy who have committed acts of pedophilia.
Although the present pope, Benedict XVI, has generally been described as a strict defender of Catholic orthodoxy, the society remembers him as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, one of the architects of the Second Vatican Council. As pope, he has offended the traditionalists by encouraging the construction of more mosques in Christian Europe, by his visit to the synagogue in Cologne and by his failure to enforce the church's prohibitions against abortions and same-sex marriages more forcefully.
Worst of all, the society believes that Benedict's tolerance has made him appear almost as a spokesman for the holocaust religion. Auxiliary Bishop Williamson drew fresh attention to himself and the Society by statements he made at a religious service held on All Saints Day in a seminary near Regensburg, Germany. A Swedish newsman at the event filmed the interview. When the conversation turned to the Jewish question, the filmed interview records Bishop Williamson saying as follows.
TV: Bishop are these your words? "There was not one Jew killed by the gas chambers. It was all lies, lies, lies." Are these your words?
BW: You are quoting from Canada, I believe, yes. I believe that the historical evidence is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler.
TV: So there were no gas chambers?
BW: I believe there were no gas chambers, yes. I think as far as I have studied the evidence, I am not going by emotion, as far as I have understood this evidence, I think, for instance, people who are against what is widely believed today about, quote unquote, the holocaust. I think those people, the revisionists as they are called; the most serious conclude that between 200,000 and 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but not one of them by gassing in gas chambers.
You may have heard of the "Leuchter Report." Fred Leuchter was an expert in gas chambers. He designed three gas chambers for three states for the execution of criminals. So he knew what was involved. And he studied what the supposed gas chambers in Germany, at some point in the 1980s, what remains of the supposed gas chambers, the crematoria in Birkenau, Auschwitz, for instance. And his conclusion, his expert conclusion was, it is impossible that this could have ever served for the gassing of large numbers of people. Because cyanide gas is very dangerous, if you, let's suppose you gas 300 people that you crowded into a chamber and you gas them. It is very dangerous to go in and pull out the corpses because one whiff of gas that is trapped in the clothes will kill the person. It is extremely dangerous.
Once you have gassed people, you've got to evacuate the gas. To evacuate the gas you need a high chimney, if it's too low the gas sinks to the pavement and kills anybody walking by. . . . If there were a high chimney then the shadow most of the day would have fallen on the ground and the allied aerial photographers that flew over the camp would have picked up the shadows of the chimneys. There were never any such shadows; there were no such chimneys. In which case the Fred Leuchter testimony, "there can't have been any gas chambers."
He looks at the doors of the gas chambers. The doors have to be absolutely airtight. Otherwise again the gas escapes and kills the people outside. The doors of the gas chambers they show to tourists at Auschwitz are absolutely not airtight. They are absolutely not.
TV: What you are saying now is, the holocaust never occurred—not in the way historians see it today?
BW: I am going by the historical evidence according to people who have observed and examined the evidence. I believe what they conclude. If they change their conclusion, I'll be likely to follow their conclusion because I think they judge by the evidence. I think that two to three hundred thousand Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none in gas chambers.
TV: If this is not anti-Semitism, what is it then?
BW: If anti-Semitism is bad, it is against the truth. If something is true, it is not bad. I am not interested in the word anti-Semitism. The word is very dangerous.
TV: [Another] bishop calls you an anti-Semite.
BW: The bishop can call me what he likes. He can call me a dinosaur; he can call me an idiot. It is not a question of name-calling. It is a question of historical truth. Historical truth goes by evidence and not by emotion. There has certainly been a huge exploitation. Germany has paid out billions and billions of Deutschmarks and now euros, because the Germans have a guilt complex about their having gassed 6 million Jews. But I don't think 6 million Jews were gassed. But be careful, this is against the law in Germany. You could have me thrown into prison before I leave Germany. I hope this is not your intention. (End of interview.)
The bishop is obviously interested in the truth, not in word mongering or name-calling. Despite warnings and the imposition of excommunication from the Holy See, the alternate church founded by Lefebvre endured and even flourished to the extent that Pope Benedict has had to make very public concessions.
As early as 2005 then-Cardinal Ratzinger received the general of the Pius Brotherhood, Bernard Fellay, and the German head, Father Franz Schmidberger, at his summer residence, Castelgandolfo. Pope Benedict has since permitted greater use of Latin in the mass and has reinstated the old Good Friday prayer. Last May the pope let it be known that the Vatican embraces the unity of the priestly brotherhood. A healthy exchange of views between the society and the church in Rome has continued until a decision was reached last week.
To the shock of some and the satisfaction of others, Pope Benedict XVI has lifted the excommunications of all four bishops of the Society of St. Pius X. Rabbi David Rosen, the Jerusalem-based head of interreligious affairs at the American Jewish Committee and a key Vatican-Jewish negotiator, was outraged and cautioned that he could not see how business could proceed as usual. Further, Rosen called for the pope to issue a clear condemnation of all holocaust "denials" and "deniers."
The Rev. Federico Lombardi, a Vatican spokesman, responded by saying that Bishop Williamson's views were not acts of schism or other excommunicable offense under church law. "They are his personal ideas that we certainly don't share, but they have nothing to do with the issue of excommunication and the removal of the excommunication," Father Lombardi explained.
The German government and courts, which have always diligently pursued and prosecuted any perceived offense against victims of the holocaust, will no doubt again be called upon to investigate this affair.
Daniel W. Michaels was for over 40 years a translator of Russian and German texts for the Department of Defense, the last 20 years of which he was with the Naval Maritime Intelligence Center. He is a member of THE BARNES REVIEW's contributing editorial board.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Col. Donn de Grand Pre (Army, retired) will live in the hearts of generations yet unborn because his pen was mightier than his sword, but his eternal soul has ascended, we are sure, to Heaven. Col. Grand Pre died on January 24 at his Virginia farm.
He was raised on a farm in North Dakota, but left to join the Army at 18. In the 1950s, Grand Pre advanced to the higher levels of the military.
Grand Pre served in Burma and China during World War II and was twice wounded while commanding troops in Korea. His status as a war hero added credibility to his argument, reflected in numerous books, that wars are fought for profit, not patriotism. He had valuable insights into this subject due to his unique position in the Department of Defense. In 1967, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara appointed Grand Pre director for ground weapons systems in the newly created office of International Logistics Negotiations, responsible for negotiating sales contracts with heads of foreign nations for military weapons systems.
The Washington Post Magazine said of Grand Pre on Sept. 30, 1979: "If you had been a Middle Eastern ruler in the 1970s in search of American weapons systems, you would have called Donn de Grand Pre: Pentagon arms peddler."
He is best known for his "Barbarians Inside the Gates" trilogy, featuring The Serpent's Sting, The Viper's Venom and The Rattler's Revenge, where he made a strong case against war.
Other volumes include his semi-autobiographical novels, The Boys From Bent Willow, Look Homeward Cowboy and his candid, non-fiction memoir, Confessions of an Arms Peddler. His books are available from his widow, Ursula at P.O. Box 1124, Reva, VA. 22727.
In addition to his published works, Grand Pre was a popular figure on talk radio. Grand Pre argued powerfully that an international elite manipulates high finance and other levers of power for the ultimate purpose of establishing a world government—a New World Order.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
While the U.S. prepares to send at least 25,000 more troops to Afghanistan, many European allies are refusing to follow suit. Some are even considering reducing the numbers of soldiers they have on the battlefield.
That is just one example of the ways in which Europeans differ from the Obama administration in planning a strategy for Afghanistan. Another is that Germany and France would like to see what has loosely been termed "a contact group" of countries leading the way to a solution of the conflict. The "contact group" would include Russia and China, thereby involving the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. Membership would also be extended to Pakistan and Iran, which border Afghanistan, and to India which, in the wake of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai last November, has taken a keen interest in events in Afghanistan.
The concept of expanding the range of countries involved in the Afghan war was first proposed at a NATO summit in 2006 by former French President Jacques Chirac. It found favor with Germany, which argued it was better to have more hands at the wheel. The U.S. delegation at the summit, led by then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, angrily opposed the idea and warned that it would create a command structure that lacked focus. From Washington's perspective, the proposal risked ceding U.S. policy in the region to China and Russia. In the end, Miss Rice convinced the summit to abandon the proposal.
Lately, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has resurrected it amid reports that she and French President Nicholas Sarkozy see it as a way of lessening the burden of the Afghan war on NATO. Following Barack Obama's inauguration, Ms. Merkel indicated she was not in favor of sending more German troops to Afghanistan, signaling that a new strategy was required. France has said it is reluctant to increase its 2,600 contingent and other E.U. nations like Holland want to reduce their troop commitment. In Britain too, there is growing disquiet about the war but the Labor government is unlikely to support the "contact group" strategy if the Obama administration, like its predecessor, opposes it. However, senior political figures have publicly expressed concerns about the war.
Recently Lord Ashdown, leader of the Liberal Democrats, who served with the British army in Northern Ireland, criticized the "international community" for having no clear plan for Afghanistan. He said it was "a scandal, wasting the lives" of young men and women on the front lines. He issued a dire warning that if NATO did not come up with a victory plan soon the war against the Taliban could be lost. He added that commanders on the ground had agreed with him that NATO had failed to take advantage of its victories against the Taliban.
So, even if Germany and France cannot push through the 2006 Chirac initiative to widen responsibility for the war, there will still be major disagreements between the U.S. and some of its allies over battlefield strategy and the political future of the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai.
With Afghan elections scheduled for this year, there have been leaked reports that the Obama administration is not a fan of Karzai because it believes he has failed to eradicate corruption in his government, thereby weakening the political process. It is said the U.S. would prefer a coalition of his peers to run the country and set a new example for governance. Some of his political opponents have already told Washington that they intend to oppose him and would like the U.S. to publicly state that it would prefer him to step down.
Karzai has detected the growing opposition from Washington and from Pakistan, a nation he has consistently blamed for many of his country's ills. But, he feels confident that, while he is supported by France and Germany, his tenure as president is secure and he will be re-elected president. Much to the annoyance of Pakistan, he has established close ties to India, a big player in the region that has Washington's ear. Lately, he has shrewdly played to the growing clamor among his own people for tighter controls on NATO operations and especially on raids by U.S. Special Forces.
In several public statements he pointed to the fact the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan found that 400 civilians were killed in air raids last year. In many instances, the air power was called in by Special Forces teams that had found themselves outgunned. Karzai has constantly demanded more accountability from NATO for civilian casualties and in doing so has enhanced his image with Afghans. He also knows that as a Pashtun his departure from power would be viewed by his tribe as a slight by Washington.
One other area in which the U.S. and its allies may differ in the months ahead is in the prosecution of the war. The fact more U.S. troops will be on the battlefield will see Washington calling the shots when it comes to deciding military strategy. As a consequence, it will not favor, as some Europeans do, the Karzai principle that the Afghan military should be consulted about all NATO operations and given advance warning about proposed Special Forces raids. Put simply, the U.S. military feels it cannot trust its Afghan counterparts with sensitive intelligence.
There is also a disagreement among NATO members about using a tactic from the Iraq war, namely creating militias and paying tribal elders to fight the Taliban. The aim is to create a type of "Afghan Awakening" to mirror the way Sunni militias were paid to fight al-Qaeda in Anbar province in Iraq.
Afghan president, Hamid Karzai is opposed to the use of militias, arguing that there are enough weapons in the country without adding more to the mix. In contrast, Lord Ashdown supports the U.S. strategy of militias and the surge of more U.S. combat troops but he remains convinced that many countries are not pulling their weight. He claims the "international community," by which he means the U.S. and its NATO allies, is merely trying to stabilize Afghanistan rather than planning to win the war. He points to the fact that only 1/25th of the military and 1/50th of the aid that was used in the Bosnian conflict is now being committed to the Afghan war.
If he is right, and there is no reason to doubt him because he was the international high representative in Bosnia for four years, the Obama administration will have to think carefully if it wants to win the Afghan war.
By Ashdown's calculations, winning would require a troop surge of immense proportions, which is a strategy America's NATO allies will not support.
Therefore, can the goal for President Obama be to win the war or should he simply seek to stabilize Afghanistan and plan for an exit within a decade? While the president ponders those options he might also want to keep a close eye on Pakistan, which is steadily becoming mired in terror generated by an unchecked Taliban, which is asserting itself throughout the country. In 2008, the Taliban killed more people in Pakistan than they killed in Afghanistan. More worrying, for the U.S. and its allies is the realization that Pakistan is a nuclear nation.
Richard Walker is the pen name of a former news producer.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
FACING TWO WARS and a global depression, you would think that Congress has better things to do than to make a federal case out of troublemakers who use their cell phone cameras to snap candid photographs of people in compromising positions.
But that's exactly what happened in late January when Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) introduced the Camera Phone Predator Alert Act (H.R. 414).
King's solution to the problem, which is already a prosecutable offense in most states, involves mandating that, one year after the passage of the act, all mobiles with cameras made in the United States must emit a "tone or other sound audible within a reasonable radius of the phone."
In other words, they would just have to make a noise. An army of bureaucrats at the Consumer Product Safety Commission would then be tasked with monitoring that all makers comply with the new rule at a cost of millions of dollars to taxpayers.
Techies have already offered up a way to get around the proposed law that King and all of the other highly paid intelligentsia in Congress never thought of: You will still be able to buy a quiet camera phone that has been made outside of the United States.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Where is Capt. Sully Sullenberger, the heroic pilot who captured
the nation's imagination by safely landing his airplane in the
Hudson
River after clearing
the George Washington Bridge in midtown Manhattan? Considering
the adulation he so rightly received, it's hard to understand
why he isn't speaking with every media outlet conceivable. The
Airline industry could use a much-needed shot in the arm, yet
Sullenberger is strangely missing in action. Why?
Capt. Sullenberger made only one appearance - when his hometown of Danville, Calif. insisted on welcoming him back. At his insistence, the event was kept small and Sullenberger spoke briefly, revealing nothing. His modesty is becoming and convenient.
Could his absence be due to a cover-up regarding defective engines aboard his airliner? On Jan. 20, CNN reported, "Two days before U.S. Airways Flight 1549 crashed into the Hudson River, passengers on the same route and same aircraft say they heard a series of loud bangs, and the flight crew told them they would have to make an emergency landing."
Independent consulting firms and the NTSB verified that this was the exact same plane - AWE 1549 - with the same tail number - N106US - that barely avoided a major urban catastrophe on Jan. 15.
Maintenance records for the Airbus 320 "indicate a compressor stall occurred on January 13." A passenger aboard this flight, John Hodock, recounted his experience. "About 20 minutes after take-off, the plane had a series of compressor stalls. There were several loud bangs, and fire coming out of the right engine." first class passenger Steven Jeffrey confirmed this account, saying the pilot announced over his intercom that the plane was experiencing "compression locks" which made the engines stall.
Coinciding with this data, on Jan. 21, Michel Amon of Newsday wrote that two weeks earlier, the Federal Aviation Administration "ordered heightened inspection procedures for the type of engine on that aircraft, saying it was prone to a rare type of stall." The FAA specifically warned of "compressor stalls" that were "likely to exist or develop on the CFM 56-5B engine series."
Both engines on Dapt. Sullenberger's airliner were CFM56-5Bs. The FAA also issued an "airworthiness directive" on Dec. 13, 2008, urging all airlines to inspect these types of engines.
Problems on the Jan. 13 flight were clearly serious as passengers stated that it sounded like the plane's wings were breaking off, red emergency lights came on, and fire erupted from one engine after loud bangs wer heard. Kirk Koening, president of Expert Aviation Consulting, told Newsday on Jan. 20 that stress from this type of compressor stall "can cause permanent engine damage."
When Flight 1549 took off on Jan. 15, both engines shut off simultaneously in only 1.5 minutes, while passengers also noticed flames shooting from the engines. Again, this was the exact same plane, with the exact same tail number, taking off from the exact same airport, on the exact same route that had experienced near emergency compressor problems only two days earlier.
Too coincidental? Did this fated plane simply hit a flock of geese, or is there more to be revealed? Is Capt. Sullenberger's silence a clue that he doesn't want to implicitly partake in a cover-up ? Alison Camastra, who was on the Jan. 13 flight, later voiced her suspicions to CNN. "It's kind of concerning to me. As bad as the noises were and the shaking was on the plane that we were on, that they were still flying that plane two days later definitely concerns me."
Senior NTSB investigator Robert Benzon informed Associated
Press sources that "the probe into the crash-landing
will take a year.
|Top|
The House has passed an $819 billion economic stimulus package. In reality, this bill is just an escalation of a government-created economic mess. As before, a sense of urgency and impending doom was used to extract mountains of money from Congress with minimal debate. So much for change. This is déjà vu. We are again being promised that its passage will help employment, help homeowners, help the environment, etc. These promises are worthless. This time around especially, Congress should know better than to pass anything of this magnitude without first reading the fine print. There are many red flags in this bill.
At least $4 billion is allocated to expanding the police state and the war on drugs through Byrne grants, which even the Bush administration opposed, and the COPS program, both of which are corrupt and largely ineffective programs.
To help Big Brother keep a better eye on us and our children, $20 billion would go toward health information technology, which would create a national system of electronic medical records with out adequate privacy protection. These records would instead be subject to the misnamed federal "medical privacy" rule, which allows government and state-favored special interest to see medical records at will. An additional $250 million is allocated for states to nationalize individual student data, expanding federal control of education and eroding privacy.
Seventy-nine billion bails out states that haphazardly expanded their budgets during the bubble years, but refuse to retrench and cut back, as their taxpayers have had to, during recession years.
And $200 million expands Americorps while $100 million goes to "faith-and-community" based organizations for social services, which will further insinuate the government into charity and community service. Private charities are much more efficient and effective because they are directly accountable to donors, while public programs tend to get rewarded for failure. With its money, the federal government brings its incompetence and its whims, while creating foolish dependence.
The bill is rife with cintral planning projects: $4 billion for job training, much of which will be used to direct workers into "green jobs," $200 million to "encourage" electric cars, $2 billion to support U.S. manufacturers of advanced batteries and battery systems, which is yet another function of government I Can't find in the Constitution. Not to mention $500 million for energy efficient manufacturing demonstration projects, $70 million for a Technology Innovation Program for "research in potentially revolutionary technologies" in which government, not supply and demand, will pick winners and losers. Another $746 million goes for after-school snacks.
This bill delivers an additional debt burden of $6,700 to every American man, woman and child.
There is a lot of stimulus and growth in this bill - that
is, of government. Nothing in this bill stimulates the freedom
and prosperity of the American people. Politician-directd spending
is never as successful as market-driven investment. Instead of
passing this bill, Congress should get out of the way by cutting
taxes, cutting spending, and reining in the reckless monetary
policy of the Federal Reserve.
|Top|
This AFP news article is copyrighted and can not be reproduced here. However it can be read at this location:
"Another Real Estate Crisis Is About To Hit"
http://www.vdare.com/roberts/090121_real_estate.htm
Nationally syndicated columnist Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D.,
a former editor at The Wall Street Journal, is the author of
several books. He has been associated with the Hoover Institution
and the Institute for Political Economy and from 1981 to 1982
served as assistant secretary of the treasury for economic policy.
|Top|
For decades, the white people of America have been subjected to a continual barrage from blacks and others that you and I are somehow "responsible" for the Aftican slave trade and that we need to "atone" for our "guilt."
There are a number of flaws with the idea that whites are somehow "responsible" for the African slave trade. First of all, very few white people even owned slaves - slavery was a rich man's pursuit and did not exist amongst the middle and working classes of white people. Second, even if every one of us had an ancestor who owned slaves (which is an extremely unlikely proposition), it makes little sense to blame the children for the supposed sins of their fathers.
Third, it is a fact that blacks sold their own kind into slavery. As this is the case, blacks are every bit as much to blame for slavery as are whites.
Fourth, European whites did not bring the slaves to America. On the contrary, it was in almost all instances Jewish traders who brought them here (as Louis Farakkhan has also pointed out).
There is nothing whatsoever for the white race to feel guilty concerning slavery and it is time to quit apologizing for something others are responsible for. If in fact the war was about slavery, as many black scholars insist, then approximately 350,000 white soldiers on the Northern side died in the American Civil War trying to free the slaves.
Have you ever heard of any blacks paying homage to or thanking these men?
************************
Jewish Involvement in the Black Slave Trade
Source: Elizabeth Donnan, 4 Volumes, Documents Illustrative
of the History of the Slave Trade to America, Washington,
D.C. 1930, 1935 Carnegie Institute of Technology, Pittsburgh,
Pa.
|Top|
Free traders working to delete ‘America-first' provisions from latest spending package
GLOBALISTS ARE IN A TIZZY over provisions in the massive $1 trillion stimulus package, which promote raw materials and manufactured goods that have been made in America. While White House free traders have been mum about the language, it's anyone's guess whether meddling from internationalists will force legislators to strip the bill of the America-first measures.
In letters to legislators and top White House officials on
Feb. 2, European
Commission Ambassador to Washington John Bruton whined about
"buy American" provisions in the not-yet-approved bill.
They would require public works projects to favor U.S. steel, iron and manufactured goods over imports. The letters claimed that U.S. officials and other countries pledged not to "resort" to the dreaded "P" word—protectionism—at a meeting of world leaders in November.
The provisions are in the trillion dollar stimulus bill, which has already been approved by the House. A slightly different version is currently being debated in the Senate. The Senate version says that no funds from the stimulus may be used for a project "unless all of the iron, steel and manufactured goods used in the projects are produced in the United States."
The House version has similar language but does not mention manufactured goods. Putting their support for multinational corporations ahead of American manufacturers and workers, Republican leaders in Congress sided with their paymasters and blasted the provisions in the legislation.
"I don't think we ought to use a measure that is supposed to be timely, temporary and targeted to set off trade wars," said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky).
President Barack Obama also questioned the bill, telling a television network: "I think it would be a mistake . . . at a time when worldwide trade is declining for us to start sending a message that somehow we're just looking after ourselves and not concerned with world trade."
Globalists are worried about the new trend in Washington and the world, where—horror of horrors— elected officials actually put the well-being of their own citizens ahead of globalist bankers and executives at multinational corporations.
Writes David A. Andelman, the editor of World Policy Journal, a global news organization: "The ‘Buy America' rule attached to the $819 billion stimulus plan now working its way through the Senate is only a short step from new tariff barriers."
Andelman once again went back to that tired, old free-trading fairy tale that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which put tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods, was to blame for prolonging the Great Depression.
People cannot learn from past mistakes if they do not get access to historical facts, so it is worth recounting the true history of Smoot-Hawley. The Smoot-Hawley Act was signed into law on June 17, 1930, almost a year after the depression had started. Four years later, legislation was passed that essentially repealed it.
During that short time, the decline in exports, which has been blamed on Smoot-Hawley, accounted for only a half percent of the 50 percent decline in gross domestic product over that same timeframe. Private bankers—most notably the Federal Reserve and Wall Street investment firms—were far more to blame for the financial crisis than measures instituted to help American industry.
In addition, Smoot-Hawley generated tax revenue for the government at a time when it desperately needed it, and that money did not have to come from American workers who were already squeezed by rising unemployment and prices.
As this paper goes to press, the Senate has yet to vote on the stimulus bill. AFP editors will be watching this bill closely to ensure that the America-first provisions make it to the president's desk for his signature.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
STRESSED BY THE ECONOMY and competition from the Internet and private shipping companies, officials from the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) have asked Congress for permission to scale back their deliveries from six days a week to five in order to dramatically cut costs. They are considering not delivering on Tuesdays, according to one report.
The quasi-public Postal Service has been an "independent agency" of the U.S. government since 1971, but it remains heavily regulated by Congress. It is supposed to break even or make a small profit to reinvest in its operations. It must deliver mail six days a week across the United States at the same price, even to Alaska and Hawaii. It cannot close post offices, and its stamp prices can rise only at the rate of inflation.
In the past two years, however, the Postal Service has lost $7.9 billion, and it has had to borrow money to pay its bills. Last year, mail volume fell 4.5 percent, and the Postal Service expects a bigger drop in 2009. Like many other large corporations, the Postal Service's biggest hurdle today is the cost of providing health care to current and future retirees. In late January, Postmaster General John Potter went before Congress for permission to delay $2 billion in health care payments until after 2016, saying, without the break, his organization could run out of cash later this year when a billion dollars in health funds come due.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES and abroad are hoping that President Obama will end America's illegal wars, halt America's support for Israel's massacre of Lebanese and Palestinians, and punish, instead of reward, the shyster banksters whose fraudulent financial instruments have destroyed economies and imposed massive sufferings on people all over the world. If Obama's appointments are an indication, all of these hopeful people are going to be disappointed.
James Petras examines Obama's foreign policy appointments and finds the largest collection of Zionist militarists outside of Israel.
Petras concludes that Obama's "diplomatic" team
has Iran in its sights, and hostility that meshes with Israel's
own intent. Not realizing that a member of the press had been
mistakenly invited to a selected audience, the Israeli ambassador
to Australia said that Israel's attack on Gaza was a
dress rehearsal for a major attack on Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu,
the expected winner of Israel's March elections, has again declared
that Israel will not permit Iran to have a nuclear energy program
as it would provide the basis for developing nuclear weapons.
It makes no sense for Israel to baldly state its intention to attack Iran if Israel does not mean it. What if the Iranians believe the Israelis and decide to strike first with their long-range missiles?
Obama's economic appointments are just as discouraging. Obama chose as his treasury secretary Timothy Geithner, the man who helped Bush's treasury secretary, Hank Paulson, engineer the $700 billion dollar rip-off of the U.S. taxpayer, money that was gifted to the crooked banksters who destroyed Americans' pensions, jobs and health care coverage.
These banksters, and the negligent federal regulators who enabled them, should be put in prison, not handed hundreds of billions of dollars.
Instead, Obama has appointed one of the chief orchestrators of the rip-off to the helm of the Treasury. Obama's National Economic Council is just as depressing. Clinton's Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers, is its head. Summers recently declared that he had no inkling that a financial crisis was about to hit. Why did Obama put a person without a clue in charge?
Summers's colleagues are just as bad. Obama has appointed Diana Farrell, lead author of a phony study that claimed offshoring of American jobs is a win-win game for Americans, as deputy director of the National Economic Council. Farrell is affiliated with McKinsey & Company, a firm that helps American corporations offshore their operations.
In his book, Outsourcing America, economist Ron Hira tore Farrell's McKinsey report to shreds. Why not appoint Ron Hira and Nouriel Roubina, who predicted the crisis, to the National Economic Council?
With Israel's most fervent American allies whispering in one ear and banksters and offshoring propagandists whispering in the other, how can President Obama fulfill any of the hopes that people have?
The discouraging fact is that even when faced with crisis in the economy and in foreign policy, the American political system is incapable of producing any leadership. Here we are in the worst economic crisis in a lifetime, perhaps in our history, and on the brink of war in Pakistan and Iran while escalating the war in Afghanistan, and all we get is a government made up of the very people who have brought us to these crises.
Just as the Bushites could not admit the failure of their man, the Obamacons will not be able to admit the failure of their man.
The era of American leadership has passed. America's shyster financial system has brought economic crisis to the world. America's wars of aggression are seen as serving no purpose except the enrichment of the military industries associated with Dick Cheney. The world is looking elsewhere for leadership.
Vladimir Putin made a play for this role at Davos, where his speech at the opening ceremony was the most intelligent speech of the event.
Putin reminded the World Economic Forum that "just a year ago, American delegates speaking from this rostrum emphasized the U.S. economy's fundamental stability and its cloudless prospects. Today, investment banks, the pride of Wall Street, have virtually ceased to exist. In just 12 months, they have posted losses exceeding the profits they made in the last 25 years."
Putin made his case that the existing financial system based on the U.S. dollar and American financial hegemony has failed. Putin said that a secure world requires cooperation that requires trust. He made it clear that the Americans have proven that they cannot be trusted.
Nationally syndicated columnist, Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., a former editor at The Wall Street Journal, is the author of several books. He has been associated with the Hoover Institution, and the Institute for Political Economy and from 1981 to 1982 served as assistant secretary of the treasury for economic policy.
Subscribe to American Free Press. Online subscriptions: One year of weekly editions—$15 plus you get a BONUS ELECTRONIC BOOK - HIGH PRIESTS OF WAR - By Michael Piper.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Gold's climb above $1,000 an ounce and silver over $22 an ounce last spring is the beginning. Gold's climb will be strong and steady. With gold trading close to $1,000 per ounce and silver $13 now is the time to move into nice quality coins.
Gold is only taking a little breather before heading to $2,500 an ounce and silver to $100 an ounce - or even higher depending on circumstances.
We are in the worst economic meltdown ever. America will pay for its addiction to irresponsible and reckless spending.
We were duped into a $700 billion debt for a porkfest bailout. From the first $350 billion, $18 billion went to Wall Street fatcats in bonuses. The idea that we can borrow our way out of debt is ridiculous; we are printing money at the fastest rate ever.
America lost 71,400 jobs on black Monday, Jan.26, 11,500 Tuesday, and 15,300 on Wednesday. Americans lost over 5 million jobs in 2008. Job loss is expected to be over 6 million in 2009. We are headed for a depression that is really a hyper-inflationary spiral.
Gold and silver can protect your money from the financial tsunami that lies ahead.
REASONS WHY GOLD AND SILVER WILL TAKE OFF ...
• The Dollar's value is declining. Precious metals are
a safe haven from the growing federal deficit, the sub-prime
mess and the Fed's bailout disaster. This is a forkfest with
big trouble accounting for the bailout money; no accounting is
a disgraceful and despicable canard.
• Hyperinflation on the Way. Your cost of living at the
current rate of inflation should double ever five years. We see
real inflation at over 15 percent. Food prices have doubled in
the last three years. Oil is on its way back up, we think to
over $150 a barrel again. Inflation is causing investors to lose
money in "safe" investments like U.S. government bonds.
• The Fed is out of Control. The Fed continues to print
money at the fastest Pace in history. The reckless expansion
of the money supply is the root cause of inflation. With the
bailouts we are guaranteed egregious government spending with
porkfest U.S.A.
• Gold and silver are the only true stores of value and
wealth. The true price of the bailout porkfest will be over $#
trillion. The buying power of your money is guaranteed to buy
less ever year. Gold and silver are a tangible safe, secure,
private, and confidential answer to a very serious problem we
all face. Hard money can guarantee you protection.
• The budget deficit will continue. We have spent billions
and there is no end in sight. Banks continue to fail requiring
more bailouts. Over 1,500 banks have failed in the last two years
and 8 million foreclosures lie ahead.
As one expert put it. "gold's history ... has been like a swift military strike, then a period wher the supply lines are re-established; the wounded, the equipment and morale is regenerated then gold starts moving again. Advance and consolidate, this pattern of conservative military marching will drive gold's price to record highs and is why gold's trend will be bullish for years to come. Simple answer is, protect your wealth with gold and silver.
Remember, it wasn't raining when Noah built the ark.
|Top|
Tzipi Livni is the "face of Israel" in the propaganda
campaign to justify Israel's holocaust and genocide against the
helpless civilians - men, 
women
and children - of Gaza. She is the second most powerful politician
in Israel. For years, both Time and Forbes Magazine
have ranked her one of the most powerful women in the world as
they charted her meteoric rise through the ranks of Israeli politics.
She concentrated more andmore power in her hands as a member
of the Knesset; foreign minister; justice minister and deputy
prime minister - all at the same time.
Imagine Hillary Clinton holding on to her powerful seat in the Senate plus being the attorney general plus the secretary of state plus replacing Cheney as vice president all at the same time - and soon to run the most powerful government of Earth - the imperial supra-state that ruthlessly dictates to its many colonies, especially the once independent United States. That is the dictator who may soon sit side by side with Hillary to decide on peace and war, the fate of not only Iraq and Gaza, but of America and the world.
Israeli Vice Prime Minister and foreign Minister Tzipi Livni joined Israel's spooks in 1980 after leaving the Israeli army with the rank of lieutenant. She was the Mossad agent in charge of hunting and "eliminating" targets on Mossad's hit lists. She operated out of Paris but traveled all over Europe. The London Sunday Times exposed her secret active duty role when Mamoun Meraish was shot dead by a hit squad in Athens on Aug. 21, 1983.
Livni has never talked about her years with Mossad, but a glimpse of the nature of the work was given by her closest female partner on European assignments. "The risks were tangible," said Mira Gal, who became head of her ministerial office. "If I made a mistake the result would be arrest and catastrophic political implications for Israel."
"Tzipi was not an office .... She blended in well in European capitals, working with male agents, most of them ex-commandos, taking out Arab terrorist."
"Tzipi is a hawk when it comes to Syria and Iran," said a leading political commentator. "She is against withdrawal from the Golan Heights, and one prime minister she will want to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities."
She should get along well with Hillary, who made a campaign
pledge on ABC-TV's Good Morning America on April 22, 2008 to
attack and "totally obliterate" Iran and its 71 million
people.
|Top|
Benjamin Netanyahu
- who may well be Israel's next prime minister at a time of unprecedented
tension between the various players in the Middle East - is predicting
with all the confidence of a seasoned Gypsy fortune tellerthat
"al Qaeda" plans to destroy the burial site of Jesus
Christ, located in Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulcher.
Offering no proof that such a plan is afoot other than crowing over his "accuracy" in predicting the attacks on the Twin towers six years before 9-11, nevertheless Netanyahu is quoted saying that "radical Islam" will attack the "symbolic heart of the Christian religion," resulting in a "chain reaction we can't even envision" and "an escalation of religious conflict above and beyond the regional conflict we have now ...."
This is the same Netanyahu who - immediately after the attacks of 9-11 resulting in the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans - was quoted saying the terror attacks were "very good" in that they would generate "immediate sympathy for Israel." He reiterated these feelings in 2008 while speaking at Bar Ilan University in Israel where he was quoted saying that Israel "benefitted" from the 9-11 attacks as well as the war in Iraq, adding that these events "swung American public opinion in our favor.
To those who have studied Israel's history of terrorism and false flag attacks in achieving her goals over the last half century, including (but not limited to) her deliberate murder of 34 Americans serving aboard the USS Liberty; the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon in 1983 and the mother of them all, 9-11, Netanyahu's latest statement should be seen not as a prediction but as a threat. Using coded language, he is revealing that destruction of Christendom's holiest site is part of a carefully planned Mossad operation. Mossad's motto is "By way of deception, thou shalt do war." Netanyahu and his associates in Israel are hoping to lay the psychological expectation for such an event to take place, at which point Israel gets credit for her amazing powers of clairvoyance when indeed it does happen by her own machinations. Following such an event, she would then be able to wave a finger in the face of the Christian world, shake her head disapprovingly and say, "Should have listened to your elder brothers when it comes to these Islamic terrorists. Better luck next time."
The fact that Netanyahu would make such a prediction when not the slightest indication exists that such a thing would even be possible - given Islam's inherent reverence for Christian churches - indicates he knows much more about this upcoming terrorist attack than he is letting on.
Destroying or deliberately damaging Christian churches is expressly forbidden in Islam. Beginning as far back A.D. 636 with the Treaty of Jerusalem signed by the Christian community there and Caliph Omar, commander of the Muslim forces who took the city, the Muslims promised under the "assurity of God" that Christians would receive "safe conduct" for their persons, property, and churches, that their churches "shall neither be used by us as dwellings nor destroyed," that "no constraint" would be exercised against them in religion, nor shal any harm be done to any of them." The obvious proof the Muslims were good to their word is the fact that scattered throughout the Holy Land are hundreds of Christian churches and shrines to this day, still in good repair and a blatant contradiction to the propaganda being spewed these days about "intolerant Islam."
In fact, even long before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Israel was working tirelessly to foment its long-desired "clash of civilization" between the Christian and Muslim worlds for Israel's benefit. Given that Israel sees both as organic enemies to her stated aspirations of world domination, what better circumstances cold exist than that the two mutually destroy each other, leaving the lion's share of the world's wealth and resources easy pickings for the Jewish state.?
Israel's choice of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher as the target of her intended false flag operation is not random. This location is considered by Christians to be their holiest shrine, where with powerful emotion they recall Jesus' sham trial and subsequent crucifixion and death at the hands of Jewish thugs 2,000 years ago. There are other significant factors associated with it as well.
Of all the Christian holy places most reviled by Judaism (the only possible exception being St. Peter's Basilica in Rome) the location in Jerusalem marking the crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is certainly at the top. With the murder of Jesus Christ, the Jewish leadership believed this troublesome revolution against Jewish supremacism led by some upstart Galilean carpenter was finished. The "mopping up" operations followed shortly thereafter when these leaders and those under their powerful sway swore an oath not to eat or drink until "The Way" had been eradicated and its adherents exterminated.
Having obviously failed in these endeavors, Judaism's position from that moment forward concerning the person of Jesus Christ and his anti-Judaic movement has been anything but complimentary. Within Jewish society in general He is commonly referred to as "Yoshke" (the village idiot) while within the pages of the Talmud and other Jewish "holy" books He is depicted as a mamzer (bastard) born of an illicit union between a menstruating prostitute named Miriam and a Roman centurion named Pantera. Besides these, He is also called a sorcerer, a sexual deviant, a collaborator with the occupying Romans and a false prophet.
Therefor, the fact that Christianity not only survived Judaism's various pogroms and persecutions aimed at its extermination, but has flourished for 2,000 years as the world's largest religion playing an important role in world affairs has been an unbearable thorn in the eye of zionism's forefathers and her caretakers today. This being the case, if there is any church Israel would love to see destroyed first in her process of "Judaizing" Jerusalem (as the process is referred to presently) it is the Church of the resurrection that commemorates Jesus' eternal character.
Those who chalk up all of this talk of hatred for all things Christian to the typical business of "anti-Semitism" should look at recent history as well. Despite Theodore Herzl's promises to Pope Pius X that christian sites in Palestine wold be "protected" by the Jews, the fact is nevertheless that "cleansing" the Jewish state of Christian vestiges has been on of Israel's most important goals even before her official founding in 1948. Over the last century, Jewish attacks on Christian churches ( and particularly during times of conflict with the Palestinians, when the "fog of war" could be used as a semi-believable excuse) have been all too common. Mimicking the behavior of their Bolshevik cousins from previous decades, the zionists have on occasions too numerous to count (and certainly more numerous than revealed by false prophets such as John Hagee and others) firebombed, shelled and mortared many Christian churches throughout the Holy Land. Those not destroyed were treated with open contempt, being vandalized and, in many cases, having hman feces smeared over the walls, altars, icons and statues.
In one instance when the Christian patriarch in Jerusalem - speaking as a representative of the Vatican - complained about Jewish abuse of the Christians of Palestine, Israel (through one of her intermediaries) responded with "Your pope is a foolish man. If he has an army, let him send it." Recently a Christian teenager in Israel was almost killed when a package sent to his home by Jewish extremists associated with terrorist groups Kach and the Jewish Defense League exploded. In 2007 Jewish terrorists set a Christian church on fire in Jerusalem. In March 2006, a Jewish couple - pretending to be Christian pilgrims - entered the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth (Jesus' hometown) pushing a baby carriage filled with explosives with the obvious intention of killing scores of Christians. They were attacked and subdued by the church-goers before they could carry out their plans. Although hundreds of similar events have been chronicled little (if any) attention is paid to it by the Jewish press in America for fear of losing American support for the Jewish state.
People throughout the world must be alarmed at Netanyahu's
recent "prediction" and understand that it is an indicator
of what has been planned by the Jewish state.
|Top|
There seems a striking parallel between the post-Bolshevik school curriculums for Russian children and today's heavily used free online encyclopedia, Wikpedia. A creepy similitude fosters sex education on the Wikipedia web site as it did in soviet Russia after the churches were converted into dance halls and slaughter-houses by the new communist regime.
Researching this topic I get on Wikipedia and see user-friendly, fully illustrated sex primers written in :how-to" style spanning everything from conventional hetero to homosexual acts hailing from every point of the globe. The illustrations are in lavish color. One gets the felling that he is reading a manual for aspiring porn stars and prostitutes. If children are old enough to work a computer mouse, they can get an education above and beyond what they might be learning in the back of the school bus.
The Wikipedia omits certain notorious, historical Supreme Court cases, for example, but will include detailed, illustrated "how-to's" on every manner of perverted sex act known to man. It seems that the common thread running through Wikipedia and old Bolshevik Russia ties in neatly with Marx and Engel's Communist Manifesto.
One of the Strategies for breaking down the family unit on which any country takes its fundamental strength is to cheapen the bond between husband and wife. In the Communist Manifesto, wife-swapping was encouraged to bring this about. Note how the commune life-style of the late 1960s exemplified some of these property and woman-sharing concepts in our own country. The ideology of the Bolsheviks, thereby, was more insidious and far-reaching than Americans may have dreamed.
It is my inference that today the Communist Manifesto
is alive and well all around us. Particularly the Manifesto
thrives in the sneaky sex education of our young. There is a
hearty encouragement and celebration of promiscuity that permeates
every medium from which we are daily served a barrage - magazines,
billboards, the sides of buses, television, computers, even the
glittering screens of baseball stadium. Everywhere, ever day,
we are reminded that our wives and daughters are sexual commodities.
|Top|
REP. JOHN LINDER (R-Ga.) has introduced legislation which would end the income tax and abolish the IRS and replace them with a state-administered sales tax on all goods and services. The bill, titled the Fair Tax Act of 2009 (HR 25), already has 44 cosponsors and has been referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
In a nutshell, the legislation calls for an end to income, payroll, estate and gift taxes to be replaced by a sales-tax system called the Fair Tax.
The Fair Tax, originally developed by economists and businessmen, calls for a flat sales tax of approximately 23 percent on all goods and services. Under the plan, food, clothing, housing and transportation would be exempt from taxes. However, in order to keep the wealthy from playing the system, every month, Americans would be reimbursed by the government for the taxes they pay on these. The reimbursement checks, called "prebates," would be based on the size of one's family, not on how much money a person makes. So, in other words, a family of four, who are all legal residents of the United States, would get approximately $700 a month whether they earn the minimum wage or make a million dollars a year.
The program's appeal comes from the fact that it is the most progressive tax system out there—and the fairest in the truest sense of the word. Obviously, people who can afford to purchase mink coats or Ferraris would pay more in taxes than those who buy windbreakers and bicycles.
Americans would also get more money in their pockets as they would receive their total paychecks, and employers would no longer have to shake down their own employees to pay their share of taxes.
You would not be penalized—or taxed—for simply saving your money. Only spending would incur taxes. So self-sufficient Americans, who produce their own food, would only be taxed if they sell something. From a business owner's perspective, the Fair Tax would reduce the cost of filing taxes, because all he would have to do is take his total revenue and divide it by the percentage for the Fair Tax. He would then simply write a check to the government to pay his share.
No more shelling out thousands of dollars for accountants, lawyers and tax experts, who make a mint every year trying to decipher the 60,000 pages in the tax code.
Linder has been introducing this bill for the past decade, and every year it dies in committee. With high-level tax evaders in the news, the time is ripe for tax reform. Linder's Fair Tax proposal is a decent plan that, most importantly, calls for the abolition of the IRS, which targets regular Americans for failing to pay their taxes while ignoring the wealthy elites like Tom Daschle and Timothy Geithner.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
OUR GREATEST FOUNDING FATHER and first president, George Washington, probably wouldn't be ready to celebrate his birthday on Feb. 22 if he were alive today. Having led the 13 colonies to independence from the British Empire in 1783, following the course of a difficult eight-year struggle by those freedom-loving American colonists who followed him, Washington (who lived from 1732 to 1799) would most assuredly be appalled to see that the liberties achieved from the American Revolution are now being flagrantly defied by a number of figures who populate the upper ranks of the administration of Barack Obama.
Six former Rhodes Scholars (educated at Oxford University in Britain) and four others associated with the London School of Economics are serving in key posts in the Obama administration. That's not good.
Here are 10 of the key "British"—that is, Rothschild —operatives now ensconced in the Obama administration (more can be expected):
Susan Rice—ambassador to the UN; Michael McFaul—head of the Russian desk at the National Security Council; Elena Kagan—solicitor general of the United States; Anne-Marie Slaughter—State Department policy planning staff; Neal S.Wolin—deputy counsel to the president for economic policy; Ezekial Emanuel—senior counselor at the White House Office of Management and Budget on health care policy; Lawrence Summers—head of the National Economic Council; Peter Orszag—director of the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Rouse—senior advisor to the president; Mona Sutphen—deputy chief of the White House staff.
The truth about the Rhodes Scholarships is not known to the average American who is constantly told by the mass media that Rhodes Scholars (such as former President Bill Clinton) are among "the best and the brightest."
The Rhodes Scholarships—awarded to Americans and students from other former British colonies—are funded by a trust set up by 19th Century British imperial figure Cecil Rhodes, whose intent was to indoctrinate these scholars with the theme that the American colonies should be reunited with the British Empire and that they should work through "public service" to achieve that goal.
But Rhodes wasn't just some rich madcap dreamer. His ventures were underwritten by the international Rothschild dynasty operating from the financial district in London known as "The City"—the banking center of the Rothschild controlled British empire that also includes the London School of Economics.
So now a clique of internationalists trained in the idea of extinguishing American independence are ensconced in the Obama administration.
And another Rhodes Scholar, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, is widely touted as the great Grand Old Party candidate to "take back the White House" in 2012. Jindal doesn't offer "change." He—like the other globalists in the Obama administration—is part of the problem.
All of this is not a "conspiracy theory." Rather, these facts are well known to those familiar with what the Rhodes scholarships are really about.
A journalist specializing in media critique, Michael Collins Piper is the author of The High Priests of War, The New Jerusalem, Dirty Secrets, The Judas Goats, The Golem, Target Traficant and My First Days in the White House All are available from AFP.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
New York's normally far left Village Voice has published a revealing article, which for the first time here placed the central blame for the current major economic problems in the U.S. on the behavior of several London banks.
The article, "What cooked the world's economy? It wasn't your overdue mortgage" focuses on the legendary banking community of the City of London and the very questionable rise of its derivative market along with the classic cooperation by the British government as being the central avenue through which the U.S. and world's economic system has been seriously damaged.
The City of London is not that ancient city on the Thames River. It is not only separate, it once controlled the whole British Empire. It is generally considered to be a Rothschild entity.
Derivatives, briefly a financial note that hedges a loan's risk against default, became increasingly popular in recent years driven ,many say, by the sweeping changes brought on by the one world economic globalization movements starting in the mid-1980s to today.
In the mid-1990s, several published accounts show that Congress under the Clinton administration removed almost all effective legal overview on derivative markets, which quickly began providing unprecedented, ultra-huge profits for key figures in the market, many of whom were politically well connected.
While many seasoned financial experts published a mounting list of warnings that the derivatives were as ultra dangerous as they were ultra profitable, few in any position of power showed any inclination to even examine what was occurring.
But besides official noninvolvement being a factor, the article clearly, for the first time, points out that the derivative industry is based in the City of London—long the world's most important, secretive and officially protected banking compound in the world, located outside of the reach of U.S. regulators.
The British government adopted its classic noninvolvement behavior. The result was that the London derivative market skyrocketed to $100 trillion, many say more, by 2003.
The article quotes sources as placing the current value of the London derivative market at over $600 trillion, which far overshadows the value of all other financial markets. In providing an overview of what has gone wrong the article notes that disgraced mega financier Bernie Madoff, despite the media attention, represents "peanuts" in the current economic disaster. The authors contrasted the losses under Madoff to the huge damage caused by the London banking compound and their U.S. bank partners, always the junior partner, many patriotic figures note, when the City of London is involved.
The Voice followed the derivative money trail till it reached AIG financial products and its chief officer, Joseph Cassano, who openly described the institutions that became involved in the London-controlled derivative world as a "global swath" of hedge funds, investment banks, money managers, high net worth individuals, municipal governments, sovereigns and supra- national business corporations and pension funds.
Many other written accounts have detailed what resulted. With the legendary secrecy the London banks and the British government practice, exact figures are impossible to secure. But knowledgeable observers say that at least half of the major derivative operations, which critics call "bucket shops," after the crooked storefront stock trading operations of the mid-to-late 1800s, have ceased operations, leaving their major investors, including major pension funds, high and dry.
The Voice article and many other published reports have focused on the financial community and the handling of the taxpayer-funded $700 billion bailout for the U.S., and by proxy, British financial institutions destabilized by chronic mismanagement.
Both the Voice article and many other published accounts to this point have focused on the extensive secrecy which shrouds just what is being done with taxpayer funds in the financial markets.
Also due to public uproar over the secrecy, it became known that the Federal Reserve, which is not a government entity but is privately-owned and controlled, late in 2008 made loans to key banks on a level significantly larger than the congressional bailout. With no public knowledge, the "Fed" lent key banks what is reported to be $1.2 to 1.5 trillion. The Federal Reserve refuses to disclose major details of the emergency aid to major banks, stating that standard Freedom of Information Act disclosure laws do not apply to it.
But while the Village Voice article is the first major establishment publication to openly connect the present crisis to the British banks, a general recognition of the London banking compound as being the world economic power center has been growing through unusual avenues of late.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Ponzi scheme financier Bernard Madoff should feel fortunate that he got nabbed when he did. Now under house arrest in his $7 million Manhattan penthouse, he could be lying in a pine box, six feet under if some of the people he crossed got their hands on him.
Former funds manager Harry Markopolos told a House Financial Services subcommittee on Feb. 4 that Madoff had cheated some extremely dangerous figures out of millions of dollars.
"Mr. Madoff was running such a large scheme of unimaginable size and complexity, and he had a lot of dirty money," Markopolos testified. "Let me describe dirty money to you. When you're that big and you're that secretive, you're going to attract a lot of organized crime money, which we now know came from the Russian mob and the Latin American drug cartel. When you're zeroing out mobsters, you have a lot of fear. He could not afford to get caught, because once he got caught. . . ."
Markopolos switched course to address his own fears of being murdered if Madoff learned of his investigation:
"If he would've known my name and knew he had a team tracking him, I didn't think I was long for this world. Mr. Madoff was one of the most powerful men on Wall Street, and he was in a position to end our careers, or worse." He continued, "Mr. Madoff was already facing life in prison if he were caught, so he'd face little to no downside to removing whatever threats he felt we posed. My team and I surmised that if Mr. Madoff gained knowledge of our activities, he might feel threatened enough to seek to stifle us."
As his research continued over a 10-year period, Markopolos found that Madoff's operation rivaled the infamous BCCI scandal of the 1980s and 1990s. In addition to his association with Russian oligarchs and Colombian drug lords, Madoff was also linked to high-society stockbroker Robert M. Jaffe (now under investigation by Massachusetts security regulators and linked to New England mobster Gennaro Angiulo), Cayman Island money launderers, and corrupt pro-Israel financiers Sy Syms and Jacob Merkin.
Syms ran billions of dirty money through the Israeli Discount Bank of New York, while researcher Wayne Madsen wrote on January 14:
"Madoff is suspected of transferring much of his ill-gotten gain to Israeli banks, including one, Bank Leumi, that Madoff associate J. Ezra Merkin bought from the Israeli government when Ariel Sharon was prime minister and current PM Ehud Olmert was finance minister."
Madoff was a past treasurer of the American Jewish Congress. Could these be the men Markopolos referred to when saying that Madoff "had been aided by an army of colleagues within his investment business in Manhattan"?
Government regulators still refused to act. "The SEC had enough to get Madoff," Markopolos said. "I drew them pictures. I gave them a road map. I told them what questions to ask and who to phone."
While hundreds of people lost their life savings, Wall Street continued its "code of silence." In turn, the banking cartel's elite pressured their subordinates to turn a blind eye. Former SEC Commissioner Paul Atkins confessed, "We were actively discouraged from going after Ponzi schemes, pump-and-dump schemes, and things that were considered small cases. Actively discouraged by our superiors."
Markopolos said the SEC didn't listen to his warnings because, "they're too in-bed with the large derivative traders and investment banks. People lost money because they had faith in government." The syndicate is flourishing between Washington and Wall Street.
Victor Thorn is a hard-hitting researcher, journalist and the author of many books on 9-11 and the New World Order. These include 9-11 Evil: The Israeli Role in 9-11 and Phantom Flight 93.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
President Obama is illegally removing the Census Bureau from the Commerce Department and moving it to the White House. What difference does it make who runs the census? It's the difference between freedom and slavery, war and peace, everything from the priced of gas to where and when you will sleep and eat.
Census results are used to allocate congressional seats, assign electoral votes to elect the president and dole out government program funding. Census data directly affects how more than $300 billion per year in federal funding is allocated to communities for neighborhood improvements, public health, education, transportation and much more.
In recent years Congress has been growing more corrupt and has become a rubber stamp to an imperial presidency, representing not the people but the special interests with big money be buy "access." Nevertheless, it is possible to elect good representatives or put the heat on the bad ones. But how much "representation" would you have if countless numbers of ineligible "voters" - felons, dead people, illegal aliens or fictitious persons - outvote you?
Says Bruce Chapman, director of the census from 1981 to 1983 in the Reagan administration:
Everyone knows that it is possible to organize a decennial census in a way that benefits one part or another politically. One way to effectuate this otherwise unpalatable departure from the Census Bureau's 200-year history of non-partisanship is to put the bureau administratively under direction of the politicos in the White House.
In reality that would be a sure invitation to cook the books on the highly consequential count of Americans ... It puts a priority on manipulation of carefully derived census criteria. The only reason the White House would want to be involved is in figuring out how to add more voting power to certain states and groups within states.
Simply put, there is no excuse for this idea. It is not true that the Census Bureau has ever been under the direct management of the White House, and for good reason. Even if angels were in charge of the Executive Mansion, if the nation's premier statistical agency were placed under White House direction, the danger to public trust would be enormous.
The decennial count is one of the few federal functions specifically described in the Constitution itself and must be operated above suspicion of politics. Power flows from an accurate census count. Everyone involved for yers has seen the count therefore as a sacred trust.
It must not be polluted with even a semblance of presidential meddling.
Obama's decision to take control of the census came after black and Hispanic leaders objected tothe nomination of Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) as commerce secretary. In 1998 President Clinton wanted to use statistical "sampling" instead of actual counting (enumeration as demanded by the Constitution) so that minorities wouldn't be "under-counted."
Latino and black political special ethnic interest politicians applauded Clinton's plan to enhance Democrat power bases when the districts were to be redrawn after the 2000 census. Conservatives, such as Judd, opposed the scheme as an unconstitutional book-cooking scam that opened the door to corruption.
In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled that sampling adjusted figures
could not be used to apportion seats in Congress.
|Top|
An Ohio congressman has called on the federal government to take back the power to issue money from the Federal Reserve, the private central bank that, along with Wall Street, is to blame for plunging the world into an economic crisis not seen since the Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s.
"The Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express," said Rep. Kennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) on the floor of the House of Representatives on January 26. "It's a collection of private bankers that was established in 1913 by the Federal Reserve Act."
Kucinich called on the federal government to institute monetary reform beginning by issuing debt-free money - dollars that have not been loaned into circulation at interest by banks.
"We can take a new direction, and that new direction must include monetary reform," said Kucincih.
Kucinich quoted monetary theorist Stephen Zarienga, the author of The Lost Science of Money,* saying, "the bulk of our money is not created by our government, but by banks when they make private loans."
Kucinich quoted the Constitution as authorizing the government to be the sovereign power to issue money.
"Because of this monetary crisis," he said, "we have an opportunity here. Instead of giving private bankers more power, we need to incorporate the Federal Reserve into the Treasury Department where all new money could be created as government money, not as interest-bearing debt.
He also said the government needs to halt the banks' privilege of creating money out of thin air by ending the frational reserve system. "Past monetized private credit would be converted into government money," he said.
"Banks would continue to do what people think they do now under this new approach," he said. They would only act as intermediaries by accepting savings deposits and loaning that money or their own cash out to borrowers. "And what would the government do?" he asked. "Well, we wouldn't have to borrow money and continue to owe money to the banks to finance the needs of this country."
The proposal came during an hour-long speech by Kucinich, who offered fierce criticism of the banking industry in general, saying that bankers shamelessly exploited legislation, which was supposed to help Americans avoid bankruptcy, inorder to get free money from taxpayers.
"It turned out to be a windfall for banks," said Kucinich. "But hold on to your hat, Mr. and Mrs. America, because the banks are not done. They're going to be looking for even more money, and they're using this opportunity to game the system."
Kucinich also had choice words for speculators.
"We've seen speculation driving thisexonomy. An economy built on gambling, and not real production, is not sustainable. Moving to a financial sector as a source of profits isan unsustainable Ponzi scheme," he said.
Remember that this time in our national experience is all abut taking wealth from the great mass of the American people - from your paychecks, wallets and pocketbooks - and moving it right to the top," he said.
"We're in a world of debt, creating more and more debt in a debt-based economy," said Kucinich. "And the pros who put us in this mess refuse to admit that debt is the problem that put us here."
The current situation is unique, Kucinich said, because never before in American history have we seen so much debt. "The growth of our public and private debt from $10.5 trillion to $43 trillion during Alan Greenspan's tenure from 1987 to 2006 gives us some sense of the real magnitude of the problem," he said.
The Federal reserve knew this financial meltdown was on its way. "Yet we saw Greenspan pretend hedidn't have a clue," he said. "The Fed didn't do its job."
Under those circumstances," Kucinich asked, "would Americans want the Fed to have more power?
"Someone has to stand up for the American taxpayers, ans say, ‘Stop it,' he said. "We have to get control of this Federal Reserve."
The Lost Science of Money by Stephen Zarlenga is available
from First Amendment Books (Hardcover, 724 pages, item #1070)
for $60. Send check or money order to First Amendment Books,
645 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, Suite 100, Washington, D.C. 20003.
For faster ordering log on to AFP's website: www.americanfreepress.net
or call 888-699-NEWS to order by Visa or MC.
|Top|
I have recently had several opportunities on various news programs to discuss the economy and what is wrong with the so-called economic stimulus package. I have said over and over what we shouldn't be doing, and now I'd like to explain what we should be doing.
But to improve the situation, you must firs have a solid grasp of how we got here. Government policies and central planning created the housing bubble, now going bust. About a decade ago the government made expanded home ownership and affordable housing a public goal. Through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the secondary mortgage market the government incentivized creative, low down-payment, more widely available mortgage products, and discouraged the market-proven lending standards of the past.
The Federal Reserve kept interest rates artificially low, which added more fuel to this fire.
The increased demand for housing sent prices soaring until in many markets housing became even more unaffordable, necessitating even more creative mortgages, and impossibly leveraging homeowners. Many risky investment vehicles such as mortgage-backed securities, derivatives, credit default swaps grew out of this unsustainable situation. As the foreclosures began, the house of cards started to tumble. Too many people have confused the symptoms and the pain of the bust with the problematic policies that caused the bubble, which is really what needs to be treated.
First of all, just as the best cure for a hangover is not to drink so much, the best cure for a recession is a recession. It is time to sober up and return to free market sanity, risk and reward, supply and demand, without political intervention. Politicians are good at catering to the needs of special interests, but very bad at determining what needs to take place in the market. Government should stick to punishing fraud and enforcing contracts. When they use the tax code, bureaucratic departments and their manipulative rules and regulations to dictate social and economic behavior, we end up with distortions and malinvestments. Bailing out banks, continuing failed Fed policies and strapping the taxpayer with toxic debt will worsen the pain, and punish the innocent.
If Congress really wanted to do something helpful, it would cut taxes. Ideally, we would repeal the income tax altogether and get the IRS off the economy's back, which would be a huge boon. We should also cut spending. Cut every unconstitutional department and program, every wasteful governmental encroachment onthe people's liberty and money, starting with our massive overseas empire. The cost of our empire is bringing us to our knees, just as the Soviets' empire did to them. Congress should also abolish the Federal Reserve and take back its responsibilities to ensure sound money, safe from the manipulations of powerful banking interests.
These things would constitute real change, real economic stimulus.
The plans being bandied about Washington are just more of the
same. As long as no one seriously considers the cure, we are
unfortunately destined to prolong the disease.
|Top|
It's been about 10 years since the Jerusalem Post admitted that the Israeli underworld had been taken over by Russian Jewish mob bosses. But despite official Mossad condemnations, little has been done to interfere with the drug and slave trade the Russian Jewish bosses have brought to Israel. Recently, even Amnesty International (AI) has slammed Israel for refusing to do much about the Jewish mob's white slave traffic worldwide, based in Israel. Several years ago, Amnesty wrote:
"The Israeli government has failed to take adequate measures to prevent, investigate, prosecute and punish human rights abuses committed against trafficked women. In general, trafficked women are effectively treated as criminals by the various Israeli agencies with whom they cone in contact, rather than as victims of human rights abuses. This is so even though many of them have been subjected to human rights abuses such as enslavement or torture, including rape and other forms of sexual abuse, by traffickers, pimps or others involved in Israel's sex industry.... Trafficking of women to Israel is not illegal." (AI, "Israel's Sex Industry," 2000.)
The Jewish mafia is deep into gun running, and the Islamic "terrorist groups" in the Middle East and Central Asia are their best customers. Given this, one would think that the IDF would have taken a bite out of their operations, but, to the contrary, the Jewish mob continues to function out of Israel with little interference.
Israeli estimates place the investment of the Jewish bosses in the Israeli economy at about $20 billion since the late 1970s. This might speak a little to the refusal of Israeli law enforcement to do anything about this. Further, the bosses' financing of the Chechen rebels throughout the 1990s protected the Western - owned pipelines the Tussian government had its eye upon. Significantly, mafia bosses have been involved in running less expensive weapons to the Georgian government, a government that harbors drug gangs throughout the mountains around the Panski Gorge.
According to Stratfor.com research and intelligence organization, the Israeli government estimates that 10 percent of all Jewish immigration to Israel is criminal, yet, little is done to stem this tide other than pious denunciations. The Israeli government has admitted that mafia money went to finance much of Benjamin Netanyahu's campaign for prime minister in 1996.
Back in 1995, the then-head of the FBI Louis Freeh claimed that the Russian Jewish mafia was the "greatest threat to American security" in the world, though, several days later, he was forced to retract his statements, according to the BBC.
The Israelis might have several good reasons for not only harboring, but encouraging mafia activity within their borders.
First, the substantial Jewish investment in the global arms trade permits Israel to support rebel groups worldwide through mafia channels that otherwise would be credited to Israeli government policy. For example, Russian-Jewish mafia figures are financing the Darfur separatists in Sudan (through the agency of Ukrainian Jewish boss Viktor Bout), and the Colombian communist FARC rebels through the agency of the greatest boss of them all, the Israeli Simon Mogilevich, who bought the Hungarian anti-aircraft factories in the early 1990s, as well as a chunk of the famous Sukhoi combat jet firm in Russia. Involvement in Miami-based Ludwig "Tarzan" Fainberg's attempt to supply the Dali cartel with Russian submarines some time ago might suggest a strong involvement in global arms sales.
The fact that the Israeli underworld could finance some of Georgia's arms supplies permitted the Israelis plausible denial once the shooting started last summer. Furthermore, the mob, in supplying weapons and even training to Central asian Islamic groups, might permit the Israelis a modicum of control over these groups. The Mossad itself admitted in the early 1990s that Mogilevich was deep within the IDF and the Israeli state, and by 1994, this master murderer and gangster was able to get an internationally recognized license to sell and buy weapons on the open market. Apparently, Mogilevich was (and is) very important to the IDF as a subsidiary arms supplier.
As far as Israel itself is concerned, there are now hundreds of legal brothels in Israel featuring Slavic girls who, according to Fainberg, go for about $10,000 to $15,000 each. They are bought and sold by Russian Jewish mafia figures ans sent to Israel, America and Britain to work. Tel Aviv has made no substantial effort to stem this tide.
Fainberg's drug, weapons and slave trade with Tel Aviv, Kiev and St. Petersburg, in recent years, began using the comparatively open free U.S.-Canadian border for his transactions, financing the relatively new Toronto marijuana and cocaine fad. He was recently arrested by Canadian police and, without explanation, deported to Israel where he will continue his operations without interference. Fainberg brags that he has "ties" with the FBI.
Hence, the Russian Jewish mafia is a "smoking gun" case linking American intelligence to international drugs and slavery, along with the Israeli government. At the same time, it also links these entities to the "Arab terror" groups operating throughout the world, who are the Israeli mafia's top arms clients. In other words, it is not out of the question that the mafia ties the entire Anglo-Israeli complex together, linking the sexual revolution, pornography, weapons, slaves and drugs together with the apparent cooperation of the American FBI and the Israeli police services.
At least two of the big three Israeli-Russian crime figures
have their base in Israel, the famed Sergei Mikhas (who the media
claims is not Jewish, but has no trouble gaining and keeping
Israeli citizenship) and Fainberg. Mogilevich prefers the relative
calm of Hungary, but also retains Israeli citizenship.
|Top|