This Week In Science! March 1st-8th, 2013! Science Rules!

Like any good scientist I love true science and hate lies masquerading as science.  There is ample evidence of bias and inaccuracy in almost every realm of modern scientific inquiry.  These flaws go back decades if not centuries and therefore many of the flawed policies and dangerous assumptions plaguing civilization are now rooted as much in bad science as they are in bad religion, bad politics, and bad economics.

Almost every great scientific discovery throughout history was dismissed by the scientific establishment at the time.  The modern world is no different from the past in this regard.  In modern times corporate, bankster, political, military, and egotistical interests have skewed science and spread fallacies to an unprecedented extent.

Fortunately, we have The Internet which is the most powerful tool ever available for exposing corruption and deception.  Right now a new group of scientists that prove the Establishment is smoking crack has emerged via the internet, but unfortunately most scientists are blinded by tradition.

Many university and corporate scientists treat peer reviewed scientific journals like religious texts.    After all, if it's "peer reviewed" it must be the best, latest, and most reputable science, right?  Wrong.  In recent (and not so recent years) countless reputable doctors, scientists, and experts have gone against the grain and spoken out against the flaws in their respective fields. Blindly accepting peer reviewed information is not science.  It's a circle jerk.

One book which I found formative in my growing awareness of this realization is "Overdosed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine" by John Abramson, MD.  In the book Abramson irrefutably shows how tortured and false the "science" modern medicine is built upon has become.  He exposes numerous instances of biased and falsified information regarding the most profitable pharmaceuticals in the most "reputable" medical journals.

I was supposed to become an MD and got so far as my first month in medical school before realizing that establishment medicine cared much more about profit than health and was more concerned about managing chronic conditions than it was with actually making sick people well again.

If greed, bias, and falsehood has even overrun medical science, what makes you think any other field of inquiry is immune to the toxic corruption emanating from modern banking, politics, media and business? 

Would you professional scientists PLEASE get off your asses and do your own research, express your own hypotheses, and expose the glaring faults in much that Establishment Science would have us believe?  Our lives and our planet depend on it.

May the following image offer you some guidance as you begin your quest...

If you disagree with anything in this image, prove me wrong.  Don't attack my character.  Don't dismiss me out of hand.  Don't cite some "reputable" institution or research you know nothing about.  Gather data from a multitude of sources, formulate your own hypothesis, do your own research, and seriously prove me wrong.  Otherwise, stop calling yourself a scientist or claiming you methods are scientific.  Regurgitating others' words is not science.  It's public relations.

Be a scientist, not a puppet.  Peace.

Sequestration Drama 2013: Will Budget Cuts Really Hurt Yellowstone, GTNP, and JH Economies?!

This political cartoon sums up the situation in DC nicely.  Over the last several years the (corrupt) Federal Government has repeatedly threatened doom and gloom if they don't get their way, which generally means more taxes, more military spending, more centralized control, more Orwellian police state, less human rights, and more taxpayer money thrown down assorted rat holes that do not actually benefit taxpayers.

Now we have articles in the local paper here in Jackson Hole warning that the local economy will suffer and jobs will be eliminated if budget cuts are forced because National Parks, National Forests, and National Refuges (like the Elk Refuge here in NW Wyoming) will suffer some of the steepest cuts were the government to cut spending.  Would this actually hurt our local economy here in Wyoming?  I doubt it.  I think it's just a scare tactic -- economic terrorism, if you will -- a method the (corrupt) Federal Government has perfected abroad over the last century.

There is even talk of shutting down the entire Federal Government, which I think would actually be a great move if they actually shut down everything including the Amerikan military industrial complex.  Since the military accounts for 54% of US spending and has terrorized the entire world with threats of nuclear annihilation since 1945, shutting that down seems like the sanest of all possible actions.

Unfortunately, sanity is not the (corrupt) Federal Government's strong suit.  In fact, all these threats are merely political tools.  These are in fact "manufactured crises", and you don't have to take my word for it.  Check out what Obama said in his latest SOTU while trying to drum up bipartisan support for insane policies...

Excerpt from Barack Obomber's State of the Union 2013 (bold highlights are mine)

"I realize that tax reform and entitlement reform won’t be easy. The politics will be hard for both sides. None of us will get 100 percent of what we want. But the alternative will cost us jobs, hurt our economy, and visit hardship on millions of hardworking Americans. So let’s set party interests aside, and work to pass a budget that replaces reckless cuts with smart savings and wise investments in our future. And let’s do it without the brinksmanship that stresses consumers and scares off investors. The greatest nation on Earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufactured crisis to the next. Let’s agree, right here, right now, to keep the people’s government open, pay our bills on time, and always uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America. The American people have worked too hard, for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials cause another."

The most absurd thing about all this political posturing is the government agencies continually proposed for the chopping block are those that actually benefit the American people, protect our environment, and/or can potentially turn a profit (legally).

The continued threats to shut down or severely limit the Postal Service, National Parks, Health and Human Services, etc. prove this institutionalized insanity.  Equally insane is the fact that the government pretends that cutting 85 billion of beneficial services from a 3.7 trillion budget would make the slightest difference.  Those cuts amount to 2.3% budget cut, a mere drop in the bucket of waste and corruption.

If the Feds really wanted to balance the budget, this is all they would have to do.

1) STOP PAYING TRIBUTE TO A PRIVATE BANKING CARTEL.  Currently the US Government pays over $300 billion annually to the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank on an entirely manufactured and illegitimate debt.  If we told the global banking cartel to suck eggs, the US' annual expenses would drop by 8.1% overnight.

2) CUT THE OVERINFLATED MILITARY BUDGET IN HALF.  The US currently spends at least $729 billion on its military annually.  This is over six times more than China spends on it's military and as much as the top ten military nations combined.  Cutting that budget in half would decrease the US annual expenses by almost 10% overnight with no noticeable decrease in the average citizen's security.  If that money was invested in America instead of blown up overseas, we would see unprecedented prosperity in this country.

Note: the figure $729 billion does not take into consideration backdoor or black op budgets.  A good example of how deep the military rathole goes was revealed on September 10th, 2001 when Donald Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon had misplaced $2.3 TRILLION.  Convenient timing for such an announcement, eh?!

3) STOP BUILDING A POLICE/SURVEILLANCE/PRISON STATE.  We all know Homeland Security has been a priority since the false flag attacks of 2001 and subsequent fabricated "War on/of Terror".  Just how much has been spent on the police state over the last decade?  At least $700 billion.  How much is allocated in 2013?  At least $100 billion more.

"The Department of Homeland Security, has a total 2012 budget of about $57 billion.... That budget only hints at what’s being doled out for homeland security at the federal level. Such moneys flow not just from Homeland Security, but from the Justice Department, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Commerce Department, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Defense. In 2010, the Office of Management and Budget reckoned that 31 separate federal agencies were involved in homeland security-related funding that year to the tune of more than $65 billion. The Census Bureau, which has itself been compromised by War on Terror activities — mapping Middle Eastern and Muslim communities for counter-terrorism officials — estimated that federal homeland security funding topped $70 billion in 2010. But government officials acknowledge that much funding is not included in that compilation. (Grants made through the $5.6 billion Project BioShield, to offer but one example, an exotic vaccination and medical program launched in 2004, are absent from the total.)

Even the estimate of more than $635 billion in such expenditures does not tell the full spending story. That figure does not include the national intelligence or military intelligence budgets for which the Obama Administration is seeking $52.6 billion and $19.6 billion respectively in 2013, or secret parts of the national security budget, the so-called black budget."

(SOURCE: http://www.salon.com/2012/03/05/the_cost_of_americas_police_state/ )

Cutting all of this creepy Orwellian crap out of the budget would save the US at least 4% annually. Combined with the two additional cuts mentioned above, the US budget would drop by at least 23% overnight.

4) MAKE LARGE CORPORATIONS AND THE ULTRAWEALTHY PAY THEIR SHARE OF TAXES.  Many of the largest and most profitable corporations in the US pay little or no taxes.  Though the official corporate tax rate is around 30%, the biggest corporations actually pay between 2% and 10%.  Meanwhile, taxes on the wealthiest Americans are still near all-time-lows and the same tax loopholes exploited by corporations are affordable for the wealthiest Americans as well...

This ThinkProgress article from 2011 shows the absurdity of the tax situation and the seemingly neverending stream of government manufactured crises we have been dealing with recently...

As congressional negotiators continue to debate the contents of a deficit reduction package, discussions are reportedly tiltingtoward a deal that will include spending cuts but no revenue increases.

Over at the Campaign for America’s Future, the Institute for Policy Studies’ (IPS) Sam Pizzigati notes that one way to very easily tackle U.S. debt going forward would be to increase taxes on corporations and the wealthy to levels more closely matching mid-20th century rates. Pizzigati cites an IPS paperfrom last spring to make the argument that if corporations and households making more than $1 million paid the same rates as they did in 1961, our debt would virtually disappear in a decade:

Some numbers — from an Institute for Policy Studies report released this past spring — can help us better visualize just how monumental this political failure has been. If corporations and households taking in $1 million or more in income each year were now paying taxes at the same annual rates as they did back in 1961, the IPS researchers found, the federal treasury would be collecting an additional $716 billion a year. In other words, if the federal government started taxing the wealthy and their corporations at the same rates in effect a half-century ago, the federal debt to investors would almost totally vanish over the next decade.

As ThinkProgress has previously reported, the richest Americans are paying their lowest taxesin a generation. Additionally, Center for American Progress experts Michael Linden, Seth Hanlon, and Jordan Eizenga have shown that the United States is actually very low-tax compared to other developed countries.

(SOURCE: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/07/25/277857/corporations-rich-taxes-debt-disappear/ )

So, long story short, the federal government is not just inept but blatantly corrupt.  They could easily balance the budget and do away with the debt if they actually worked for the benefit of American citizens of humanity as a whole.  We have to eliminate corrupt government before corrupt government eliminates us.  Peace.


Rachel Marsden: Least Intelligent Mainstream Warmonger Disinformation Hack of All Time? Certainly Crazy and a Contender.

According to a 2012 Gallup Poll, a full 60% of Americans do not trust the mainstream media.  With the help of insane media personalities like Rachel Marsden, that percentage is sure to climb.

I don't normally do hit pieces, but this morning I came across a syndicated opinion piece in the local paper so misleading and offensive that I feel compelled to refute its content and expose its author. The sorry excuse for an editorial is "Leggo my 'Argo': Iran's unhealthy fixation on Ben Affleck" by Rachel Marsden.

The not-quite-witty title is apt because it summarizes the article nicely: lame attempts at humor backed up by irrelevant disinformation.  "Leggo my 'Argo'" is a sorry excuse for wordplay, and Iran is not fixated on Ben Affleck: Iran's leaders are merely responding Hollywood's recent anti-Iranian propaganda piece "Argo".

Before we deal with Marsden's warmongering stance on modern Iranian/US relations, a little history lesson is in order...

Now that we know what's really going on in Iran, let's dissect Marsden's article point by point.  Let's debunk disinformative nonsense with historical fact, irrefutable logic, incisive questions, and unbiased language.  In our never-ending quest for universal media literacy it's important that intentionally misleading, warmongering psychopaths are exposed as such.

by Rachel Marsden

NOTE: Italics are Marsden's words.  Bold are mine.

PARIS -- When Ben Affleck's "Argo" -- a film based on the true-life, CIA-assisted Canadian operation to rescue American diplomats during the Iranian hostage crisis in 1979 -- won the Oscar for Best Picture, all I could think about was how badly Iran blew a prime opportunity to keep quiet for once.

How exactly would Iran benefit from "keeping quiet" while a propaganda film demonizing the country is being heralded as high art?

Iranian Culture Minister Mohammad Hosseini is so incensed with the portrayal of his country in "Argo" that the government is financing a film in response. Look, Canadians took issue with some "Argo" distortions, too -- mainly because, as former U.S. President Jimmy Carter has said, "90 percent of the contributions to the ideas and the consummation of the plan was Canadian," while the film portrays the inverse. But Canada isn't going to get all insecure about something that happened more than three decades ago. Granted, Canada also has a lot going for it -- including a world of "friends" with whom to trade.

Marsden has just admitted that "Argo" grossly misrepresents the situation.  She then grossly misrepresents Iran by comparing it's political footing to that of Canada.  Iran has been badgered by the United States since 1953.  See video above.

By contrast, the Iranian regime considers its image to be so fragile that a single Hollywood film must be treated as a threat. Even Affleck is more secure in his manhood than Iran. The director has called Iran's criticism "a badge of honor."

Iran is a nation-state, not a man.  Iran has no "manhood", in fact about half of the seventy-five million human beings who live in Iran are women.  Let's not paint every Iranian with the same brush, eh?

Iran could learn from Affleck, who has bombed out in the past but has learned whatever lessons he needed. He simply moves on and tries not to repeat the same bad scripts. When Iran bombs out, it never, ever lets go of the script.

Iran's "script" is to retain its sovereignty despite intense political and military pressure from global imperialists.  Comparing  a Hollywood star's life lessons to the governance of a sovereign nation is idiotic.

Iran's grasp of diplomatic relations hasn't improved much since the "Argo" era, regardless of what Iranians want us to believe. The best image that any country can project is through its day-to-day actions, its relationships, its friends.

Iranians merely want us to leave them alone.  If countries project their images through their day-to-day actions, most of the Western world is failing miserably due to endless wars of aggression, bankster bailouts, austerity against citizens, blatant and repeated deceptions exposed, etc.

Sadly, Iran doesn't have many friends. Well, it has Russia and China as besties -- but someone should ask Russian President Vladimir Putin how it feels to have your friend's checks start bouncing, as Iran's did when Russia was trying to help build the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

Marsden is 38 years old yet she uses middle schooler words like "besties" in an attempt to dumb down the rest of us.  Iran and Russia successfully completed the Bushehr nuclear power plant and it is now running at full capacity though "the work was delayed several years by technical and financial challenges as well as by political pressure from the West."  Political pressure from the West was a bigger factor than the "bounced checks" Marsden is conjuring up for disinformation's sake.

While trying so desperately to martyr itself as a victim of the meddling West, Iran is dropping ammo all over Africa. Great Britain's Conflict Armament Research recently issued a report detailing Iranian ammunition used by "foreign-backed insurgents, rebel forces, Islamist-oriented armed groups and warring communities." Speaking of which, Israel just bombed an Iranian general who was hanging out in a Syrian conflict zone -- no doubt handing out cupcakes and balloon animals to children.

Regarding Marsden's source Conflict Armament Research:

"In the cases documented to date neither the outer wooden boxes nor their contents have specified any information that might identify the manufacturer. For these reasons, Conflict Armament Research had to employ cross-case analysis—comparing ammunition and packaging documented in known Iranian shipments with ammunition and packaging discovered elsewhere—to identify the ammunition as Iranian in origin.

To summarise these investigations in brief, Conflict Armament Research observed ammunition packed in green battle bags in Kenya (2008) and Côte d’Ivoire (2010). It also documented complete packaging (outer wooden boxes and their contents) in Côte d’Ivoire in 2009 and 2012. In none of these cases did it find any evidence to indicate manufacture by Iran."

SOURCE: Page 15 of "The Distribution of Iranian Ammunition in Africa" by Conflict Armament Research (NOTE: Conflict Armament Research is a private corporation founded in 2011 and as an information source it is neither credible nor reputable. Humorously, CAR's Facebook page only has 44 likes. Please tell them how you feel about their falsified information and warmongering.)

Regarding the "Iranian general hanging out in a Syrian conflict zone", there are no credible reports that this actually happened, and Iran has every right to help Syria defend itself from foreign mercenaries disguised as freedom fighters  who are attempting to overthrow the Syrian government.

Meanwhile, Iran's own trade partners seem to have relegated the nation to "Mr. Right, For Right Now" status, with China, India, Malaysia, South Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Turkey and Taiwan qualifying for exemptions from U.S. sanctions for having significantly reduced their imports of Iranian oil.

All Iran wants is to sell their oil on a FREE MARKET, not within the corrupt, rigged Petrodollar System.  Any self-respecting Conservative -- which Marsden claims to be -- should see the validity of this desire.

I can't even begin to imagine how this must anger the knee-jerk anti-Americans who chronically fly off handle at the thought of Iran not having a God-given right to trade with the United States and its allies while simultaneously bad-mouthing them all. Pretty soon the anti-Westerners will be the only ones left on earth who will want to do business with Iran -- and by that I mean them personally. Like, they can go online and send over some pizza or something.

Marsden now decides to demonize and ridicule anyone who believes Iran has a right to defend its interests, retain its sovereignty, and trade on a FREE MARKET.  If the United States wants Iran to stop "bad mouthing" it, maybe the United States should stop "Argoing" and sabotaging Iran.

As China keeps colonizing Africa and going into resource-rich nations to drink their respective milkshakes dry, Iran will be increasingly relegated to flophouse status -- a pit stop for Chinese imperialists in transit between their de facto African colonies. China could even fill up Iran like a giant foam ball pit at Chuck E. Cheese because it will be all theirs.

The West has been colonizing resource-rich nations and drinking them dry for over a century.  This is the pot calling the kettle black.  Once again Marsden's attempt at humor falls flat on its face/ass/bullshit-spewing-organ.

Oh, so you haven't heard about China seducing and colonizing various African nations rich in resources but poor in their ability to exploit them? That's likely because there are no corporate logos at which to point fingers of blame -- unless you count the Chinese Communist Party as a massive corporate entity unto itself.

Meanwhile NATO and associated Western nations are militarily invading African and Middle Eastern countries because they don't want Westerners impeding at all.  At least China is conducting itself respectfully and diplomatically instead of operating with economic sanctions, drone warfare, sabotage, and state-sponsored terrorism.

I guess bilious anti-Westerners who foam at the mouth with every incursion Western nations make into Africa -- usually for national security or humanitarian purposes -- figure that the sort of dubious labor conditions they abhor in China would still be preferable to anything a Western corporation would introduce in Africa.

How about we let the Africans, the Syrians, the Iranians, and the rest of the world decide for themselves what the best way to manage their own lives.  Invading sovereign nations "for national security or humanitarian purposes" is total BS. The blood of innocents is on Marsden's hands as much as it is on our politricksters and hired guns.

That's the reality Iran has created for itself -- and the movie that it should really be worried about.

That the disillusioned misrepresentation of reality that Marsden has created for herself -- and the sorry excuse for journalism that the rest of us are laughing about.


If you really want to know how crazy and delusional Marsden is, you need to check out her Wikipedia page.  She has apparently created scandalous controversies around herself for decades in a deluded search for fame...

Rachel Marsden on Wikipedia (she sure comes off like a crazy person)

Please take the time to help expose Marsden in hopes of getting her to STFU.  Perhaps you should visit her on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, YouTube, etc and let her know that you don't appreciate her deceptive and deluded opinions flooding our airwaves.

Rachel Marsden.com (hideous website looks like a D- school project)
Rachel Marsden on Twitter (389 followers... a nobody in the world of social media)
Rachel Marsden on Facebook (242 likes... a nobody in the world of social media)
Rachel Marsden Consulting on Facebook (9 likes... nonexistent social media sway)
Rachel Marsden on Pinterest (one follower... schweet!)
Rachel Marsden's book on Amazon.com (one review total, earning one of five stars)


Space Data Portends Extended Solar Minimum and Mini Ice-Age

NOTE FROM OFF: This blog post originally appeared at Geoengineering Exposed.  It's such an important topic that I am reposting.  Check out the videos below from the always provocative Suspicious0bservers.

Lest you have any doubt about the basic principles of this topic, I present the following headline from NASA posted in 2009...

Sun is plunging into the deepest solar minimum in a century

(what follows reblogged from Geoengineering Exposed)

Suspicious observers header

Suspicious Observers Channel – HERE
The science of Global Warming is not settled.
Enormous energies from our own Sun and newly recognized influences from the solar system and deep space are finally telling a bigger story  than any carbon tax is capable of fixing.  
A new study predicts that earth’s climate will be significantly influenced by an extended solar minimum that may have already begun.
“Scafetta, N., and R. C. Willson, 2013.  Planetary harmonics in the historical Hungarian aurora record (1523–1960)”
The historical Hungarian auroral record extends from 1523 to 1960 and is longer than the sunspot record. Harmonic analysis reveals four major multidecadal secular cycles forming an approximate harmonic set at periods of 42.85, 57.13, 85.7 and 171.4 years. These four frequencies are very close to the four major heliospheric oscillations relative to the center of mass of the solar system caused by Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. Similar frequencies are found in solar radiation models based on long cosmogenic isotope records (Steinhilber et al. 2012) and in long records of naked eye sunspot observations (Vaquero et al., 2002). Harmonic regression models are used to reconstruct and forecast aurora and solar activity for the period 1956-2050. The model predicts:
1) the multidecadal solar minimum in the 1970s that is also observed in the sunspot record.
2) a solar maximum in 2000 – 2002 that is observed in the ACRIM total solar irradiance satellite composite.
3) a prolonged solar minimum centered in the 2030s
These findings support a hypothesis that the Sun, the heliosphere and the terrestrial magnetosphere are partially modulated by planetary gravitational and magnetic forces synchronized to planetary oscillations as also found in other recent publications.
(ACRIM  = Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor )
The graph predicts a 40 year period of solar minimum associated with frigid temperatures similar to that of  the “Dalton Minimum” –beginning now
New Dalton Minimum

Energy From Space

An Alternate hypothesis for Climate Change

NOTE FROM OFF: This is another great video from Suspicious0bserver on related topics...

Another great video from Suspicious0bservers.  This one focuses on Geoengineering's relationship to all of this...

And one more from Suspicious0bservers...


Geoengineering Explained In 10 Minutes: Mainstream Perspective, Ethical Issues, Military Applications, Overlooks Ongoing Programs

This series of excerpts is from a CBC broadcast titled "Playing God With Planet Earth". It is the best mainstream media explanation of Geoengineering that I have found. Like most reports from the mainstream it fails to tell the whole truth on the topic. Nevertheless, it is a great into to the topic of climate modification and the growing controversy surrounding it.

My opinion is that Geoengineering Programs utilizing advanced aerial spraying and directed energy techniques were developed decades ago and have been used for global Weather Warfare starting around 1997 with the commencement of the US Military's "Operation Cloverleaf." My opinion is that programs designed to intentionally change the climate have caused a lot more "natural" disasters, destruction, death, and human suffering than natural or accidental climate change.

For the rest of the story follow the links below...

US Air Force: Weather As A Force Multiplier: Owning The Weather By 2025

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Recommends GEO-ENGINEERING Investment Opportunities (To Help Them "Fight Against" Climate Change They've Been Causing With Geoengineering) http://www.oilfreefun.com/2012/10/cou...

Geoengineering: Dangerous Proposal Or Lethal Reality? by Dane Wigington http://www.oilfreefun.com/2012/10/geo...

Why In The World Are They Spraying (documentary film)

What In The World Are They Spraying? (documentary film)

WeatherWar101 (youtube channel)

WeatherWars.info (youtube channel)

ClimateViewer3D (youtube channel)


Where do "Environmentalist" NGOs like Greenpeace stand on Geoengineering, Climate Modification, and Weather Warfare?!

I can't decide whether Greenpeace International's latest promotional image is a subtle attempt to wake their followers to the ongoing Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering Solar Radiation Management programs (SAG SRM) or if a mere coincidence has them encouraging their legions to "Look Up And Think About The Arctic".

Greenpeace International has 1.3 million followers on Facebook so it would be great if they got behind to wheel on exposing Geoengineering.  I think they will soon take a stance on the issue, but I doubt they are planning to address the fact that climate modification has been taking place for over a decade.  We'll see...

I ponder this conundrum because searching Greenpeace.com for the term "geoengineer" brings up a mere 8 hits total.  Five results link to obscure PDFs from 1991, 1997, 1999, 2001, and 2011 respectively. Two results link to the same article published in 2011 which only mentions geoengineering once in passing.

Believe it or not, the sole remaining search result on Greenpeace.org for "geoengineer" links to a comment I personally made on their post "Is the world heading towards another food crisis" on November, 2012:

In short, it appears that NOBODY at Greenpeace has an opinion on geoengineering... except for me.  I find it hard to believe that no other comments including the word "geoengineer" have ever been made at Greenpeace, so perhaps my comment somehow slipped past the censors.  Either that or Greenpeace's internal search engine sucks.

For the purpose of the point I'm making in this article, it is irrelevant whether one believes that geoengineering is already taking place or that geoengineering is merely in the experimental and proposed stages.  The only unacceptable opinion on the topic is one based entirely on ignorance.

Regardless of how far along geoengineering programs have progressed, there is NO DOUBT that they have been proposed and do in fact exist and are explicitly designed to intentionally change the climate.  A simple Google News Search for "geoengineer" yields a whopping 1,270 results at the time of writing.  Most mainstream articles give the impression that geoengineering is in the experimental stage, but they clearly admit it exists and that governments are considering it.

Surely someone at Greenpeace should have chimed in by now with an opinion on the issue or at least an objective article that simply explains the topic... but like so many other Environmental NGOs Greenpeace seems deaf and dumb to geoengineering.

Here is a fine example of typical mainstream coverage of the topic of geoengineering: Harvard Geoengineer David Keith interviewed by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.  This particular interview is very revealing...

Broadcast: 22/11/2012
Reporter: Tony Jones

In a recent Gallup Poll titled US Distrust in Media Hits New High, 60% of Americans said they trusted the mainstream media "very little or not at all".  That 60% figure is certainly higher for committed Environmentalists than it is among the general populace.  Despite the widespread distrust of the media, it's amazing how many Environmentalists and NGO Environmental Organizations merely regurgitate one side of the Mainstream Misleadia's narrative on Climate Change.

One branch of the Mainstream Misleadia says that Climate Change does not exist or that it is not caused by humans.  The other branch of the Mainstream Misleadia says that Climate Change is largely human's fault and is primarily due to our greenhouse gas emissions.  The second perspective is clearly more accurate, but is it the whole truth on the issue?

When does the Mainstream Misleadia give the whole truth on any issue?!

And if the Mainstream Misleadia is already reporting on Geoengineering, why doesn't Greenpeace have an opinion on the topic?!  Surely attempts to intentionally change the climate are of rather important concern to Environmental NGOs.  Or are Environmental NGOs like Greenpeace merely toeing the globalist's line and only pushing the soft issues that really don't matter?!

Surely any attempts to intentionally change the climate are the greatest environmental issue of our time.

My advice to Environmentalists is to look up and actually study the skies directly over their own heads.  By merely comparing what is seen overhead with data accessible through flight traffic tracking websites it becomes apparent rather quickly that some jets leave long, lingering, spreading trails while other jets don't.  Comparing data makes it easy so see that these planes are of a similar design and are flying at similar altitudes... so why do some leave massive spreading trails while others leave trails that disappear quickly?!

Want more info on the history of weather modification, climate modification, and weather warfare?

Check this article out: WEATHER WARFARE 101  I worked hard on it to do justice to this crucial issue.  Thanks for your consideration.  Peace.

2013: Immortal Technique on Life, Struggle & Success (Video)

I started listening to a Immortal Technique a few years ago and was really captivated by his lyrics and overall message.  His words got me researching a lot of topics I previously did not even know existed.  What I like most about Technique is that his words are very carefully chosen and everything he says checks out factually when I research it.  There's nothing more important or respectable than the unadulterated truth.  Much respect to Immortal Technique for that.

Listen to Immortal Technique's revolutionary wisdom on his recent album "The Martyr"...

NY Times "Exposes" Junk Food Industry: Fails to Mention GMO's, MSG, HFCS, Aspartame, Pesticides, Irradiation, or Much of Anything

If the mainstream media was intentionally trying to prove itself worthless, it wouldn't have to do much differently.

Yesterday the NY Times Magazine published a long, rambling, primarily irrelevant article called, "The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food".  Note that the title does not damn the junk food industry whose products are destroying human health, literally killing people, and causing the corrupt medical establishment to flourish.

What does the Times blame for our epidemic of preventable illness? The usual scapegoats: Fat, Sugar, and Salt.  In reality, actual fats, sugars, and salts are essential to human health.  It is the artificial substances masquerading as food, the pesticides, the genetically modified organisms, and the downright toxic additives put in our food that is truly responsible for the decline in human health.

Instead of calling for action or focusing on the broader social implications of a toxic food supply the Times offers its deepest condolences and pity instead.  The magazine cover says it all with the caption: "I feel so sorry for the public" as if they the Times, its writers, and its readers are somehow exempt from the covert poisoning as a means of generating medical revenues and controlling/culling the population.

The #1-rated reader comment on the article says everything else I'm trying to say, so here it is...

Valley Lee, Md.

In this whole very large article, there was not one word about genetically modified food, hybridized wheat or high fructose corn syrup and the science surrounding the addictive attributes of these substances. The science exists, but the media steadfastly refuses to follow up on it. Fat, sugar, salt, etc are not harmful. It is what has been done to our normal food, that has caused our illnesses. Cargill, Monsanto, Kraft, Pillsbury, etc, etc. are all participants in the industrial food system that has made a few generations of humans very sick. You can see a direct connection with the rise of our major modern diseases and the rise of gmo's, hybridized wheat and high fructose corn syrup. Irradiation, preservatives, and other modern methods of food processing, has sealed the coffin on the public's health, with our colons deprived of good bacteria and natural enzymes. It is no wonder our healthcare costs have skyrocketed and the pharms are making a killing.


Obama Admits The US Government Intentionally Manufactures Crises That Harm American Citizens (SOTU 2013 Video)

Watch the video and listen to these fools clap for this crap.  Bear in mind that the two-party political system only exists to give the illusion of choice and that big business interests and the global banking cartel control both the US money supply and political process.

Excerpt from Barack Obomber's State of the Union 2013 (bold highlights are mine)

"I realize that tax reform and entitlement reform won’t be easy. The politics will be hard for both sides. None of us will get 100 percent of what we want. But the alternative will cost us jobs, hurt our economy, and visit hardship on millions of hardworking Americans. So let’s set party interests aside, and work to pass a budget that replaces reckless cuts with smart savings and wise investments in our future. And let’s do it without the brinksmanship that stresses consumers and scares off investors. The greatest nation on Earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufactured crisis to the next. Let’s agree, right here, right now, to keep the people’s government open, pay our bills on time, and always uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America. The American people have worked too hard, for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials cause another."

What is Brinksmanship?  Wikipedia knows... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinkmanship

Brinkmanship (alternately, brinksmanship) is the practice of pushing dangerous events to the verge of—or to the brink of—disaster in order to achieve the most advantageous outcome. It occurs in international politics, foreign policy, labour relations, and (in contemporary settings) military strategy involving the threatened use of nuclear weapons.

This maneuver of pushing a situation with the opponent to the brink succeeds by forcing the opponent to back down and make concessions. This might be achieved throughdiplomatic maneuvers by creating the impression that one is willing to use extreme methods rather than concede. During the Cold War, the threat of nuclear force was often used as such an escalating measure. Adolf Hitler also used brinkmanship conspicuously during his rise to power.

Lee Camp's Moment of Clarity SHOW: Episode 1: Billionaires *NEW!* *NEW!* *NEW!* *NEW!* *NEW!* *NEW!* *NEW!* *NEW!*

Lee Camp is a heck of a comedian in the no-holds-barred tradition of George Carlin.  Lee has been active with Occupy since the protests began and has made several hundred Moment of Clarity videos on assorted topics, helping all of us swallow pills of bitter truth with a candy coating of laughter.  Now Lee has his own SHOW.

Like Lee Camp on Fascbook:
Subscribe to Lee Camp on YouTube:
Check out Lee's website:

Now enjoy Episode 1: BILLIONAIRES from Lee Camp's Moment of Clarity SHOW...

Air Force Veteran Kristen Meghan Exposes Ongoing GeoEngineering Chemtrail Programs at US Military Bases

Twelve year Air Force Veteran Kristen Meghan explains her experiences with chemtrail/geoengineering programs while working as an Industrial Hygenicist at bases here in the United States.  In this great interview with Charlie McGrath of Wide Awake News, Meghan shines light in a lot of the dark corners of the geoengineering issue.

This interview gives a very important first hand glimpse into the massive covert global geoengineering programs. Both the radio host and the interviewee are former military personnel.

Dane Wigington on The Vinny Eastwood Show: GeoEngineering: All Other Environmental Concerns Are Irrelevant (February 19, 2013)

This is a very important interview.  In my opinion, both of these guys are legit and well-informed.  Please listen...

Published on Feb 20, 2013


Vinny's NUTShell: Dane Wigington http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org

Look lets be blunt, if you don't believe in geoengineering or chem trails by now, you're in deep trouble, have no facts on your side and will likely be one of the multitude to die because of them.

Time is short, with many planetary feedback mechanisms being kicked into gear as a direct result of what is being sprayed, we've set off a chain reaction that is releasing methane at an alarming rate, the last time this happened 90% of sea life died, 70% of land creatures also died.

So get off your ass! If you're not out of your chair and spreading public awareness of this issue after listening to this broadcast you ARE part of the problem, next to geoengineering all other environmental concerns are irrelevant, do something now or humanity may not get another shot.

Just don't wig out or go into a crazy rant or you'll do more harm than good!
Subscribe for $1-$5 a month for commercial free archives and exclusive uninterrupted video interviews! only athttp://www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com
For Blushield products that protect you from wireless radiation click here: http://www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com/b...
Watch this video and please share it around!

Our Coming Environmental Catastrophe: Geoengineering and Weather Warfare

When considering our changing climate, it's important to consider all viewpoints.  Greenhouse gasses are NOT the only factor causing our changing climate, and there are important political, economic, and environmental implications if we continue to allow policy to be driven by misconceptions...

Corbett Report Video posted Feb. 14, 2013.


Max Mogren of Oil Free Fun on The Vinny Eastwood Show

2:18:2013: Gonna have to get a better microphone and work on avoiding the cuss words on the radio.  Otherwise, I think it went pretty well...



Evidence of Breakthrough Energy Tech on 9/11: The Dawn of a New Age: Dr. Judy Wood

This is one of the most fascinating and thought-provoking videos I have ever seen. I have nibbled at Dr. Judy Wood's work for the last year, but this is the first full length film of one of her presentations that I have ever seen.

Remember that you shouldn't believe everything you see, read or hear, but it's important to keep an open mind and change your opinions in the presence of new information.

This video presents a lot of information that will be new to many people.  It meshes with my own understanding of suppressed new energy technologies and the potential for their weaponization.  If this video is factual, it contains the key to the dawn of a new age.

Perhaps the dark clouds left by the false flag attacks of 9/11 have a silver lining after all...

Dr Judy Wood at the Breakthrough Energy Movement conference, 2012 Holland from Breakthrough Energy Movement on Vimeo.


All The Wars Are Bankers Wars: Fight The Banks, Not One Another

NOTE from O.F.F.: This is the best video I have seen in a very long time.  Take notes, do your own research, and prove this crucial historical fact to yourself.

I know many people have a great deal of difficulty comprehending just how many wars are started for no other purpose than to force private central banks onto nations, so let me share a few examples, so that you understand why the US Government is mired in so many wars against so many foreign nations. There is ample precedent for this.

The United States fought the American Revolution primarily over King George III's Currency act, which forced the colonists to conduct their business only using printed bank notes borrowed from the Bank of England at interest. After the revolution, the new United States adopted a radically different economic system in which the government issued its own value-based money, so that private banks like the Bank of England were not siphoning off the wealth of the people through interest-bearing bank notes.

"The refusal of King George 3rd to allow the colonies to operate an honest money system, which freed the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, was probably the prime cause of the revolution." -- Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father

But bankers are nothing if not dedicated to their schemes to acquire your wealth, and know full well how easy it is to corrupt a nation's leaders. Just one year after Mayer Amschel Rothschild had uttered his infamous "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws", the bankers succeeded in setting up a new Private Central Bank called the First Bank of the United States, largely through the efforts of the Rothschild's chief US supporter, Alexander Hamilton. Founded in 1791, by the end of its twenty year charter the First Bank of the United States had almost ruined the nation's economy, while enriching the bankers. Congress refused to renew the charter and signaled their intention to go back to a state issued value based currency on which the people paid no interest at all to any banker. This resulted in a threat from Nathan Mayer Rothschild against the US Government, "Either the application for renewal of the charter is granted, or the United States will find itself involved in a most disastrous war." Congress still refused to renew the charter for the First Bank of the United States, whereupon Nathan Mayer Rothschild railed, "Teach those impudent Americans a lesson! Bring them back to colonial status!" Financed by the Rothschild controlled Bank of England, Britain then launched the war of 1812 to recolonize the United States and force them back into the slavery of the Bank of England, or to plunge the United States into so much debt they would be forced to accept a new private central bank. And the plan worked. Even though the War of 1812 was won by the United States, Congress was forced to grant a new charter for yet another private bank issuing the public currency as loans at interest, the Second Bank of the United States. Once again, private bankers were in control of the nation's money supply and cared not who made the laws or how many British and American soldiers had to die for it.

Once again the nation was plunged into debt, unemployment, and poverty by the predations of the private central bank, and in 1832 Andrew Jackson successfully campaigned for his second term as President under the slogan, "Jackson And No Bank!" True to his word, Jackson succeeds in blocking the renewal of the charter for the Second Bank of the United States.
"Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!" -- Andrew Jackson, shortly before ending the charter of the Second Bank of the United States. From the original minutes of the Philadelphia committee of citizens sent to meet with President Jackson (February 1834), according to Andrew Jackson and the Bank of the United States (1928) by Stan V. Henkels

Shortly after President Jackson (the only American President to actually pay off the National Debt) ended the Second Bank of the United States, there was an attempted assassination which failed when both pistols used by the assassin, Richard Lawrence, failed to fire. Lawrence later said that with Jackson dead, "Money would be more plenty."

Of course, the public school system is as subservient to the bankers' wishes to keep certain history from you, just as the corporate media is subservient to Monsanto's wishes to keep the dangers of GMOs from you, and the global warming cult's wishes to conceal from you that the Earth has actually been cooling for the last 16 years. Thus is should come as little surprise that much of the real reasons for the events of the Civil War are not well known to the average American.

When the Confederacy seceded from the United States, the bankers once again saw the opportunity for a rich harvest of debt, and offered to fund Lincoln's efforts to bring the south back into the union, but at 30% interest. Lincoln remarked that he would not free the black man by enslaving the white man to the bankers and using his authority as President, issued a new government currency, the greenback. This was a direct threat to the wealth and power of the central bankers, who quickly responded.

"If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe." -- The London Times responding to Lincoln's decision to issue government Greenbacks to finance the Civil War, rather than agree to private banker's loans at 30% interest.

In 1872 New York bankers sent a letter to every bank in the United States, urging them to fund newspapers that opposed government-issued money (Lincoln's greenbacks).
"Dear Sir: It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers... as will oppose the issuing of greenback paper money, and that you also withhold patronage or favors from all applicants who are not willing to oppose the Government issue of money. Let the Government issue the coin and the banks issue the paper money of the country... [T]o restore to circulation the Government issue of money, will be to provide the people with money, and will therefore seriously affect your individual profit as bankers and lenders." -- Triumphant plutocracy; the story of American public life from 1870 to 1920, by Lynn Wheeler
"It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to circulate as money any length of time, as we cannot control that." -- Triumphant plutocracy; the story of American public life from 1870 to 1920, by Lynn Wheeler

"Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power, and chattel slavery destroyed. This, I and my European friends are in favor of, for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care for the laborer, while the European plan, led on by England, is for capital to control labor by controlling the wages. THIS CAN BE DONE BY CONTROLLING THE MONEY." -- Triumphant plutocracy; the story of American public life from 1870 to 1920, by Lynn Wheeler

Goaded by the private bankers, much of Europe supported the Confederacy against the Union, with the expectation that victory over Lincoln would mean the end of the Greenback. France and Britain considered an outright attack on the United States to aid the confederacy, but were held at bay by Russia, which had just ended the serfdom system and had a state central bank similar to the system the United States had been founded on. Left free of European intervention, the Union won the war, and Lincoln announced his intention to go on issuing greenbacks. Following Lincoln's assassination, the Greenbacks were pulled from circulation and the American people forced to go back to an economy based on bank notes borrowed at interest from the private bankers.

Finally, in 1913, the Private Central Bankers of Europe, in particular the Rothschilds of Great Britain and the Warburgs of Germany, met with their American financial collaborators on Jekyll Island, Georgia to form a new banking cartel with the express purpose of forming the Third Bank of the United States, with the aim of placing complete control of the United States money supply once again under the control of private bankers. Owing to hostility over the previous banks, the name was changed to "The Federal Reserve" system in order to grant the new bank a quasi-governmental image, but in fact it is a privately owned bank, no more "Federal" than Federal Express. Indeed, in 2012, the Federal Reserve successfully rebuffed a Freedom of Information Lawsuit by Bloomberg News on the grounds that as a private banking corporation and not actually a part of the government, the Freedom of Information Act did not apply to the operations of the Federal Reserve. 1913 proved to be a transformative year for the nation's economy, first with the passage of the 16th "income tax" Amendment and the false claim that it had been ratified.
"I think if you were to go back and and try to find and review the ratification of the 16th amendment, which was the internal revenue, the income tax, I think if you went back and examined that carefully, you would find that a sufficient number of states never ratified that amendment." - U.S. District Court Judge James C. Fox, Sullivan Vs. United States, 2003.

Later that same year, and apparently unwilling to risk another questionable amendment, Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act over Christmas holiday 1913, while members of Congress opposed to the measure were at home. This was a very underhanded deal, as the Constitution explicitly vests Congress with the authority to issue the public currency, does not authorize its delegation, and thus should have required a new Amendment to transfer that authority to a private bank. But pass it Congress did, and President Woodrow Wilson signed it as he promised the bankers he would in exchange for generous campaign contributions. Wilson later regretted that decision.
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -- Woodrow Wilson 1919

The next year, World War One started, and it is important to remember that prior to the creation of the Federal Reserve, there was no such thing as a world war.

World War One started between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, but quickly shifted to focus on Germany, whose industrial capacity was seen as an economic threat to Great Britain, who saw the decline of the British Pound as a result of too much emphasis on financial activity to the neglect of agriculture, industrial development, and infrastructure (not unlike the present day United States). Although pre-war Germany had a private central bank, it was heavily restricted and inflation kept to reasonable levels. Under government control, investment was guaranteed to internal economic development, and Germany was seen as a major power. So, in the media of the day, Germany was portrayed as the prime opponent of World War One, and not just defeated, but its industrial base flattened. Following the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was ordered to pay the war costs of all the participating nations, even though Germany had not actually started the war. This amounted to three times the value of all of Germany itself. Germany's private central bank, to whom Germany had gone deeply into debt to pay the costs of the war, broke free of government control, and massive inflation followed (mostly triggered by currency speculators) , permanently trapping the German people in endless debt.

When the Weimar Republic collapsed economically, it opened the door for the National Socialists to take power. Their first financial move was to issue their own state currency which was not borrowed from private central bankers. Freed from having to pay interest on the money in circulation, Germany blossomed and quickly began to rebuild its industry. The media called it "The German Miracle". TIME magazine lionized Hitler for the amazing improvement in life for the German people and the explosion of German industry, and even named him TIME Magazine's Man Of The Year in 1938.

Once again, Germany's industrial output became a threat to Great Britain.

"Should Germany merchandise (do business) again in the next 50 years we have led this war (WW1) in vain." - Winston Churchill in The Times (1919)

"We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not." - Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast)

"Germany becomes too powerful. We have to crush it." - Winston Churchill(November 1936 speaking to US - General Robert E. Wood)

"This war is an English war and its goal is the destruction of Germany." - Winston Churchill (- Autumn 1939 broadcast)

Germany's state-issued value based currency was also a direct threat to the wealth and power of the private central banks, and as early as 1933 they started to organize a global boycott against Germany to strangle this upstart ruler who thought he could break free of private central bankers!

As had been the case in World War One, Great Britain and other nations threatened by Germany's economic power looked for an excuse to go to war, and as public anger in Germany grew over the boycott, Hitler foolishly gave them that excuse. Years later, in a spirit of candor, the real reasons for that war were made clear.

"The war wasn't only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out without doing one shot, but we didn't want to."- Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

"Germany's unforgivable crime before WW2 was its attempt to loosen its economy out of the world trade system and to build up an independent exchange system from which the world-finance couldn't profit anymore. ...We butchered the wrong pig." -Winston Churchill (The Second World War - Bern, 1960)

As a side note, we need to step back before WW2 and recall Marine Major General Smedley Butler. In 1933, Wall Street bankers and financiers had bankrolled the successful coups by both Hitler and Mussolini. Brown Brothers Harriman in New York was financing Hitler right up to the day war was declared with Germany. And they decided that a fascist dictatorship in the United States based on the one on Italy would be far better for their business interests than Roosevelt's "New Deal" which threatened massive wealth re-distribution to recapitalize the working and middle class of America. So the Wall Street tycoons recruited General Butler to lead the overthrow of the US Government and install a "Secretary of General Affairs" who would be answerable to Wall Street and not the people, would crush social unrest and shut down all labor unions. General Butler pretended to go along with the scheme but then exposed the plot to Congress. Congress, then as now in the pocket of the Wall Street bankers, refused to act. When Roosevelt learned of the planned coup he demanded the arrest of the plotters, but the plotters simply reminded Roosevelt that if any one of them were sent to prison, their friends on Wall Street would deliberatly collapse the still-fragile economy and blame Roosevelt for it. Roosevelt was thus unable to act until the start of WW2, at which time he prosecuted many of the plotters under the Trading With The Enemy act. The Congressional minutes into the coup were finally released in 1967 and became the inspiration for the movie, "Seven Days in May" but with the true financial villains erased from the script.

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service as a member of our country's most agile military force -- the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from second lieutenant to Major General. And during that period I spent more of my time being a high--class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. "I suspected I was just a part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all members of the military profession I never had an original thought until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of the higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service. Thus I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-12. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that the Standard Oil went its way unmolested. During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. I was rewarded with honors, medals and promotion. Looking back on it, I feel I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three city districts. I operated on three continents." -- General Smedley Butler, former US Marine Corps Commandant,1935

As President, John F. Kennedy understood the predatory nature of private central banking. He understood why Andrew Jackson fought so hard to end the Second Bank of the United States. So Kennedy wrote and signed Executive Order 11110 which ordered the US Treasury to issue a new public currency, the United States Note.

Kennedy's United States Notes were not borrowed form the Federal Reserve but created by the US Government and backed by the silver stockpiles held by the US Government. It represented a return to the system of economics the United States had been founded on, and was perfectly legal for Kennedy to do. All told, some four and one half billion dollars went into public circulation, eroding interest payments to the Federal Reserve and loosening their control over the nation. Five months later John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas Texas, and the United States Notes pulled from circulation and destroyed (except for samples held by collectors). John J. McCloy, President of the Chase Manhattan Bank, and President of the World Bank, was named to the Warren Commission, presumably to make certain the banking dimensions behind the assassination were concealed from the public.

As we enter the eleventh year of what future history will most certainly describe as World War Three, we need to examine the financial dimensions behind the wars.

Towards the end of World War Two, when it became obvious that the allies were going to win and dictate the post war environment, the major world economic powers met at Bretton Woods, a luxury resort in New Hampshire in July of 1944, and hammered out the Bretton Woods agreement for international finance. The British Pound lost its position as the global trade and reserve currency to the US dollar (part of the price demanded by Roosevelt in exchange for the US entry into the war). Absent the economic advantages of being the world's "go-to" currency, Britain was forced to nationalize the Bank of England in 1946. The Bretton Woods agreement, ratified in 1945, in addition to making the dollar the global reserve and trade currency, obligated the signatory nations to tie their currencies to the dollar. The nations that ratified Bretton Woods did so on two conditions. The first was that the Federal Reserve would refrain from over-printing the dollar as a means to loot real products and produce from other nations in exchange for ink and paper; basically an imperial tax. That assurance was backed up by the second requirement, which was that the US dollar would always be convertible to gold at $35 per ounce.

Of course, the Federal Reserve, being a private bank and not answerable to the US Government, did start overprinting paper dollars, and much of the perceived prosperity of the 1950s and 1960s was the result of foreign nations' obligations to accept the paper notes as being worth gold at the rate of $35 an ounce. Then in 1970, France looked at the huge pile of paper notes sitting in their vaults, for which real French products like wine and cheese had been traded, and notified the United States government that they would exercise their option under Bretton Woods to return the paper notes for gold at the $35 per ounce exchange rate. Of course, the United States had nowhere near the gold to redeem the paper notes, so on August 15th, 1971, Richard Nixon "temporarily" suspended the gold convertibility of the US Federal Reserve Notes. This "Nixon shock" effectively ended Bretton Woods and many global currencies started to delink from the US dollar. Worse, since the United States had collateralized their loans with the nation's gold reserves, it quickly became apparent that the US Government did not in fact have enough gold to cover the outstanding debts. Foreign nations began to get very nervous about their loans to the US and understandably were reluctant to loan any additional money to the United States without some form of collateral. So Richard Nixon started the environmental movement, with the EPA and its various programs such as "wilderness zones", Roadless areas", Heritage rivers", "Wetlands", all of which took vast areas of public lands and made them off limits to the American people who were technically the owners of those lands. But Nixon had little concern for the environment and the real purpose of this land grab under the guise of the environment was to pledge those pristine lands and their vast mineral resources as collateral on the national debt. The plethora of different programs was simply to conceal the true scale of how much American land was being pledged to foreign lenders as collateral on the government's debts; eventually almost 25% of the nation itself.

With open lands for collateral already in short supply, the US Government embarked on a new program to shore up sagging international demand for the dollar. The United States approached the world's oil producing nations, mostly in the Middle East, and offered them a deal. In exchange for only selling their oil for dollars, the United States would guarantee the military safety of those oil-rich nations. The oil rich nations would agree to spend and invest their US paper dollars inside the United States, in particular in US Treasury Bonds, redeemable through future generations of US taxpayers. The concept was labeled the "petrodollar". In effect, the US, no longer able to back the dollar with gold, was now backing it with oil. Other peoples' oil. And that necessity to keep control over those oil nations to prop up the dollar has shaped America's foreign policy in the region ever since.

But as America's manufacturing and agriculture has declined, the oil producing nations faced a dilemma. Those piles of US Federal Reserve notes were not able to purchase much from the United States because the United States had little (other than real estate) anyone wanted to buy. Europe's cars and aircraft were superior and less costly, while experiments with GMO food crops led to nations refusing to buy US food exports. Israel's constant belligerence against its neighbors caused them to wonder if the US could actually keep their end of the petrodollar arrangement. Oil producing nations started to talk of selling their oil for whatever currency the purchasers chose to use. Iraq, already hostile to the United States following Desert Storm, demanded the right to sell their oil for Euros in 2000 and in 2002, the United Nations agreed to allow it under the "Oil for food" program instituted following Desert Storm. One year later the United States re-invaded Iraq, lynched Saddam Hussein, and placed Iraq's oil back on the world market only for US dollars.

The clear US policy shift following 9-11, away from being an impartial broker of peace in the Mideast to one of unquestioned support for Israel's aggressions only further eroded confidence in the Petrodollar deal and even more oil producing nations started openly talking of oil trade for other global currencies.

Over in Libya, Muammar Gaddafi had instituted a state-owned central bank and a value based trade currency, the Gold Dinar. Gaddafi announced that Libya's oil was for sale, but only for the Gold Dinar. Other African nations, seeing the rise of the Gold Dinar and the Euro, even as the US dollar continued its inflation-driven decline, flocked to the new Libyan currency for trade. This move had the potential to seriously undermine the global hegemony of the dollar. French President Nicolas Sarkozy reportedly went so far as to call Libya a “threat” to the financial security of the world. So, the United States invaded Libya, brutally murdered Qaddafi ( the object lesson of Saddam's lynching not being enough of a message, apparently), imposed a private central bank, and returned Libya's oil output to dollars only. The gold that was to have been made into the Gold Dinars is, as of last report, unaccounted for.

According to General Wesley Clark, the master plan for the "dollarification" of the world's oil nations included seven targets, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran (Venezuela, which dared to sell their oil to China for the Yuan, is a late addition). What is notable about the original seven nations originally targeted by the US is that none of them are members of the Bank for International Settlements, the private central bankers private central bank, located in Switzerland. This meant that these nations were deciding for themselves how to run their nations' economies, rather than submit to the international private banks.

Now the bankers' gun sights are on Iran, which dares to have a government central bank and sell their oil for whatever currency they choose. The war agenda is, as always, to force Iran's oil to be sold only for dollars and to force them to accept a privately owned central bank.

The German government recently asked for the return of some of their gold bullion from the Bank of France and the New York Federal Reserve. France has said it will take 5 years to return Germany's gold. The United States has said they will need 8 years to return Germany's gold. This suggests strongly that the Bank of France and the NY Federal Reserve have used the deposited gold for other purposes, and they are scrambling to find new gold to cover the shortfall and prevent a gold run. So it is inevitable that suddenly France invades Mali, ostensibly to combat Al Qaeda, with the US joining in. Mali just happens to be one of the world's largest gold producers with gold accounting for 80% of Mali exports. War for the bankers does not get more obvious than that!

You have been raised by a public school system and media that constantly assures you that the reasons for all these wars and assassinations are many and varied. The US claims to bring democracy to the conquered lands (they haven't; the usual result of a US overthrow is the imposition of a dictatorship, such as the 1953 CIA overthrow of Iran's democratically elected government of Mohammad Mosaddegh and the imposition of the Shah, or the 1973 CIA overthrow of Chile's democratically elected government of President Salvador Allende, and the imposition of Augusto Pinochet), or to save a people from a cruel oppressor, revenge for 9-11, or that tired worn-out catch all excuse for invasion, weapons of mass destruction. Assassinations are always passed off as "crazed lone nuts" to obscure the real agenda.

The real agenda is simple. It is enslavement of the people by creation of a false sense of obligation. That obligation is false because the Private Central Banking system, by design, always creates more debt than money with which to pay that debt. Private Central Banking is not science, it is a religion; a set of arbitrary rules created to benefit the priesthood, meaning the owners of the Private Central Bank. The fraud persists, with often lethal results, because the people are tricked into believing that this is the way life is suppoed to be and no alternative exists or should be dreamt of. The same was true of two earlier systems of enslavement, Rule by Divine Right and Slavery, both systems built to trick people into obedience, and both now recognized by modern civilizatyion as illegitimate. Now we are entering a time in human history where we will recognize that rule by debt, or rule by Private Central Bankers issuing the public currency as a loan at interest, is equally illegitimate. It only works as long as people allow themselves to believe that this is the way life is supposed to be.

But understand this above all; Private Central Banks do not exist to serve the people, the community, or the nation. Private Central Banks exist to serve their owners, to make them rich beyond the dreams of Midas and all for the cost of ink, paper, and the right bribe to the right official.

Behind all these wars, all these assassinations, the hundred million horrible deaths from all the wars lies a single policy of dictatorship. The private central bankers allow rulers to rule only on the condition that the people of a nation be enslaved to the private central banks. Failing that, said ruler will be killed, and their nation invaded by those other nations enslaved to private central banks.

The so-called "clash of civilizations" we read about on the corporate media is really a war between banking systems, with the private central bankers forcing themselves onto the rest of the world, no matter how many millions must die for it. Indeed the constant hatemongering against Muslims lies in a simple fact. Like the ancient Christians (prior to the Knights Templars private banking system) , Muslims forbid usury, or the lending of money at interest. And that is the reason our government and media insist they must be killed or converted. They refuse to submit to currencies issued at interest. They refuse to be debt slaves.

So off to war your children must go, to spill their blood for the money-junkies' gold. We barely survived the last two world wars. In the nuclear/bioweapon age, are the private central bankers willing to risk incinerating the whole planet just to feed their greed?

Apparently so.

Flag waving and propaganda aside, all modern wars are wars by and for the private bankers, fought and bled for by third parties unaware of the true reason they are expected to gracefully be killed and croppled for. The process is quite simple. As soon as the Private Central Bank issues its currency as a loan at interest, the public is forced deeper and deeper into debt. When the people are reluctant to borrow any more, that is when the Keynesian economists demand the government borrow more to keep the pyramid scheme working. When both the people and government refuse to borrow any more, that is when wars are started, to plunge everyone even deeper into debt to pay for the war, then after the war to borrow more to rebuild. When the war is over, the people have about the same as they did before the war, except the graveyards are far larger and everyone is in debt to the private bankers for the next century. This is why Brown Brothers Harriman in New York was funding the rise of Adolf Hitler.

As long as Private Central Banks are allowed to exist, inevitably as the night follows day there will be poverty, hopelessness, and millions of deaths in endless World Wars, until the Earth itself is sacrificed in flames to Mammon.

The path to true peace on Earth lies in the abolishment of all private central banking everywhere, and a return to the state-issued value-based currencies that allow nations and people to become prosperous.