Web Research Links for the Week of 9/18/17

Note: These links are posted at the top of the page as the week progresses. Links from previous weeks can be found under the “Current Quicklinx” button above. If you have a link you would like to share, please put it into a comment.

Blueprint for water ‘control’? Pol says EPA made secret maps for new regulatory push – by Judson Berger – http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/27/blueprint-for-water-control-pol-says-epa-secretly-created-maps-for-new.html – “The EPA denied the maps were drawn to chart areas subject to the Clean Water Act. The agency said they were only drawn to identify the “extent and location” of waterways and other details.”

Hurricane Harvey & the Weather Terrorists from Land, Sea and Air – (35 min)

From the Mother-May-I? Desk: USA Asks Russia For Meeting To Discuss ‘Future Of Deir Ezzor’ – Russian Mediahttps://southfront.org/usa-asks-russia-meeting-discuss-future-deir-ezzor-russian-media/

2 Cargo Planes With Supplies And Equipment Arrive Deir Ezzor Airport – Syrian MoDhttps://southfront.org/2-cargo-planes-supplies-equipment-arrive-deir-ezzor-airport-syrian-mod/

Israeli Website Claims ISIS Commander Revealed As Mossad Agent – by Whitney Webb – http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47835.htm – “Given the reports of Benjamin’s arrest, last year’s strange-seeming statement by Israel’s military intelligence chief, Maj. Gen. Herzi Halevy, makes more sense. Halevy had stated that Israel does not want to see Daesh defeated and also had expressed concern about the recent offensives against Daesh territory, lamenting the “most difficult” situation the group had found itself in at the time. He further added that Israel would do “all we can so as to not find ourselves in such a situation” where Daesh faces defeat… In light of Benjamin’s arrest, part of Halevy’s concern for Daesh may have been born out of the fear that a Daesh defeat could put the lives of Mossad agents, as well as years of their work within Daesh, at risk.”

Investigation: White Helmets Committing Acts Of Terror Across Syria – The supposedly Syrian NGO White Helmets were established in Turkey, not in Syria. They are largely trained in Turkey and Jordan, not inside Syria. They were established in March 2013 by a British ex-military officer with $300,000 in seed funding from Japan, the U.K. and the U.S. – by Vanessa Beeley – http://www.mintpressnews.com/investigation-white-helmets-committing-acts-terror-across-syria/231597/

Delingpole: Climate Alarmists Finally Admit ‘We Were Wrong About Global Warming’ – by James Delingpole – http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/09/19/delingpole-climate-alarmists-finally-admit-we-were-wrong-about-global-warming/ – “That’s why Benny Peiser, of the Global Warming Policy Foundation says, this is a “landmark” moment in the history of great climate change scare… ‘It’s the first official confirmation we’ve had that CO2 is not as big a driver of climate change as the computer models have claimed; and it’s the first official admission that the planet is not warming dangerously.’ ”

A New Provocation: US Establishes First Permanent Military Base Inside of Israel – by Patrick Henningsen – http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/09/19/new-provocation-us-establishes-first-permanent-military-base-inside-israel/ – The US base may also be used to launch air sorties to defend Israel’s recent illegal annexation of the part of the Golan Heights, land which it has managed to take under the cover of the Syrian conflict. Recently, Israel has managed to pry away this contested land from Syria with the help of Al Nusra terrorists on the ground, after they previously chased out UNDOF Peacekeepers which had been positioned there since 1976.

Scientists And Physicians Send Appeal About 5G Rollout And Health Dangers To The European Union – by Catherine Frompovich – https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/scientists-physicians-send-appeal-5g-rollout-health-dangers-european-union.html – The reason for the appeal is “RF/EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment,” but 5G has not been investigated fully for potential health hazards and environmental impact by INDEPENDENT scientists, rather than industry scientists who apparently would rubber stamp 5G similarly as the other generations of telecommunications updates have been.”

Nearly 1,000 US Troops in Syria Are Currently Under Attack by Russians – by Darius Shahtahmasebi – http://theantimedia.org/us-troops-syria-under-attack-russians/ – “The U.S. does not have a legal basis to operate within Syria; even former Secretary of State John Kerry has admitted as much… Never letting the nuisance that is the law get in the way of the American military, it seems as though the U.S. may continue pursuing this strategy, which will ultimately bring the American air force and the Russian air force together to bomb the same territory with complete polar opposite intentions while supporting rival forces on the ground… This is easily one of the biggest geopolitical events in recent times, taking place right under our very noses. Yet it is not even headline news on any of the corporate media outlets’ home pages right now (seriously, check for yourself).”

BREAKING: Israeli warplanes have struck the Syria-Lebanon border – This comes weeks after Hezbollah liberated Syria-Lebanon borderlands from ISIS and al-Qaeda terrorists – by Adam Garrie – http://theduran.com/breaking-israeli-warplanes-struck-syria-lebanon-border/”

US Coalition Announces They’ll Defend ISIS by Attacking Syrian Army if They Go After Them – US-backed forces say they will not allow Assad regime to cross Euphrates River to take additional ISIS territory in Deir ez-Zor – by Matt Agorist – http://thefreethoughtproject.com/us-coalition-isis-syria/ – “Bouthaina Shaaban, an aide to Assad, said they are ready to fight the SDF to free the rest of their country… ‘Whether it’s the Syrian Democratic Forces, or Daesh (Islamic State) or any illegitimate foreign force in the country … we will fight and work against them so our land is freed completely from any aggressor,’ she said in an interview with Hezbollah’s Al Manar TV… ‘I‘m not saying this will happen tomorrow … but this is the strategic intent,’ she said.”

HPV Vaccination: Sacrificial Virgins: Part I – Not for the greater good (13 min)

Google, Facebook and Twitter told to take down terror content within two hours or face fines – by Christopher Hop & Kate McCann – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/19/google-facebook-twitter-told-take-terror-content-within-two/ – “Theresa May, the Prime Minister, will on Wednesday urge internet firms to go ‘further and faster’ to stop the spread of terrorist material – including the development of new technology to stop it from ever appearing on the web in the first place.” (emphasis added)

EXPOSED: Hillary Clinton Moved 800K From Her Campaign To Help Fund ANTIFA – by Lucian Wintrich – http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/09/exposed-hillary-clinton-moved-800k-campaign-help-fund-antifa/ – “In building investigations, Daily Caller first discovered that Hillary transferred a mass sum of money from her campaign over to Onward Together: Clinton transferred $800,000 from her failed 2016 presidential campaign to Onward Together shortly before announcing the group’s launch in May, documents the campaign filed with the FEC reveal.”

Can We Survive Technology? The Origin of SRM Geoengineering and the Modern Theory of Man-made Global Warming – by Peter Kirby – https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/can-survive-technology-origin-srm-geoengineering-modern-theory-man-made-global-warming.html – “Ten years after the detonations of the world’s first atomic bombs and the subsequent Japanese surrender, and two years before his death, Fortune magazine published Johnny von Neuman’s “Can We Survive Technology?” It is undoubtedly the first significant mention of the SRM geoengineering thesis and arguably the first mention of the modern theory of man-made global warming… It is interesting to note that the first words written at the top of the first page read, “The New Goals – VI.” If one glances at this phrase, one might read ‘The New Gods’ as the eye will have a tendency to amalgamate the ‘a’ and the ‘l’ in the word ‘Goals,’ turning these two letters into a ‘d’ and therefore forming the word ‘Gods.’ Maybe this is a subliminal message meant to deify von Neumann. And make no mistake, at the time, the world was standing in awe.”

UN deadlock on Ukraine peacekeepers – Ukraine rejects Putin proposal for UN peacekeepers to protect OSCE observers on conflict contact line – by Alexander Mercouris – http://theduran.com/un-deadlock-ukraine-peacekeepers/

From the If-You-Read-One-Article-This-Week Desk: Russian special forces repel a US-planned attack in Syria, denounce the USA and issue a stark warning – by The Saker – http://thesaker.is/russian-special-forces-repel-a-us-commanded-attack-in-syria-denounce-the-usa-and-issue-a-stark-warning/ – “This is unprecedented on many levels. First, the Russians clearly believe that this attempt to kill or capture a platoon of the Russian military police was planned by the United States. The fact that they are making this accusation officially shows the degree of irritation felt by the Russians about the duplicity of the Americans. Second, this is the first time, at least to my knowledge, that Russian Spetsnaz forces had to be sent in to rescue a surrounded Russian subunit. All Spetsnaz operators survived, but three of them were wounded in the operation (the Russians are not saying how badly). The close air support by very low flying SU-25 aircraft was obviously coordinated by Spetsnaz forward air controllers and probably saved the day. In other words, this was a close call and things could have ended much more badly (just imagine what the Takfiri crazies would have done, on video, to any captured Russian serviceman!).” (emphasis added)

Researchers Connect a Human Mind to the Internet for the First Time Ever – by Jake Anderson – https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/researchers-connect-human-mind-internet-first-time-ever.html – Researchers say the project could provide valuable information for future deep learning algorithms and could even assist Musk’s endeavors in creating true BMI. Many futurists believe that as the impact and everyday importance of the Internet grows, it is inevitable that humans will merge the physical world with online virtual environments, ushering in a generation of enhanced augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and a synthesis of the two that some call Mixed Reality.

Federal Reserve Will Continue Cutting Economic Life Support – by Brandon Smith – https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/federal-reserve-will-continue-cutting-economic-life-support.html – “The process that the Federal Reserve has undertaken has been a long and arduous one cloaked in disinformation. It is a process of dismantlement. Through unprecedented stimulus measures, the central bank has conjured perhaps the largest stock and bond bubbles in history, not to mention a bubble to end all bubbles in the U.S. dollar.”

Judicial Reform Activist and Attorney Abducted by Police While Broadcasting – by Janet Phelan – https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/judicial-reform-activist-attorney-abducted-police-broadcasting.html – “The video reveals an obviously anxious Ostrowski stating he had just seen a Wilkes-Barre police officer climbing over his fence. He says, ‘I am staying on Facebook live here til someone pulls me off the air.’.. ‘Andy Ostrowski has done nothing wrong to anyone,’ he says on the video. ‘Andy Ostrowski has done nothing but hit enter on emails and things on Facebook.’ At that juncture, Ostrowski suddenly stated that two police officers had just entered his house, wearing gloves and carrying tasers In the background, one can hear the officers ordering him to stand up while he repeatedly asks for to see the warrant. One then hears the off-camera officer saying he has a warrant to take him into custody for a mental health evaluation. The camera then goes dark.”

Ex-CIA agent tweets article blaming Jews for US wars, then apologizes – Valerie Plame Wilson links to piece called ‘America’s Jews are driving America’s wars,’ then says she is of ‘Jewish decent,’ finally says she made a ‘doozy’ of a mistake – https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-cia-agent-tweets-article-blaming-jews-for-us-wars-then-apologizes/

The Article that Valerie Plame Wilson was attacked for Tweeting: America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars – by Philip Giraldi – http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/americas-jews-are-driving-americas-wars/ – “I spoke recently at a conference on America’s war party where afterwards an elderly gentleman came up to me and asked, ‘Why doesn’t anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room? Nobody has mentioned Israel in this conference and we all know it’s American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for Netanyahu? Shouldn’t we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?’ ”

Sergey Lavrov offers Russia’s point-for-point rebuttal of Donald Trump’s UN speech – by Adam Garrie – http://theduran.com/sergey-lavrov-offers-russias-point-for-point-rebuttal-of-donald-trumps-un-speech/ – “Turkish Sultan Erdogan’s security guards beat protesters during NYC speech (Video) – Erdogan referred to the American protesters as “terrorists” – by Alex Christoforou – “The violence began after Lucas Chapman, an American and former YPG volunteer fighter screamed: ‘Murderer! You’re a terrorist, get out of my country!’ in the middle of Erdogan’s speech… This isn’t the first time Erdogan’s thugs have beaten up American protesters on American soil.”

Ohio State University Tells Students In ‘Privilege Workshop’ Only Whites Are Racisthttp://www.thedailysheeple.com/ohio-state-university-tells-students-in-privilege-workshop-only-whites-are-racist_092017 – “Ohio State University’s “Privilege Workshop,” tells students that not only are white people the only ones who can be racist but that they also cannot be victims of racism. The workshop is apparently to educate white students about their privilege and how to not ‘act racist.’ ”

FL Residents Warned They’ll Be Ticketed for Hurricane-Damaged Homeshttp://theantimedia.org/fl-hurricane-damaged-homes-ticketed/ – “But Perez stopped laughing when the official told him he would be writing up a report and would be back to check on the property. Perez told WSVN that the man said he’d ‘have to write me a fine’ if the fence wasn’t up to code by then… ‘At the time this officer was out here, we didn’t have power, we didn’t have food, we didn’t have ice. He is crazy, ridiculous,’ Perez said, adding that ‘it’s not like I can go to Home Depot’ because all the stores were closed.”

Long List Of Weather Control Patents Prove Technology Exists To Manipulate Storms – by Mac Slavo – http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/long-list-of-weather-control-patents-prove-technology-exists-to-manipulate-storms_09212017

Israeli Forces Struck Damascus International Airport. Syrian Air Defense Downed Israeli Drone – Reportshttps://southfront.org/israeli-forces-struck-damascus-international-airport-syrian-air-defense-downed-israeli-drone-reports/ – “Early on Friday (Sept. 22), the Israeli Air Force struck a target in the Damascus International Airport, according to pro-opposition sources and the Israeli media.”

SDF Shelled Government Troops Crossing Euphrates. 9 Soldiers Killed – Unconfirmedhttps://southfront.org/sdf-shelled-government-troops-crossing-euphrates-9-soldiers-killed-unconfirmed/

The US Has New Red Line in Syria — And It’s Ridiculous – by Darius Shahtahmasebi – http://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/world/us-new-red-line-syria-ridiculous/ – “The U.S. media has also downplayed the fact that Russia is backing one side of this conflict and the U.S. is backing another — even though this emerging conflict puts 900 U.S. personnel directly at risk. What happens if and when the Syrian army decides it wants to defend itself from the U.S.-backed forces? Will the Russian and American air forces collide – or will the situation be successfully de-escalated?”

LAVROV: Russia will not allow a partition of the Syrian Arab Republic – Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has addressed journalists at the UN in a wide ranging press conference – by Adam Garrie – http://theduran.com/lavrov-russia-will-not-allow-a-partition-of-the-syrian-arab-republic/

US-backed Forces Push For Another Oil Field While ISIS Attacks Syrian Army Near Deir Ezzorhttps://southfront.org/us-backed-forces-push-for-another-oil-field-while-isis-attacks-syrian-army-near-deir-ezzor/ – “Meanwhile, ISIS continued fierce attacks against government forces in Khsham village and Saqr Island east of Deir Ezzor city. The ISIS attacks don’t allow government troops to develop momentum on the oil-rich eastern bank of the river… Earlier this, the Russian Defense Ministry announced that it has observed almost no fighting between ISIS and the SDF.”

The Killing of History ~John Pilgerhttp://21stcenturywire.com/2017/09/22/killing-history-john-pilger/ – “The sheer energy and moral persistence of these great movements largely succeeded; by 1987 Reagan had negotiated with Mikhail Gorbachev an Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that effectively ended the Cold War. Where are the ghosts of the great anti-war demonstrations that took over Washington in the 1970s? Where is the equivalent of the Freeze Movement that filled the streets of Manhattan in the 1980s, demanding that President Reagan withdraw battlefield nuclear weapons from Europe?.. Today, according to secret NATO documents obtained by the German newspaper, Suddeutsche Zetung, this vital treaty is likely to be abandoned as “nuclear targeting planning is increased”. The German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel has warned against ‘repeating the worst mistakes of the Cold War … All the good treaties on disarmament and arms control from Gorbachev and Reagan are in acute peril. Europe is threatened again with becoming a military training ground for nuclear weapons. We must raise our voice against this.’.. But not in America. The thousands who turned out for Senator Bernie Sanders’ “revolution” in last year’s presidential campaign are collectively mute on these dangers. That most of America’s violence across the world has been perpetrated not by Republicans, or mutants like Trump, but by liberal Democrats, remains a taboo.”

Florida Supreme Court Rules Police May Detain Passengers During Traffic Stops – by Aaron Kesel – https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/florida-supreme-court-rules-police-may-detain-passengers.html

Syria – Russia Accusing U.S. Of Attacks, Abduction Attempts, Team-play With Al-Qaeda – by Moon of Alabama – http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/09/syria-russia-accuses-us-of-attacks-direct-coordination-with-al-qaeda.html#more – Note: Great comments below article

E.U. to Trump: ‘We’re Not Renegotiating Iran Nuclear Deal’ – Israel Not Happy – by Patrick Henningsen – http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/09/21/eu-trump-we-are-not-renegotiating-iran-nuclear-deal-parties-compliant/ – “The desire to obliterate Obama’s mark on history may be something else that Trump and Netanyahu share. The Israeli leader had an acrimonious relationship with Obama, who successfully fended off Netanyahu’s bid to derail the Iran deal in the US Congress two years ago.”

Spanish prosecutor seeks sedition charges for leaders of Catalan protests – by Hannah Strange – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/22/spanish-prosecutor-seeks-sedition-charges-leaders-catalan-protests/ – “The Spanish National Court was asked to investigated alleged sedition during protests that broke out across the city during a sweeping round of raids targeting pro-independence leaders on Wednesday. The crime carries a charge of up to 15 years in prison.”

Homeless man Said Houston Homeless Shelter was caught killing Homeless people

The Kurdish Question: Why Federalization In Syria And The Creation Of A Kurdistan Is A Very Bad Idea – by Brandon Turbeville – https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/the-kurdish-question-why-federalization-in-syria-and-the-creation-of-a-kurdistan-is-a-very-bad-idea.html – “This propaganda narrative has continued until today where it is now considered almost a heresy to suggest that the YPG is not a freedom fighting brigade that guarantees everyone’s rights. To suggest that there should not be a Kurdish state carved out of Syria is to subject oneself to the onslaught of accusations as being pro-Erdogan and/or racist. There is a reason behind the push to lionize the YPG, however, that the Western media is promoting and that the alternative media has become obviously blinded to.”

Harvard Study Proves Apple Slows Down old iPhones to Sell Millions of New Modelshttp://ourfuturesucks.com/2017/09/22/harvard-study-proves-apple-slows-down-old-iphones-to-sell-millions-of-new-models/Note: This article originally appeared at: http://www.anongroup.org/harvard-study-iphones/– where the link now gets a 404-Not Found error… hmmm

Deepwater Horizon Gulf Oil Spill And The Corexit Oil Dispersant Health Problems Confirmed – by Catherine J. Frompovich – https://www.naturalblaze.com/2017/09/deepwater-horizon-gulf-oil-spill-corexit-oil-dispersant-health-problems-confirmed.html – “But Judge Barbier ruled that if he were to permit the plaintiffs’ claims, “then, during the next substantial spill or ‘spill of national significance,’ the threat of liability might cause the manufacturer of dispersant X to refuse to provide its product, even though the FOSC determined that dispersant X should be used.”.. Ecolab, a water, hygiene and energy technology business that is the parent company of Nalco, expressed gratification with Tuesday’s decision.” – Comment: Easy to see who actually rules

Iran President Hassan Rouhani Speech to UN General Assembly, 9/20/17 (24 min)

Why is the wisdom expressed here by Rouhani belittled and attacked by the U.S./Nato/Zionist Empire?

US special ops forces & hardware spotted at ISIS positions north of Deir ez-Zor – Russian MoDhttps://www.rt.com/news/404365-us-special-forces-isis/ – “The newly released images ‘clearly show that US special ops are stationed at the outposts previously set up by ISIS militants.’.. ‘Despite that the US strongholds being located in the ISIS areas, no screening patrol has been organized at them,’ the Russian Ministry of Defense said… This could mean that the US military staff “feel absolutely safe” in the area which is held by the terrorists, the ministry of defense stated.”

 

Advertisements

The New Manhattan Project: Ongoing Research Reveals the Roots

The New Manhattan Project: Ongoing Research Reveals the Roots of Global Climate Control and the Massive Program Filling the Skies with Chemical Spray

by Bruce Tanner

On April 29, Peter A. Kirby did a presentation (video below) in San Francisco, outlining some of his research and theories on the Chemtrails we see in the sky above us almost every day in most parts of the Western world, and on how they got there.

In the Summer of 2016, Kirby published his comprehensive Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project. For Peter, this marked the end of Phase 1 of what he sees as a long-term research project to document one of the most ambitious, and potentially devastating, scientific and industrial projects ever conceived by man. In his book, and in the lecture below, he outlines many, many of the institutions and documented players in the project, each of which has a past and a paper trail that can give us a deeper look into what’s been done and where we may be going. Peter has good reason to compare this with the gigantic and covert venture by the U.S. Deep State to create the Atom Bomb during WWII.

Starting in 2009, he began digging into books, magazines, libraries, government reports and the Internet to find information to explain the officially denied and yet in-your-face program of enormously extensive spraying of chemicals from planes being seen and documented all over the world. By the time Kirby started his research, there was, as he says in his book, already a problem, not of too little information but of too much. There were dozens of books and documents covering various aspects of a project that was obviously too big to sweep under the rug. But there was nothing that tied it all together and got to the bottom of what was going on.

Peter found, though, that there were smoking guns all along the trails of evidence, many in government and research papers, in professional journals, and in unbelievably candid statements made by scientists and project leaders, that piqued his curiosity and lead him deeper on the trail. He shares all this material, and his deductions from it in Chemtrails Exposed and in this video presentation.

Was the 1933 Berlin Reichstag fire a False Flag or not?

Today on TomatoBubble.com Mike King posted an article claiming vehemently that the Reichstag fire was really set by the partially blind leftist foreigner Marinus van der Lubbe, who was beheaded for the crime, and that anyone stating otherwise was lying. So I did a few searches and came up with the three articles below:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1310995/Historians-find-proof-that-Nazis-burnt-Reichstag.html

Historians find ‘proof’ that Nazis burnt Reichstag

By Tony Paterson in Berlin – 15 Apr 2001

THE first documentary evidence has emerged to support the view that the Nazis started the 1933 Reichstag fire that Hitler used as a pretext to establish a dictatorship.

While historians have agreed that there is no substance to Nazi claims that German Communists were to blame for the blaze, there has also been a lack of evidence to back the widely held belief that Hitler’s supporters burnt down the parliament building in Berlin.

After poring over 50,000 pages of hitherto unexamined documents from former East German and Soviet archives, four leading German historians have now concluded that the fire was a Nazi plot. Marinus van der Lubbe, 24, a pro-Communist Dutch labourer, was beheaded by the Nazis after admitting that he started the blaze alone to encourage a workers’ uprising.

The news magazine Der Spiegel backed this version of events in the 1960s after a wide-ranging investigation. Now, however, the four historians argue that Der Spiegel’s coverage was part of a cover-up by Nazi sympathisers to protect the culprits from prosecution. Their findings put them at odds with other leading academics.

They base their case on remarks by Adolf Rall, a thief and Nazi stormtrooper, whose body was found in woods near Berlin in November 1933. Rall is said to have told prosecutors of a meeting of the SA stormtroopers during which the SA leader, Karl Ernst, ordered them to enter the Reichstag through a tunnel and sprinkle flammable liquid inside.

Ernst is said to have told his men that an excuse was needed to begin attacking Communists. Hitler used the fire to justify the arrest and torture of 25,000 Left-wing activists and to pass an emergency decree establishing absolute Nazi authority.

According to the historians, a former stormtrooper working in the jail where Rall was serving a sentence, heard of his statement and tipped off the SA. Its leaders are then said to have arranged for the statements to be destroyed by accomplices in the prosecutors’ office and for him to be murdered.

His remarks however are said to have been referred to in other papers found in the archives. The four historians – Hersch Fischler, Jurgen Schmaedeke, Alexander Bahar and Wilfred Kugel – say Nazi complicity in the blaze was kept secret by ex-Nazi journalists after the war.

Der Spiegel’s investigation in the 1960s was led by the historical researcher Fritz Tobias. His findings have been backed by the historian Hans Mommsen and are supported by one of his British counterparts, Ian Kershaw, in his recent work Hitler 1889-1936: Hubris.

The historians – writing in the journal Historische Zeitschrift – accuse Mr Tobias of “wanting to dispel the odium of arson from National Socialism” through his claims. Mr Tobias has defended himself, saying: “I was born into a Social Democratic household and am the last person to want to exculpate Hitler and his consorts.”

Last week, Der Spiegel published a 10-page rebuttal of the four historians’ conclusions. It said: “The thesis which holds that van der Lubbe was the only arsonist involved remains the most plausible explanation.” Although Mr Tobias was not an ex-Nazi, the magazine conceded that other former members had been employed.

http://spartacus-educational.com/Adolf_Rall.htm

Adolf Rall

Adolf Rall, was the eldest of five children, was born in Berlin on 7th June 1905. After leaving school he became a locksmith. In the late 1920s he joined the Sturmabteilung (SA).

On 30th April, 1932, Rall was arrested for stealing cars in Dresden. He was found guilty and sent to prison. Soon after his release he was arrested again for car theft and was returned to prison. In April 1933, he was sentenced for stealing a Daimler sedan in Stuttgart. (1)

According to a German anti-Nazi newspaper, Pariser Tageblatt, published in Paris, Rall had information about the Reichstag Fire. (2) It was claimed that “a former stormtrooper working in the jail where Rall was serving a sentence”, discovered that he knew what had happened. (3)

It was stated that Karl Ernst and Hermann Göring were involved in planning the act of arson. Rall suggested that before the Reichstag fire broke out, he had been in “the subterranean passageway that connects the Reichstag assembly building to the building in which the government apartment of the Reich President Hermann Göring is located. Rall said that he had personally witnessed various members of his SA unit bringing the explosive liquids into the building”. Apparently, Ernst told Rall “that an excuse was needed to begin attacking Communists”. (4)

Adolf Rall died in his cell on 2nd November, 1933. It was reported in The Daily Telegraph that the leaders of the SA “arranged for the statements to be destroyed by accomplices in the prosecutors’ office and for him to be murdered.” (5)

Rudolf Diels and Hans Gisevius also provided information to support this story.

 

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2001/07/reic-j05.html

Book Review

 

The Reichstag Fire, 68 years on

Alexander Bahar, Wilfried Kugel: Der Reichstagbrand – Wie Geschichte gemacht wird (The Reichstag Fire – How History is Created), edition q, Berlin 2001, ISBN 3-86124-523-2, 864 pages, price: 68.00 DM

5 July 2001

On February 27, 1933—more than 68 years ago—the Berlin Reichstag, the seat of Germany’s parliament, was set on fire. Shortly after the fire began, the Dutch left-wing radical Marinus van der Lubbe was arrested at the scene of the crime, apparently as the sole culprit.

Even before his identity was established, the Nazi leaders accused the German Communist Party (KPD) of having committed arson. According to Nazi propaganda, the Reichstag fire was intended as a signal for a communist uprising that had long been planned—a claim for which there was not a shred of evidence. In actual fact, the KPD leadership was neither willing nor able to organize such an uprising, so the Reichstag fire could not have been a signal for it.

For the Nazis, who had been in power less than a month, since January 30, 1933, the Reichstag fire was the excuse for a hitherto unparalleled persecution of Communist and Social Democratic workers, intellectuals and party leaders. On February 28, 1933 alone, just one day after the fire, thousands of persons active in, or allied with, the workers movement were arrested. The first to be arrested also included writers Egon Erwin Kisch, Ludwig Renn and Carl von Ossietzky, later murdered by the Nazis in a concentration camp.

All left-wing newspapers, including the Social Democratic daily Vorwärts, the Communist Party press and the German Trotskyists’ newspaper Permanente Revolution, were confiscated and banned.

Two decrees put into effect only one day later, the “Decree on the Protection of People and State”, subtitled “against communist acts of violence endangering the state,” and the “Decree Against Treason of the German People and High-Treason Activities,” were used to annul practically overnight the essential basic rights incorporated in the constitution of the Weimar Republic. These so-called “fire decrees” stayed in effect until the end of the Third Reich and formed the pseudo-legal basis for the entire Nazi dictatorship.

In the days immediately following the fire, the Nazis used the opportunity to generally weaken the entire German workers movement and prepare its destruction, a pressing task since early Reichstag elections had been scheduled for March 5, 1933, and a Nazi election victory was by no means certain.

There were still millions of workers organized in the SPD (Social Democrats), the KPD and the trade unions who were prepared to fight against the Nazis. The results of the March elections made this clear: the SPD and the KPD were still able to garner a combined vote of 13.2 million, the same number of votes they had received during the last elections in 1932. The NSDAP (Nazis) received 17.2 million votes (compared to 11.7 million in the 1932 elections), but were not able to gain an absolute majority of votes on their own. This was only possible with the aid of their German Nationalist allies from the “Kampffront Schwarz-Rot-Weiss”.

It was the SPD leadership’s capitulation before the Nazis and the division of the workers due to the “social fascism theory” propagated by the leaders of the Stalinist KPD that prevented National Socialism from being stopped at the last minute and combated.

As early as 1931, Leon Trotsky already formulated the task at hand in his open letter to the members of the KPD, How Can National Socialism be Defeated?:

“The front must now be directed against fascism. And this common front of direct struggle against fascism, embracing the entire proletariat, must be utilised in the struggle against the Social Democracy, directed as a flank attack, but no less effective for all that.

“It is necessary to show by deeds a complete readiness to make a bloc with the Social Democrats against the fascists in all cases in which they will accept a bloc… We must understand how to tear the workers away from their leaders in reality. But reality today is-the struggle against fascism…

“The overwhelming majority of the Social Democratic workers will fight against the fascists, but–for the present at least–only together with their organisations. This stage cannot be skipped. We must help the Social Democratic workers in action–in this new and extraordinary situation–to test the value of their organizations and leaders at this time, when it is a matter of life and death for the working class.”(1)

As we know, history took a different turn: the Nazis were victorious, and the German and European working class suffered its worst and most devastating defeat. The authors leave no doubt as to the fact that the leaders of both the SPD and the KPD bear decisive responsibility for this defeat. This is made particularly clear in the authors’ portrayal of the so-called “Prussian coup,” the ouster of the SPD-led Prussian government in July 1932 by the Reich Chancellor (head of government) of the time, Franz von Papen. Although the majority of their members were only waiting for the word to offer massive resistance, the SPD and trade union leaders didn’t put up even the semblance of a fight against Papen’s “cold coup d’etat,” and thus paved the way for the Nazis.

Who were the arsonists?

To this very day, there is hardly any event in German history that has been debated as heatedly as the issue of who really set the Reichstag on fire.

In years of meticulous research, the two authors of the book, historian Alexander Bahar and physicist and psychologist Wilfried Kugel, carried out the first comprehensive evaluation of the 50,000 pages of original court, state attorney office and secret police (Gestapo) files that had been locked away in Moscow and East Berlin until 1990. The result is a remarkable and explosive, more than 800-page document that for the first time provides almost complete circumstantial evidence that the Nazis prepared and set the Reichstag fire themselves.

The authors have thus succeeded in disproving a hypothesis that even today is still fairly widespread: that the Dutchman Marinus van der Lubbe was the sole perpetrator. They “base their evidence largely on original documents that are stored in public archives, but have not been evaluated up to now… The book contradicts in many ways all of the research reports that have been published so far on the Reichstag fire, based on what the authors say is the first thorough evaluation of all presently available relevant sources… In summary, the authors have succeeded after years of work in presenting a comprehensive chain of circumstantial evidence—albeit one that will only have a conclusive character for those readers who are prepared to take on the intellectual challenge presented by the often highly complex and convoluted aspects of this case of political crime.” (2)

Bahar and Kugel describe the two contradictory hypotheses as to who was actually responsible for setting the fire as follows:

“As incontestable as it is that the Nazis benefited from the Reichstag fire and made skillful use of it in establishing their dictatorship, opinion remains divided as to who actually committed the deed. The communists accused by the Nazi authorities at the Reichstag Fire Trial in Leipzig were already ruled out in 1933 for obvious reasons: quite apart from the lack of evidence, the suicidal and thus nonsensical nature of such a deed was self-evident, despite Nazi propaganda to the contrary. So did Marinus van der Lubbe, the 75% vision-impaired Dutch left-wing radical communist arrested in the burning Reichstag set the fire on his own? Or were the culprits to be found among the Nazis?” (3)

As early as the summer of 1933, the Brown Book on the Reichstag Fire and Hitler’s Terror was published in Switzerland under the editorship of Willi Münzenberg. In this book, German emigrés attempted to provide proof that the Nazis had committed the crime in a secret operation run by Nazi leader Hermann Göring. And even before the Reichstag Fire Trial in Leipzig, the “Legal Commission of the International Investigation Committee” came to the conclusion that the Nazis had set the fire themselves. Up to 1949, this was the prevailing opinion of all serious contemporaries outside of Germany. “Everyone abroad was and remains convinced that the Nazis set fire to the Reichstag.” (4)

In Germany, however, the legend of Marinus van der Lubbe as the sole perpetrator was created after 1945 by the first head of the Gestapo, Rudolf Diels, and his former staff. Diels, who was in charge of the sweeping arrests carried out on the night of the fire, had every reason to exonerate the Nazi rulers after World War II, since he was deeply involved in the Reichstag fire himself. As the authors explain:

“six hours before the Reichstag fire, Rudolf Diels, head of the … Political Police since February 23, 1933 and subsequently head of the Secret State Police Office (Gestapo), wrote the following police radio telegram which was sent to all police stations in Prussia at about 6:00 p.m.: ‘Communists reportedly plan to carry out systematic raids on police squads and members of nationalist associations with the aim of disarming them.’ … ‘Suitable countermeasures are to be taken immediately, and where necessary communist functionaries placed under protective custody.’” (5)

“The arrests carried out the next night had thus already been initiated by Rudolf Diels, the Chief of the Political Police, on the afternoon of February 27.” (6)

The authors prove that it would have been impossible for Marinus van der Luppe to set on fire a building as large as the Reichstag on his own, by reconstructing in minute detail the course of the fire on the basis of countless testimony documents and investigation and court files (particularly in Chapters 2 and 4).

Their conclusion is that “the ‘culprit’ van der Lubbe had even less time to carry out his alleged act of arson than has hitherto been assumed, namely only 12 to 13 minutes… The view often expressed in historical literature that the Reichstag arson had taken Göring, Goebbels and Hitler ‘by surprise’ must now presumably be regarded once and for all as a myth.” (7)

In Chapters 5 to 7, the authors document the proceedings at the so-called Reichstag Fire Trial, which began on September 21, 1933 in Leipzig, and then present the circumstantial evidence for the guilt of the Nazis. The exact evaluation of all of the fire expert reports leads to one conclusion: “ All of the fire experts agreed that the fire in the Reichstag assembly hall had to have been set by several culprits. Van der Lubbe’s self-incrimination was thus proved to be a lie.” (8) (My emphasis – W.K.)

In the trial before the Leipzig Reichsgericht court, which the Nazis had originally planned as a show trial, the accused were “van der Lubbe and comrades.” The Dutchman’s alleged “comrades” were Ernst Torgler, the former chairman of the KPD parliamentary group in the Reichstag, and three Bulgarian communists who were living illegally in Germany: Georgi Dimitrov, who had been the head of the Berlin-based Western European Office of the Executive Committee of the Comintern (Third International) until early 1933, Blagoj Popov and Vasil Tanev. Despite coerced witnesses (including concentration camp prisoners), planted and forged “evidence,” and torture and terror against the accused, the Nazis never succeeded in proving the alleged guilt of the communists. Dimitrov’s undaunted conduct in court, in particular, added to the embarrassment for the Nazi leaders. The Reichsgericht passed its verdict on December 23, 1933: “The accused Torgler, Dimitrov, Popov and Tanev are acquitted.” Marinus van der Lubbe, the only “presentable” culprit, was sentenced to death and executed on January 10, 1934, despite the existing expert opinions and testimony which conclusively ruled out the Dutchman as the sole perpetrator.

Finally, the authors expose the Nazis as the only feasible culprits. Among the documentary evidence the authors base this verdict on is the testimony of SA member Adolf Rall (who was later murdered by the SA and the Gestapo). The emigré newspaper Pariser Tageblatt reported on December 24, 1933: “he (Rall) stated he was a member of the SA’s “Sturm 17” unit. Before the Reichstag fire broke out, he had been in the subterranean passageway that connects the Reichstag assembly building to the building in which the government apartment of the Reich President [Hermann Göring] is located. Rall said that he had personally witnessed various members of his SA unit bringing the explosive liquids into the building.” (10)

Hans Bernd Gisevius, who had worked as a junior lawyer for the political police from August to December 1933, made the following testimony at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial in 1946: “It was Goebbels who first came up with the idea of setting fire to the Reichstag. Goebbels discussed this with the leader of the Berlin SA brigade, Karl Ernst, and made detailed suggestions on how to go about carrying out the arson. A certain tincture known to every pyrotechnician was selected. You spray it onto an object and then it ignites after a certain time, after hours or minutes. In order to get into the Reichstag building, they needed the passageway that leads from the palace of the Reichstag President to the Reichstag. A unit of ten reliable SA men was put together, and now Göring was informed of all the details of the plan, so that he coincidentally was not out holding an election speech on the night of the fire, but was still at his desk in the Ministry of the Interior at such a late hour… The intention right from the start was to put the blame for this crime on the Communists, and those ten SA men who were to carry out the crime were instructed accordingly.” (11)

Based on this testimony and a wealth of other circumstantial evidence, the course of this act of arson can be reconstructed as follows:

“On February 27, 1933, at about 8:00 p.m. a commando group of at least 3, and at most 10 SA men led by Hans Georg Gewehr entered the basement of the palace of the Reichstag President. The group took the incendiary substances deposited there, and used the subterranean passageway to go from the Reichstag President’s palace to the Reichstag building, where they prepared the assembly hall in particular with a self-igniting liquid they probably mixed in the hall. After a certain latency period, the liquid set off the fire in the assembly hall. The group made their getaway through the subterranean passageway and the basement of the Reichstag President’s palace (and possibly also through the adjacent basement leading to the machinery and government employees’ building) to the public street ‘Reichstagsufer.’ Göring entered the burning Reichstag building at 9:21 p.m. at the latest, presumably in order to provide a cover for the commando group’s retreat.

“Van der Lubbe was brought to the Reichstag by the SA at exactly 9:00 p.m. and let into the building by them. The sound of breaking glass which was noticed by witnesses and which was allegedly due to van der Lubbe breaking window panes to get into the building was probably only intended to attract the attention of the public. The Dutchman was sacrificed as the only available witness.” (12)

Almost all of the SA men involved in the deed (with the exception of Hans Georg Gewehr) and many accessories to the crime were later murdered by the Nazis, above during the so-called “Röhm putsch” on June 30, 1934.

Responsibility for the Reichstag Fire was a constant source of debate between German historians after the Second World War. In the early 1960’s, the attempt was made to establish the hypothesis of van der Lubbe as the sole culprit—in particular by Rudolf Augstein’s magazine Der Spiegel and the “amateur historian” and intelligence officer Fritz Tobias. To this very day, some prominent German historians base themselves on this hypothesis and still attempt to deny the guilt of the Nazis. With their new book Der Reichstagbrand, Alexander Bahar and Wilfried Kugel have provided authoritative evidence to finally dispel the longstanding controversy.

* * *

References

(1) Leon Trotsky: Portrait des National Sozialismus, Arbeiterpresse Verlag, Essen 1999, p. 61
(2) A. Bahar and W. Kugel: Der Reichtagsbrand, edition q, Berlin 2001, p. 19
(3) ibid., p. 15
(4) Braunbuch über Reichstagsbrand und Hitlerterror, Universum-Bücherei, Basle 1933, p. 74
(5) Bahar and Kugel, p. 71
(6) ibid., p. 72
(7) ibid., p. 73
(8) ibid., p. 321
(9) Walther Hofer et. al.: Der Reichstagsbrand, Arani-Verlag, Berlin 1972/1978, revised new edition: Ahriman-Verlag, Freiburg 1992, p. 2
(10) Bahar and Kugel, p. 533
(11) ibid., p. 543
(12) ibid., preliminary remarks “Reconstruction of the Reichstag arson”

The nature of Judaism and the question of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

Regarding The Protocols and Judaism and the accordant political “philosophy” Zionism, I highly recommend Gilad Atzmon’s “The Wandering Who.”

IMO, Judaism is the creation of the AI construct (possibly associated with the Draco reptilians) that has targeted Earth for thousands of years as part of “its” program of conquest in this sector of the universe. The idea of a “chosen” people is the ultimate expression of what Eckhart Tolle has called the psychopathology of the “garden variety ego.” The ego (everyone experiences the challenges of this phenomenon) is a sub-routine running in the mind that creates itself as some “thing” separate from all-that-is, and sets up military-grade psychological defense mechanisms to protect its illusion of separation. It has no interest or care for any other being it necessarily sees as separate from itself, except for the advantages that being can provide for its strategies of self-preservation, control and ego-gratification (imaginary psychological states).

Judaism was adopted by the Turkic Khazarian Kaganate in the second half of the the first millenium (which timeline may not be accurate, another story entirely) for the creation of political advantages and the pre-eminence of their empire over their neighbors. The psychopathology of the “chosenness” hook in the Judeo-tribal identity complex seems to have eventually dominated their mindsets. When the Khazars were eventually overrun by the Turkic Russ empire toward the end of the first millennium, the “religious” leaders of Khazar society refused to capitulate and be assimilated by the Russian culture.

It’s my theory that from the time of their defeat as an empire, elements of the Khazarian “shtetel” leadership operated an underground “secret council” that eventually spread throughout the lands populated by the Khazarian diaspora (i.e. Ashenazi Jews). IMO, this secret council created Sabbatean Judaism, the Rothschild financial empire, with its powerful intelligence arm that eventually emerged publicly as the Mossad, as well as the Bavarian Illuminati (with its connections to the Jesuits, another possible project of the proposed Khazarian secret council). The Illuminati went underground and penetrated all of the secret societies of the West, turning them to the task of implementing the grand agenda of world conquest.

Again IMO, The Protocols are an accurate reflection of the thinking of the secret council, leaked, intentionally (as part of their “religion’s” tenet of announcing their intentions – “predictive programming”), or not. The eerie accuracy of the way history has followed the path of implementation of The Protocols throughout the 20th Century to today, and the ways in which the strategies evident within the Global Imperium (the UN, Agenda 21, Social Marxism, domination of banking, the surveillance state, etc. ad nauseum) are a powerful indication of the reality of The Protocols.

Bruce

A Conversation on “Gender Identity”

This is a set of comments on an article on Alternet: “White House to Public Schools: Let Students Use Whatever Bathroom They Want” (http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/obama-administration-directs-public-schools-let-students-use-whatever-bathroom-they) between myself and “FreethinkingWorldGuy,” inspired by one of his several comments below the article:

You characterize a call for sensible treatment of school kids “liberal self-righteousness”? So what should Obama do in your opinion? Send the schools a note urging them to continue creating similar “bathroom laws” around the country? Or just keep quiet, allowing disruptions and problems that these anti-transgender laws are causing to spread?
My first response, to comment above: @FreethinkingWorldGuy – Hey, kewl screenname, dood. Creates just the right impression to earn you a pass from the politically correct sheeple.

What should Obama do? Well, how about remaining within the bounds of the Constitution which clearly does not grant the authority to legislate to the “Unitary Presidency?” Not even the Congress has the power to dictate such policy to the 50 sovereign states. Are you down with creating One Big Brother Over All to dictate to us everything we can do to the End Of Time, amen?

Glad you like my screename! Weird stuff about what my it can do for me, but you’re certainly free to have your own opinion about that.

But to the matter at hand…

So is your beef with Obama is that he’s legislating unlawfully by sending the memo to schools? Not seeing it. Where do you stand re: the notorious “bathroom laws”?

Re: Big Brother, no, I’m a big privacy fan, which is EXACTLY why I am glad to see Obama taking a position and step to protect the privacy of school children.

I’m getting the sense that it is YOU who likes the idea of Big Brother–in the form of public school teachers and staff–policing children’s choice of bathroom.

Me: You seriously think that children have a problem with their choice of bathroom, do you? Like they thought it up on their own, just like they independently started worrying about what their “choice of gender” should be? So, then there’s no agenda going on to influence children’s identities, to keep them confused, to keep them on the Common Core bandwagon so they grow up confused about who they are or even how to think? So then the Fed administration has every right to dictate what people in all the 50 states have to do about their bathroom habits to protect the masses of poor suffering cross-gender kids and protect them from the mean local populations, school boards, teachers and staff?

Right, got you.

In general, no, I don’t think children have a problem with their choice of bathroom. For transgender people (including children), they didn’t have a problem either–until we started seeing “bathroom bill” laws pop up.

It is true that most of us self-identify with gender to match our anatomy. But it doesn’t line up that way for everyone. I discard black-and-white thinking about necessity that gender match anatomy for 100% of the population, or that gender identity is a choice.

There is a growing body of science to explain why alignment doesn’t always line up, and I have seen a number of compelling cases where children–even at a very young age (e.g. 4), self-identify with the opposite sex, regardless of efforts by some to “correct” them. Transgender people are clear about their own gender identity, regardless of some who might believe and/or claim to the contrary.

“So then the Fed administration has every right to dictate what people in all the 50 states have to do about their bathroom habits to protect the masses of poor suffering cross-gender kids and protect them from the mean local populations, school boards, teachers and staff?”

The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution. The 50 states you refer to should NOT be allowed to write laws that burden any group of people based on religion, race, sex, or gender. Moreover, the 50 states do, to varying degrees, accept federal funds–to the tune of many billions of dollars. Federal Title IX funds specifically forbids gender-based discrimination.

You write like there would be no fallout from “bathroom bill” laws. There already has been, and it will get worse if it isn’t nipped in the bud. Again, they cause problems were the weren’t any before.

@FreethinkingWorldGuy -You write like there would be no fallout from the increasingly arrogant actions of the clearly illegitimate Federal Administrative System which is increasingly normalizing its violations of the Constitution, of the American revolutionaries’ clear intention that the newly minted States were each nations in their own rights, and of due process.

“Transgender people are clear about their own gender identity, regardless of some who might believe and/or claim to the contrary.” While this may be true for adults, your assertion that 4 year olds are clear on this is, I’m quite sure, not backed up by anything but the writings of some psychiatrists and psychologists who are enrolled in the social engineering matrix of globalism and social engineering. Their “studies” and the “growing body of science” you tout are highly subjective and far from scientific.

In my personal experience, my next door neighbor was seduced by gay men on our block as a young teenager and “decided” that he was gay. My observation at the time was that this led to extreme difficulties, suffering, and confusion for him, and to the destruction of his family of origin. He was far from clear about how to manage the direction of his life.

“The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution.” Really? You, of course, are referring to where slaves are legitimized and deemed to count as 3/5 of a human being for the purpose of representation in Congress. Or perhaps you’re talking about the Native Americans, who were largely exterminated? The idea of “not burdening” people on the basis of “gender” is, I think, extremely strained, and has become weaponized against the stability of our cultures and of the family unit upon which the strength of human culture depends. The “government” cannot succeed in building strong human families, and, I think, has no intention to do so.

Your observation that the states are now dependent on Federal funding is very true and particularly insidious. This is, I think, by design. The Fed Admin. has access to essentially limitless hot money from the bankers at the Federal Reserve, borrowed against the will of the people, who will have no choice but to be saddled with this debt, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars owed by American babies at birth. This hot money is also a weapon against honest Americans, and the working and middle classes are being driven by it to the wall. To force “gender equality,” a concept which is amorphous and ambiguous at best upon us as a consequence of a criminally distorted financial system is both tragic and wicked. If this is what you espouse as being a matter of course and something that is “good for us,” then I think you are complicit in this criminality.

“To force ‘gender equality,’ a concept which is amorphous and ambiguous at best upon us as a consequence of a criminally distorted financial system is both tragic and wicked.”

You are muddying up a lot of things here. So let’s sort things out, shall we? First of all, the primary issue that we disagree on is gender identity. Apparently, you believe that that is black-and-white, cut and dry. And you know what? For some people it is. But for others it is not. And here’s a kicker for you on that: Variation on this is NATURAL. It’s not, as you believe, linked to a “criminally distorted financial system”.

I stated earlier that transgender people are not confused about their gender identity, which is counter to what you believe. To be fair, I’ll admit that I oversimplified that a bit; there are some people who actually do go through a process of development and discovery, regarding gender their own identity and sexuality. And some people actually identify partly with BOTH genders. The main difference between you and I on this matter is that while you see this as confusion, I accept it as within normality of the human condition. People get confused when their instinct re: gender identity leads them (naturally) to have certain feelings and inclinations, but outside influences are telling them that such feelings are wrong. I could point you to science and/or case studies backing up early gender identity, but when you say things like:

“While this may be true for adults, your assertion that 4 year olds are clear on this is, I’m quite sure, not backed up by anything but the writings of some psychiatrists and psychologists who are enrolled in the social engineering matrix of globalism and social engineering”,

It is clear to me that you see everything through the prism of conspiracy. So I won’t bother.

“ ‘The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution.’ Really? You, of course, are referring to where slaves are legitimized and deemed to count as 3/5 of a human being for the purpose of representation in Congress. Or perhaps you’re talking about the Native Americans, who were largely exterminated?”

SERIOUSLY?

You’re going to bring up the 3/5 slave compromise and horrendous treatment of American Indians in the context of a contemporary discussion on gender identity? Okay, let me spell it out for you: The 3/5 compromise was bad (though not as bad as NO representation) and the treatment of Indians was horrible. At least we agree on this, right? We also seem to agree on perils of national debt, and likely on some areas of mismanagement by the federal government. But those topics can be discussed separately from a discussion about gender identity.

Me: “You are muddying up a lot of things here. So let’s sort things out, shall we? First of all, the primary issue that we disagree on is gender identity. Apparently, you believe that that is black-and-white, cut and dry. And you know what? For some people it is. But for others it is not. And here’s a kicker for you on that: Variation on this is NATURAL. It’s not, as you believe, linked to a “crim inally distorted financial system”.”

How is it apparent that I think gender identity is cut-and-dried? I know that it is a very difficult issue and experience for many. However, I also think that it has become a wedge issue for cultural Marxists who deliberately want to damage, particularly children, in order to destabilize and engineer society.

I do think that we humans are stronger if we cultivate our health, and that we are stronger when we accept our true gender at birth. When we accept our bodies as they are, we have access to biological guidance of our feelings and impulses. When children are actively encouraged, or even forced, to question their “inner gender preference” at the expense of actually experiencing who they are, that tragic outcomes potentially eventuate. It seems obvious that such outcomes actually may threaten the survival of humanity, and certainly threaten the well-being of society and culture.

I also think it should be obvious that “gender identity” is not an appropriate matter for government to arrogate powers over. Creating the synthetic idea that psychological gender identity rises to the levels of race or real gender as far as the need for protections of equality is, I think, a weaponized concept being fed to the population with powerful propaganda which constitutes real violence.

“Government” did push and protect slavery and genocidal violence against Native Americans when it served the interests of power. I don’t think it’s a stretch to question whether what is now being done with psychological gender identity is not the promotion of real damage against Americans in the interests of elite power. And the primary tool these interests are using to dispossess and cripple their “subjects” is the criminally distorted financial system. Keeping the sheeple confused, at odds with themselves, unable to think critically, and identified with cultural Marxist themes serves the interests of our owners in maintaining their abilities to harvest our wealth (and if you think this isn’t what’s happening, I welcome your alternative analysis and the evidence to back that up). I think it is of a piece.

You seem to imply that anyone looking through “the prism of conspiracy” is unworthy of being engaged in your laser-targeted debate on gender identity. But how do you think that “the national debt” came to be? How do you think 6 (or 5) corporate conglomerates have come to control 95% of the information that people in the West consume? (and what is the monumental effect of that?) If you think this has arisen by accident, then there is clearly little ground to continue a conversation.

Comment to Dane Wigington’s thesis that CO2 warms Earth and acidifies oceans

Hunter-Wigington

Comment to video interview of Dane Wigington on Greg Hunter’s USA Watchdog.com – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJAwxY4WEqM&feature=youtu.be :

I have been working on the Geoengineering issue for several years in Santa Cruz, California. I have previously been coached by Dane Wigington in how to work with Weather Modification and Aerosol Spraying skeptics. I have tremendous respect for all of his tireless work to wake people up to the disastrous effects of the spray programs, and, especially HAARP and SBX (Sea-Based X-Band) Radars and their ruinous cold-air down-bursts used for Weather Mod. The down-bursts also create massive UP-Bursts that shred the ionosphere and the ozone layer, leading to the insane levels of UV-B and even UV-C that are being measured now. The UV radiation is one of the most dangerous factors in this, killing the world’s forests, the plankton that maintains life in the oceans, and the coral reefs.

That said, I must emphatically disagree with Dane’s assertions that CO2 is warming the planet and acidifying the oceans. CO2, according to some scientists, is at a near starvation level for plants on Earth. There is evidence that the planet has been cool within regular variations over hundreds of millions of years, and has been cool at times when CO2 in the atmosphere was more than 10 times higher than it is today. This evidence is found in the shells of fossil brachiopods, which evidently had no problems forming shells at those high concentrations of CO2. More than this, shortly before James Hansen, prime “global warming” propagandist, retired from NASA, a group of scientists there did a major experiment with an instrument on NASA’s TIMED satellite named SABER that showed that CO2 and nitric oxide in the upper atmosphere shed massive heat from solar storms BACK INTO SPACE, cooling the planet.

As for “ocean acidification,” you might look at these links: 1. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/12/evidence_discovered_that_ocean_acidification_scare_may_be_as_fraudulent_as_global_warming.html – 2. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/10/ocean-acidification-chicken-of-the-sea-little-strikes-again/ – 3. https://www.masterresource.org/ocean-acidification/ocean-acidification-another-failing-scare-story/

From the last link: “Overall the SPPI report makes for a fascinating (although quite technical) read. I recommend it to anyone who wants to get into the nitty-gitty details of how marine organisms from corals, to phytoplankton, to fish respond to changes in the ocean’s chemistry as a result from atmospheric CO2 enrichment… In conclusion, based on the many real-world observations and laboratory experiments described above, it is clear that recent theoretical claims of impending marine species extinctions, due to increases in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration, have no basis in empirical reality. In fact, these unsupportable contentions are typically refuted by demonstrable facts… Additionally, SPPI has just announced its release of a strong critique (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/acid_test.html) of the NRDC documentary (also based upon Dr. Idso’s efforts). Here is the summary: “So what’s the story here? Are coral reefs really in their  last decades of existence? Will the shells of other calcifying marine life also dissolve away during our lifetimes? The NRDC film certainly makes it appear that such is the case; but a little scientific sleuthing  reveals nothing of substance in this regard. In fact, even a cursory review of the peer-reviewed scientific literature reveals that an equally strong case – if not a more persuasive one – can be made for the proposition that the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration will actually prove a boon to calcifying marine life. Sadly, however, the NRDC chose to present an extreme one-sided, propagandized view of ocean acidification; and in this critique we present the part of the story that they clearly don’t want you to know.”

Bottom line: There is enormous funding for pushing the ideas that CO2 threatens life on Earth for purposes of Social Engineering and finalizing Technocratic control of the world’s population under an oligarchic tyranny. This is being done by the same people who now have unbelievable power to control weather systems, to control food, and to bring drought to pesky non-compliant regions (i.e. California right now). They literally threaten all life on Earth, principally the forests and oceans, as Dane says. There a HUGE problem here. It just is not from CO2.

 

Obama’s Last SOTU: Unabashed Hypocrisy on Parade

Obama-fake_tearsDeconstructing Obama’s 2016 State of the Union Address

Master confusifier, Ericksonian hypnotist, psychopathic narcissist, and man-of-enigmatic-past Barack Hussein Obama showed up before the assembled Congress to hit his mark and perform the ritual of spinning comforting fictions and confusion about what’s going on with “America.” This speech is embedded with a mass of odd and contradictory suggestions that fly past before anyone can possibly process them.

Obama is like a kiddy pool, shallow even at the deep end, but up on the podium he’s primed to deliver to us the deep feelings that assure us that we’re still human, and share the values of the fake man. Yes, I did listen to it, and this edit is my brave attempt to deal with the cognitive dissonance.

A nauseated look at Mr. Obama’s last State of the Union address (as prepared for delivery, from Whitehouse.gov) – text being commented on is in Bold Red, my comments are bold and in (parentheses):

 Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, my fellow Americans,

Tonight marks the eighth year I’ve come here to report on the State of the Union.  And for this final one, I’m going to try to make it shorter.  I know some of you are antsy to get back to Iowa.

I also understand that because it’s an election season, expectations for what we’ll achieve this year are low.  Still, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the constructive approach you and the other leaders took at the end of last year to pass a budget and make tax cuts permanent for working families.  So I hope we can work together this year on bipartisan priorities like criminal justice reform, and helping people who are battling prescription drug abuse. We just might surprise the cynics again.

But tonight, I want to go easy on the traditional list of proposals for the year ahead.  Don’t worry, I’ve got plenty, from helping students learn to write computer code to personalizing medical treatments for patients.  And I’ll keep pushing for progress on the work that still needs doing.  Fixing a broken immigration system.  Protecting our kids from gun violence.  Equal pay for equal work, paid leave, raising the minimum wage.  All these things still matter to hardworking families; they are still the right thing to do; and I will not let up until they get done.

But for my final address to this chamber, I don’t want to talk just about the next year.  I want to focus on the next five years, ten years, and beyond.

I want to focus on our (your) future.

We live in a time of extraordinary change – change that’s reshaping the way we live, the way we work, our planet and our place in the world.  It’s change that promises amazing medical breakthroughs, but also economic disruptions that strain working families.  It promises education for girls in the most remote villages, but also connects terrorists plotting an ocean away.  It’s change that can broaden opportunity, or widen inequality.  And whether we like it or not, the pace of this change will only accelerate.

America has been through big changes before – wars and depression, the influx of immigrants, workers fighting for a fair deal, and movements to expand civil rights.  Each time, there have been those who told us to fear the future; who claimed we could slam the brakes on change, promising to restore past glory if we just got some group or idea that was threatening America under control.  And each time, we overcame those fears.  We did not, in the words of Lincoln, adhere to the “dogmas of the quiet past.”  Instead we thought anew, and acted anew.  We made change work for us, always extending America’s promise outward (what promise, exactly?) to the next frontier, to more and more people.  And because we did – because we saw opportunity where others saw only peril (WTF does that mean?) we emerged stronger and better than before (as always, forever without end, Amen).

What was true then can be true now.  Our unique strengths as a nation – our optimism and work ethic, our spirit of discovery and innovation, our diversity and commitment to the rule of law – these things give us everything we need to ensure prosperity and security for generations to come.

In fact, it’s that spirit that made the progress of these past seven years possible.  It’s how we recovered from the worst economic crisis in generations. (Lie)  It’s how we reformed our health care system, and reinvented our energy sector; (made “health care” unaffordable and brought the Fracking disaster to America) how we delivered more care and benefits to our troops and veterans, (Lie) and how we secured the freedom in every state to marry the person we love (made it possible for gays and lesbians to enter into marriage contracts with an authoritarian government).

But such progress is not inevitable.  It is the result of choices we make together (Lie – the people of the United States make NO CHOICES as we are OWNED – thanks, George)And we face such choices right now (get ready, and keep the KY Jelly handy).  Will we respond to the changes of our time with fear, turning inward as a nation, and turning against each other as a people?  Or will we face the future with confidence in who we are, what we stand for, and the incredible things we can do together? (totally hyperbolic, insincere, flattering BS – or THIFBS)

So let’s talk about the future, and four big questions that we as a country have to answer – regardless of who the next President is, or who controls the next Congress.

First, how do we give everyone a fair shot at opportunity and security in this new economy? (when we hear this, do we just roll over and grant him credibility when he says this is what he wants?)

Second, how do we make technology work for us, and not against us – especially when it comes to solving urgent challenges like climate change? (OK, confusing conflation of Memes: We know what they want to do with their technology, and it’s clear that “climate change” is code for using technology to control us more)

Third, how do we keep America safe and lead the world without becoming its policeman? (code for “Stop Gun Violence” as well as a Big Lie – We ARE the world’s policeman – at least until the UN is sent in with “Responsibility to Protect” the world FROM us)

And finally, how can we make our politics (control people to) reflect what’s best in us, and not what’s worst? (trick question: this is something that “politics” can never do – We each, individually need to bring what’s best in us to the table)

Let me start with the economy, and a basic fact (hypnotic suggestion): the United States of America, right now, has the strongest, most durable economy in the world (OMG, LIE, LIE, LIE).  We’re in the middle of the longest streak of private-sector job creation in history (Lying With Statistics – LWS).  More than 14 million new jobs (what kind of jobs?); the strongest two years of job growth since the ‘90s (LWS); an unemployment rate cut in half (LWS).  Our auto industry just had its best year ever (with unsold inventory building up to avoid layoffs and most cars now sold with Sub-Prime Loans).  Manufacturing has created nearly 900,000 new jobs in the past six years (LWS).  And we’ve done all this while cutting our deficits by almost three-quarters. (LWS)

Anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling fiction (Lie – and a hypnotic induction to ignore what you see all around you).  What is true – and the reason that a lot of Americans feel anxious – is that the economy has been changing in profound ways, changes that started long before the Great Recession hit and haven’t let up (Lie and crazy-making).  Today, technology doesn’t just replace jobs on the assembly line, but any job where work can be automated (economy’s fine, who needs a job?).  Companies in a global economy can locate anywhere, and face tougher competition (poor bubbies).  As a result, workers have less leverage for a raise (and we’ll keep manipulating things to make this more true).  Companies have less loyalty to their communities (OLIGARCHS have less loyalty to their fellow humans).  And more and more wealth and income is concentrated at the very top (but there’s no decline here).

All these trends have squeezed workers, even when they have jobs; even when the economy is growing (Lie).  It’s made it harder for a hardworking family to pull itself out of poverty, harder for young people to start on their careers, and tougher for workers to retire when they want to.  And although none of these trends are unique to America, they do offend our uniquely American belief (THIFBS) that everybody who works hard should get a fair shot (Lie – the Elite Planners do not believe this).

For the past seven years, our goal has been a growing economy that works better for everybody (Lie)We’ve made progress (Lie).  But we need to make more.  And despite all the political arguments we’ve had these past few years, there are some areas where Americans broadly agree (i.e. when not overcast, the sky is blue with chemtrails) .

We agree that real opportunity requires every American to get the education and training they need to land a good-paying job (no opportunity without programming).  The bipartisan reform of No Child Left Behind was an important start (and Common Core is finishing the job), and together, we’ve increased early childhood education (what does that mean?), lifted high school graduation rates to new highs (by lowering standards), and boosted graduates in fields like engineering (who have to move back in with their parents and get a job flipping burgers).  In the coming years, we should build on that progress, by providing Pre-K for all (earlier programming), offering every student the hands-on computer science and math classes that make them job-ready on day one (and don’t teach pesky critical thinking), and we should recruit and support more great teachers for our kids (as long as they’re fine with dumbing children down).

And we have to make college affordable for every American (let’s cut Bernie off at the pass with Elite-sanctioned Socialism)Because no hardworking student should be stuck in the red (which is why we made it impossible to remove student debt with bankruptcy).  We’ve already reduced student loan payments to ten percent of a borrower’s income.  Now, we’ve actually got to cut the cost of college.  Providing two years of community college at no cost for every responsible student (good slave) is one of the best ways to do that, and I’m going to keep fighting to get that started this year.

Of course, a great education (what do you think that means?) isn’t all we need in this new economy.  We also need benefits and protections that provide a basic measure of security (the nanny state will protect you from cradle-to-grave – If we have the funding).  After all, it’s not much of a stretch to say that some of the only people in America who are going to work the same job, in the same place, with a health and retirement package, for 30 years, are sitting in this chamber (is this some kind of sick joke?).  For everyone else, especially folks in their forties and fifties, saving for retirement or bouncing back from job loss has gotten a lot tougher (most seniors don’t have squat, so we’ll tell you what your options are)Americans understand that at some point in their careers, they may have to retool and retrain (how about a “customer service” job after your engineering career went to India?)But they shouldn’t lose what they’ve already worked so hard to build (unless, of course, your pension was already stolen).

That’s why Social Security and Medicare are more important than ever; we shouldn’t weaken them, we should strengthen them.  And for Americans short of retirement, basic benefits should be just as mobile as everything else is today (and they will ALWAYS be there, no matter what, Praise the Fed)That’s what the Affordable Care Act is all about (Lie).  It’s about filling the gaps in employer-based care (like we all have) so that when we lose a job, or go back to school, or start that new business, we’ll still have coverage (that we can’t afford).  Nearly eighteen million have gained coverage so far.  Health care inflation has slowed (Lie)And our businesses have created jobs every single month since it became law (LWS).

Now, I’m guessing we won’t agree on health care anytime soon.  But there should be other ways both parties can improve economic security.  Say a hardworking American loses his job – we shouldn’t just make sure he can get unemployment insurance; we should make sure that program encourages him to retrain for a business that’s ready to hire him (intense training for Walmart greeters).  If that new job doesn’t pay as much, there should be a system of wage insurance in place so that he can still pay his bills (I’m smelling that Nanny State…).  And even if he’s going from job to job, he should still be able to save for retirement and take his savings with him (what planet is this guy from?).  That’s the way we make the new economy work better for everyone (everyone that counts, that is).

I also know Speaker Ryan has talked about his interest in tackling poverty (like in the NFL, and giving it brain-damage)America is about giving everybody willing to work a hand up (Lie), and I’d welcome a serious discussion about strategies we can all support, like expanding tax cuts for low-income workers without kids (we care so much we’re gonna steal less).

But there are other areas where it’s been more difficult to find agreement over the last seven years – namely what role the government should play in making sure the system’s not rigged in favor of the wealthiest and biggest corporations (yeah, we’ll reign in “corporations,” but certainly not your Owners)And here, the American people have a choice to make (yeah, Slavery or, em, Slavery).

I believe a thriving private sector is the lifeblood of our economy.  I think there are outdated regulations that need to be changed, and there’s red tape that needs to be cut.  But after years of record corporate profits, working families won’t get more opportunity or bigger paychecks by letting big banks or big oil or hedge funds make their own rules at the expense of everyone else; or by allowing attacks on collective bargaining to go unanswered.  Food Stamp recipients didn’t cause the financial crisis; recklessness on Wall Street did (Lie – it was all planned).  Immigrants aren’t the reason wages haven’t gone up enough; those decisions are made in the boardrooms that too often put quarterly earnings over long-term returns.  It’s sure not the average family watching tonight that avoids paying taxes through offshore accounts.  In this new economy, workers and start-ups and small businesses need more of a voice, not less.  The rules should work for them (I’m lying – we have no intention of allowing this).  And this year I plan to lift up the many businesses who’ve figured out that doing right by their workers ends up being good for their shareholders, their customers, and their communities, so that we can spread those best practices across America (thank you, satan).

In fact, many of our best corporate citizens are also our most creative (like, em, making money out of thin air).  This brings me to the second big question we have to answer as a country:  how do we reignite that spirit of innovation to meet our biggest challenges (while we continue to dumb you down and reinforce your Stockholm Syndrome conditioning – Hard, eh)?

Sixty years ago, when the Russians beat us into space, we didn’t deny Sputnik was up there.  We didn’t argue about the science, or shrink our research and development budget.  We built a space program almost overnight, and twelve years later, we were walking on the moon (don’t want to miss a chance to catapult this propaganda).

That spirit of discovery is in our DNA (yeah, we have American DNA, changes when you cross the border – Unless you’re a terrorist)We’re Thomas Edison and the Wright Brothers and George Washington Carver (and Charlie Hebdo – BTW this is THIFBS).  We’re Grace Hopper and Katherine Johnson and Sally Ride.  We’re every immigrant and entrepreneur from Boston to Austin to Silicon Valley racing to shape a better world.  And over the past seven years, we’ve nurtured that spirit (thank you, satan).

We’ve protected an open internet (Lie), and taken bold new steps to get more students and low-income Americans online (how about a little DEVICE, Scarecrow?).  We’ve launched next-generation manufacturing hubs, and online tools that give an entrepreneur everything he or she needs to start a business in a single day (there’s room at the top – Just check out Mark Zuckerberg!).

But we can do so much more.  Last year, Vice President Biden said that with a new moonshot, America can cure cancer (with chemotherapy, radiation or surgery).  Last month, he worked with this Congress to give scientists at the National Institutes of Health the strongest resources they’ve had in over a decade.  Tonight, I’m announcing a new national effort to get it done.  And because he’s gone to the mat for all of us, on so many issues over the past forty years, I’m putting Joe in charge of Mission Control (ground control to Major Tom)For the loved ones we’ve all lost, for the family we can still save, let’s make America the country that cures cancer once and for all (yow, a GIGANTIC pile of steaming lies).

Medical research is critical.  We need the same level of commitment when it comes to developing clean energy sources (so we can put inventors’ work under National Security patent findings, or if need be, kill them – RIP Stanley Meyer).

Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it (we’ll be branding you a terrorist “Denier” and disappearing you under NDAA)You’ll be pretty lonely (in detention), because you’ll be debating our military (water-boarding is NOT torture), most of America’s business leaders, the majority of the American people (mind-control is a thing of beauty), almost the entire scientific community (official science WORKS), and 200 nations around the world who agree it’s a problem and intend to solve it.

But even if the planet wasn’t at stake; even if 2014 wasn’t the warmest year on record (Lie)until 2015 turned out even hotter (Lie)why would we want to pass up the chance for American businesses to produce and sell the energy of the future? (now we’re gettin’ to the truth of the matter)

Seven years ago, we made the single biggest investment in clean energy in our history.  Here are the results.  In fields from Iowa to Texas, wind power is now cheaper than dirtier, conventional power (sorry about those birds).  On rooftops from Arizona to New York, solar is saving Americans tens of millions of dollars a year on their energy bills, and employs more Americans than coal – in jobs that pay better than average.  We’re taking steps to give homeowners the freedom to generate and store their own energy – something environmentalists and Tea Partiers have teamed up to support.  Meanwhile, we’ve cut our imports of foreign oil by nearly sixty percent (Fracking Rawks!), and cut carbon pollution (carbon pollution? – oh that’s right, we don’t “debate the science”) more than any other country on Earth.

Gas under two bucks a gallon ain’t bad, either (ha, take that Vladimir).

Now we’ve got to accelerate the transition away from dirty energy.  Rather than subsidize the past, we should invest in the future – especially in communities that rely on fossil fuels (OK, I’ll just say this once: petroleum is NOT “fossil fuel” – ‘nuff said).  That’s why I’m going to push to change the way we manage (charge for) our (we do own the whole damn world) oil and coal resources, so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet (don’t plan on commuting to work)That way, we put money back into those communities (Lie) and put tens of thousands of Americans to work building a 21st century transportation system (oh yeah, get you out of those darn cars and into Bullet Trains, that’ll do ‘er).

None of this will happen overnight, and yes, there are plenty of entrenched interests (not like my bosses on Wallstreet) who want to protect the status quo.  But the jobs we’ll create, the money we’ll save, and the planet we’ll preserve – that’s the kind of future our kids and grandkids deserve (just make sure they get “their shots”).

Climate change is just one of many issues where our security is linked to the rest of the world.  And that’s why the third big question we have to answer is how to keep America safe and strong without either isolating ourselves or trying to nation-build everywhere there’s a problem (isn’t that what god made nukes for?).

I told you earlier all the talk of America’s economic decline is political hot air (Ericksonian suggestion #2).  Well, so is all the rhetoric you hear about our enemies getting stronger and America getting weaker.  The United States of America is the most powerful nation on Earth (that’s right, we will HURT you).  Period.  It’s not even close.  We spend more on our military than the next eight nations combined (this is something to brag about?)Our troops are the finest fighting force in the history of the world (USA, USA!).  No nation dares to attack us or our allies (except, perhaps, ISIS) because they know that’s the path to ruin.  Surveys show our standing around the world is higher than when I was elected to this office (what surveys can he possibly be talking about?), and when it comes to every important international issue, people of the world do not look to Beijing or Moscow to lead (unless of course they’re not people under the thrall of Western propaganda, in other words, terrorists) – they call us.

As someone who begins every day with an intelligence (perhaps this word has been degraded) briefing, I know this is a dangerous time (there are people who want to hurt us). But that’s not because of diminished American strength or some looming superpower (ISIS, ISIS, ISIS, ISIS…).  In today’s world, we’re threatened less by evil empires and more by failing states (like places that are TOTALLY BANKRUPT?)The Middle East is going through a transformation that will play out for a generation (if we have our way), rooted in conflicts that date back millennia (you are getting sleepy…)Economic headwinds blow from a Chinese economy in transition (if “something” goes wrong with our economy, it’s their fault)Even as their economy contracts (neener, neener, neener), Russia is pouring resources to prop up Ukraine (WTF?) and Syria – states they see slipping away from their orbit.  And the international system we built after World War II is now struggling to keep pace with this new reality (it couldn’t happen to nicer guys).

It’s up to us (you, to do as you’re told) to help remake that system.  And that means we (the Royal we) have to set priorities.

Priority number one is protecting the American people and going after terrorist networks (and, yes, we do mean HOMEGROWN terrorists).  Both al Qaeda and now ISIL (ISIS, IS, whatever, our cherished creature) pose a direct threat to our people, because in today’s world, even a handful of terrorists who place no value on human life (remember Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Panama, Yugoslavia, Chile, Nicaragua, Honduras, etc. ad nauseum), including their own (war on the proles), can do a lot of damage.  They use the Internet (Mainstream Media) to poison the minds of individuals inside our country; they undermine our allies (including our Greatest Ally, Israel).

But as we focus on destroying ISIL, over-the-top claims that this is World War III just play into their hands.  Masses of fighters on the back of (very cool) pickup trucks and twisted souls plotting in apartments (board rooms) or garages (Federal buildings) pose an enormous danger to civilians and must be stopped.  But they do not threaten our national existence.  That’s the story ISIL wants to tell; that’s the kind of propaganda they use to recruit.  We don’t need to build them up to show that we’re serious (but to advance the Hegelian Dialectic), nor do we need to push away vital allies in this fight by echoing the lie that ISIL is representative of one of the world’s largest religions.  We just need to call them what they are – killers and fanatics who have to be rooted out, hunted down, and destroyed (as the State is designed to do).

That’s exactly what we are doing (not quite)For more than a year, America has led a coalition of more than 60 countries to cut off ISIL’s financing, disrupt their plots, stop the flow of terrorist fighters, and stamp out their vicious ideology (how’s that working for us?).  With nearly 10,000 air strikes, we are taking out their leadership, their oil, their training camps, and their weapons.  We are training, arming, and supporting forces who are steadily reclaiming territory in Iraq and Syria (from their governments, after all they’re “failed states”).

If this Congress is serious about winning this war, and wants to send a message to our troops and the world, you should finally authorize the use of military force against ISIL.  Take a vote.  But the American people should know that with or without Congressional action, ISIL will learn the same lessons as terrorists before them (like the empire of the West).  If you doubt America’s commitment – or mine – to see that justice is done, ask Osama bin Laden (don’t make me lie again!).  Ask the leader of al Qaeda in Yemen, who was taken out last year, or the perpetrator of the Benghazi attacks, who sits in a prison cell (hold on a sec, has Hillary finally been detained?) .  When you come after Americans, we go after you.  It may take time, but we have long memories, and our reach has no limit (grandiosity knows no bounds…).

Our foreign policy must be focused on the threat from ISIL and al Qaeda, but it can’t stop there. For even without ISIL, instability will continue for decades in many parts of the world (we have think-tanks working on it) – in the Middle East, in Afghanistan and Pakistan, in parts of Central America, Africa and Asia.  Some of these places may become safe havens for new terrorist networks; others will fall victim to ethnic conflict, or famine, feeding the next wave of refugees.  The world will look to us (what world is he referring to?) to help solve these problems, and our answer needs to be more than tough talk or calls to carpet bomb civilians.  That may work as a TV sound bite, but it doesn’t pass muster on the world stage.

We also can’t try to take over and rebuild every country that falls into crisis (are there no nukes?).  That’s not leadership; that’s a recipe for quagmire, spilling American blood and treasure that ultimately weakens us.  It’s the lesson of Vietnam, of Iraq – and we should have learned it by now (you’d think).

Fortunately, there’s a smarter approach, a patient and disciplined strategy that uses every element of our national power.  It says America will always act, alone if necessary, to protect our people and our allies; but on issues of global concern, we will mobilize the world to work with us, and make sure other countries pull their own weight (mush, you huskies).

That’s our approach to conflicts like Syria, where we’re partnering with local forces and leading international efforts to help that broken society pursue a lasting peace (of the dead).

That’s why we built a global coalition, with sanctions and principled diplomacy, to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran.  As we speak, Iran has rolled back its nuclear program, shipped out its uranium stockpile, and the world has avoided another war (I want some of what he’s smoking).

That’s how we stopped the spread of Ebola in West Africa.  Our military, our doctors, and our development workers set up the platform that allowed other countries to join us in stamping (i.e. rolling) out that epidemic.

That’s how we forged a Trans-Pacific Partnership to open (monopolize) markets, protect (screw) workers and the environment, and advance American (predatory) leadership in Asia.  It cuts 18,000 taxes on products Made in America, and supports more good jobs (in countries where folks work for poverty wages and manufacturers can pollute and then sue us if we try to interfere).  With TPP, China doesn’t set the rules in that region, we do.  You want to show our (ignorance is) strength in this century?  Approve this agreement.  Give us the tools to enforce it.

Fifty years of isolating Cuba had failed to promote democracy, setting us back in Latin America.  That’s why we restored diplomatic relations, opened the door to travel and commerce, and positioned ourselves to improve (“improve”) the lives of the Cuban people.  You want to consolidate our leadership and credibility in the hemisphere?  Recognize that the Cold War is over.  Lift the embargo.

American leadership in the 21st century is not a choice between ignoring the rest of the world – except when we kill terrorists; or occupying and rebuilding whatever society is unraveling.  Leadership means a wise application of military power (da boss wants you should give us your resources), and rallying the world behind causes that are right.  It means seeing our foreign assistance as part of our national security, not charity.  When we lead nearly 200 nations to the most ambitious agreement in history to fight climate change (yeah, the climate’s gonna stop changing any time now) – that helps vulnerable countries, but it also protects our children (with heavy metal nano-particulate protection).  When we help Ukraine defend its democracy (fascists), or Colombia resolve a decades-long war, that strengthens the international order (and what order is that?) we depend upon.  When we help African countries feed their people and care for the sick (how about some GMO’s and some vaccinations?), that prevents the next pandemic from reaching our shores.  Right now, we are on track to end the scourge of HIV/AIDS, and we have the capacity to accomplish the same thing with malaria (did Barack finally hear about MMS? – oh, didn’t think so)something I’ll be pushing this Congress to fund this year (just put it on the tab).

That’s strength.  That’s leadership.  And that kind of leadership depends on the power of our example (we can only pray that people don’t learn by example).  That is why I will keep working to shut down the prison at Guantanamo:  it’s expensive, it’s unnecessary, and it only serves as a recruitment brochure for our enemies.

That’s why we need to reject any politics that targets people because of race or religion.  This isn’t a matter of political correctness. It’s a matter of understanding what makes us strong.  The world respects us not just for our arsenal; it respects us for our diversity and our openness and the way we respect every faith (Lie).  His Holiness, Pope Francis, told this body from the very spot I stand tonight that “to imitate the hatred and violence of tyrants and murderers is the best way to take their place.” (and we’re well on our way)  When politicians insult Muslims, when a mosque is vandalized, or a kid bullied, that doesn’t make us safer.  That’s not telling it like it is.  It’s just wrong.  It diminishes us in the eyes of the world.  It makes it harder to achieve our goals.  And it betrays who we are as a country (I think that’s getting pretty clear to most folks by now).

(Cue the Ericksonian Cheerleading and entrainment push):

“We the People.”  Our Constitution begins with those three simple words, words we’ve come to recognize mean all the people, not just some (funny, that’s not the way the Courts interpret it); words that insist we rise and fall together.  That brings me to the fourth, and maybe the most important thing I want to say tonight.

The future we want – opportunity and security for our families; a rising standard of living and a sustainable, peaceful planet for our kids – all that is within our reach (flagrant Lie).  But it will only happen if we work together.  It will only happen if we can have rational, constructive debates (these debates are not on the agenda – At all).

It will only happen if we fix our politics (I thought they were already fixed).

A better politics doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything.  This is a big country, with different regions and attitudes and interests.  That’s one of our strengths, too.  Our Founders distributed power between states and branches of government, and expected us to argue, just as they did, over the size and shape of government, over commerce and foreign relations, over the meaning of liberty and the imperatives of security (blah, blah).

But democracy does require basic bonds of trust between its citizens (whom we’re working to divide with distrust even as I speak)It doesn’t work if we think the people who disagree with us are all motivated by malice, or that our political opponents are unpatriotic (and our society is devolving at breakneck speed despite the “empathy and good intentions” of our hierarchical overlords).  Democracy grinds to a halt without a willingness to compromise; or when even basic facts are contested (such as the known facts that 19 hijackers with box cutters brought us to our knees on 9/11 and “Adam Lanza” killed 27 people at Sandy Hook Elementary), and we listen only to those who agree with us (I’m listening to you, Barry).  Our public life withers when only the most extreme voices get attention.  Most of all, democracy breaks down when the average person feels their voice doesn’t matter; that the system is rigged in favor of the rich or the powerful or some narrow interest (so I guess it’s all working then).

Too many Americans feel that way right now (and we have plans to deal with them).  It’s one of the few regrets of my presidency – that the rancor and suspicion between the parties has gotten worse instead of better.  There’s no doubt a president with the gifts of Lincoln or Roosevelt might have better bridged the divide, and I guarantee I’ll keep trying to be better so long as I hold this office.

But, my fellow Americans, this cannot be my task – or any President’s – alone.  There are a whole lot of folks in this chamber who would like to see more cooperation, a more elevated debate in Washington, but feel trapped by the demands of getting elected.  I know; you’ve told me.  And if we want a better politics, it’s not enough to just change a Congressman or a Senator or even a President; we have to change the system to reflect our better selves.

We have to end the practice of drawing our congressional districts so that politicians can pick their voters, and not the other way around.  We have to reduce the influence of money in our politics, so that a handful of families and hidden interests can’t bankroll our elections – and if our existing approach to campaign finance can’t pass muster in the courts, we need to work together to find a real solution.  We’ve got to make voting easier, not harder, and modernize it for the way we live now (repeat after me: voting brings change, voting brings change…).  And over the course of this year, I intend to travel the country to push for reforms that do.

But I can’t do these things on my own.  Changes in our political process – in not just who gets elected but how they get elected – that will only happen when the American people demand it (Lie)It will depend on you (staying in “your place” and listening to your betters).  That’s what’s meant by a government of, by, and for the people (hey, just who are these “people?”).

What I’m asking for is hard.  It’s easier to be cynical; to accept that change isn’t possible, and politics is hopeless, and to believe that our voices and actions don’t matter.  But if we give up now, then we forsake a better future (and Charlie Brown is gonna kick that football one of these days)Those with money and power will gain greater control over the decisions that could send a young soldier to war, or allow another economic disaster, or roll back the equal rights and voting rights that generations of Americans have fought, even died, to secure (is this a prediction?)As frustration grows, there will be voices urging us to fall back into tribes, to scapegoat fellow citizens who don’t look like us, or pray like us, or vote like we do, or share the same background (or to Wake the Flock up, withdraw our consent to be governed and cease compliance with a violent, illegitimate system).

We can’t afford to go down that path (da boss wants you should stay in line).  It won’t deliver the economy we want, or the security we want, but most of all, it contradicts everything that makes us the envy of the world (like the platinum mastercard and tailgate parties).

So, my fellow Americans, whatever you may believe, whether you prefer one party or no party, our collective future depends on your willingness to uphold your obligations as a citizen (14th Amendment citizen, with “privileges” and “responsibilities” – You did consent to this, yes?) .  To vote.  To speak out.  To stand up for others, especially the weak, especially the vulnerable, knowing that each of us is only here because somebody, somewhere, stood up for us.  To stay active in our public life so it reflects the goodness and decency and optimism that I see in the American people every single day. (I’m getting’ all teary eyed now…)

It won’t be easy.  Our brand of democracy is hard.  But I can promise that a year from now, when I no longer hold this office (oh please, oh please, anybody but Obama – hey, it worked with Bush, right?), I’ll be right there with you as a citizen – inspired by those voices of fairness and vision, of grit and good humor and kindness that have helped America travel so far.  Voices that help us see ourselves not first and foremost as black or white or Asian or Latino, not as gay or straight, immigrant or native born; not as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans first, bound by a common creed.  Voices Dr. King believed would have the final word – voices of unarmed truth and unconditional love.

They’re out there, those voices.  They don’t get a lot of attention, nor do they seek it, but they are busy doing the work this country needs doing.

I see them everywhere I travel in this incredible country of ours.  I see you.  I know you’re there.  You’re the reason why I have such incredible confidence in our future.  Because I see your quiet, sturdy citizenship all the time. (and you’re saying to yourself: I will stay inside my box)

I see it in the worker on the assembly line who clocked extra shifts to keep his company open, and the boss who pays him higher wages to keep him on board.

I see it in the Dreamer who stays up late to finish her science project (better not be a free energy device if you know what’s good for you), and the teacher who comes in early because he knows she might someday cure a disease (if, of course, the “cure” is patentable).

I see it in the American who served his time, and dreams of starting over – and the business owner who gives him that second chance.  The protester determined to prove that justice matters, and the young cop walking the beat, treating everybody with respect, doing the brave, quiet work of keeping us safe.

I see it in the soldier who gives almost everything to save his brothers, the nurse who tends to him ‘til he can run a marathon, and the community that lines up to cheer him on.

It’s the son who finds the courage to come out as who he is (that’s right, Dad, I’m an anarchist), and the father whose love for that son overrides everything he’s been taught (Son, now I see – We don’t need a monolithic authority that arrogates to itself the power to use deadly force to protect it’s interests).

I see it in the elderly woman who will wait in line to cast her vote as long as she has to; the new citizen who casts his for the first time; the volunteers at the polls who believe every vote should count, because each of them in different ways know how much that precious right is worth. (Don’t forget to vote, and vote often!)

That’s the America I know.  That’s the country we love.   Clear-eyed.  Big-hearted.  Optimistic that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.  That’s what makes me so hopeful about our future.  Because of you.  I believe in you.  That’s why I stand here confident that the State of our Union is strong (Boston Strong!).

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

UN Agenda 21 Still Advancing Worldwide

UN Agenda 21 Still Advancing Worldwide

“We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order — a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful — and we will be — we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders.” – G.H.W. Bush Speaking at start of first Gulf War, 1991

What is Agenda 21? — Quoting from the UN website: “Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.”(sic)

equity-environment-economy-350Many have said that Agenda 21 is now outdated policy that’s fallen into neglect. This is far from true. For example, among many other things, the slow-motion train wreck of our ongoing world economic collapse supports UN Agenda 21, and the UN conference on “Post-2015 Sustainability Agenda” coming this September is a clear reiteration. Apologists say that Agenda 21 is only “Soft Law,” a policy that has no teeth. But they’re lying. In 20 years, through stealth implementation, this plan has become embedded in local policies all over the United States. It’s called Sustainable Development. Wherever you see it you’ll find “The 3 E’s:” ecology, economy, equity. In the upcoming UN conference, where the Jesuit Pope Francis will be appearing to promote his recent encyclical, they’re being called “People, Planet and Prosperity.”

Agenda 21 emerged full-blown from the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) aka The Rio Summit, in 1992. 16 to 17 thousand “delegates,” who were somehow given official status as officers of the UN, travelled from all over the world to take part in an 11 day party in Rio De Janeiro, where they were presented with Agenda 21, The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio, a more than 300 page document that they were asked to approve, though it seems unlikely that many of them could have had time to even read it. Unsurprisingly, they voted to accept it, and it was suddenly official United Nations policy for the world.

I recently spoke with a delegate to Rio from Santa Cruz, who took exception to the way I’ve characterized the Rio Summit above. After more than 20 years, she entirely believes that the document was created by agreement at Rio, that its ideas and principles are unimpeachable, and that it has only been improved on since then. This is the genius behind the ways this program of worldwide social engineering has been rolled out, as well-meaning people are enrolled as supporters through poetic-sounding but fuzzy phrases, pledges of concern for the masses of humanity, and clever misdirection.

In fact, the Agenda 21 document was largely a creation of Maurice Strong, a mysterious man with a double-tracked career as both a high official at the UN, and as a billionaire financial insider extracting the Earth’s resources in the petroleum and mining industries. Strong first took the world stage prominently as “Secretary General,” a title the UN, for whatever reasons, adopted directly from communist and socialist organizations, of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972.

Strong’s very scant bio on Wikipedia says that he “met a leading UN official in 1947 (when Strong was just 18) who arranged for him…to serve as a junior security officer at the UN headquarters in Lake Success, New York” (before the new UN building was built on land donated by the Rockefellers in Manhattan). Just one year later, Strong became a trainee in a high-powered brokerage in Canada, “where he took an interest in the oil business,” and was transferred to an office in “the Alberta oil patch.” There he was quickly hired as an assistant to an oil-industry leader, Jack Gallagher — All while maintaining his connections at the UN.

In 1971, before the conference in Stockholm, Strong commissioned a report on the state of the planet, entitled “Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet”. The report summarized the findings of 152 leading experts from 58 countries in preparation for that first UN meeting on the environment. This was the world’s first “state of the environment” report. Following the Conference, Strong became the Chairman of the new United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), until 1975, and served as a member of the Brundtland Commission (below).

The 1972 conference was followed by several other major conferences as well as sets of meetings all over the world laying out the shape of this emerging globalist agenda. Despite the elusive nature of this long process and the ways it’s remained under the radar of the mainstream media, it has somehow remained on track with constant reiterations. In 1976 there was the UN Conference on Human Settlements which produced a Declaration containing 26 principles concerning the environment and development, an Action Plan with 109 recommendations, and a Resolution.

Here is an excerpt from the Conference Preamble: “Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market.  Private land ownership is also the principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, and therefore, contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes

This preamble is followed by 65 pages of very specific land use recommendations. Among the many recommendations are: A-1) Redistribute population in accord with resources, D-1) Government must control the use of land to achieve equitable distribution of resources, D-2) Control land use through zoning & land-use planning, D-3) Excessive profits from land use must be recaptured by government, D-4) Public ownership of land should be used to exercise urban and rural land reform, and D-5) Owner rights should be separated from development rights which should be held by a public authority.

Then, in the fall of 1983, the 38th Session of the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution to create a commission “to propose long-term environmental strategies for achieving sustainable development to the year 2000 and beyond” (emphasis added). Gro Harlem Brundtland, former (and later) Prime Minister of Norway and Vice President of the Socialist International (sometimes called “the cradle of globalism”) was appointed to chair the commission. In her forward to Our Common Future, the 400 page report from what would become known as The Brundtland Commission, she wrote, ” ‘ A global agenda for change’ – this was what the World Commission on Environment and Development was asked to formulate. It was an urgent call by the General Assembly of the United Nations…” With this conference, the term “sustainable development” first appeared.

It’s from this long-term plan which emerged 20 years before the 1992 Rio Summit, that the many seemingly friendly terms such as Sustainability, Smart Growth, Resilient and Walkable Communities, and High Density Urban Mixed-Use Development come. It seems like no one had never heard these phrases 10 years ago but that now they’re everywhere we look. Among other key terms are: Equity, Affordable housing, Consensus, Social Justice, Human Settlements, Watershed, Facilitator, Best Management Practices, Outcome Based Education. Habitat Restoration, Quality of life, Benefit of all, Public/Private Partnerships, Common good, Collaborative, Inter-disciplinary, Stakeholder, School to Work, Visioning, and the all-important Regional. If you see these terms, particularly in combinations, you can be sure you’re looking at language dedicated to implementing this agenda.

In 1992, 172 governments attended the Rio Summit, with 116 sending heads of state. There were also 2,400 people from UN-connected NGO’s. Then President George HW Bush was there on Prince Charles’ yacht, where he signed the Agenda 21 document with absolutely no legal standing to do so.

In 1993, shortly after Bill Clinton took office, Nancy Pelosi helped, with 33 original cosponsors, to introduce legislation “to implement Agenda 21.” The bill passed the house, but was stopped in the Senate. But with clearly international pressure to advance the program, in June 1993 Democrat Clinton created The President’s Council on Sustainable Development which has placed Sustainability Officers in every federal department and agency since then. This has resulted in administrative regulations enforcing Agenda 21 policies as (possibly fraudulent) hard law, and in huge distortions in federal funding that have forced States to adhere to federal dictates.

biodiversity_wildlands_map-capture

An international treaty, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), was also presented at the Rio Summit for signing, and was eventually brought to the U.S. Senate for ratification in 1994. At first, it looked like it would pass, but at the last hour, text from a book Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), which was not to be published for another year and a half, was leaked to staff of Senators, along with the now well-known Biodiversity Wildlands Map, which showed graphically the plan to move Americans off the land and into dense “human settlement zones.” The Convention wasn’t ratified, while the MSM reported that the GBA book did not exist. Congress has, so far, refused to implement Agenda 21 as policy for the United States of America. But it has been advanced by Presidential edicts.

The End of Natural Property Rights — UN policy on “land” has been clear since the 1976 Conference on Human Settlements. Its preamble on land quoted above continues:

“Social justice, urban renewal and development, the provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole.

“Public control of land use is therefore indispensable to its protection as an asset and the achievement of the long-term objectives of human settlement policies and strategies.”

This makes obvious the position of the UN policy makers that private property is now to be considered as a social asset to be controlled by “the public.” The exact nature of this public is, however, not clear. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution says, “No person shall… be deprived of… property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” But the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17 Sec 2 says, “Property shall not be arbitrarily taken.” This is a crucial difference. Somehow “the public” can take private property from you, as long as it’s not done “arbitrarily.”

Santa Cruz County seems to have been targeted for early implementation of Agenda 21. Two years before Agenda 21 was unveiled in 1992, the voters of the County passed Measure C, “The Decade of the Environment ” containing many of the key tenets of the UN Program, and which has been reaffirmed every ten years by the Board of Supervisors, and is reported on regularly by the Planning Department.

Cover-SC_County-Local_A21-bThe Supervisors also fell into step with the Agenda in 1993-94 when they “officially approved the process” of the “Sustainable Santa Cruz: Local Agenda 21” 100-page planning guide created by Action-Santa Cruz County and the Santa Cruz Chapter of the United Nations Association. This type of document was directly called for in Agenda 21 itself — In Chapter 28, “Local Authorities Initiatives,” the first objective listed is “(a) By 1996, most local authorities in each country should have undertaken a consultative process with their populations and achieved a consensus on ‘a local Agenda 2I’ for the community…” Of course, this directive was unknown in most of the rest of the U.S.

In our society the direct taking of peoples’ properties is, so far, unacceptable to most people. What has happened instead, certainly in Santa Cruz, is the use of permitting processes, zoning and taxation, including the infamous “Red Tags,” to gradually take away the productive use of their land from property owners without compensation. Though a relatively small county, Santa Cruz has, after LA County, the second-largest planning department in the State. There are currently thousands of red tags on record here, and, according to some counts, hundreds of owners have been forced off their properties, which have, in many cases, been transferred to insider “Private Partners” through practices many say are corrupt. Frequently, after the new owner appears, zoning is changed or permits are issued for new uses.

It is getting increasingly hard to get permits for single family homes, while permitting is easier to get for “High Density, Mixed Use” (typically floors of small apartments above retail spaces of questionable utility – AKA “Stack n’ Pack” housing). The Santa Cruz Supervisors are in the process of creating a new tax to fund this high-density “Low Income” housing through an “Affordable Housing Assessment” on all new construction, including additions, in the County. This will raise the cost of building a house by perhaps tens-of-thousands of dollars.

International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives — or ICLEI (pronounced Ick-ly) is a UN NGO that had it’s founding meeting in 1990 in the General Assembly chamber at the UN building in Manhattan. ICLEI staff wrote one of the chapters of the Agenda 21 document, under the direction of Maurice Strong. Santa Cruz City and County have both been members of ICLEI since its inception, though this has been made as obscure as possible by local officials over time. ICLEI works to bring top-down policies from the UN globalist agenda to local communities under the guise of being guided by its membership.

ICLEI was directly involved in the creation of California bills AB 32 and SB 375, mandating severe ongoing restrictions on our “greenhouse gas emissions” in the name of the heavily-pushed and yet highly questionable theory of “global warming” caused by CO2. ICLEI was then hired by hundreds of cities and counties in California to help them draft the “Climate Action Plans” mandated to help reach the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals set in AB 32. This is a serious conflict of interest violation by this formal arm of the UN.

Regionalism — Regional “governance” is a concept that has been advancing in the U.S. since World War II. Regionalism has been extended across America primarily through executive presidential action, including Nixon’s creation of multi-state Federal Regions, and through confusing provisions of Congressional “Acts” which require the action of Regional Planning Agencies or Councils of Government (COG’s) in order to secure the more and more essential federal funding needed for major public works. Regional Agencies are composed of appointed officials from all levels of local government, and are not subject to direct input by voters. Our local COG is the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG), founded in 1968, two years after the U.S. Model Cities Act set up the framework for AMBAG to be a funding conduit.

The COG for the nine Bay Area Counties is ABAG, the Association of Bay Area Governments. ABAG, is working with ICLEI to create the “One Bay Area” program. One Bay Area is a major initiative to promote the top-down plan to implement Agenda 21 around the San Francisco Bay. This plan for a region containing 7.5 million people, is designed to entirely remake the region in the image of Smart Growth, high-density housing and government transportation planning.

Over the next 20 years 630,000 new residential units are projected by ABAG. ALL residential construction specified by the plan is be multi-family housing. 80% of this housing must be within ½ mile of the plan’s designated “transit corridors” (permits will not be granted outside these zones). One corridor, the El Camino Real, running from San Jose to San Francisco, will be transformed into a series of government controlled Stack ‘n Pack smart growth developments. The plan is that all private vehicles will be banned from what is to then be called “The Grand Boulevard.” Through the ABAG COG, the federal government has committed more than 300 billion, mostly highway tax dollars to this “Plan Bay Area.”

Locally, something similar but more modest is being proposed under the newly rechristened “Sustainable Santa Cruz County” Regional Transportation Plan, where the eventual centerpiece will be a widened “Soquel Drive Corridor” from Dominican Hospital to Aptos, where hundreds of units of Stack n’ Pack housing will be built, close to planned public transit to include the much ballyhooed “Rail Trail” and possible train service. As part of enrolling us into this planned “sustainable” development, public “consensus” meetings have been held regularly by the Planning Department and Sustainable Santa Cruz County for the last few years.

Recent Advances in the Globalist Programs for Sustainable Development — In 2015 we are seeing two major events to promote and re-energize global population control, and a very curious confluence of globalist social engineering and the Roman Papacy. From Sept. 25 to 27 the UN will be holding its “Post-2015 Sustainability Agenda” conference at its New York headquarters, accompanied by an appearance of Pope Francis doing a formal presentation of his monumental ecologist encyclical “Laudato Si” (praised be). This conference is a clear extension of the Millennium Summit in 2000. Instead of the 8 “Millennium Development Goals” set there to be realized by 2015 (none have been), we are being given 17 this time, to be done by 2030. I will only share Goal 17 – “Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.” Suffice it to say that The Agenda for the 21st Century slogs on.

Then, from Nov. 30 to Dec. 11 in Paris, France, will come the massive propaganda onslaught of COP21, billed as “The UN Climate Conference.” Actually, COP stands for Conference of the Parties of the Kyoto Accords, so it’s interesting to see the event subsumed under the UN. While even the 2014 IPCC report, in its section on the real climate science, admitted that there has been no significant warming of the planet for the last 15 years or so (despite the desperate pleas of upcoming disaster contained in the report’s “summary for decision makers”), we are now being lobbied relentlessly about “climate change” by the corporate media (and NPR) to prepare us for a draconian “carbon suppression regime” they hope to create at this conference. Any “carbon” taxes arising at this 12-day event are rumored to be, for the first time, going directly to the UN (“a credible United Nations”).

I’ll briefly touch upon the apparent synchronicity of Pope Francis’ encyclical with the huge world effort to push the United Nations. While it’s easy to see why many people find some of the ideas expressed in it to be moving, even poetic, to me they seem rather diffuse and confusing. More than that, the Pope’s focus on pushing the need to respond immediately to a posited “climate crisis” and to problems eerily like those driving UN sustainable development, is quite striking. Some in the “climate reality” community are elated that the spiritual force of the Pope’s message may put their quest for a serious solution to carbon “pollution” over the top. If so, it will have been very convenient.

Bruce Tanner is a researcher, writer and videographer on deep politics, deep history and the structural nature of the (non-existent) ego. He and his wife Cynthia live in Santa Cruz, California, where they organized the local THRIVE Solutions Group. This article was originally published in Connection Magazine, Santa Cruz.

 

 

 

Is Pope Francis’ encyclical really about protecting “the planet and the poor?”

Email reply to a friend after being emailed links to an article by David Suzuki raving about Pope Francis’ encyclical “Laudato Si” and a link to the encyclical itself, which was described as “a rare mix of poetic beauty and the appropriate use of intelligent thought”:

Hi (name withheld),

I would urge you to do more research into what’s going on here. Suzuki has been pushing the AGW meme for quite some time now, in the face of, and without commenting on, peer-reviewed scientific papers that show that the temperature on Earth is driven primarily by the Sun’s magnetic field.

A French scientist, Philippe de Larminat, characterized by the MSM as a “climate doubter” (better than “denier” I guess) was barred from appearing in Rome at the April climate summit sponsored by the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences in preparation for the recent encyclical. As far as the proponents of AGW theory are concerned, there is no need to even look at evidence that suggests that it might be a major mistake to talk about taking the life-giving power of fuels containing carbon molecules away from people in the developing world, who desperately need them for survival.

I think I previously gave you a DVD with the documentary on the work of Henrik Svensmark, The Cloud Mystery, which covers the difficulties he had back in 2005-2006 publishing his peer-reviewed paper proving the energetic and chemical pathways by which cosmic rays create showers of particles called muons which cause the formation of microscopic nuclei for low-altitude clouds, which have the effect of cooling the Earth. An article I wrote on this back in 2010 can be found at https://berealtruth.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/the-cloud-mystery/. In that, I lay out the information in the documentary that shows persuasive evidence that the Earth has remained in regular cycles of heating and cooling for hundreds of millions of years, and has been cool within the parameters of these cycles even at times when there was more than 10 times the amount of CO2 presently in our atmosphere. You can read about Svensmark’s work and its implications in more detail in a book he co-authored with the great science author Nigel Calder, The Chilling Stars.

Even Al Gore has admitted that the correlations between atmospheric temperatures and CO2 that he stressed in An Inconvenient Truth, show that the rise in CO2 lags behind the rises in temperature by a matter of years. You can also see the current work of retired NASA scientists to present information contesting the AGW theories at http://www.therightclimatestuff.com/. Another factor in the current rise in CO2 in the atmosphere is the dramatic uptick in volcanic activity we’re having worldwide, which greatly increases the amount of gasses being emitted.

The papal encyclical largely implies that there is a moral imperative to, in protecting our Earth Mother, do what we can to prevent climate disaster. He says this is particularly necessary to protect the impoverished of the world, without mentioning the potential disaster for them of any kind of “carbon” rationing regime. Also, if there is an imperative to protect the Earth and its people, why is there no mention of the ongoing geoengineering agenda which Dane Wigington has documented is now killing the forests of the world (not to mention poison us all with a cocktail of toxic heavy metals)?

Why has the Pope weighed in on this issue at this time, even going so far as to appear at the U.N. in concert with the upcoming conference on “the Post-2015 Sustainability Agenda” (i.e. an updated iteration of Agenda 21)? Could it be to provide momentum in preparation for the COP21 conference in Paris in Nov. and Dec.? Can it be that the global elite agenda needs to bring in a “carbon” suppression program rapidly now, before it becomes utterly obvious that the Earth, due to the drastic reduction in the solar magnetic field that’s been underway since the mid-1990’s, indicated by the very weak solar maximum last year, is most likely leading to a longer term cooling trend? This has been shown by the infamous “hiatus” that NOAA recently got caught cooking data in an attempt to try to deny is even happening. Even the 2014 IPCC report, which had a powerfully propagandistic “Summary for Decision Makers,” admitted that there has been no warming for 15 years in the scientific part of the report. Given that the IPCC has been pushing for draconian measures against the world population for nearly 2 decades, why would they include that information if it were not true?

I’m suggesting that there are reasons other than “settled science” and a need to protect the population of the world for what’s going on now. It doesn’t make sense to give the Vatican unquestioned moral leeway as somehow representing unimpeachable ethics, in the face of Rome’s history of controlling people over the centuries, including recent decades, and in particular, playing games with scientific knowledge. If the science were “settled,” why would people on the AGW bandwagon be rejoicing that this encyclical is the element that can push their efforts for control of the world population over the top? Shouldn’t the truth do that?

In Lak’ech,
Bruce

A Reply to a Question on “Chemtrail Debunking”

This is a response to a volunteer for the Coalition to End Toxic Aerosols (CETA) campaign. She was having a discussion by email with a friend, and her friend started sending her articles that, in her friend’s opinion, showed that Geoengineering is the product of the imaginations of that flaky and excitable species known as “Conspiracy Theorists.” One of the links she sent me to look at is: http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/what-are-chemtrails.htm – My reply is below:


The article on How Stuff Works (such a cozy name for a website – simply some homey common sense…) is a professionally created propaganda piece. These types of articles are deliberately created to give people who don’t want to see what’s happening over their heads and consider its implications, because understanding the information would be devastating to their worldviews, an excuse to defer to the debunkers as experts. People then will present this propaganda to their friends that are just trying to tell them about real programs that are affecting the lives of them and their loved ones, to continue to fend off the bad news – news that calls into question the nature and trustworthiness of the government and the health systems, among other things. These types of articles generally never actually look at the data that people exposing the geoengineering agenda present. They give people pat answers that seem to make sense on the surface, but that don’t hold up on examination. I will list some of the data points that contradict this kind of thinking below:

1) The article is careful to stress that the people who say that something is being sprayed in the sky are Conspiracy Theorists. This should be a big clue to anyone reading this. The term was created by the CIA in the wake of the Warren Commission Report on the Kennedy assassination to scare people away from looking at the severe inconsistencies and implausibilities of that cover up.

2) Contrails have always been made of ice particles, appearing at high altitudes where the air is very cold. There is a formula for calculating how long they will linger based on altitude, barometric pressure, temperature and humidity. The laws of physics have not changed suddenly at the end of the 1990’s. Contrails do not linger for hours from horizon to horizon and spread out to create dead-looking scummy clouds that often have strange rainbow hues in them where they refract the sun.

3) The materials from the geoengineering spray have been observed to precipitate to the ground and can be observed as major flurries of powders, tiny fibers, or even web-like strands that can cover large areas of ground. These materials have been gathered and tested and they contain the usual suspects: Aluminum oxide and salts, Barium and Strontium salts and other heavy metals, as well as other man-made substances.

4) People have gotten very sick and died after heavy spraying in some places. In Britain in the early 2000’s there was a wave of spraying that jammed the emergency rooms, and so many people died that they needed to bring in refrigerated trucks to use as temporary morgues.

5) Modern High-Bypass Fan Jet Engines are almost incapable of leaving contrails except under the most extreme conditions – The turbo fans that are the main drivers of the engines force massive volumes of non-combusted air around the center combustion chamber, which dry out the exhaust and cool it down, inhibiting the formation of ice particles.

6) Engines have always left other particulates and chemicals in their exhausts. Why did they start appearing differently around 1996 or so? Some analysts have said that more modern engines actually burn cleaner. Again, the laws of physics did not change.

7) People in many locations have tracked the air traffic of the planes leaving geoengineering plumes. Most of them do not appear in logs of commercial traffic. Many of them are flying in prohibited military airspace. The planes also leave their aerosols in obvious weather formations where parallel or grid patterns will appear in concentrated areas that have demonstrated potential to affect weather systems. I have personally seen massive sets of parallel plumes sprayed over Death Valley, the high Sierras, and Baja California, where clear skies in the mornings were completely whited out by the afternoons in areas where there was no logical reason for commercial air traffic.

8) The ingredients of the aerosol plumes have been found in air, on surfaces, in running and standing water, in snow and in the soil. In the soil, aluminum and barium have been found around structures, but not in the soil beneath them. It raises the ph level in soil. In Shasta County, Francis Mangels has found that the soil has generally gone from around 5.8 ph to 6.7 – he’s found much high alkalinity in some places. This raised alkalinity is inhibiting the ability of plants to absorb nutrients and shrubs and trees are dying even where water is plentiful around creeks, etc. The materials have been found in newly created ponds at very high levels. In streams around Shasta the aquatic insect life has been reduced 90 percent or more and fish are starving. Mangels also found aluminum at 61,000 parts per billion in snow on Mt. Shasta. This is not a form of aluminum that occurs in nature, it’s been refined and processed.

9) There are many patents for doing geoengineering that call for precisely the materials that are being found in the wake of the spraying. The patents call for nano-particulates (in some patents smaller than 10 microns) which will float in the sky as long as possible. Nano-particulates have special chemical properties. They are immediately absorbed by the capillaries in the lungs and enter the bloodstream, where they cross the blood-brain barrier without interference. These materials are found in peoples’ blood and hair samples. Nano-particulates are also explosively flammable, which gives an explanation for the much hotter and more dangerous wildfires that have been observed and commented on by fire-fighters in many places.

10) Kristen Meghan, who was an Air Force Base Bio-Environmental Engineer, is a whistle blower who has come forward at great risk to her own safety. She saw the inventory manifests of the geoengineering materials that were coming onto her base, as well as the biological tests on the Air Men and Women on the base that showed the presence of these materials in their bodies.

11) There are dozens of photographs of different kinds of spraying equipment installed inside what appear to be passenger-type jets. Some show patent numbers on the tanks which correspond to patents on environmental aerosol processes.

12) One of the features of the “Polar Vortex” in the Eastern U.S. and other freak storms is the fall of what’s sometimes called “wet snow” that doesn’t melt in a normal way, when the temperatures are above freezing, even up into the low 50’s. People have noticed that this snow often has a chemical smell.

People don’t seem to remember what natural weather looks like anymore. Many younger people have never seen it during their lifetimes. Many don’t want to look at the sky now. How to help people realize what’s going on directly over their heads is a great challenge for us. For instance, I don’t recommend forwarding this email to your friend. You possibly need to spend time with your friends and find out what their core concerns are before trying to present them with specific information. It’s likely that they have fears about issues that stand in the way of being able to listen to ideas that trigger them. Listening is something that needs to go both ways. If you can master deep listening you will likely find the dynamics of your conversations shifting.

It’s important to understand that programs with these kinds of massive impacts will pervade all social institutions. The people who are doing this know that their actions are wrong. It only makes sense to speculate that they’ll use all of the resources at their disposal to keep people from knowing what’s happening or from interfering with their strategies.

And here is a link to a talk by Geoengineering whistle blower Kristen Meghan, in which she comments on the “debunking” sites Metabunk and Contrail Science. Those sites are part of a network of sites all put up by one man who many believe is a government disinfo operative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHm0XhtDyZA&spfreload=10

Learning to share controversial information is an art.