Was George H.W. Bush Involved in Assassination of JFK?
Posted: November 23, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, America, Anti-Christ, Anti-Semitism, Antichrist, Armageddon, Ashkenazi Jew, assassination, Barack Obama, Bible, Bilderberg, Bill Gates, bloodline Leave a commentPerhaps the strongest case implicating George H.W. Bush (#41) in the assassination of JFK (#35) has been presented by John Hankey, an independent student of the crime, who has produced several documentarieslaying out the case against him, the latest of which is “The Dark Legacy”. John has become very controversial, especially on the basis of attacks launched against him by an organization called “CITKA”, which has published a severe critique authored by one Seamus Coogan.
While I do not believe that Hankey has everything right–in particular, his skepticism about the identity of a man seen standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository does not appear to be justified nor do his doubts about Fletcher Prouty’s identification of USAF Gen. Edward Lansdale in a photograph of “the three tramps”, which was confirmed by no less a personage than Gen. Victor Krulak, former Commandant of the Marine Corps, where other photos show the same man having walked up to George H.W. Bush, which, ironically, is about the strongest possible confirmation of Hankey’s thesis that anyone could want–he has been on the right track.
Lansdale was famous in the CIA for his skill at arranging assassinations, where many of us believe that he organized the actual execution that took place in Dealey Plaza.
In CITKA’s critique, “The Dark Legacy of John Hankey”, however, Seamus Coogan commits so many serious blunders in his discussion of the assassination that anyone less familiar with the eddies and currents of JFK research might suspect it was a work of disinformation.
Since the CITKA site is supervised by Jim DiEugenio, I should observe that I have not been uniformly impressed by his own research on JFK. He published a well-regarded book on Jim Garrison, Destiny Betrayed (1992), and co-edited Assassinations (2003) with Lisa Pease, which reprinted many excellent essays that had previously been published in PROBE, the journal of CITKA.
But I have found his work on other matters highly uneven, including, in particular, his defense of the research by Jefferson Morley and David Talbot into the revelations by Shane O’Sullivan, which substantiated the identification of three persons at the Ambassador Hotel the evening that Bobby was shot, which I have discussed in detail in “RFK: Outing the CIA at the Ambassador”. Even on the basis of my mixed experience with them in the past, I have been surprised by the blunders that are committed in the course of their critique of Hankey’s work. Here I will illustrate with three.
(1) Coogan faults him for reporting 6 or 7 wounds
That there be no doubt of what Coogan is claiming, I will cite the specific passages vertatim:
18:43 Hankey tries to sell the idea that, in all, there were 6 wounds in Kennedy and Connally. Yet you may recall that at the time of 14:23 Hankey had already utilised the iconic courtroom clip from “JFK” in which Garrison (Kevin Costner) utilises Alven Oser (Gary Grubbs) and Numa Bertel (Wayne Knight) to demonstrate the trajectory of the 7 wounds in both Kennedy and Connally. Hankey somehow missed the fact that, most of the time, entrance wounds leave exits.
But JFK had an entry wound to his throat (#1), an entry wound to his back 5.5″ below his collar just to the right of the spinal column (#2), an entry at the back of his head in the vicinity of the external occipital protuberance (#3), and another entry in the vicinity of his right temple (#4), while Gov. John Connally was hit at least once in the back (#5) and perhaps as many as twice more, once in the right wrist (#6) and once in his left thigh (#7). While there is room to argue that (#7) may have resulted from (#6), even then there are 6 or 7 hits–plus we know that 3 other shots missed! The evidence can be found in Assassination Science (1998), Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000), and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003), but more effortlessly in “Dealey Plaza Revisited: What happened to JFK?”, for example, which is easily accessible on-line.
For Coogan to imply that Hankey is wrong strikes me as a rather important blunder. These shots were fired from in front, from the side, and from behind.
Lansdale walking past “the three tramps”
(2) Coogan assumes that the Zapruder film is authentic
In another passage, Coogan takes for granted that the Zapruder film is authentic as a resource:
You may be asking: “So what if Connally had used the incorrect term, and anyhow Hankey did eventually admit Kennedy slumped.” Well actually it’s quite an issue. Because Hankey uses the slump to launch into a diatribe about Connally seeing Kennedy ’choking on a bullet and being shot in the head’ when there is no evidence for this on the Zapruder film. As adjudged by the Z film, everybody in the world – except Hankey – can clearly determine that Connally only gives Kennedy a brief glance. And he is clearly turning back around at the time of the fatal headshot.
But the proofs that the film has been reconstructed to remove the limo stop and conceal the blow-out to the back of JFK’s head is abundant and compelling. I organized the first symposium on Zapruder film alteration at the Lancer Conference in Dallas in 1996 and have published a book and many articles about it, including“JFK: Who’s telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?” and “US Government Official: JFK Cover-Up, Film Fabrication” on Veterans Today. The Zapruder camera used a 16mm strip of celluloid by shooting the “A” side and then flipping over to shoot the “B” side.
To be projected in an 8mm projector, it had to be split and spliced together. But an 8mm split film developed in Dallas was brought to NPIC in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, 23 November, while a 16mm unsplit film developed in Rochester was brought there the following day. There are five physical differences between the original and the extant version.
As though that were not enough, Clint Hill has been describing his actions that day the same way for 47 years, including rushing forward, climbing on the limo, pushing Jackie down and lying across their bodies while peering down into a massive, fist-sized hole in the back of JFK’s head, then turning to his colleagues and giving them a “thumb’s down” before the vehicle reaches the Triple Underpass–yet none of this is in the extant film. Anyone who compares frame 374, in which that blow-out can be seen, with frames following 313 can determine for themselves that it has been blackened out in earlier frames.
And Connally also reported in his early testimony that he looked over his right shoulder to see what was going on, but then turned back to his left to get a better view when he felt a doubling-up in his chest from a shot fired from the side. Which means that Connally’s own testimony provides another proof of Zapruder fakery. Those who write without understanding this much about these things appear to be either incompetent or dissembling.
(3) Coogan denies the body was secretly removed from the plane
The occurrence of body alteration has been established by the meticulous research of David S. Lifton, Best Evidence (1980), which has now been corroborated–in spades!–by the ARRB, as Douglas Horne, who served as its Chief Analyst for Military Records, has demonstrated in his five-volume study, Inside the ARRB (2009). That, however, does not inhibit Coogan from taking Hankey to task over the prospect that JFK’s body was secretly removed from Air Force One while the official, ceremonial bronze casket was being off-loaded under the glare of the bright lights of the national new media. He is thus moved to make observations such as the following:
Lansdale waiting to speak with Bush
I have to wonder how many people have ever watched the arrival of Kennedy’s coffin? It’s virtually impossible for anything to have gone on. Now while the runway suddenly goes black and there is mention of a power cut as the plane comes in, the plane is still very much in motion when the lights are restored making it pretty hard to disembark a ton worth of casket. What most authorities believe today is that there was post-autopsy fakery in the x-rays, and perhaps the photos. And clearly, some of the photos are missing. (See for example, Gary Aguilar’s excellent essay in Murder In Dealey Plaza, pgs. 175-218)
But the throat wound, which was described as a small, round wound of entry by Malcolm Perry, M.D., three times during the Parkland Press Conference at Parkland Hospital, which I published as Appendix C inAssassination Science (1998) but was not provided to the Warren Commission, is very different than the large, ragged wound photographed during the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital, as I display in The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003), page 14 (but also in my public presentations).
Perhaps the most stunning indication of the incompetence of Coogan, however, is his favorable citation of the chapter by Gary Aguilar in Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000). Aguilar’s study is devoted to demonstrating consistency between the observations of the massive blow-out at the back of the head as it was observed at Parkland and the descriptions of the wound as they were reported from Bethesda. We know from Horne’s work that Aguilar has exaggerated their consistency, since James Humes, USN-MC, who was in charge of the autopsy, actually took a cranial saw to the head to enlarge the wound.
More importantly, however, is that, if Aguilar were right, then the film has to have been altered, since the blow-out he documents is not visible in most of the film. As I have explained to others who have wanted to endorse Aguilar’s work while denying that the film has been altered, you can’t consistently do both. If Aguilar is right, then the film is fake; and if the film is authentic, then Aguilar is wrong.
There are other blunders in Coogan’s critique, including his taking at face value Richard Nixon’s contentions that he only learned of the assassination when he arrived in New York–of which he gave several versions, one of which was that “Nixon says he heard a screaming woman, stopped the cab, and wound down the window”. But if the window was up, how could Nixon have heard the woman scream? And surely screaming is not so uncommon in New York that it would have attracted the attention of this very self-centered and devious man. Like Bush and LBJ, Nixon was also complicit in the assassination of JFK.
I am not saying that Seamus Coogan got everything wrong or that John Hankey got everything right. But I do believe that the role of George Herbert Walker Bush in the assassination of JFK is a subject that deserves a great deal more attention than it has received in the past and which, I must infer, it most certainly is not going to receive from Jim DiEugenio and Seamus Coogan. And this, in turn, makes me think that, when CITKA was being formed, my decision not to join was wiser than I could have known at the time.
I am increasingly disturbed by the role it has taken in suppressing what we know about the medical evidence, including the alteration of the body, and the Zapruder film, which has been massively revised. If those who run CITKA can’t get even the most basic of our important scientific findings about the assassination right, then it is hardly surprising that they are going to trash those who are doing decidedly better than they are at pursuing the truth about JFK.
It Never Ends – MORE Startling Evidence of Bush in Dallas
by John Hankey
I don’t think we are much encouraged to see History as science. Quite the opposite, actually. And of course, that’s all politics. The winners write history, and the truth be damned. Even science can have trouble trying to act like science when political issues are involved, as we see with evolution, tobacco-and-cancer, and global warming. But I think History does have a lot in common with physical science.
For example, I can remember when “Continental Drift”, the idea that Africa and America were once stuck together, was very much considered “just a theory”; ridiculed by some, and regarded with amusement by many, and promulgated as likely by a tiny minority. But as time goes by, the evidence accumulates; and the meaning of old evidence begins to settle in; and ideas that were once considered outrageous gradually get worn in and start to be regarded as obvious common sense. Part of this process is the continual accumulation of new evidence. New pieces are added to the puzzle and the picture becomes more clear. And sometimes the hidden meaning of old evidence, that has been lying around for years, suddenly jumps out. Evidence of the fossils and minerals that can be found on the east coast of Africa, and on the west coast of Brazil, may have been lying around for years, before someone decided to look and see if they matched, and found that they did; and proved conclusively that west Africa and Brazil were once attached.
With regard to George HW Bush and the murder of John Kennedy, Joseph McBride found this memo in 1988:
Memo about “George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency”
FBI director J. Edgar Hoover wrote this memo 5 days after the assassination, naming George Bush as a CIA officer. The last, and most crucial paragraph, is very hard to read. The following is a transcription:
“The substance of the forgoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr. V.T. Forsyth of this Bureau.”
When it was first released in 1978, George Bush was an obscure bureaucrat, a virtual unknown. So when the best researchers on the planet saw this memo in 1978, they didn’t pay much attention to it. When Bush became vice president two years later, no one was able to connect his now well-known name to this obscure memo. But when Joseph McBride was messing around in 1988, Bush was running for president; and when McBride saw the memo, he jumped up and shouted “Hey, this memo is about Bush! It says he was in the CIA, way back in 1963!”
And for the longest time, the focus was on this simple isolated fact: that Hoover said Bush was in the CIA in ’63. Bush said the memo must be referring to another “George Bush,” because he wasn’t in the CIA at that time. But over the years, people were able to assemble the facts from Bush’s personal life, showing his deep involvement with the CIA at that time, and with the CIA’s anti-Castro Cubans (in the memo, Hoover calls them “misguided anti-Castro Cubans”). And over time, it has become undeniable; that Hoover was referring, in his memo, to none other than George Herbert Walker Bush. And for a while, that was it. End of story.
RUSH TO JUDGMENT (2nd edition, 1992)
But the title of this Hoover memo is, “Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy”. Isn’t that important? Well, you’d think so. But for the longest time, no one made much out it. Besides, Hoover scarcely mentions the assassination in the memo, instead focusing on these “misguided anti-Castro Cubans.” The body of the memo does not appear, at first, to be in any way related to the title of the memo “the assassination of President John F Kennedy”. But then Mark Lane, in Rush to Judgment , did the fabulous work of demonstrating, and in fact persuading a jury, that E. Howard Hunt, a major lieutenant in the CIA’s “misguided anti-Castro Cuban” program, was in Dallas and involved in the assassination. With this background–with this framework to guide the researcher–it was then possible to assemble the evidence linking Bush to Hunt.
People might have taken some notice before that Bush made the unusual request, as Nixon’s ambassador to the UN, to be given an office in the White House. They may have noticed that Hunt, although he was not being paid by anyone in the White House, or answering to anyone that we know of in the White House, also had a White House office. But with the Hoover memo in hand, establishing Bush as a supervisor of the CIA’s “misguided anti-Castro Cuban” operation, it is possible to connect Bush to Hunt at the Bay of Pigs.
With this memo in hand, it is possible to connect Bush and Hunt as two CIA operatives with offices inside the White House. With this memo in hand, it is possible to answer who it was that Hunt answered to inside the White House; and how he got the office in the first place. And with all that, it is possible to connect Bush to Hunt, and therefore to Dallas, to Hunt in Dallas, and to the “misguided anti-Castro Cuban” assassins of John Kennedy. Which is what Hoover did for us when he wrote the title of the memo. Little by little, the pieces start to fall into place. And pieces that in isolation meant nothing, become key parts of a whole picture.
But even so, this is not a rock-solid connection: Hunt was directly involved in the murder of JFK. And Bush supervised Hunt. But Bush probably supervised a lot of CIA people, not all of whom were directly involved in the assassination. A high-ranking officer may be connected to all of the acts of all of his troops, by reason of his being their commander. But it’s not a direct connection. It doesn’t establish that the officer knew about, or approved of, or was involved in, all the actions of those troops.
Enter FBI memo # 2:
Memo about the “President of the Zapata Off-Shore Drilling Company”
It will come up again in a minute, so please read the first line carefully. Bush identifies himself to the FBI as an independent oil man from Houston.
This memo establishes that sort of direct connection between Bush and Hunt, in Dallas, on the day of the assassination. This memo records Bush’s phone call to the FBI, precisely an hour and fifteen minutes after the assassination. When I first encountered this memo, and when I first put it into my movie, JFK II, I simply called it “weird”. I saw it only in isolation, a weird, isolated connection between Bush and the assassination. It took me years to see it in context. That is, to see that this phone call demonstrates, clearly, that George Bush, was on duty that day.
He was staying at the Dallas Sheraton because his duty assignment was in Dallas. His phone call to the FBI cannot have been random. This James Parrott worked for Bush as a sign-painter; he was not an assassin; this phone call is not what it purports to be; Bush was fulfilling some obscure under-cover function in making this call. So the phone call has to be seen as part of his CIA assignment; which was clearly connected to the assassination. This memo then establishes that Bush was in the Dallas area, and on duty; and that his duty assignment was connected to the assassination. And if his men were in Dallas shooting the President, as they were, he was certainly on duty supervising them. If he were not supposed to be supervising them, his bosses would have assigned him to be at his home office in Houston, Texas; or on his oil rigs in the Caribbean.
But, even in context, this memo and the phone call it describes is still weird, no? I mean, how could Bush have been so stupid as to make this insanely incriminating phone call? Without this FBI memo, recording this phone call, we don’t know, or even have a good clue as to where Bush was, or what he was doing the day of the assassination. Do we? Bush has, until recently, simply said that he did not remember what he was doing the day of the assassination. But with this memo, Bush tells us where he was and what he was doing — he hands us his head on a silver platter. What could possibly have motivated him to make such a stupid error as making this phone call to the FBI? It’s a valid question. It’s not an essential question. We can still value this memo, and extract a great deal of important content from it without answering the question of why, but the question remains.
Why the phony phone call?
And we can make a stab at answering it. Russ Baker in his fine book, Family of Secrets, suggests that Bush was attempting to establish an alibi. Now, by making this phone call, he, in fact, establishes that he was in the Dallas area, and that he was on duty, related to the assassination. So if he’s trying to establish an alibi to cover-up where he actually was and what he was actually doing, what he is trying to cover up must be some pretty bad stuff, some pretty incriminating stuff, if it’s worse than what he gives us with this alibi.
And what could be worse than what he gives us? Well, obviously, he must have actually been in Dallas. In fact, I think, this situation suggests he must have actually been in Dealey Plaza. I mean seriously. Think about it. He’s so panicked about the truth coming out, that he puts his head in a noose and hands it to us. It makes me think he must have been in Dealey Plaza, he must have been in the company of the shooters, and he must have felt that there would be evidence to prove that.
We’re just speculating at the moment. We’ll get to the evidence right now, but I’m trying to set the scene. If a guilty party is in a panic, trying to cover evidence connecting them to a crime, they may invent an explanation, or an alibi, that seems like a good idea at the time; but that in fact constitutes a very damaging admission. Anyway, stew on that while you consider this photo:
A familiar figure on 22 November 1963
You see this tall thin man in a suit, with a receding hair line. Many people claim this is Bush, standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository. And it might be. It might be a lot of people. And perhaps, when he called the FBI and incriminated himself, Bush was concerned that he might show up in a better picture than this, where he was positively recognizable, looking towards the camera.
Personally, I don’t think this photo looks much like Bush; and in fact, I didn’t think he’d be stupid enough to just be hanging around the murder scene. I thought he was sufficiently high ranking that he’d leave such on-scene stuff to his underlings. Right? At least in my mind, if you’re an officer like Bush, you’re the coach. You plan, you train and prepare your people, and then you stand back and watch it happen. Or so I thought.
Fletcher Prouty was certain that he saw pictures of Ed Lansdale, a military operative of the highest rank, signaling to the “tramps” arrested behind the grassy knoll to “be cool,” that everything was alright. Hunt was a high-ranking CIA officer, chief of the CIA’s Mexico station; and his son says he is one of the “tramps” who show up in several photos of men who were arrested behind the grassy knoll. So, some of the highest ranking members of the killers’ operation were apparently there, on the front line, to make sure that when things went wrong, as they inevitably do, these high ranking officers could be there to fix whatever the problem was. So, given that high- and low- ranking CIA officers were present, this photo of this thin man in a suit might, indeed, be Bush. It’s possible.
Shooters at the Dal-Tex
And now, look at this picture of the Dal-Tex building. The Dal-Tex building is across the street from the Book Depository, and many leading researchers into the assassination, including Jim Garrison, say there was certainly a team of shooters in this building:
Altgens photo with close-up of Dal-Tex window
Colorized version of blow-up of the Dal-Tex window
And as you can see, some imaginative individual has added some color to indicate three men in this window. Very creative, very imaginative; and at least plausible. Still, it takes way too much imagination and effort, to see Bush’s face. But now observe this link about Roger Craig. Actually, you don’t have to stop and read it, because I’ll quote the relevant part. It’s a statement from Roger Craig, winner of the deputy of the year award for Dallas in 1960, and one of the most honest men working that day in Dallas. He’s an amazing and heroic fellow, worthy of all the time you could take looking into his background and character. And here, in the following passage, he is describing a conversation he had with Jim Garrison, and he says,
“Jim also asked me about the arrests made in Dealey Plaza that day. I told him I knew of twelve arrests, one in particular made by R. E. Vaughn of the Dallas Police Department. The man Vaughn arrested was coming from the Dal-Tex Building across from the Texas School Book Depository. The only thing which Vaughn knew about him was that he was an independent oil operator from Houston, Texas. The prisoner was taken from Vaughn by Dallas Police detectives and that was the last that he saw or heard of the suspect.” (emphasis added)
Holy Moe Lee! Please notice that, in speaking to Jim Garrison, Craig says “in particular”. Apparently he and Vaughn thought this was the most significant arrest made that day; pretty amazing given that E.Howard Hunt was arrested in the rail yard behind the grassy knoll. And the only thing Craig knew about this “particular” arrestee was that he had exactly the same singular CIA-cover, “an independent oil operator from Houston, Texas”, that George Bush had used that same day in his contact with the FBI. Now, there are a very limited number of possible explanations for who this “independent oil operator” was. Let’s look at them.
Who was the “independent oil operator”?
It is conceivable that the CIA had two men in Dallas area that day, supervising the shooters, who both had the designated cover of being an “independent oil operator from Houston.” Bush was one, as the evidence above clearly shows; and perhaps there was another who was with the shooters in the Dal-Tex building, supervising them directly. But unless the CIA overlords were trying to set Bush up, they would not have told anyone else to use Bush’s CIA cover to identify themselves to the police. If another man was involved in the crime, and was arrested for it, and he told the cops he was an “independent oil operator from Houston,” this would tend to throw suspicion in Bush’s direction. Bush’s association with the CIA’s Cubans was already widely known.
Fletcher Prouty knew and wrote of it. Fabian Escalante, the head of Cuban counter intelligence, knew and has written about it. James Files, who claims very credibly, to have been a driver for the Mafia shooters in Dallas, has spoken on-camera about it. And FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, knew about it and wrote about it in his memo. So Bush was already a suspect in Hoover’s eyes. The CIA planners, then, would not have told anyone else, “in case you get arrested, tell the cops you’re an independent oil man from Houston”. Right? They would not have done this, since it would tend to incriminate Bush, who was already in a highly visible, highly suspicious position.
Another unlikely possibility is that this “independent oil operator from Houston” was just some innocent oil operator, who somehow managed to attract suspicion, and was arrested. Do you think it’s possible that another oil man from Houston just happened to be in that corner of Dealey Plaza? I hope you think it’s possible. Because, as unlikely as it seems, if you think it was possible, then certainly Bush would have been reasonable in thinking that, as he was being arrested, there were other independent oil operators in the crowd who witnessed his arrest.
You see, Bush spoke to a group of oil men in Dallas the night before the assassination (*2). If it were possible that some of them were in Dealey Plaza, he would need to be terrified of the possibility that some of them might actually have seen the arrest, and would have been able to identify him as the object of that arrest.
No wonder, then, that Bush freaked out and made this stupid incriminating phone call to the FBI. Even if it showed that he was not in Houston, or in the Caribbean, but in Dallas, at least it suggested that he was not in police custody for the murder of the President, in Dealey Plaza.
But now stop and think a minute: why was he arrested? What was he doing that drew this cop’s attention at all? What could he possibly have been doing to make this cop think that he needed to arrest Bush? Perhaps walking out of a building without attracting attention is harder than it sounds; and it reasonable to suppose that the crowd outside the Dal-Tex building had heard the shots, had heard that the President had been wounded, and they were carefully scrutinizing anyone who came out of the building.
But this story shows clearly that Bush was not the sort of cold-blooded killer who could take part in the murder of a man, and then act and look like nothing was going on as he tried to leave the scene of the crime. And it turns out that as an old man, Bush continues to suffer from this character trait, of being unable to hide feelings that need to be kept secret. As you can see in this link, at Gerry Ford’s funeral, Bush suddenly breaks into a wide grin while speaking of the Kennedy assassination. This is not a Mona Lisa smile. This is face-wrenching spasm of glee.
In a minute we’ll take up the question of why Bush would grin at his recollection of watching John Kennedy’s brains splatter; the point for us now is that he apparently had a similarly inappropriate, show-stopping expression on his face as he attempted to exit the Dal-Tex building; he had the look of a murderer in his eye, so clearly that it could not be missed; as this funereal-grin could not be missed. And the guilt plastered all over Bush’s face drew people’s attention. And this cop, Vaughn, arrested him.
Now remember, Roger Craig tells this story in the context of his discussions with New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison about the suspects who were arrested that day and who then evaporated without leaving a mugshot, interview, fingerprint, or name. Garrison spoke not only to Roger Craig, but he no-doubt spoke to Vaughn, who made the arrest. And Garrison adds the following:
ON THE TRAIL OF THE ASSASSINS (1991)
“At least one man arrested immediately after the shooting had come running out of the Dal-Tex Building and offered no explanation for his presence there. Local authorities hardly could avoid arresting him because of the clamor of the onlookers. He was taken to the Sheriff’s office, where he was held for questioning. However, the Sheriff’s office made no record of the questions asked this suspect, if any were asked; nor did it have a record of his name. Later two uniformed police officers escorted him out of the building to the jeers of the waiting crowd. They put him in a police car, and he was driven away. Apparently this was his farewell to Dallas, for he simply disappeared forever.” (On the Trail of the Assassins, p. 238)
This vision of the panicked Bush being arrested, no-doubt terrified as he was taken to the police station, and possibly even booked (though the record of any such booking has been destroyed) provides a context that explains a number of Bush’s otherwise-mysterious actions. Certainly Bush was freaked out and panic-stricken! An angry crowd clamored for his arrest, and jeered his release.
Being a newbie in these dark affairs, Bush didn’t have confidence in the ability of the old devils at CIA to make water run uphill, to make time run backwards, to silence the witnesses, to destroy the records, and make it all go away. And so he panicked; he acted on his own, stupidly; he called the FBI, thinking that he was “cleverly” providing evidence that it wasn’t him who was arrested in front of the Dal-Tex building that day. In his panic-stricken state, this seemed like a good idea. He was unable to see that he was actually creating a permanent absolutely-positive record of his involvement.
We can now also explain the grin. He grins ridiculously at Gerry Ford’s funeral, at the mention of John Kennedy’s murder, not because he is such a ghoul that he thinks splattering the contents of Kenney’s head all over Jackie Kennedy was funny; but because mentioning the assassination causes him to recall the comedy of errors that produced his own ridiculous panic, arrest, more panic, and so on.
Garrison wrote his paragraph about Bush’s arrest in 1988. Deputy Craig’s article was written in 1971 and posted in 1992. But the significance of these paragraphs was discovered last week. There hardly was an internet in 1992 when Craig’s article was posted. And for 19 years, no one noticed that this phrase, “independent oil man from Houston”, is a very unique description of Bush. No one noticed until last month, when one of the moderators of JFKMurderSolved showed it to me. And I wrote about it to some friends, and one of them suggested I read what Jim Garrison had to say.
THE FAMILY: THE REAL STORY OF THE BUSH DYNASTY (2004)
So the pieces continue to fall into place. Little by little, the picture is filled in, the questions get answered. And the conclusions become more incontrovertible. This is just the sort thing that happened with the theory of Evolution and the Big Bang theory; and the theory of continental drift. And someday they may start to teach history, as a science, based on evidence, in the universities. Really! It could happen! At which point, Bush’s involvement in JFK’s murder will be taught, like evolution, as the only plausible explanation of the available reliable evidence.
Final note: Until recently, Bush had nothing more to say about his whereabouts the day of the assassination than that he doesn’t remember where he was. That in itself is extraordinarily incriminating. Everyone who was alive at the time remembers where they were on 9-11, and on the day Kennedy was murdered. But, saying that he doesn’t remember, however improbable, is at least consistent with Bush’s autobiography, which mentions nothing.
The Oil Man’s Cover Story
Lately, however, perhaps at least partly in response to my work, Bush and Co. have concocted a story that he was speaking in Tyler, Texas to the Rotary Club. The vice-president of the Rotary Club, Aubrey Irby, says that Bush was speaking when the bellhop came over and told him, that Kennedy was dead (*1). Mr. Irby passed the information on to Mr. Wendell Cherry, who passed it on to Bush; who stopped his speech. Irby says that Bush explained that he thought a political speech, under the circumstances, was inappropriate; and then he sat down. As a would-be alibi proving Bush’s innocence, there are at least three huge problems with this story.
PROBLEM 1: The first is that it is inconceivable that Bush would not have remembered such an event; or that he would have left it out of his autobiography, since it shows what a fine and respectful fellow he is. If he didn’t remember it sooner, or include it in his autobiography, it’s clearly because it never happened.
PROBLEM 2: The second huge problem with this story is that it couldn’t possibly have happened; that is, it is made impossible by Bush’s original alibi, his phone call to the FBI, as you’ll see:
The witness who tells this story, Aubrey Irby, says that Bush excused himself and sat down. It doesn’t say that he rushed out of the room in a frantic search for a phone. The problem is that Walter Cronkite’s announcement to the world that Kennedy was dead came at 1:38. Certainly, no one was listening to Walter Cronkite in the same room in which Bush was speaking. Therefore we can be sure that this bellhop, who told Irby that Kennedy was dead, was in another room. The bellhop had to make the decision that he had heard enough of the news to leave off listening to the news. This is no small point. Texas governor Connally was severely wounded. Lyndon Johnson was reportedly wounded. There was much other news to be confirmed.
At some point, then, the bellhop decided to stop listening and go make an announcement. There’s no reason to think Irby would be the first person he would tell. But at some point he went to the room where Bush was speaking and informed Mr. Irby that the president was dead. This walk to find Irby took time, of course. Mr. Irby had to receive the information, and then he had to decide to inform Mr. Wendell Cherry, the president of the Kiwanis. Mr. Cherry had to decide that he should interrupt Bush’s speech; Mr. Cherry had to then walk over to Bush and tell him the news.
FAMILY OF SECRETS (2008)
Bush had to decide what to say; and he had to say it. And, according to the only witness, Mr. Irby, Bush “then sat down”. Somehow, when he was finished sitting, without attracting Mr. Irby’s attention, Bush had to seek and find a phone.
This would have been a hotel phone, so he would likely have had to go through the hotel switchboard to get an outside line. Do you suppose the switchboard was busy after the announcement of the President’s death? It’s a good guess. In Washington D.C. so many people rushed to make a phone call that the phone system went down.
In any case, once he got through to the hotel operator and got an outside line, Bush then had to call information and get the number of the FBI. After getting through to information, and getting the number, he then had to call the FBI; and penetrate their switchboard, which was, no doubt, very busy; and he had to locate an agent, on what must have been the busiest day in the history of the Dallas bureau. How many minutes do you suppose that would take?
Twenty seems a fair guess, though it seems implausible that a civilian could even get through, given all the official police business going on at the time. We know that the Dallas FBI was all over the murder scene, confiscating camera film and intimidating witnesses; so it’s hard to imagine how Bush, an hour after the shooting, was able to reach an agent at all. Given the “sitting” that Mr. Irby observed Bush doing, for all this to have transpired in 45 minutes would be tidy work. But Bush had to do all of this, as the FBI memo states, by 1:45, seven minutes after the news of Kennedy’s death first went out; which is blatantly impossible.
PROBLEM 3: The third problem is this question of why Bush would feel that it was necessary to concoct such a story at all? Why does he have to tell us this lie? Why does he have to get others, like Irby, to lie for him? The irony is that the harder he tries to make himself appear innocent, by lying, the more evidence he gives us of his guilt.
(*1) Kitty Kelley, The Family: the Real Story of the Bush Dynasty, p.213; cited by Russ Baker, Family of Secrets, p. 54
(*2) There are some people who manage to point to this and say “Ahha! That’s why Bush was in Dallas! Not to kill the President, but to speak to the other oilmen!” But as the Hoover memo shows, being an oilman was just a cover for Bush’s real occupation as a CIA supervisor of trained killers. He needed an excuse for being in Dallas. This speaking engagement provided him with one.
———————-
“George Bush killed Kennedy. Or was it the Mafia? Maybe Castro did it. Who cares? It was 40 years ago. What difference does it make?”
It matters.
The day he died we lost an invaluable treasure. This video documents that we lost a man of peace, who tried to cool off the cold war, and to get the American people to see their Russian enemies, not as despicable inhuman monsters, but as people like us.
On November 22, 1963, you lost the man who saved your life on October 17, 1962. At the height of the missile crisis, Kennedy’s generals and advisors were urging him to launch a first strike attack against Cuba. They assured Kennedy that the Russian missiles in Cuba were not nuclear and were not ready; but that he and they should quietly slip away to the safety of bomb shelters anyway, just to be safe; and then launch an attack, leaving the rest of us out to die. Kennedy thought about it. And then he told them that nobody was going anywhere.
If anyone died, they would be the first to go, sitting as they were in the Whitehouse, the prime target of those Russian missiles. Together they then figured out a safer plan. Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense at the time, recently learned from the Russians that the missiles were armed, were ready, were nuclear, and that their commanders were authorized to use them in case of an attack. If you live in the northern hemisphere, the lives of your parents, and your future, were certainly saved by John Kennedy on that day. It matters that his killers be exposed.
In his farewell address, President Eisenhower had warned Kennedy, and the rest of us, of the threat posed todemocracy by what Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex.” And while Kennedy famously went after the CIA, and refused to commit troops to Vietnam, I always wondered why he didn’t more openly attack this military industrial complex. And then I stumbled upon a speech he gave at the United Nations. As you will see in the video, he called upon the Russians, and United Nations, to help him to take on this military industrial complex, in order to “abolish all armies and all weapons.”
But he was swept away. And in the years since, millions have died in needless wars, trillions of dollars have been wasted on “defense”, and millions more people have lived and died needlessly in poverty. It matters that we lost him.
Bruce Willis speaks his mind about JFK
In 2007, Bruce Willis told Vanity Fair magazine, “They still haven’t caught the guy that killed Kennedy. I’ll get killed for saying this, but I’m pretty sure those guys are still in power, in some form. The entire government of the United States was co-opted.”
Now Willis probably would not mind my suggesting that he’s no genius. At best, his observation is common sense. 80% of the American people agree with him. Indeed, this video, proving that Kennedy was brought down by the most powerful men in the world and their hired thugs, is not based on secret documents. It is all information that has merely been suppressed. Oswald allegedly shot Kennedy from behind. But the day he died, the NY Times carried the story, told by the doctors in Dallas, that Kennedy had an entrance wound in his throat, another in his right temple, and a large gaping exit wound in the back of his head.
After talking to the emergency room doctors, Kennedy’s press secretary described, to the assembled press, a shot to the right temple from the right front that went “right through the head.” All of the witnesses near the right front, the grassy knoll, described hearing shots from that direction, and dozens of witnesses raced up the knoll in pursuit of the shooters. These witnesses talked to the press. But all of this information has been suppressed for the last 50 years. By whom? Who could?
You will also see in this video the overwhelming best evidence, from the best witnesses, proving beyond a reasonable dispute, that Kennedy’s body was stolen from Air Force One, and the wound to his throat was mutilated, before the autopsy. Jackie Kennedy kept watch over an empty casket on the flight from Dallas to Bethesda Naval Hospital. Then the body was quietly taken to Bethesda for the autopsy, arriving 20 minutes before Jackie and the empty casket. Who had the power to arrange this?
Who HAS the power today to suppress all this evidence and to continue to bombard us with ridiculous lies about a lone gunman? It’s a short list, isn’t it? It doesn’t include the mafia, or the Russians, or Castro. It does include the Bush family – or rather their masters in Big Oil; the banking elite; the backbone of the military industrial complex. These men, and their successors, carried out the attacks of 9-11. It matters.
Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.
John Hankey has been teaching history and English in the LA City Schools for nearly three decades, including alternative approaches that suggest revisions to what passes for “history”.
11 shocking things you now realize to be true …
Posted: November 14, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, beverages, Bilderberg, Bill Gates, calcium, cilantro, Dajjal, Dajjal Illuminati, depopulation, Discovery Channel, Dumbing Down Society, Fluoride, Food Poisoning Leave a commentWe are living through a time ofgreat awakening. The people of our world are beginning to open their eyes and realize the stunning depth of the scams and collusion taking place all around them. These scams that steal their wealth, poison them with chemicals, enslave them with financial trickery and control their minds with propaganda. These scams are the very fabric of moderngovernment, the mainstream media, universities and so-called “science” institutions.
Here are 11 of those scams that you probably never would have believed just 2-3 years ago; but nowyou probably realize these are true!Welcome to the real world, my friends. Now that we recognize the depth of the scams, let’s change things for the better. (Occupy America!)
#1 – Most of the honey you buy in the grocery store contains no actual honey whatsoever
It’s true, the so-called “honey” isn’t even technically honey. Most of it is made of cheap “mystery” sweeteners, illegally imported from China, right under the nose of the FDA.
#2 – The fluoride that’s dripped into municipal water supplies is actually a highly toxic industrial chemical byproduct
This scam is exploding in the faces of all the ignorant dentists and doctors who have been pushing this poison for years. Once again, they were wrong; the “conspiracy theorists” were right.
#3 – Flu vaccines often contain live flu viruses and actually causethe flu as a way to worsen the flu season and scare more people into buying vaccines
It’s also true with MMR vaccines, which cause the measles. Flu vaccines are the greatest medical hoax that has ever been perpetrated on the world:
#4 – Ron Paul is deliberately stripped out of mainstream news reports, online polls and debate coverage in order to “game the system” against him
The power elite don’t really want “fair and open” elections in America, you see. It’s all about rigging the system to make sure a globalist puppet gets elected instead of a Man of the People.
#5 – The United States government openly trafficks illegal guns into Mexico as a way to cause gun violence in the USA
It all seemed so very clever until they got caught, and now it just seems flatly criminal. So why can the federal government run illegal guns and nothing happens to them, but if you or I do it, we go to prison for a long, long time?
#6 – Prestigious U.S. hospitals are widely engaged in black market organ trafficking and organ transplants
And why not? It’s profitable, and they can claim they’re “saving lives!” Make no mistake: the organ transplant industry is steeped in dark, psychopathic criminal activity.
#7 – The child sex slave industry is huge, highly profitable, and found everywhere across America (and the world)
You wouldn’t have believed this, probably, until the whole Penn State scandal recently made headline news around the world. As everybody now knows, Penn State sports officials routinely raped young children, even pimping them out to other criminal rapists who paid big money to rape young boys. This went on for 15 yearsright inside a prestigious university, right here in America.
Are you shocked? You shouldn’t be. Alex Jones has been sounding the alarm about this for a decade. Nobody listened to him. They couldn’t believe it was real. People would rather bury their heads in the sand than face reality.
And yet, this Penn State scandal just scratches the surface. The far deeper horrifying truth of all this is that Child Protective Services routinely kidnaps young American children and sells them into sex slavery — so-called “white slavery.” That story has not yet been covered by themainstream media.
#8 – Commercial chickens are routinely fed arsenic, and commercial cows are routinely fed chicken poop
Oh, you didn’t know that? When you eat conventional beef, you’re eating meat from cows who created that meat by consuming chicken poop. Yumm! Can I have some more poop on that burger, please?
#9 – “Natural” foods and cereals are routinely made with genetically modified ingredients
Oh, you thought “natural” meant better than organic? Non-GMO? Stop getting suckered by the cereal companies and dishonest food conglomerates. Know what you’re really eating:
#10 – The global banking industry is a criminal racket that steals wealth from working class People and redistributes it to the global wealthy elite
You wouldn’t have believed this five years ago, but now, looking at your own bank account, the job you lost, the house you can’t sell and the health care you can’t afford, it’s all sinking in: The global financial system is an engineered con that suckers working-class people into giving up all their wealth, piece by piece, until they die bankrupt. Indentured servitude…
#11 – The U.S. government routinely conspires with pharmaceuticalgiants to conduct criminal, inhumane medical experiments on innocent people
Recent revelations about the U.S. government’s secret medical experiments in Guatemala are just the tip of the iceberg here. Dr. Jona Salk, inventor of the polio vaccine, also ran unethical medical experiments on people. In fact, the entire history of modern medicine (pharmaceuticals, vaccines, chemotherapy and more) is something of a “house of horrors” of inhumane medical experiments on innocent victims.
What else is true?
Ever wonder what else might be true about our world that you never would have believed just a few years ago? Maybe it’s time you started reading books by Jim Marrs or even David Icke.
Now is a good time to start listening to the Robert Scott Bell Show on www.NaturalNewsRadio.com where you’ll also hear news from Patrick Timpone.
Perhaps it’s time we all started questioning history, medicine, corporate science, banking institutions and all governments. Discard your blinders.
Maybe it’s time we opened our eyes to reality and stopped lying to ourselves about the depth of corruption and evil in our world. And why would we do that? Because that’s the first step to positive revolution where we work together to create a better world… a world where such criminality and suffering is ancient history.
Accept reality, in other words… and then CHANGE it for the better.
John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve …
Posted: October 31, 2011 Filed under: ADL, Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, America, Anti-Christ, Anti-Semitism, Antichrist, Armageddon, Ashkenazi Jew, Barack Obama, Bible, Bilderberg, Bill Gates, bloodline, Britain Leave a commentOn June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.
When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy – the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money – without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy’s Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: “to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion,
silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury’s vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.
silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury’s vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.“United States Notes” were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a “Federal Reserve Note” issued from the privatecentral bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a “United States Note” from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy’s Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says “Federal Reserve Note” on the top while the other says “United States Note”. Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number.
President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper “currency” circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.
Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new “money”. Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something.
Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 “Silver Certificates” were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve’s control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the “powers that exist behind U.S. and world finance”. With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt:
1) war (Viet Nam); and,
2) the creation of money by a privately owned central bank. His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of the private Federal Reserve Bank.
Executive Order 11110
AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:
SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended – (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): “(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption,” and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.
JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963
Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998:
Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as amended by:
EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725;
EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869;
EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605;
EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003;
EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617
The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy’s 1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of Kennedy’s EO 11110. A search of Clinton’s 1998 and 1999 EO’s and Presidential Directives has also shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO 11110.
The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private Corporation. Black’s Law Dictionary defines the “Federal Reserve System” as: “Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves.” Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said: “Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank’s nine member board of directors”.
The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member banks. Once again, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money:
“Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)”.
The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue (create) the “money” we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is: “The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department’s Bureau of Engraving to print them”.
Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is exactly what the privately owned FED is!
No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932:
“Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it”.
Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.
The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it’s interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs’ 1990 book Crossfire:”
Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy’s attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.
Kennedy’s comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks”.
In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963,
Ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:
“The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American’s freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight.”
In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book… a true Profile of Courage.
This research report was compiled for Lawgiver. Org. by Anthony Wayne
What is the Federal Reserve Bank?
What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we have it?
by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999
The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a country’s fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it wasn’t for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, including our FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but for profit.
There have been three central banks in our nation’s history. The first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED. What they all have in common is an insidious practice known as “fractional banking.”
Fractional banking or fractional lending is the ability to create money from nothing, lend it to the government or someone else and charge interest to boot. The practice evolved before banks existed. Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to individuals and merchants for storage of their gold or silver. The goldsmiths gave these “depositors” a certificate that showed the amount of gold stored. These certificates were then used to conduct business.
In time the goldsmiths noticed that the gold in their vaults was rarely withdrawn. Small amounts would move in and out but the large majority never moved. Sensing a profit opportunity, the goldsmiths issued double receipts for the gold, in effect creating money (certificates) from nothing and then lending those certificates (creating debt) to depositors and charging them interest as well.
Since the certificates represented more gold than actually existed, the certificates were “fractionally” backed by gold. Eventually some of these vault operations were transformed into banks and the practice of fractional banking continued.
Keep that fractional banking concept in mind as we examine our first central bank, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). It was created, after bitter dissent in the Congress, in 1791 and chartered for 20 years. A scam not unlike the current FED, the BUS used its control of the currency to defraud the public and establish a legal form of usury.
This bank practiced fractional lending at a 10:1 rate, ten dollars of loans for each dollar they had on deposit. This misuse and abuse of their public charter continued for the entire 20 years of their existence. Public outrage over these abuses was such that the charter was not renewed and the bank ceased to exist in 1811.
The war of 1812 left the country in economic chaos, seen by bankers as another opportunity for easy profits. They influenced Congress to charter the second central bank, the Second Bank of the United States (SBUS), in 1816.
The SBUS was more expansive than the BUS. The SBUS sold franchises and literally doubled the number of banks in a short period of time. The country began to boom and move westward, which required money. Using fractional lending at the 10:1 rate, the central bank and their franchisees created the debt/money for the expansion.
Things boomed for a while, then the banks decided to shut off the debt/money, citing the need to control inflation. This action on the part of the SBUS caused bankruptcies and foreclosures. The banks then took control of the assets that were used as security against the loans.
Closely examine how the SBUS engineered this cycle of prosperity and depression. The central bank caused inflation by creating debt/money for loans and credit and making these funds readily available. The economy boomed. Then they used the inflation which they created as an excuse to shut off the loans/credit/money.
The resulting shortage of cash caused the economy to falter or slow dramatically and large numbers of business and personal bankruptcies resulted. The central bank then seized the assets used as security for the loans. The wealth created by the borrowers during the boom was then transferred to the central bank during the bust. And you always wondered how the big guys ended up with all the marbles.
Now, who do you think is responsible for all of the ups and downs in our economy over the last 85 years? Think about the depression of the late ’20s and all through the ’30s. The FED could have pumped lots of debt/money into the market to stimulate the economy and get the country back on track, but did they? No; in fact, they restricted the money supply quite severely. We all know the results that occurred from that action, don’t we?
Why would the FED do this? During that period asset values and stocks were at rock bottom prices. Who do you think was buying everything at 10 cents on the dollar? I believe that it is referred to as consolidating the wealth. How many times have they already done this in the last 85 years?
Do you think they will do it again?
Just as an aside at this point, look at today’s economy. Markets are declining. Why? Because the FED has been very liberal with its debt/credit/money. The market was hyper inflated. Who creates inflation? The FED. How does the FED deal with inflation? They restrict the debt/credit/money. What happens when they do that? The market collapses.
Several months back, after certain central banks said they would be selling large quantities of gold, the price of gold fell to a 25-year low of about $260 per ounce. The central banks then bought gold. After buying at the bottom, a group of 15 central banks announced that they would be restricting the amount of gold released into the market for the next five years. The price of gold went up $75.00 per ounce in just a few days. How many hundreds of billions of dollars did the central banks make with those two press releases?
Gold is generally considered to be a hedge against more severe economic conditions. Do you think that the private banking families that own the FED are buying or selling equities at this time? (Remember: buy low, sell high.) How much money do you think these FED owners have made since they restricted the money supply at the top of this last current cycle?
Alan Greenspan has said publicly on several occasions that he thinks the market is overvalued, or words to that effect. Just a hint that he will raise interest rates (restrict the money supply), and equity markets have a negative reaction. Governments and politicians do not rule central banks, central banks rule governments and politicians. President Andrew Jackson won the presidency in 1828 with the promise to end the national debt and eliminate the SBUS. During his second term President Jackson withdrew all government funds from the bank and on January 8, 1835, paid off the national debt. He is the only president in history to have this distinction. The charter of the SBUS expired in 1836.
Without a central bank to manipulate the supply of money, the United States experienced unprecedented growth for 60 or 70 years, and the resulting wealth was too much for bankers to endure. They had to get back into the game. So, in 1910 Senator Nelson Aldrich, then Chairman of the National Monetary Commission, in collusion with representatives of the European central banks, devised a plan to pressure and deceive Congress into enacting legislation that would covertly establish a private central bank.
This bank would assume control over the American economy by controlling the issuance of its money. After a huge public relations campaign, engineered by the foreign central banks, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was slipped through Congress during the Christmas recess, with many members of the Congress absent. President Woodrow Wilson, pressured by his political and financial backers, signed it on December 23, 1913.
The act created the Federal Reserve System, a name carefully selected and designed to deceive. “Federal” would lead one to believe that this is a government organization. “Reserve” would lead one to believe that the currency is being backed by gold and silver. “System” was used in lieu of the word “bank” so that one would not conclude that a new central bank had been created.
In reality, the act created a private, for profit, central banking corporation owned by a cartel of private banks. Who owns the FED? The Rothschilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New York.
Did you know that the FED is the only for-profit corporation in America that is exempt from both federal and state taxes? The FED takes in about one trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking families listed above get all that money.
Almost everyone thinks that the money they pay in taxes goes to the US Treasury to pay for the expenses of the government. Do you want to know where your tax dollars really go? If you look at the back of any check made payable to the IRS you will see that it has been endorsed as “Pay Any F.R.B. Branch or Gen. Depository for Credit U.S. Treas. This is in Payment of U.S. Oblig.” Yes, that’s right, every dime you pay in income taxes is given to those private banking families, commonly known as the FED, tax free.
Like many of you, I had some difficulty with the concept of creating money from nothing. You may have heard the term “monetizing the debt,” which is kind of the same thing. As an example, if the US Government wants to borrow $1 million ó the government does borrow every dollar it spends ó they go to the FED to borrow the money. The FED calls the Treasury and says print 10,000 Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) in units of one hundred dollars.
The Treasury charges the FED 2.3 cents for each note, for a total of $230 for the 10,000 FRNs. The FED then lends the $1 million to the government at face value plus interest. To add insult to injury, the government has to create a bond for $1 million as security for the loan. And the rich get richer. The above was just an example, because in reality the FED does not even print the money; it’s just a computer entry in their accounting system. To put this on a more personal level, let’s use another example.
Today’s banks are members of the Federal Reserve Banking System. This membership makes it legal for them to create money from nothing and lend it to you. Today’s banks, like the goldsmiths of old, realize that only a small fraction of the money deposited in their banks is ever actually withdrawn in the form of cash. Only about 4 percent of all the money that exists is in the form of currency. The rest of it is simply a computer entry.
Let’s say you’re approved to borrow $10,000 to do some home improvements. You know that the bank didn’t actually take $10,000 from its pile of cash and put it into your pile? They simply went to their computer and input an entry of $10,000 into your account. They created, from thin air, a debt which you have to secure with an asset and repay with interest. The bank is allowed to create and lend as much debt as they want as long as they do not exceed the 10:1 ratio imposed by the FED.
It sort of puts a new slant on how you view your friendly bank, doesn’t it? How about those loan committees that scrutinize you with a microscope before approving the loan they created from thin air. What a hoot! They make it complex for a reason. They don’t want you to understand what they are doing. People fear what they do not understand. You are easier to delude and control when you are ignorant and afraid.
Now to put the frosting on this cake. When was the income tax created? If you guessed 1913, the same year that the FED was created, you get a gold star. Coincidence? What are the odds? If you are going to use the FED to create debt, who is going to repay that debt? The income tax was created to complete the illusion that real money had been lent and therefore real money had to be repaid. And you thought Houdini was good.
So, what can be done? My father taught me that you should always stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand up alone.
If “We the People” don’t take some action now, there may come a time when “We the People” are no more. You should write a letter or send an email to each of your elected representatives. Many of our elected representatives do not understand the FED. Once informed they will not be able to plead ignorance and remain silent.
Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution specifically says that Congress is the only body that can “coin money and regulate the value thereof.” The US Constitution has never been amended to allow anyone other than Congress to coin and regulate currency.
Ask your representative, in light of that information, how it is possible for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and the Federal Reserve Bank that it created, to be constitutional. Ask them why this private banking cartel is allowed to reap trillions of dollars in profits without paying taxes. Insist on an answer.
Thomas Jefferson said, “If the America people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
Jefferson saw it coming 150 years ago. The question is, “Can you now see what is in store for us if we allow the FED to continue controlling our country?”
“The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he breaks, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime, and the punishment of his guilt.”
The Shocking Lack of Evidence Supporting Flu Vaccines …
Posted: October 31, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, beverages, Bilderberg, calcium, Cell phones, cilantro, Conspiracy Theory, Dajjal, Dajjal Illuminati, Dumbing Down Society, Fluoride, Food Poisoning, foods Leave a commentWith the flu season ramping up, many are looking to vaccination as a “preventive” approach. Those who abstain are often accused of being uneducated, or worse, socially irresponsible. Nothing could be further from the truth.
As it presently stands, it is not sound medical science, but primarily economic and political motivation which generates the immense pressure behind mass participation in the annual ritual of fluvaccination.
It is a heavily guarded secret within the medical establishment (especially within the corridors of the CDC) that the CochraneDatabase Review, which is the gold standard within the evidence-based medical model for assessing the effectiveness of common medical interventions, does not lend unequivocal scientific support to the belief and/or propaganda that flu vaccines are safe and effective.
To the contrary, these authoritative reviews reveal there is a conspicuous absence of conclusive evidence as to the effectiveness of influenza vaccines in children under 2, healthy adults, the elderly, and healthcare workers who care for the elderly.
What is even more disconcerting is that only one safety study on inactivated flu vaccines has been performed in children under 2 (the population most susceptible to adverse reactions), even though in the USA andCanada current guidelines recommend the vaccination of healthy children from six months old.
Another alarming finding following the global pandemic declared by the World Health Organization in 2009, is that receipt of the seasonal flu vaccine among Canadians actually increased the rate of medically attendedpandemic H1N1 infection.
Vaccines, therefore, may actually decrease resistance to viral infection via their immunosuppressive actions. View study.
Can Vaccination Replace Natural Immunity?
At the outset it should be acknowledged that there could be no medical justification for vaccination in the first place if it were not for the observation that periodic infection from wild type pathogens confers lasting, natural immunity. In a very real sense periodic infectious challenges are Nature’s immunizations, without which the very concept of vaccination would make absolutely no sense.
The vaccination process artificially simulates and co-opts a natural process, generating a broad range of adverse unintended consequences, many of which have been documented here.Vaccine proponents would have us believe that natural immunity is inferior to synthetic immunity, and should be replaced by the latter. In some cases they even suggest breastfeeding should be delayed during immunizations because it “interferes” with the vaccine efficacy.
Sounds like naked economic incentives have trumped genuine, serious health concerns for the entire population, especially the very young, the elderly and the sick.
This warped perspective follows from the disingenuous standard vaccine researchers use to “prove” the “efficacy” of their vaccines. The chemical kitchen sink is thrown at the immune system in order to conserve the expensive-to- produce antigen and to generate a more intense immune response — a process, not unlike what happens when you kick a beehive. These chemicals include detergents, anti-freeze, heavy metals, DNA from aborted human fetuses (diploid cells) and other species, etc.
Amazingly, vaccine researchers and manufacturers do not have to prove the antibodies actually have affinity with the antigens they are marketed to protect us against, i.e. they do not have to prove “effectiveness,” only “efficacy.” This semantic trick is at the root of how the world has been deceived into accepting interventions so dangerous that their risk, like nuclear power, is underwritten by world governments, not private insurers who know they would go bankrupt paying out claims to the injured.
Another point that can not be understated is that the trivalent (3-strained) influenza vaccines are incapable of protecting us against the wide range of pathogens which produce influenza-like illness:
“Over 200 viruses cause influenza and influenza-like illness which produce the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches and pains, cough and runny noses). Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot tell the two illnesses apart. Both last for days and rarely lead to death or serious illness. At best, vaccines might be effective against only Influenza A and B, which represent about 10% of all circulating viruses.” (Cochrane Database).
It is therefore exceedingly clear that it is a mathematical impossibility for influenza vaccines to be effective at preventing wild-circulating strains of influenza. Nutritional support, then, becomes the most logical and reasonable solution.
Immune Status Determines Susceptibility to Infection
The fact is that our immune status determines susceptibility. If the immune system is continually challenged with environmental toxicants, nutritional deficiencies and/or incompatibilities, chronic stress, influenza is far more likely to take hold. If your immune system is strong, many infectious challenges occur, are met with an appropriate response, and often go unnoticed. In other words, it is not a lack of a vaccination that causes infection, rather, the inability of the immune system to function effectively. [Note: In some cases, we may become infected and the ultimate outcome is that we enjoy even greater immunity.]
While there are a broad spectrum of natural substances which have been studied for their anti-influenza properties, vitamin D deserves special consideration due to the fact that it is indispensable to produce antiviral peptides (e.g. cathelicidin) within the immune system, and can be supported for pennies a day.
A study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2010, revealed that children receiving 1200 IUs of vitamin D a day were at 59% reduced risk for contracting seasonal Influenza A infection. Moreover as a secondary outcome, only 2 children in the treatment group versus 12 for the control group, experienced an asthma attack.
There are actually a broad range of preventive strategies that are evidence-based, and available without prescription.
1) Echinacea Tea: J Altern Complement Med. 2000 Aug;6(4):327-34
2) Elderberry: J Altern Complement Med. 1995 Winter;1(4):361-9.
3) American Ginseng: J Altern Complement Med. 2006 Mar;12(2):153-7.
4) Green Tea: J Nutr. 2011 Oct ;141(10):1862-70. Epub 2011 Aug 10.
5) Probiotics: Pediatrics. 2009 Aug;124(2):e172-9.
6) Vitamin D: PLoS One. 2010;5(6):e11088. Epub 2010 Jun 14.
From 7 Billion People To 500 Million People – The Sick Population Control Agenda Of The Global Elite …
Posted: October 29, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, beverages, Bilderberg, calcium, Cell phones, cilantro, Conspiracy Theory, Dajjal, Dajjal Illuminati, Deadly Viruses, Dumbing Down Society, Fluoride, Food Poisoning Leave a commentThe United Nationshas officially designated October 31st as 7 Billion Day. On that day, theUnited Nations estimates that the population of the earth will hit 7 billion for the very first time. But instead of celebrating what a milestone 7 billion people represents, the UNPF is focusing instead on using October 31st to raise awareness about “sustainability” and “sustainable development”. In other words, the United Nations is once again declaring that there are way too many people on the planet and that we need to take more direct measures to reduce fertility. In recent years, the UN and other international organizations have become bolder about trying to push the sick population controlagenda of the global elite. Most of the time organizations such as the UN will simply talk about “stabilizing” the global population, but as you will see in this article, there are many among the global elite that are not afraid to openly talk about a goal of reducing the population of the world to 500 million (or less). To you and I it may seem like insanity to want to get rid of more than 90 percent of the global population, but there is a growing consensus among the global elite that this is absolutely necessary for the good of the planet.
As we approach October 31st, dozens of articles are appearing in newspapers all over the globe that are declaring what a horrible thing it is that we are up to 7 billion people.
In fact, it surely is no accident that the United Nations put 7 Billion Day on the exact same day as Halloween. Perhaps they want to highlight how “scary” it is that we have 7 billion people on the planet, or perhaps they are trying to send us a message by having 7 Billion Day occur on the same day as “the festival of death”.
In any event, it seems like way too much of a coincidence that 7 Billion Day just happens to fall on the same day as Halloween.
Today, “sustainable development” has become one of the key buzzwords that those in the radicalenvironmental movement love to use, but most Americans have no idea that one of the key elements of “sustainable development” is population control.
So what precisely is considered to be an ideal population for the earth by those pushing “sustainable development”?
Well, of course there is much disagreement on this issue, but many are very open about the fact that they believe that the earth should only have 500 million people (or less) on it.
For example, the first of the “new 10 commandments” on the infamous Georgia Guidestones states the following….
“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.”
CNN Founder Ted Turner would go even farther….
“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
Dave Foreman, the co-founder of Earth First, says that reducing our population down to 100 million is one of his three main goals….
“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”
Sadly, this kind of garbage is even being taught at major U.S. universities. For example, Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka once wrote the following….
I do not bear any ill will toward people. However, I am convinced that the world, including all humanity, WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us.
Mikhail Gorbachev thinks that reducing the global population by 90 percent would be just about right….
“We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren’t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.”
But most of the time, the way that the global elite speak of population control is much more “politically correct”. They tend to use terms such as “sustainable development” and “reduction of fertility rates” and “quality of life” when discussing the need to reduce our population.
As 7 Billion Day has approached, there have been articles popping up in major publications all over the globe that are advocating increased population control measures. Of course in the western world such measures are always framed as being “voluntary”, but that is the way that they always introduce things like this. Once enough people get on board with the “voluntary” population control measures they will become “mandatory”.
So now that you are aware of some of the buzzwords that are used, check out what has been written on some of the biggest news websites in the world recently….
Jeffrey D. Sachs, the director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University, recently said the following in an article for CNN….
“The arrival of the 7 billionth person is cause for profound global concern. It carries a challenge: What will it take to maintain a planet in which each person has a chance for a full, productive and prosperous life, and in which the planet’s resources are sustained for future generations?“How, in short, can we enjoy ‘sustainable development’ on a very crowded planet?”
For Sachs, one of the “keys” to sustainable development is the “stabilization” of the global population….
“The second key to sustainable development is the stabilization of the global population. This is already occurring in high-income and even some middle-income countries, as families choose to have one or two children on average. The reduction of fertility rates should be encouraged in the poorer countries as well.”
In a recent article for the Guardian, Roger Martin stated that all of the problems that humanity is facing would be easier to solve if less people were running around the planet….
“…all environmental (and many economic and social) problems are easier to solve with fewer people, and ultimately impossible with ever more.”
He also says that if we reduce the population, it will mean better lives for all the rest of us….
“On a finite planet, the optimum population providing the best quality of life for all, is clearly much smaller than the maximum, permitting bare survival. The more we are, the less for each; fewer people mean better lives.”
But is that really the case?
Of course not.
There has been tremendous human suffering all throughout history. If we eliminated 90 percent of the global population it would not suddenly usher in some kind of “golden age”.
But many among the global elite are truly convinced that we are spoiling “their planet” and they don’t want so many of us around anymore. Thanks to technology, they only need a few hundred million people to run their system, and they view the rest of us as “useless eaters”.
This all may sound quite bizarre to many of you, but this is the kind of stuff that is being taught in colleges and universities across the western world.
In fact, you are starting to see an increasing number of people in the western world actually suggest that we adopt a “one-child policy” such as China has. For example, the following is from an opinion piece that appeared in the National Post….
A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days.
The author of the opinion piece believes that such a “one-child policy” would reduce the global population to 3.43 billion by 2075….
The intelligence behind this is the following:-If only one child per female was born as of now, the world’s population would drop from its current 6.5 billion to 5.5 billion by 2050, according to a study done for scientific academy Vienna Institute of Demography.-By 2075, there would be 3.43 billion humans on the planet. This would have immediate positive effects on the world’s forests, other species, the oceans, atmospheric quality and living standards.
This is the kind of stuff that a lot of these people sit around and think about all day long.
They are obsessed with death and with reducing the population as rapidly as possible. They see us as a “plague” that is ravaging the planet, and they believe that by getting rid of us they would actually be saving the earth.
Due to public opinion, population control advocates have to tread lightly in the western world. But where they can get away with it, they are not afraid to be very forceful.
I have already discussed the horrific one-child policy in China. As the Epoch Times recently noted, enforcement of this policy can be absolutely brutal….
“Pregnant women lacking birth permits are hunted down like criminals by population planning police in China and forcibly aborted.”
If you don’t believe something like this can ever happen in the western world, you might want to think again.
Limitations on child births are already showing up in popular television shows. For example, a new show on Fox called Terra Nova portrays the future of the earth as a living hell due to overpopulation. People in the future can hardly breathe the air due to overwhelming pollution and a strict “two-child policy” is rigidly enforced.
The family featured in Terra Nova is able to go through a portal to a prehistoric world that is 85 million years in the past. In this “new world”, humans have set up a wonderful new socialist society where everyone is provided for and where “green technology” is helping them to avoid making the “mistakes” of the past.
Unfortunately, socialist utopias such as the one portrayed on Terra Nova only exist in works of fiction.
Instead, what happens most of the time in real life is that the “good intentions” of social planners devolve into absolute tyranny when put into practice.
For example, just check out what a recent National Geographic article said happened when social planners in India tried to aggressively reduce birth rates in India in the 1970s….
The Indian government tried once before to push vasectomies, in the 1970s, when anxiety about the population bomb was at its height. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her son Sanjay used state-of-emergency powers to force a dramatic increase in sterilizations. From 1976 to 1977 the number of operations tripled, to more than eight million. Over six million of those were vasectomies. Family planning workers were pressured to meet quotas; in a few states, sterilization became a condition for receiving new housing or other government benefits. In some cases the police simply rounded up poor people and hauled them to sterilization camps.
How would you feel if you were rounded up and hauled off to a sterilization camp?
Sterilization programs (most of the time they are “voluntary”) are in full force all over the globe. Much of the time they are sponsored and funded by the United Nations. The global elite are absolutely obsessed with getting women to have less babies.
That is one reason why abortion is so very important to them.
Recently, Al Gore made the following statement regarding population control….
“One of the things we could do about it is to change the technologies, to put out less of this pollution, to stabilize the population, and one of the principle ways of doing that is to empower and educate girls and women. You have to have ubiquitous availability of fertility management so women can choose how many children have, the spacing of the children.
The elite love to use terms such as “fertility management” and “family planning”, but what they really intend is for there to be less pregnancies and more abortions so that the population will not grow as quickly.
They certainly do not intend to empower women to have more children.
This agenda was also very much reflected when the March 2009 U.N. Population Division policy brief asked this shocking question….
“What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?”
Now who in the world gave the UN the right to be trying to “accelerate fertility decline” for women in poor countries?
But to many in the global elite, trying to get women to have less babies makes all the sense in the world. In a recent editorial for the New York Times entitled “The Earth Is Full“, Thomas L. Friedman made the following statement….
You really do have to wonder whether a few years from now we’ll look back at the first decade of the 21st century — when food prices spiked, energy prices soared, world population surged, tornados plowed through cities, floods and droughts set records, populations were displaced and governments were threatened by the confluence of it all — and ask ourselves: What were we thinking? How did we not panic when the evidence was so obvious that we’d crossed some growth/climate/natural resource/population redlines all at once?
These people honestly and truly believe this stuff.
Unfortunately, this agenda is even represented in the highest levels of our own government.
Barack Obama’s top science advisor, John P. Holdren, once wrote the following….
“A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”
Holdren also believes that compulsory abortion would be perfectly legal under the U.S. Constitution….
“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”
The following are 8 more quotes that show the mindset that a lot of these population control advocates have….
“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”
#2 U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg….
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
#3 David Rockefeller….
“The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident.”
#4 Jacques Cousteau….
“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day.”
#5 Prince Phillip, the Duke of Edinburgh….
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
#6 David Brower, first Executive Director of the Sierra Club….
“Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license … All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
#7 Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger….
“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
#8 Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12….
“Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”
When you believe that the earth has way too many people, human life becomes cheap, and abortion becomes a way to get rid of undesirables.
According to a recent article in the Daily Mail, thousands of “abnormal” babies are now being selectively aborted in the UK each year….
Thousands of pregnancies were aborted last year for ‘abnormalities’ including 500 for Down’s syndrome, new figures reveal.In total, there were 2,290 abortions for medical problems with the foetus, with 147 performed after 24 weeks.
In a world that is “overpopulated”, babies that are not “perfect” become more “disposable” than ever.
In fact, the truth is that the population control agenda and the “abortion rights movement” have been inseparably linked for decades. Those that are obsessed with “overpopulation” view abortion as a very necessary method of birth control, and one of their main goals is to expand access to “reproductive health care” to as many women around the globe as possible.
But in the end, our “voluntary” actions are not going to be nearly enough to reduce the population and most population control advocates realize that. Many of them are openly calling for a “benevolent” global authority to take charge to lead us through the “necessary” transition that is ahead.
In a previous article, I described the type of world that the radical population control advocates see for our future….
Imagine going to sleep one night and waking up many years later in a totally different world. In this futuristic world, literally everything you do is tightly monitored and controlled by control freak bureaucrats in the name of “sustainable development” and with the goal of promoting “the green agenda”. An international ruling body has centralized global control over all human activity. What you eat, what you drink, where you live, how warm or cold your home can be and how much fuel you can use is determined by them. Anyone that dissents or that tries to rebel against the system is sent off for “re-education”. The human population is 90 percent lower than it is today in this futuristic society, and all remaining humans have been herded into tightly constricted cities which are run much like prisons.
This is the endgame for the radical green agenda. In order to save the earth, they feel as though they must dramatically reduce our numbers and very tightly control our activities.
But is that the kind of a future that anyone would actually want to live in? Would anyone actually choose to live in a future where bureaucrats micromanage our lives for the good of the environment?
Personally, I think that the 7 billion people on earth would do just fine if they were given a lot more liberty and freedom to live their own lives as they see fit.
But letting people decide how to run their own lives is anathema to those that have bought into the population control agenda of the global elite.
They actually believe that they are smarter than all of the rest of us and that they need to tell us what to do for the good of humanity and for the good of the planet.
This patronizing approach should truly sicken all freedom-loving Americans.
So what do you think of the population control agenda of the global elite?
Please feel free to leave a comment with your opinion below….
Elites Announce Post Gadhafi Hit List …
Posted: October 22, 2011 Filed under: age of deception, Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, al-Aqsa Mosque, al-Qaeda, Allah, America, Anti-Christ, Anti-Semitism, Antichrist, Ashkenazi Jew, Bank Of England, Barack Obama, Bilderberg Leave a commentThis will make your blood boil if it’s not already.
News “source” outlets like AP and Reuters are owned propaganda mouthpieces for the elite controllers. Whatever they put out, especially in profiling pieces like this, is to give signals, while manipulating public opinion and preparing the populace for the next stages.
Never forget that.
Gadhafi is gone but other US foes remain
WASHINGTON (AP) — Moammar Gadhafi now joins the ranks of powerful foreign figures who have battled the United States only to come to a bad end.
But even with the demise of the Libyan dictator, plus Osama bin Laden, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic, there are still autocrats around the world hostile to the U.S., notably in Cuba,Venezuela, North Korea and Iran.
1. Gadhafi “battled the US” because they ATTACKED him, with the help of the other hired NATO thugs. “What, he dared to not just roll over while we murder his people and family?”
2. Thanks for the hit list, PTBs. You left out Syria, Sudan, Pakistan and whatever Gulf states don’t keep complying, or countries the military corporate industrial complex needs for “strategic purposes”. Self defense is a BS buzzword.
America’s most determined foes have been bucking more than just the world’s sole surviving superpower, which spends as much on its military as all other countries combined. All faced social and technological trends that made their work more difficult by opening more borders to trade and travel, promoting ethnic and religious tolerance and wiring the world for high-speed Internet.
But as long as the U.S. maintains its leadership role in world affairs, it will find itself a tempting target.
3. Military budget as much as the rest of the world combined! That’s to pretend to be concerned, while actually rattling their sabers. And don’t forget they spend 3 times more on private contractors making bank on the blood of innocents. “They that live by the sword shall die by the sword.”
4. “Social and technological trends that make their work more difficult”..i.e. the countries were evolving according to their own dynamics, transitioning at their own speed. The arrogant American and NATO terror-imperialists need to stay the hell out.
5. Twisted misleading lie of the day: “But as long as the U.S. maintains its leadership role in world affairs, it will find itself a tempting target.” If you mean its leadership as a warring monster on innocent populations, it damn well better be a target for those wanting to defend their countries and families!
Not all dictators are regarded as enemies of the U.S.; during the Cold War and beyond, many have been treated as stalwart allies. Today, a number of autocrats endure criticism from the U.S. but are thought to represent little threat to Washington’s strategic interests, including President Aleksander Lukashenko of Belarus, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Omar al-Bashir of Sudan and Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan.
Birds of a feather…Mugabe and Queen Lizzie
6. So what makes US installed brute beasts like Mugabe OK? Doesn’t have any oil? Pays off the US with money or human trafficking or drugs? Yes, folks, it is that dark out there. Follow the money…and power.
From the U.S. perspective, the survival of openly hostile despotic regimes may be less important than the rise of rival economic and political powerhouses like China, India, Brazil and Russia, a trend that some experts say could one day create a world where the United Statesbecomes one major power among many competing for influence and markets.
7. OMG, the US wouldn’t have full reign over the world?…whatta pity. Actually, this is just adding to the list of countries being put on alert…toe the mark or else we’re coming after you too.
The decline and fall of Gadhafi, Saddam and others doesn’t mean the age of hostile dictatorships is ending. Just as enemies can become allies, allies can become adversaries. Source
8. How perceptive. You mean it’s all politics dancing around rule by force? I’m shocked.
9. And we know “the age of hostile dictatorships is far from over”…the US corporofascist dictatorshipmasquerading as a “free democracy” is at this point the worst, most oppressive, world and society polluting, metastasizing monstrosity to ever attempt to rule the earth.
And if people don’t disengage and disable the mechanics of this now global monster, a much worse worldwide police state awaits.
Meet the cold, hideous face of murder
Watch this wicked CFR gofer joke and laugh at Gadhafi’s outright cold blooded assassination by these monsters. Lady, what goes around comes around. You reap what you sow. I’d rather you woke up from your evil spell and joined conscious humanity but I fear it’s way too late for you and your ilk.
I guess you and yours won’t be needing a trial either, Hills, if this is the form of justice you subscribe to.
See appalling video HERE
Just had to weigh in on this sordid, heartbreaking, wanton destruction and barbaric genocide taking place while these devils wear the mask of “humanitarians”.
Can it get any more Orwellian? I don’t know.
Be well. And be conscious. And please act accordingly. The world is waiting for the awakening.
CDC Caught In Blatant Lies About Pandemics And Vaccines …
Posted: October 22, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, Aspartame, beverages, Bilderberg, calcium, Cell phones, cilantro, Conspiracy Theory, Dajjal, Dajjal Illuminati, Dumbing Down Society, Fluoride Leave a commentThe CDC relies on an authoritative presence to influence not just USA health policy, but world health policy. This prestigious presence also demands more federal funding, which is being questioned. It seems that the CDC’s research, practices, and expenditures have been under scrutiny lately.
Although very few know of what has been hidden from public view regarding CDC investigations, there may soon be too much dirt for the White House to cover upcompletely.
–
–
Remembering the 2008 swine flu hoax
Remember all those pandemic forecasts from the CDC when different high numbers of swine flu outbreaks were reported? A CBS News program called “Washington Unplugged” wanted to know more details on how those figures were derived, but the CDC stonewalled that reporter.
To his credit, he went around the CDC by surveying each individual state’s health agency, and he discovered thatvery few swine flu cases reported by the CDC were confirmed as swine flu.Most were actually a normal “seasonal” flu.
The discrepancy between CDC swine flu statistics and actual confirmed cases was too large to considered sloppy record keeping. Upon further pressure from “Washington Unplugged” news producer, the CDC clamped down more and decided they couldn’t track swine flu cases anymore because “it was too difficult.”
The CDC quit doing what they’re supposed to do because they got caught cooking the swine flu stats.
This was a rare case of kudos for the mainstream media. For those paying attention, it flagged the CDC’s bogus promotion of swine flu shots for aflu that hardly existed and that many considered less dangerous than a normal seasonal flu.
CDC lies about mercury in vaccines
From investigative reporter Tim Bolen of The Bolen Report’s two part article “The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are – And Has Covered It Up” (sourced below). As early as 1998 the CDC knew that there were problems with using thimerosal mercury in vaccines.
This was especially true with the ever increasing childhood vaccination schedule. Their own researchers turned in a internal draft stating this. The CDC decided to cover this up by hiring fake studies to explain away those mercury links to the rising autism rates.
The earliest misleading study was the “Danish Study,” masterminded for the CDC by Kreesten Madsen, whose partner Paul Thorsen has recently been indicted for fraudulent funding activities. This epidemiological study became the cornerstone for the foundation of lies “proving” thimerosal was not a factor for causing autism or other childhood developmental disabilities.
Bolen adds, “Even the US Congress began to smell the CDC stink and investigated.” A congressional committee released a 2003 report calledMercury in Medicine – Taking Unnecessary Risks. The report pdf can be seen here:http://vaccines.procon.org/sourcefi…
Congressman Dan Burton headed theinvestigation. He had a grandchild who was vaccinated then became autistic, and he was ruthless with vaccine industry and CDC representatives while he presided over hearings. The appropriate findings and excellent suggestions were ignored by the Bush administration and the CDC.
Bolen wondered where anti-vaccinationactivist Bobby Kennedy, Jr. got a one in six figure for developmentally challenged children. Then he came across a bulletin from the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics issued in 2004 entitledAutism A.L.A.R.M.(source below) which stated that one in six children had developmental/behavioral issues while one in 166 werediagnosedwith an autistic disorder.
Tim Bolen estimates that from 1998 to 2011, close to 12 million children worldwide have been afflicted with autism, making the worldwide autism ratio one out of 111 children. The CDC claims they don’t understand how this is all happening. They just know it is.
The full title of the CDC is Center for Disease Control and Prevention. They’re very heavily funded but clueless about autism and developmental disorders on the rise?
Ten billion and asking for more
In 2007 Senator Tom Coburn issued a report titledCDC Off Center(source below). The report cites huge mismanagement of funds for non-disease related expenses, generous payrolls, overly lavish facilities, and trips wasting funds on frivolous disease control issues while unable to explain how they are preventing disease.
CBS did a special report on Coburn’s report, and mentioned that even then (2007) the CDC was asking the US Government for an additional billion dollars to its $10 billion dollar budget. See where the money goes on this TV report here:http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/…
David and Goliath
A Ph.D biochemist, Brian Hooker, whose son became autistic after a series of vaccinations, has recently filed a suit against the CDC for violating the Freedom of Information Act by not releasing data he has been requesting since 2005 regarding CDC studies that dismissed mercury vaccine dangers.
According to Bolen, Hooker is going in with top gun lawyers in the Washington, DC loop. He has given the CDC an ultimatum to release the documents he wants by late October 2011. This could be interesting.
Sources for this article include:
Bolen Reports CDC thimerosal cover up part 1http://www.bolenreport.com/Geier/fo…
Bolen reports CDC thimerosal cover up part 2http://www.bolenreport.com/Geier/fo…
CBS 2008 CDC Swine flu investigationhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009…
Senator Tom Coburn’s CDC Off Center reporthttp://coburn.senate.gov/public/ind…
Autism A.L.A.R.M.http://www.ewg.org/files/AutismAlar…
CDC Caught In Blatant Lies About Pandemics And Vaccines …
Posted: October 21, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, America, Aspartame, beverages, Bilderberg, calcium, Cell phones, cilantro, Conspiracy Theory, Dajjal, Dajjal Illuminati, Dumbing Down Society, Fluoride, Food Poisoning Leave a commentThe CDC relies on an authoritative presence to influence not just USA health policy, but world health policy. This prestigious presence also demands more federal funding, which is being questioned. It seems that the CDC’s research, practices, and expenditures have been under scrutiny lately.
Although very few know of what has been hidden from public view regarding CDC investigations, there may soon be too much dirt for the White House to cover upcompletely.
–
–
Remembering the 2008 swine flu hoax
Remember all those pandemic forecasts from the CDC when different high numbers of swine flu outbreaks were reported? A CBS News program called “Washington Unplugged” wanted to know more details on how those figures were derived, but the CDC stonewalled that reporter.
To his credit, he went around the CDC by surveying each individual state’s health agency, and he discovered thatvery few swine flu cases reported by the CDC were confirmed as swine flu.Most were actually a normal “seasonal” flu.
The discrepancy between CDC swine flu statistics and actual confirmed cases was too large to considered sloppy record keeping. Upon further pressure from “Washington Unplugged” news producer, the CDC clamped down more and decided they couldn’t track swine flu cases anymore because “it was too difficult.”
The CDC quit doing what they’re supposed to do because they got caught cooking the swine flu stats.
This was a rare case of kudos for the mainstream media. For those paying attention, it flagged the CDC’s bogus promotion of swine flu shots for aflu that hardly existed and that many considered less dangerous than a normal seasonal flu.
CDC lies about mercury in vaccines
From investigative reporter Tim Bolen of The Bolen Report’s two part article “The CDC Has Known All Along How Dangerous Vaccines Are – And Has Covered It Up” (sourced below). As early as 1998 the CDC knew that there were problems with using thimerosal mercury in vaccines.
This was especially true with the ever increasing childhood vaccination schedule. Their own researchers turned in a internal draft stating this. The CDC decided to cover this up by hiring fake studies to explain away those mercury links to the rising autism rates.
The earliest misleading study was the “Danish Study,” masterminded for the CDC by Kreesten Madsen, whose partner Paul Thorsen has recently been indicted for fraudulent funding activities. This epidemiological study became the cornerstone for the foundation of lies “proving” thimerosal was not a factor for causing autism or other childhood developmental disabilities.
Bolen adds, “Even the US Congress began to smell the CDC stink and investigated.” A congressional committee released a 2003 report calledMercury in Medicine – Taking Unnecessary Risks. The report pdf can be seen here:http://vaccines.procon.org/sourcefi…
Congressman Dan Burton headed theinvestigation. He had a grandchild who was vaccinated then became autistic, and he was ruthless with vaccine industry and CDC representatives while he presided over hearings. The appropriate findings and excellent suggestions were ignored by the Bush administration and the CDC.
Bolen wondered where anti-vaccinationactivist Bobby Kennedy, Jr. got a one in six figure for developmentally challenged children. Then he came across a bulletin from the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics issued in 2004 entitledAutism A.L.A.R.M.(source below) which stated that one in six children had developmental/behavioral issues while one in 166 werediagnosedwith an autistic disorder.
Tim Bolen estimates that from 1998 to 2011, close to 12 million children worldwide have been afflicted with autism, making the worldwide autism ratio one out of 111 children. The CDC claims they don’t understand how this is all happening. They just know it is.
The full title of the CDC is Center for Disease Control and Prevention. They’re very heavily funded but clueless about autism and developmental disorders on the rise?
Ten billion and asking for more
In 2007 Senator Tom Coburn issued a report titledCDC Off Center(source below). The report cites huge mismanagement of funds for non-disease related expenses, generous payrolls, overly lavish facilities, and trips wasting funds on frivolous disease control issues while unable to explain how they are preventing disease.
CBS did a special report on Coburn’s report, and mentioned that even then (2007) the CDC was asking the US Government for an additional billion dollars to its $10 billion dollar budget. See where the money goes on this TV report here:http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/…
David and Goliath
A Ph.D biochemist, Brian Hooker, whose son became autistic after a series of vaccinations, has recently filed a suit against the CDC for violating the Freedom of Information Act by not releasing data he has been requesting since 2005 regarding CDC studies that dismissed mercury vaccine dangers.
According to Bolen, Hooker is going in with top gun lawyers in the Washington, DC loop. He has given the CDC an ultimatum to release the documents he wants by late October 2011. This could be interesting.
Sources for this article include:
Bolen Reports CDC thimerosal cover up part 1http://www.bolenreport.com/Geier/fo…
Bolen reports CDC thimerosal cover up part 2http://www.bolenreport.com/Geier/fo…
CBS 2008 CDC Swine flu investigationhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009…
Senator Tom Coburn’s CDC Off Center reporthttp://coburn.senate.gov/public/ind…
Autism A.L.A.R.M.http://www.ewg.org/files/AutismAlar…
Bilderberg mystery: Why do people believe in cabals?
Posted: October 18, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, Bilderberg, Bilderberg mystery, Why do people believe in cabals Leave a commentNot a really muscular look at the subject, but perhaps a beginning. Unless it’s designed to simply damp down interest in the subject. That’s a possibility too. There’s the ridicule of reptilians, which is probably to be expected given the lack of knowledge of the subject in today’s world. But at least the spotlight is being shined on the Bilderberg, which, like other secretive organizations, does not function well in the glare of publicity. Thanks to Hani.
Bilderberg mystery: Why do people believe in cabals?
BBC News, June 7, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13682082
Ordinary people can only guess at the goings-on at the meetings of the secretive Bilderberg Group, which is bringing together the world’s financial and political elite this week. Conspiracy theories abound as to what is discussed and who is there. Why, asks Tom de Castella?
The belief in secret cabals running the world is a hardy perennial. And on Thursday perhaps the most controversial clandestine organisation of our times – the Bilderberg Group – is meeting behind closed doors.
In the manner of a James Bond plot, up to 150 leading politicians and business people are to gather in a ski resort in Switzerland for four days of discussion about the future of the world.
Previous attendees of the group, which meets once a year in a five-star hotel, are said to have included Bill Clinton, Prince Charles and Peter Mandelson, as well as dozens of company CEOs.
First meeting in 1954, the aim was to shore up US-European relations and prevent another world war. Now under the group’s leadership of former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and one-time EU vice president, Viscount Davignon, the aim is purportedly to allow Western elites to share ideas.
Meaning of cabal
- The use of the world cabal to mean a “secret or private intrigue of a sinister character formed by a small body of persons; ‘something less than conspiracy’ (Ben Johnson)”, was first used in 1660
- Thirty years earlier, it was first used to mean secret
- From “cabala” – Jewish mystical tradition
Source: Oxford English Dictionary
But conspiracy theorists have accused it of everything from deliberately engineering the credit crunch to planning to kill 80% of the world population. Longtime opponent and US radio host Alex Jones, heckled one meeting through a megaphone: “We know you are ruthless. We know you are evil. We respect your dark power.”
Part of the reason for alarm is the group’s secretive working methods. Names of attendees are not usually released before the conference, meetings are closed to the public and the media, and no press releases are issued.
The gnashing of teeth over Bilderberg is ridiculous, says Times columnist David Aaronovitch. “It’s really an occasional supper club for the rich and powerful,” he argues.
Denis Healey, co-founder of the group, told the journalist Jon Ronson in his book Them that people overlook the practical benefits of informal networking. “Bilderberg is the most useful international group I ever attended,” he told him. “The confidentiality enabled people to speak honestly without fear of repercussions.”
So why do groups like this cause so much alarm? Aaronovitch, who wrote the 2009 book Voodoo Histories, says plots to install a new world order have traditionally been a conspiracy fantasy. “They tend to believe that everything true, local and national is under threat from cosmopolitan, international forces often linked to financial capitalism and therefore, also often, to Jewish interests.”
Former European Commissioner Viscount Davignon heads the Bilderberg GroupSecret cabals extend beyond the Bilderberg Group. The Illuminati, which derives from a 16th Century Bavarian secret society, is alleged to be an all powerful secret society, including US presidents, that has controlled major world events. The Freemasons – famous for their peculiar handshakes – is a secret fraternity society that has become more open in recent years after extensive criticism.
The charter of Hamas – the Islamist party governing Gaza – asserts that the Freemasons are in league with the Jews and those unlikely bully boys – the Rotary Club – to undermine Palestine.
John Hamill, spokesman for freemasonry’s governing body in England and Wales says the organisation is aware of Hamas’s allegation.
“There’s no truth in it, freemasonry is apolitical. It probably arises because one of our ceremonies is about the story of King Solomon’s Temple. For some reason Islamic governments translate that into Zionism.”
In fact, many conspiracy theories surrounding cabals hint at an anti-Semitic worldview. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a forged document, probably created by agents of Tsarist Russia, which appeared to show a Jewish plot to take over the world.
Despite being proved to be a fraud, the idea has been kept alive by anti-Semites and has spawned later versions. One of those, the Zionist Occupational Government, argues that countries have puppet governments but that the real power is held by Jewish interests.
It’s much smarter than conspiracy – this is moulding the way people think so that it seems like there’s no alternative to what is happening” Prof Andrew Kakabadse, Bilderberg People
More recently, former sports journalist David Icke has proclaimed that the world is governed by alien, reptilian shape shifters. In other words, giant lizards.
There is obviously no right-wing monopoly on conspiracy theories. During the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Hilary Clinton blamed a “vast right-wing conspiracy” for her husband’s predicament. And more recently, some on the left have argued that the 9/11 attacks were organised by President Bush’s inner circle in order to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
The politics of cabals has always been pretty muddled, says James McConnachie, co-author of the Rough Guide to Conspiracy Theories. These groups allow protesters to project their own fears onto them.
In the US, the most extreme fear over Bilderberg is of a hidden cabal run by the European Union and threatening American freedoms. In Europe, the view is often of a free market elite trying to push through a right-wing agenda.
“Conspiracy theories are quite blind to conventional notions of left and right,” says McConnachie. “The left is organising an international government. Meanwhile, global capitalism on the right may be doing the same thing by different means.”
For Aaronovitch what often triggers widespread cabal theories are moments of great upheaval.
“It happens a lot when times are changing significantly. Whether, oddly, they are changing for better as well as for the worse. Why did McCarthyism happen at the time when US economy was growing faster than at any time in history?”
Society was in flux, the economy expanding rapidly and millions of servicemen were coming back from the war.
It’s not just the about social context. Some people are more susceptible than others to believing in wacky cabals, says Prof Chris French, of Goldsmith College’s psychology department. “It’s people who tend to be alienated by the mainstream, who feel powerless. They have a need to have a sense of control.”
Not only do they not trust the government, they tend not to trust their neighbours either. And in the need for control, there may be links to the roots of religious belief, he says.
The conspiracy theorists may get overexcited but they have a point, says Prof Andrew Kakabadse, co-author of new book Bilderberg People.
Secret talks
- Bilderberg is named after the Dutch hotel where the first meeting took place in 1954
- The initial focus was the state of the trans-Atlantic alliance and the problems facing Europe and the US
- British Labour politician Denis Healey was a founding member
- An invitation list is compiled each year by a steering committee
- About 120 people from North America and Europe are invited. About one-third are from government and politics, and two-thirds from finance, industry, labour, education and communications
- Meetings often feature future political leaders shortly before they become household names. Bill Clinton went in 1991 while still governor of Arkansas, Tony Blair was there two years later while an opposition MP
The group has genuine power that far outranks the World Economic Forum, which meets in Davos, he argues. And with no transparency, it is easy to see why people are worried about its influence.
“It’s much smarter than conspiracy,” says Prof Kakabadse. “This is moulding the way people think so that it seems like there’s no alternative to what is happening.”
The agenda the group has is to bring together the political elites on both right and left, let them mix in relaxed, luxurious surroundings with business leaders, and let the ideas fizz.
It may seem like a glorified dinner party but that is to miss the point. “When you’ve been to enough dinner parties you see a theme emerging,” he says. The theme at Bilderberg is to bolster a consensus around free market Western capitalism and its interests around the globe, he says.
“Is this all leading to the start of the ruling the world idea? In one sense yes. There’s a very strong move to have a One World government in the mould of free market Western capitalism.”
Degree of nefariousness
Conventional critiques of alienated people seeking order in a chaotic world may well be true. But there’s more to it than that, McConnachie argues.
“The other explanation is more dangerous. That they are precisely right – they just over-egg the way they articulate it.”
The Bilderberg Group matches up to how a global conspiracy would work – a secretive body attempting to shape the direction of the world, he suggests.
“The only difference is the degree of nefariousness,” he says. “They tend to see this cabal as outright evil. When things are more nuanced than that.”
For all the tales of lizards running the world, we all owe a debt to conspiracy theorists, McConnachie argues.
“Occasionally you have to give credit to conspiracy theorists who raise issues that the mainstream press has ignored. It’s only recently that the media has picked up on the Bilderbergers. Would the media be running stories if there weren’t these wild allegations flying around?”
But Aaronovitch disagrees. Believing in cabals leads to certain groups being victimised and obstructs a rational view of the world.
“To have a strong belief in the Bilderberg Group means believing in a fantasy,” he says. “It suggests that there are people – like God – acting as a higher power. And it replaces the intolerable thought that there’s nothing at work at all, that the world is chaotic. It may be a form of therapy but it has people believing in an anti-scientific message.”
China Calls it a Western Plot …
Posted: October 18, 2011 Filed under: Ahmed Sajjad Hashemy, Bilderberg, Coverage of Bilderberg, ISRAEL, Media, Media Consumption, Media Influence, Social Media, We Did It Leave a commentDestabilizing China and attempting to overthrow a government of 1.3 billion people most certainly is a grievous act of war. Add to that operations unfolding across Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe and South America and you have a recipe for World War III.
While initially passed off as spontaneous, wholly organic uprisings, the smirking corporate-financier oligarchs are now conceding that indeed they have meticulously planned, trained, funded, and supported uprisingsfrom Tunisia to Egypt, fromTehran and Belarus toBurma and Beijing. With Western forces storming Libya and the Ivory Coast from above, they are signaling their will to bring their global campaign from proxy forces on the ground to armed intervention, with Iraq and Afghanistan proving their will to invade and occupy as the truest expression of imperial ambition.International Reaction
While Clinton and Obama talk about the “one voice” the world speaks with, in reality they are referring to the US, UK, EU and their coalition of the coerced. When the UNSC r.1973 regarding using force against Libya was brought to vote, Russia, China, India, Brazil and even Germany abstained. And while the US did indeed vote “yes” they did so without consulting the nation’s legislative branch, circumventing their own national constitution to illegally ramrod the intervention through.
China, after being targeted by similar “revolutionary” activities as seen in the Middle East and Northern Africa has now accused the United States of “using the issue of human rights reports to interfere in other countries’ internal affairs.” It should be noted that these “reports” come from entirely disingenuous corporate-funded organizations. It should also be noted that indeed the US has now admitted to funding activist groups and equipping them with technology to organize and carry out subversive activities within their respective countries.
The Washington Post in March 2011 reported that the US State Department, US Department of Defense, and Broadcasting Board of Governors, upon which Secretary of State Hillary Clintonsits as a director, are funding tech firms providing dissidents with means to undermine their governments in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, and even China. More recently an AFP report in April 2011 reported that the US State Department has also been providing training to thousands of dissents at locations around the world before sending them back to undermine the respective governments. Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Iran, and China are all listed as nations targeted by the US State Department’s activities.
So it comes as a surprise to see US foreign policy think-tanks like the “Neo-Conservative” PNAC redux Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) propose that China is “paranoid” for calling these openly admitted US funded destabilizations a “vast Western conspiracy.” FPI has also concluded that not only is China’s response to openly foreign-funded sedition unreasonable, but such a response demands further action to be taken by the United States. Such brazen hubris can only be expected from a group consisting of global elitists who have neither paid the cost of their agenda financially nor shouldered a rifle to defend it.
So it comes as a surprise to see US foreign policy think-tanks like the “Neo-Conservative” PNAC redux Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) propose that China is “paranoid” for calling these openly admitted US funded destabilizations a “vast Western conspiracy.” FPI has also concluded that not only is China’s response to openly foreign-funded sedition unreasonable, but such a response demands further action to be taken by the United States. Such brazen hubris can only be expected from a group consisting of global elitists who have neither paid the cost of their agenda financially nor shouldered a rifle to defend it.
Many of the “activists” at the center of the US State Department’s concerted attack on China are being granted “pro-bono” legal aid form the globalist “Freedom Now” organization, funded and lined by Council on Foreign Relations members and corporate funded foundations.
From a March 2011 Land Destroyer report “Target China:”
The corporate-financier run Western media has been recently beating their chests over the imprisonment of Nobel Laureate and “human rights activist” Liu Xiaobo, a proponent of ending China’s strong central government and politically active military in favor of a weak, Western-style system run by corruptible, feckless, incompetent leadership that invites multinational corporations to entropically infest state institutions and seize control of the nation’s people and resources. Liu Xiaobo’s support goes beyond the media’s scornful chastisement of China’s government on his behalf, and includes “pro-bono” legal aid from theCouncil on Foreign Relations lined “Freedom Now” organization. Readers may remember “Freedom Now” from their extensive involvement in supporting the Syrian opposition leading the recent unrest against the Assad government.
Freedom Now is also providing legal services for Gao Zhisheng, a human rights lawyer also imprisoned in China. Gao had written an open letter to the US Congress detailing human rights violations in China, and his family currently resides in the United States. Council on Foreign Relations minion Jerome Cohen, Canadian MP Irwin Cotler, and former Canadian MP David Kilgour are personally leading the campaigns for both Liu Ziaobo and Gao Zhisheng. All three, are also involved in meddling around the globe in similarly hypocritical gambits revolving around “human rights activists” who just so happen to be fighting governments the West would like to see changed.
While it may seem noble to champion for human rights, it is a matter of fact that men like Cohen, Cotler, and Kilgour, and the entire Freedom Now organization along with the CFR that populates its membership and the foundations that fund it, are amongst the greatest enemies of human rights and human freedom on earth. The Council on Foreign Relations has tirelessly repeated its goal of establishing a one world government, with members working ceaselessly to achieve it and their publications over the decades perpetually reflecting this ambition. This is a world government that is of, by, and for the corporate-financier oligarchy’s interests, and their interests alone.
China’s Response
China has now openly charged the West with interfering in their internal affairs. In a recent Reuters report, “China crackdown driven by fears of a broad conspiracy,” it stated that “Chinese leaders believe domestic foes, their foreign backers and Western governments are scheming to undermine and ultimately topple the Communist Party. Recent speeches and articles from security officials echo with warnings of subversive plots backed by Western “anti-China” forces.”
Indeed, considering the evidence both openly admitted and being carried out through less visible channels like the Freedom Now organization, this is more than a paranoid conspiracy theory, it is a stated fact that indicates China is not only aware of what is happening inside their own country, but also who is really behind it.
The Reuters report continues by stating, “But what outsiders may see as a loose, disparate group of dissidents, bloggers, lawyers, and grassroots agitators, China’s security police treat as a subversive, Western-backed coalition with the potential to erupt into outright opposition.” The reality is that these groups are only seen as being a loose, disparate opposition because the Western media is portraying them as such, even in light of recent admissions from the State Department on the contrary.
China, according to the Reuters report, “view that “color revolutions” that swept Central Asia several years ago were Western-promoted rehearsals for a similar subversive assault on China.” All evidence clearly says that these were Western created, funded, and supported organizations operating in Serbia in 2000 as the Otpor movement, which later became CANVAS, training protesters from the Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia, and more recently from Tunisia and Egypt. The scale on which organizations like CANVAS meddle across the globe is admitted in Foreign Policy’s “Revolution U” article where CANVAS claims to have worked with groups from over 50 other countries.
Iran & Syria
China then is not simply paranoid but grappling with a very real, concerted effort to destabilize its 1.3 billion population and collapse its government. Joining China in its condemnation of the West’s meddling is Iran which has recently stated that the unrest in Syria is also a Western plot. The evidence is overwhelming, with Syrian opposition amongst the many receiving aid to destabilize and topple their governments from the US, and opposition parties on the ground with leadership operating out of the US and London.
Iran itself was the subject of a 156 page Brookings Institute Report titled “Which Path to Persia?” detailing the use of covert military operations, foreign-backed color revolutions, sanctions, and outright military invasion to topple the Iranian government and institute regime change. Much of what was detailed in the report has already begun to unfold not only in Iran but in Libya as well.
Belarus
Belarus, also the target of US funded CANVAS trained mobs, foreign funded opposition,sanctions, and Congressional resolutions declaring the Belarusian government “illegitimate,” has also made statements that the unrest in their nation was the result of a Western plot. Quite clearly it is, and with the recent bombing of Minsk’s subway resulting in the death of 12, Belarus’ government has reiterated the fact that it is a target of Western destabilization with President Alexander Lukashenko specifically saying the bombing may have been “a gift from abroad.”
Joe Liberman betrays his mandate given by the American people and the US Constitution to explainhis resolution of incorporating Belarus into the “Euro-Atlantic world.” The US has spent years trying to absorb the former Soviet territories into the “Washington Consensus.”
Implications
The charade is over, and the reality of global confrontation between the West and the world it presumes dominion over is beginning. What was once eluded to only within the halls of think-tanks and obscure commentary is now headline news. For the people of the world, it would be beneficial to recognize it is not servile, feckless politicians like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or Joe Liberman that are responsible for this confrontation. It is the multinational corporate-financier oligarchs that transcend borders and to a certain degree already dominate this planet.
Identifying them is the first step to stopping them. Full-spectrum boycotts and campaigns to eliminate and replace their presence within our local communities is what we can start doing today. Politicians afar can be compromised and coerced and cannot be looked to in order to solve our problems, we must look within ourselves and to our communities. We can either do this now, or face the consequences of being bled financially and quite literally as this confrontation intensifies.
The Vision Media 