KommonCents

Democrat can’t wait 5 minutes after the OK tornado to blame the proven hoax ‘global warming’

2013-05-21T16:13:00.001-04:00

The global warming hoax has been the engine driving the plan to steal the earth’s real estate and resources and enslave mankind through UN Agenda 21. It’s probably the number one tool for setting up the new world order.

That’s why they will hold on to it at all costs despite the plain evidence that not only is there no ‘manmade’ global warming occurring, there is no global warming at all.

Despite the fact that tornado outbreaks are substantially down and there’s been no warming in 15 years:

Dem Senator uses for rant over global warming...

Flashback 1975: Outbreaks Blamed On Global COOLING...

Unexplained ‘standstill’ in global warming since 1998 simple answer—it isn’t happening!

2013-05-20T19:21:00.001-04:00

The hoax has been revealed, no warming has taken place for 15 years, in fact, it’s been getting cooler…

Still, it will not go away, they have too much invested in it. It is the major driver in UN Agenda 21, the tool with which they are stealing the earth’s real estate! Who are they? You know who they are, there are many names, but put simply, they’re the people behind the new world order!

BBC: Unexplained 'standstill' in 'global warming' -- since 1998!

Anchorage sets record for longest snow season...

Climate slowdown means extreme rates of warming 'not as likely'

By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent, BBC News

The impacts of rising temperature are being felt particularly keenly in the polar regions

Scientists say the recent downturn in the rate of global warming will lead to lower temperature rises in the short-term.

Since 1998, there has been an unexplained "standstill" in the heating of the Earth's atmosphere.

Writing in Nature Geoscience, the researchers say this will reduce predicted warming in the coming decades.

But long-term, the expected temperature rises will not alter significantly.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

The most extreme projections are looking less likely than before”

End Quote Dr Alexander Otto University of Oxford

The slowdown in the expected rate of global warming has been studied for several years now. Earlier this year, the UK Met Office lowered their five-year temperature forecast.

But this new paper gives the clearest picture yet of how any slowdown is likely to affect temperatures in both the short-term and long-term.

An international team of researchers looked at how the last decade would impact long-term, equilibrium climate sensitivity and the shorter term climate response.

Transient nature

Climate sensitivity looks to see what would happen if we doubled concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere and let the Earth's oceans and ice sheets respond to it over several thousand years.

Transient climate response is much shorter term calculation again based on a doubling of CO2.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported in 2007 that the short-term temperature rise would most likely be 1-3C (1.8-5.4F).

But in this new analysis, by only including the temperatures from the last decade, the projected range would be 0.9-2.0C.

The report suggests that warming in the near term will be less than forecast

"The hottest of the models in the medium-term, they are actually looking less likely or inconsistent with the data from the last decade alone," said Dr Alexander Otto from the University of Oxford.

"The most extreme projections are looking less likely than before."

The authors calculate that over the coming decades global average temperatures will warm about 20% more slowly than expected.

But when it comes to the longer term picture, the authors say their work is consistent with previous estimates. The IPCC said that climate sensitivity was in the range of 2.0-4.5C.

Ocean storage

This latest research, including the decade of stalled temperature rises, produces a range of 0.9-5.0C.

"It is a bigger range of uncertainty," said Dr Otto.

"But it still includes the old range. We would all like climate sensitivity to be lower but it isn't."

The researchers say the difference between the lower short-term estimate and the more consistent long-term picture can be explained by the fact that the heat from the last decade has been absorbed into and is being stored by the world's oceans.

Not everyone agrees with this perspective.

Prof Steven Sherwood, from the University of New South Wales, says the conclusion about the oceans needs to be taken with a grain of salt for now.

"There is other research out there pointing out that this storage may be part of a natural cycle that will eventually reverse, either due to El Nino or the so-called Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and therefore may not imply what the authors are suggesting," he said.

The authors say there are ongoing uncertainties surrounding the role of aerosols in the atmosphere and around the issue of clouds.

"We would expect a single decade to jump around a bit but the overall trend is independent of it, and people should be exactly as concerned as before about what climate change is doing," said Dr Otto.

Is there any succour in these findings for climate sceptics who say the slowdown over the past 14 years means the global warming is not real?

"None. No comfort whatsoever," he said.

IRS used as political weapon against White House enemies

2013-05-17T18:11:00.001-04:00

`This is scandalous for sure but ask yourselves why they put this out when they did. The news world was consumed with Benghazi, finally, after all it happened over 8 months ago, and the questions were piling up. They needed to change the subject.`

It’s a well know ploy to get out of big trouble, confess to a lesser transgression. So, just how bad is Benghazi? Chances are we will not find out in our lifetimes now that the magnifying glass has been focused somewhere else!

`IRS HID PROBE UNTIL AFTER ELECTION...`

Agency stalled conservative groups, but gave speedy approval to Obama foundation...

`Used 'planted' question to reveal scandal...`

This is evidence that this scandal was intended to take Benghazi off the news cycle! 'Absolutely Not Illegal'... Lesser transgression confessed to, however, the assertion that it was absolutely not illegal may not pan out! 'IS THIS STILL AMERICA?' Charlie Rangel outraged: 'Wrong to Abuse the Tax System'... IRS ASKED GROUP ABOUT 'CONTENT OF THEIR PRAYERS' THEY KNEW

This woman, the person in charge when these conservative groups were targeted, is now in charge of the IRS enforcement arm of Obamacare!

IN CHARGE DURING 'TEA PARTY' TARGETING, NOW RUNS IRS OBAMACARE OFFICE...

If this doesn’t scare you you are obviously not a conservative!

IRS henchwoman got $103,390 in bonuses...

Top Dem Warns: Much More to Come...
OUSTED CHIEF: 'Don't Remember' ...

House Chairman Accuses WH of 'Cover-Up'...
Political intimidation...
Conservative Hispanic Groups Targeted...
NOONAN: This Is No Ordinary Scandal...

News Anchor Who Complained of IRS Harassment 'Off the Air'...
How You Can Tell If the IRS Is Eyeing You...

Franken urged IRS to target tea party in 2012...
Did bias extend to targeting conservative companies?

WOAH- HUGE STORY!!… Obama IRS Asked Tea Party Groups For Back-End Access to Their Websites

Congressman Receives Standing Ovation After He Rips IRS Commissioner...

The truth about abortion is coming out with the exposure of gruesome murders committed by ‘doctors’

2013-05-17T13:43:00.001-04:00

Another abortion 'house of horrors' in TX?

Doctor accused of illegal late-term procedures...

'Twisted heads off fetus' necks with bare hands'...

Second 'house of horrors' abortion clinic where doctor 'twisted heads off fetus' necks with his bare hands' is investigated in Texas

Houston doctor Douglas Karpen is accused by four former employees of delivering live babies during third-trimester abortions and killing them
Witnesses said he would either snip their spinal cords, stab a surgical instrument into their heads or twist their heads off with his hands
Texas Department of State Health Services is using in its investigating of the doctor
Accusations come days after Dr Kermit Gosnells was found guilty of murdering newborns at his Philadelphia abortion clinic

By Helen Pow PUBLISHED: 17:24 EST, 16 May 2013 | UPDATED: 11:54 EST, 17 May 2013

A second 'house of horrors' abortion clinic is being investigated in Texas, just days after Dr Kermit Gosnell was found guilty of murdering newborns at his Philadelphia termination center.

Dr. Douglas Karpen, seen here in court, is accused of killing babies aborted in their third trimester

Houston doctor Douglas Karpen is accused by four former employees of delivering live fetuses during third-trimester abortions and killing them by either snipping their spinal cord, stabbing a surgical instrument into their heads or 'twisting their heads off their necks with his own bare hands'.

Other times the fetus was so big he would have to pull it out of the womb in pieces, Karpen's ex-assistant, Deborah Edge, said in an Operation Rescue video, which has prompted a criminal investigation into the doctor.

'Sometimes he couldn't get the fetus out... he would yank pieces – piece by piece – when they were oversize,' Edge explained.

'And I'm talking about the whole floor dirty. I'm talking about me drenched in blood.'

Two of Edge's colleagues, Gigi Aguliar, and Krystal Rodriguez, also described the hellish scenes which took place at the Aaron Women's Clinic in Houston in 2011, and possibly two other abortion clinics run by Karpen in Texas.

Another staffer, who remains anonymous, filed an affidavit with her account of events, which the Texas Department of State Health Services is using in its investigation.

'We have several people looking into the allegations,' Harris County District Attorney spokesman Sara Marie Kinney told Chron.com.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said he had read the allegations 'with disgust' before calling for a full investigation into Karpen and his clinics.

SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO - WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT

Speaking out: Krystal Rodriguez, left, Deborah Edge, center, and Gigi Aguliar, right, have all come forward to talk about their former boss Karpan

Anti-abortion film claims doctor killed fetuses outside womb

Lifenews.com, an anti-abortion news website, has published cell phone photographs taken by the employees of fetuses with gashes in their necks after they were killed at the clinic, though these are far too gruesome for MailOnline to show.

Edge said fetuses were killed well after 24 weeks gestation at the Houston clinic, which resulted in a sweat-inducing job that took about an hour per procedure. She said every morning on multiple occasions she would see fetuses born alive and then quickly killed by the doctor.

'When he did an abortion, especially an over 20 week abortion, most of the time the fetus would come completely out before he either cut the spinal cord or he introduced one of the instruments into the soft spot of the fetus in order to kill it.... or actually twisting the head off the neck with his own bare hands,' she explained.

'It was still alive because it was still moving and you could see the stomach breathing.'

The women described one occasion where a fetus that Karpen thought was dead suddenly 'opened its eyes and grabbed (the doctor's) finger' after he wrenched it from the womb. However, it met a similar fate to the other fetuses at the clinic, the women said.

'He thought it was dead but the fetus actually opened its eyes and grabbed his finger,' Aguliar said. 'He was alive. He thought it was deceased already. He was getting ready to put it in the back.'

Crime scene: The hellish scenes allegedly took place at the Aaron Women's Clinic, pictured, in Houston in 2011, and possibly two other abortion clinics run by Karpen in Texas

They also recounted occasions when women were so far along with their pregnancy they were actually induced into labor and in two cases their fetus' came out while they were in the bathroom.

Rodriguez described another incident where a patient's fetus fell from her and onto the floor in the clinic's waiting room.

'(Karpen) just picked it up with a Chux and put it in the trash bag,' she said.

According to Rodriguez, as long as patients had the cash, Karpen would perform an abortion well past 24 weeks. A late-term procedure cost between $4,000 and $5,000 at the clinic, they said in the video which was filmed as the clinic was still operating and released on Wednesday.

Edge said she regularly got upset during her work and couldn't watch when Karpen allegedly killed the newborns. But she said she didn't know that what he was doing was illegal.

'We used to look at each other and sometimes our tears would come out with the other assistants,' Edge said. 'We would always think "he's so greedy."'

Welcome to NJ or Welcome to NR (New Russia): Pro gun speaker jackbooted out of hearing

2013-05-17T12:38:00.001-04:00

How much time do we have folks, days, weeks, months, a year or two? If we don’t do something every bit of freedom we were given by our forefathers will be taken away by a government that has become more tyrannical than the one they broke away from!

[Video] Welcome to NJ, Pro Gun Citizen Forcefully Removed From Hearing in the Middle of His Testimony

May 17 2013

So, this is NJ huh?

Second Amendment activist, James Kaleda, was forcefully removed from a hearing on a new gun control bill in NJ during his testimony.

Yes, James’ testimony got a little heated, but he was still making an intelligent argument.

Notice in the video the legislators laugh as they have their security (armed with guns of course) remove Kaleda before he finished his testimony.

Kaleda receives a standing ovation from the gallery during his ejection.

From the Youtube description of the video:

James Kaleda explains that the proposed NJ Gun Bills will not save any lives but will endanger them. He is ejected by Committee Chair Senator Norcross. This took place at the NJ Senate gun control hearings in Trenton on April 30, 2013.

I guess this is how they handle dissent in NJ, remove it from the building with armed guards.

DID YOU NOTICE WHO OBAMA THREATENED?

2013-05-17T11:35:00.001-04:00

DID YOU NOTICE WHO OBAMA THREATENED?!!
It's incredible that 42% of Americans think that this unqualified, incompetent, dishonorable, ego-driven fraud is doing a good job.
Take a moment. Admit it to yourself.
...
You know who his supporters are.
They are the people that YOU support -- FINANCIALLY!!
Did you notice who Obama threatened when he wasn't getting his way on raising the debt ceiling? He threatened to not pay:
- Social Security Retirees
- Military Retirees
- Social Security
- Disability
and
-Federal Retirees.
- Now let this sink in really good...
- He did not threaten to stop payments to illegal aliens.
- He did not threatened to take frivolous benefits such as Internet access away from violent inmates.
- He did not offer to fire some of the thousands of unnecessary federal employees that he hired.
- He did not offer to cut down on his or his wife's frivolous gallivanting around. $20 Million already spent on family vacations. (One Million on a FL golf outing). All our money...why not?
- He did not threaten to not pay the senators and representatives or any of their staff.
- He did not threaten to take benefits away from welfare recipients or to stop the free cell phones they get.
- He did not threaten the food stamp programs.
- He did not threaten to reduce payments in foreign aid.
- He did not threaten to cut back on anything that involves his base voters.
- The list could go on and on. He is in full political mode!
Why are we allowing this person to destroy this wonderful country with his selfishness and his lies? Have WE lost our blooming minds!!!!!!!!
His type of change is killing our country. He needs to be stopped.
Do not forget about his tactics when it's election time 2014.
Get out and Vote in the mid-term election - 2014.
Support the people in the House and Senate that are willing to cut taxes and spending.
LET'S MAKE 2014 - THE Beginning of a turn around.
Forget change! We want our $$$$$$$$$ back and we want to take our country back NOW!!
We the people are coming.

North American Union: Why the lie that we stole the Southwest territories is not refuted

2013-05-17T11:19:00.001-04:00

That’s also one of the the reasons the feral government won’t seal the border.

A North American Union? Really?

Why the government won't seal the southern border
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
**************
Recently, I heard more false claims that the US stole much of the land that is now the southwestern states from Mexico. It’s TOTAL BUNK!
The mainstream media continues to publish those claims without counterbalancing them with the truth. That does two things. It emboldens those perpetrating those false claims against the US – and -- it is accepted as truth by our woefully undereducated citizenry.
Over three years ago we attempted to bring truth to the discussion by explaining that the US did, in fact, purchase that land. It is a matter of historical fact.
As the months have gone by, I have seen no attempt to set the record straight. This, dear reader, is how revisionist history becomes so successful. No one refutes it. It is the first rule of propaganda: tell the lie long enough and loud enough and it will eventually be accepted as truth.
It would seem that is what those groups in the United States, whose aim it is to push AMNESTY for Illegal Aliens legislation through the Congress and onto Obama’s desk for his signature, are endeavoring to do. We refer, of course, to the new Immigration Reform Bill. I mean, how can we insist that those people abide by the law and apply for citizenship in the US legally, because, after all, IT IS THEIR LAND.
OK, let’s take another shot at setting the record straight and look at some facts.
First, The Mexican War:
The Mexican War between the United States and Mexico began with a Mexican attack on American troops along the southern border of Texas on Apr. 25, 1846. Fighting ended when U.S. Gen. Winfield Scott occupied Mexico City on Sept. 14, 1847; a few months later a peace treaty was signed (Feb. 2, 1848) at Guadalupe Hidalgo. In addition to recognizing the U.S. annexation of Texas defeated Mexico ceded California and, New Mexico (including all the present-day states of the Southwest) to the United States.
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, ending the Mexican War, was signed on February 2, 1848, by Nicholas P. Trist, for the United States, and by a special commission representing the collapsed government of Mexico.
Under the treaty, Mexico ceded to the United States Upper California and New Mexico (including Arizona) and recognized U.S. claims over Texas, with the Rio Grande as its southern boundary. The United States in turn paid Mexico $15,000,000, assumed the claims of American citizens against Mexico, ($3.25 Million) recognized prior land grants in the Southwest, and offered citizenship to any Mexicans residing in the area. Then a few years later, the US bought the land that is now Arizona and New Mexico from Mexico for another 6 million dollars.
Why did we need that additional land?
After the end of the Mexican-American War in 1848, border disputes between the United States and Mexico remained unsettled. Land that now comprises lower Arizona and New Mexico was part of a proposed southern route for a transcontinental railroad. US President Franklin Pierce was convinced by Jefferson Davis, (Later the First President of the Confederate States of America) then the US Secretary of War, to send James Gadsden (who had personal interests in the rail route) to negotiate the Gadsden Purchase with Mexico. Under the resulting agreement, the U.S. paid Mexico $10 million. There was a problem with the money, however: Even though the agreement specified $10 million, the US Congress only agreed to pay $7 million. When the money finally arrived, in Mexico City, $1 million was found to be lost, thus making $6 million the amount Mexico actually got for the sale of that land. Hey, they set the price… we paid it!
Run the numbers and you will find that the US paid Mexico $24,250,000.00 (24 million, two-hundred-and-fifty-thousand) US dollars for the land in the Southwest US which many claim, today, we (The US) stole!
You know, I get a bit tired, and even short-tempered, with folks who attempt to perpetuate an untruth by the act of sheer omission. As a Southerner, I know how that can hurt. To say the US stole all that land in the Southwest is a flat-out lie. So, 24 and-a-quarter-million isn’t much money? Not by today’s standards perhaps, but back in the mid 1800’s we’re talking about somewhere in the area of $600,000,000.00! Now that IS big bucks!
So, next time you hear someone prattling on about how the US stole all the southwestern United States from Mexico, set them straight. Tell them we bought it and paid for it. If they refuse to believe you refer them to the Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty and the Gadsden’s Purchase a few years later. It’s all there. It’s a part of history -- a part of history students in the American government schools apparently never hear about.
Of course, the claims that we stole the land from Mexico is all a part of the propaganda being employed to saddle Americans with more undeserved guilt. People who feel guilty will ofttimes respond in the way those prodding them wish them to respond. That is what is hoped for with all the unmitigated garbage heaped on America today.
Actually, as I view the relationship between the US and Mexico today, I have to wonder if there really is a move afoot to combine the three nations of the North American Continent into one nation, or one entity as in, say, the European Union.
Some form of union of America, Mexico, and Canada has been discussed or proposed in academic, business, and political circles for decades now. The NAU (North American Union) is a theoretical economic and political union of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The concept is loosely based, as we said, on the European Union, occasionally including a common currency called the "Amero" or the North American Dollar. You may read more about this NAU at: SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Union
Before you brush this aside (As I did years ago!), ask yourself why, exactly, is the US government refusing to seal the southern border with Mexico? Why?
I'm tired of supporting the country of Mexico with the billions of US dollars a year pouring into Mexico from Mexican citizens who have burglarized the US. The total amount is staggering.
The US has a huge number of problems these days that must be dealt with. But we must not let our guard down for one minute else an amnesty bill for illegal aliens (The New Immigration Reform Bill) will be passed by the Congress and signed by the President into law.
Eternal vigilance truly is the price of freedom.
© J. D. Longstreet

IRS to enforce Obamacare, same IRS that targeted conservatives: patriots, tea party, constitutionalists

2013-05-16T23:39:00.001-04:00

Remember all the talk about repealing Obamacare, defunding it, etc.. Seems like it was all talk and no action. What does that tell you about those talkers?

Never forget the one man that could have stopped it, Chief Justice John Roberts. What does that tell you about him?

They are owned by the occult bankster cabal!

IN CHARGE DURING 'TEA PARTY' TARGETING, NOW RUNS IRS OBAMACARE OFFICE

`IRS henchwoman got $103,390 in bonuses...`

The few emails WH released on Benghazi clearly show they lied

2013-05-16T18:57:00.001-04:00

Good to see the story hasn’t been derailed by everyone, it needs to stay front and center ‘above the fold’ the ‘lead story’…

Benghazi Emails Directly Contradict White House Claims

Stephen F. Hayes May 16, 2013 12:09 AM

The White House on Wednesday released 94 pages of emails between top administration and intelligence officials who helped shape the talking points about the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that the CIA would provide to policymakers in both the legislative and executive branches.

The documents, first reported by THE WEEKLY STANDARD in articles here and here, directly contradict claims by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the revisions of those talking points were driven by the intelligence community and show heavy input from top Obama administration officials, particularly those at the State Department.

The emails provide further detail about the rewriting of the talking points during a 24-hour period from midday September 14 to midday September 15. As THE WEEKLY STANDARD previously reported, a briefing from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence shows that the big changes came in three waves – internally at the CIA, after email feedback from top administration officials, and during or after a meeting of high-ranking intelligence and national security officials the following morning.

The initial CIA changes softened some of the language about the participants in the Benghazi assault – from “Islamic extremists with ties to al Qaeda” to “Islamic extremists.” But CIA officials also added bullet points about the possible participation of Ansar al Sharia, an al Qaeda-linked jihadist group, and previous warnings about the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi. Those additions came out after the talking points were sent to “the interagency,” where the CIA’s final draft was further stripped down to little more than boilerplate. The half dozen references to terrorists – both in Benghazi and more generally – all but disappeared. Gone were references to al Qaeda, Ansar al Sharia, jihadists, Islamic extremists, etc. The only remaining mention was a note that “extremists” had participated in the attack.

As striking as what appears in the email traffic is what does not. There is no mention of the YouTube video that would become a central part of the administration’s explanation of the attacks to the American people until a brief mention in the subject line of emails coming out of an important meeting where further revisions were made.

Carney, in particular, is likely to face tough questioning about the contents of the emails because he made claims to reporters that were untrue. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two – of these two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility,’ because the word ‘consulate’ was inaccurate,” he told reporters on November 28, 2012.

That’s not true. An email sent at 9:15 PM on September 14, from an official in the CIA’s Office of Public Affairs to others at the agency, described the process this way. “The State Department had major reservations with much or most of the document. We revised the document with their concerns in mind.”

That directly contradicts what Carney said. It’s also difficult to reconcile with claims made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during testimony she gave January 23 on Capitol Hill.

“It was an intelligence product,” she said, adding later that the “intelligence community was the principal decider about what went into talking points.” (See here for the original version of the talking points and the final one.)

Carney and other top Obama administration officials have long maintained that CIA officials revised the talking points with minimal input from Obama administration officials. The claim made little sense when they made it – why would CIA officials revise on their own a set of talking points they’d already finalized? The emails demonstrate clearly that it isn’t true.

Another CIA email, this one a draft of a message for CIA director David Petraeus, noted that the talking points process had “run into major problems,” in part because of the “major concerns” raised by the State Department. That same email reported that the issues would be revisited at the Deputies Committee meeting on Saturday morning.

Elsewhere, CIA officials seemed to understand that the document had been stripped of most of its content. An email from an official with the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis, the office that drafted the original version of the talking points, signed off on the final version but seemed to understand that the new version wouldn’t please those who had requested it. “They are fine with me,” this CIA official wrote. “But, pretty sure HPSCI [the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] won’t like them. :-)”

When Petraeus received the rewritten talking points, he objected. “Frankly, I’d just as soon not use this,” he wrote to a legislative affairs staffer. But he declined to put up a fight.

The documents answer some questions and raise many others. Did Hillary Clinton have any role in the efforts of State Department staffers to push for the many substantive revisions to the talking points? Clinton, who testified that she was a hands-on part of the State Department’s response to the attacks, has claimed she had nothing to do with the talking points.

And what about the administration’s claims that State and White House officials weren’t involved with substantive edits? In one email, Jake Sullivan, deputy chief of staff to Hillary Clinton, reports to State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland that he’s spoken with Obama’s top spokesman at the National Security Council, Tommy Vietor. “I spoke with Tommy. We’ll work through this in the morning and get comments back.”

In a separate email, he writes: “Talked to Tommy. We can make edits.”

BUSTED: Angelina duped by corporate greed?

2013-05-16T18:18:00.001-04:00

I don’t think she would sell her breast and ovaries for money but I think greedy b@stards would lie to her and use her to line their pockets with gold!

I’m not doubting her good intentions but I remember the good intentioned liberal idea to ban the highly effective insecticide DDT. It resulted in the deaths of millions in Africa due to malaria.

I doubt she had any idea of the core issues involved here, the patenting of our genes. This is a long read for a blog but well worth the few minutes…

EXPOSED: Angelina Jolie part of a clever corporate scheme to protect billions in BRCA gene patents, influence Supreme Court decision (opinion)

Thursday, May 16, 2013 by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) Angelina Jolie's announcement of undergoing a double mastectomy (surgically removing both breasts) even though she had no breast cancer is not the innocent, spontaneous, "heroic choice" that has been portrayed in the mainstream media. Natural News has learned it's all part of well-timed for-profit corporate P.R. campaign that has been planned for months and just happens to coincide with the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision on the viability of the BRCA1 patent.

This is the investigation the mainstream media refuses to touch. Here, I explain the corporate financial ties, investors, mergers, human gene patents, lawsuits, medical fear mongering and the trillions of dollars that are at stake here. If you pull back the curtain on this one, you find far more than an innocent looking woman exercising a "choice." This is about protecting trillions in profits through the deployment of carefully-crafted public relations campaigns designed to manipulate the public opinion of women.

The signs were all there from the beginning of the scheme: Angelina Jolie's highly polished and obviously corporate-written op-ed piece at the New York Times, the carefully-crafted talking points invoking "choice" as a politically-charged keyword, and the obvious coaching of even her husband Brad Pitt who carefully describes the entire experience using words like "stronger" and "pride" and "family."

But the smoking gun is the fact that Angelina Jolie's seemingly spontaneous announcement magically appeared on the cover of People Magazine this week -- a magazine that is usually finalized for publication three weeks before it appears on newsstands. That cover, not surprisingly, uses the same language found in the NYT op-ed piece: "HER BRAVE CHOICE" and "This was the right thing to do." The flowery, pro-choice language is not a coincidence.

What this proves is that Angelina's Jolie's announcement was a well-planned corporate P.R. campaign with carefully-crafted messages designed to influence public opinion. But what could Jolie be seeking to influence?
...how about trillions of dollars in corporate profits?

Upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision to rule on patent viability for BRCA1 gene

Angelina Jolie's announcement and all its carefully-crafted language had four notable immediate impacts:

It caused women everywhere to be terrified of breast cancer through the publishing of false statistics that drove fear into the hearts of anyone with breasts. (See below for explanation.)
It caused women to rush out and seek BRCA1 gene testing procedures. These tests just happen to be patented by a for-profit corporation called "Myriad Genetics." Because of this patent, BRCA1 tests can cost $3,000 - $4,000 each. The testing alone is a multi-billion-dollar market, but only if the patent is upheld in an upcoming Supreme Court decision (see below).
It caused the stock price of Myriad Genetics (MYGN) to skyrocket to a 52-week high. "Myriad's stock closed up 3% Tuesday, following the publication of the New York Times op-ed," wrote Marketwatch.com.
It drove public opinion to influence the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision to rule in favor of corporate ownership of human genes (see more below).

Women all over the world are being duped into supporting Angeline Jolie, having no idea that what she's really doing is selling out women to the for-profit cancer industry. But to fully understand what's happening, you have to dig deeper...

Myriad Genetics sees stock price skyrocket thanks to Jolie, and Obamacare will funnel billions their way

"Salt Lake City-based Myriad Genetics (MYGN) holds the patent on the test that determined the actress had an 87% chance of developing breast cancer, as well as the genes themselves," wrote MarketWatch.com.

And that's only the beginning. If the U.S. Supreme Court can be influenced to uphold Myriad's patent, it could mean a trillion-dollar industry over just the next few years. Even more, Myriad Genetics is reportedly "ripe for mergers" according to the financial press, because it's part of the super-hot human genome industry.

"The world's largest maker of DNA testing and analysis tools, Life Technologies Corp. said that it is set to be acquired by Thermo Fisher Scientific for a record $13.6 billion," writes MarketWatch.com. "A race that kicked into high gear more than 26 years ago is heating up, with foreign governments and corporations joining the U.S. in funding the quest to map all the human genomes. And even as the recent flurry of mergers and acquisitions in the genomics space has spurred returns, investors still have opportunities to profit from this multibillion-dollar industry."

The higher Myriad's stock price goes, the more profitable a merger becomes for its current owners. So Jolie's P.R. stunt just happened to generate unknown millions of dollars in value for the very people who claim a patent monopoly over the breast cancer genes residing in the bodies of women. Coincidence? Hardly.

Obamacare mandates taxpayers pay for BRCA gene testing: yet another government handout to wealthy corporations

But here's what's even more crooked about all this: You know how Obama likes to talk "free market" but actually engages in so-called "crony capitalism" by handing out money to all his corporate buddies, Wall Street insiders and deep-pocketed campaign donors? Part of Obamacare -- the "Affordable Care Act" -- mandates that taxpayers pay for BRCA1 genetic testing!

Myriad Genetics, in other words, stands to receive a full-scale windfall of profits mandated by government and pushed into mainstream consciousness through a campaign of "medical terror" fronted by Angelina Jolie and the New York Times. Are you starting to see how this all fits together yet?

This is all one big coordinated corporate sellout of women, and it's all being hidden by playing the "women's power" card and using "choice" language to more easily manipulate women. Angelina Jolie, remember, is a key spokesperson for the United Nations, an organization already caught engaged in child sex slavery and drug running. Although Jolie obviously isn't engage in that sort of behavior, her job is to covertly influence American women into supporting a carefully-planned, plotted and executed corporate profit campaign that turns women's bodies into profits.

Here's why the Supreme Court decision puts trillions of dollars at stake...

Details on the upcoming Supreme Court decision

The ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation filed a lawsuit in 2009, challenging the corporate ownership of human genes. Anyone who believes in women's rights, human rights, civil rights or even the right to eat non-GMO foods should immediately agree that corporations should NOT be able to patent human genes and then use those patents to rake in billions of dollars in profits while stifling scientific research into those genes.

A question to all women reading this: Do you believe a corporation in Utah owns your body? If not, you should be opposed to corporate ownership of human genes. It also means you should oppose Angelina Jolie's P.R. campaign because although she's running a brilliant public relations campaign, behind the scenes her actions are feeding potentially trillions of dollars of profits directly into the for-profit human gene patenting industry that denies human beings ownership over their own genetic code.

The ACLU explains the basics of its lawsuit against Myriad Genetics as follows:

On May 12, 2009, the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) filed a lawsuit charging that patents on two human genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2, are unconstitutional and invalid. On November 30, 2012, the Supreme Court agreed to hear argument on the patentability of human genes. The ACLU argued the case before the U.S. Supreme Court on April 15, 2013. We expect a decision this summer.

On behalf of researchers, genetic counselors, women patients, cancer survivors, breast cancer and women's health groups, and scientific associations representing 150,000 geneticists, pathologists, and laboratory professionals, we have argued that human genes cannot be patented because they are classic products of nature. The suit charges that the gene patents violate the First Amendment and stifle diagnostic testing and research that could lead to cures and that they limit women's options regarding their medical care.

Got that? If the Supreme Court rules against Myriad Genetics, it will cause a multi-billion-dollar breast cancer genetic testing industry to collapse virtually overnight. This means a huge loss for not just Myriad, but also many other human gene corporations that wish to exploit the human body -- including the bodies of women -- for monopolistic profits. (All patents are government-granted monopolies.) Ultimately, trillions of dollars in corporate gene patents are at stake here.

Patenting human genes is huge business

Today, about 20 percent of your genes are already patented by corporations and universities. As the ACLU explains, "A gene patent holder has the right to prevent anyone from studying, testing or even looking at a gene. As a result, scientific research and genetic testing has been delayed, limited or even shut down due to concerns about gene patents."

This means that when corporations own patents on human genes, it stifles scientific research while granting that corporation a monopoly over the "intellectual property" encoded in your own DNA! (How criminal is that? You decide...)
What this means is that if the Supreme Court rules against Myriad, it would set a precedent that would dismantle the entire human gene patenting industry, affecting trillions of dollars in future profits.

This, I believe, is the real reason behind Angelina Jolie's announcement. It seems designed to invoke women's emotional reactions and create a groundswell of support for corporate-owned genes, thereby handing these corporations a Supreme Court precedent that will ensure trillions in future profits. It's a for-profit PR stunt that tries to trick women into supporting a corporate system of patents and monopolies that claims, right now, to own portions of the bodies of every woman living today.
While most media outlets have no clue about the patent issues at stake here, the Detroit Free Press took notice, saying:

"The Hollywood star's decision to get tested for a breast cancer gene mutation, undergo a double mastectomy and then write about it calls attention to a case now pending before the court. The justices have just weeks to decide if Myriad Genetics' patent on the two genes that can identify an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer is legal. Critics complain that the company's monopoly leaves them as the sole source of the $4,000 tests needed to determine each woman's risk."

Lying with statistics: Jolie's 87% risk fraud

There's more to this story than just the patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Angelina Jolie is also using blatantly misleading statistics to terrify women into thinking their breasts might kill them.

In the NYT op-ed piece, Jolie claims her doctor told her she has an "87% risk" of developing breast cancer. But what she didn't tell you is that this number doesn't apply to the entire population: it's actually old data derived almost exclusively from families that were previously documented to have very high risks of breast cancer to begin with.

A study published on the National Human Genome Research Institute website and conducted by scientists from the National Institutes of Health reveals that breast cancer risks associated with BRCA1 genes are significantly lower than what's being hyped up by Jolie and the mainstream media.

In fact, in a large room of 600 women, only ONE will likely have a BRCA mutation in her genetic code. The actual incidence is 0.125 to 0.25 out of 100 women, or 1 in 400 to 1 in 800. I used 600 as the average of 400 and 800.
And out of that 1 in 600 women who has the mutation, her risk of breast cancer is only 56 percent, not 78 percent as claimed by Jolie. But 13 percent of women without the BRCA mutation get breast cancer anyway, according to this scientific research, so the increased risk is just 43 out of 100 women.

So what we're really talking about here is 1 in 600 women having a BRCA gene mutation, then less than half of those getting cancer because of it. In other words, only about 1 in 1200 women will be affected by this. Yet thanks to people like Jolie and the fear-mongering mainstream media, women all across the nation have been terrified into believing their breasts might kill them and the best way to handle the problem is to cut them off!

This, my friends, is the essence of doomsday fear mongering. This issue affects less than one-tenth of one percent of women but is being riled up into a nationwide fear campaign that just happens to feed profits into the for-profit cancer diagnosis and treatment industry, not to mention the monopolistic human gene patenting cartels.
That's the real story of what's happening here. Don't expect to read this in the New York Times.

Corporate media refuses to mention real prevention and treatment options

As part of the breast cancer fear mongering and treatment scam now being run across the mainstream media, nearly all media sources are prohibiting any mention of holistic or natural options for treatment or prevention.

Sure, the media talks about "options," but all those options just happen to lead back to the for-profit cancer industry. As an example, read this story by ABC News, part of the lying mainstream media that misinforms women and pushes a corporate agenda:

If you do test positive for BRCA, you have options, and you don't necessarily have to go the Jolie route. Some women choose not to have surgery. Instead, they increase cancer surveillance with imaging tests. These include regular mammograms to test for breast cancer, and regular pelvic sonograms and blood-tests to watch for ovarian cancer.

Nowhere in this article does ABC News mention ways to suppress the BRCA1 gene by, for example, eating raw cruciferous vegetables containing Indole-3-Carbinol (I3C), a potent anti-cancer nutrient that halts breast cancer in its tracks. Nowhere does ABC News mention vitamin D which prevents nearly 4 out of 5 cancers of all types, including breast cancer.

Nope, the "options" being pushed by mainstream media are nothing more than mammograms, surgery, radiation and chemotherapy -- all owned and run by the for-profit cancer industry that feeds on women and exploits their bodies for profit.
Nor is their any discussion of the total scam of the "pink ribbons" cancer cure industry which is primarily focused on giving women cancer through "free mammograms." As any scientist or physicist already knows, mammograms cause cancer because they emit ionizing radiation directly into the breast and heart tissues. Get enough mammograms done and sooner or later they will detect breast cancer because they caused it! To date, 1.3 million women have been harmed by mammography.

Thanks, Angelina, for keeping the wool pulled over the eyes of women everywhere while selling out to for-profit, monopolistic, corporate interests that incessantly seek to exploit women for profit.

Photo credit: PEOPLE Magazine cover, used under Fair Use for public commentary and education.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040365_Angelina_Jolie_gene_patents_Supreme_Court_decision.html#ixzz2TUd5GpCg

Boston lockdown practice for martial law

2013-05-16T16:48:00.001-04:00

Yea, I’m one of those paranoid Hobbits from Middle Earth, a whacko bird, if you will, as John ‘Songbird’ McClain attacked. You know, the one’s that think the government is out to get us!

Victims of Boston lockdown speak out against police state tyranny

J. D. Heyes Natural News May 16, 2013

By now, images of Bostonians being forced from their homes by heavily armed police and federal agents who were searching for a lone terrorist bomber are well-known throughout the alternative media world.

Within hours after authorities in Boston, in collusion with the Feds, ordered a lockdown of the city and surrounding communities and unconstitutional, warrantless door-to-door searches of homes, video feeds of the police state tyranny were being posted online for the world to see what former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas later described as a dress-rehearsal for “martial law.”

Naturally, city and federal officials, many of whom initially denied or downplayed the situation (with the help of a compliant mainstream media), said nothing could be further from the truth. The door-to-door searches that took place during the lockdown and resultant scouring of neighborhoods, in which innocent residents were tossed out of their homes at gunpoint, were only too happy to comply with police because, after all, it was for the good and safety of the general public.

Well, in exclusive interviews with several Boston-area residents in the days following the searches, Infowars.com reveals that the tactics used by police as they searched for a wounded 19-year-old bombing suspect were not nearly as well-received as the mainstream would have you believe.

‘Dropped me off in the middle of nowhere’

“On the heels of prestitute Lawrence O’Donnell labeling Ron Paul a ‘liar’ when he called the manhunt and door-to-door searches in Watertown, Mass. a martial law exercise, Infowars reporter Dan ‘The Kraken’ Bidondi went to interview residents who were forced from their homes,” said the website.

One young man told Bidondi that the “situation was dealt with way too chaotically than it should have been.”

“I was walking down Hazel Street and, um, a cop pointed his gun at me, and then they called SWAT in and SWAT came and picked me up…and threw me in the back of a car, and dropped me off in the middle of Newton,” the young man said – which was essentially “the middle of nowhere.”

“Broad daylight,” he continued. “They just took off my cuffs and told me to walk.” They never read him any Miranda rights, either, the young man told Bidondi.

A woman who spoke with Bidondi said cops showed up at the door of her home and “told me they were going to search” the house. They didn’t ask, and they didn’t have a warrant.

“They told us we had to leave,” she said, adding she didn’t complain at the time but said “I couldn’t get everything I needed to get. I’m a diabetic and needed medicine, and I had left some stuff here, and they wouldn’t let me come back to get it.”

Bidondi asked, “Were you scared at all?”

“Yes, I was,” she answered.

She said remained at a police station for a while before her son came to pick her up, she said. No one ever formally told her or her family when the lockdown was lifted and when they could return to their home.

“It was about eleven o’clock at night and I was calling the Watertown Police and the FBI and no one told me that we could come back in yet. They kept shuffling it back and forth,” she said. Eventually she just made the decision to return to her home.

‘Leave the shoes!’

“One thing I was very, very upset about is that when we were leaving here…all the lights were on in the house, TVs, you know,” she said. “They had gone out the back door, down in my basement…I said, ‘Let me just close all my doors and lock up,’ and they said no, they would do that.

“I came home,” she continued, “the back door was open – this is hours now later – back door was open, front door was open, basement door was open, lights were on, TVs were on. No one did anything.”

The woman also showed Bidondi bullet holes in two of her cars, apparently from shootouts between police and the terror suspect.

A third resident, an older man, said police gave no prior warnings or put out any announcements that a lockdown was being implemented.

“They just walked in, you know, and they say, ‘Get outta here,’” the man said. “I said, ‘let me put my shoes on,’ you know…they don’t want to let me put my shoes on, either.”

There’s much more. Watch the interviews:

Nixon was brought down by two young rookie reporters, what a scoop. What was the scoop full of?

2013-05-15T18:06:00.001-04:00

Flashback: Watergate, Nazis, Nixon, Rockefeller

Jon Rappoport Prison Planet.com May 15, 2013

Watergate eventually became the story of two young rookie reporters who exposed and took down a president.

Try to think of another major story in your lifetime where the reporters themselves took center stage, and in the process nearly eclipsed their own work. Odd.

One of them, Bob Woodward, expanded his fame. The powers-that-be permitted him to go on and, with extraordinary access, write books criticizing future presidents. Woodward became the in-house attack dog. Mr. Limited Hangout.

The other reporter, Carl Bernstein, faded into relative obscurity. Well, he began connecting journalists to the CIA. That wasn’t a smart career move. That was, perhaps, a case of biting the hand that had fed him.

To learn why Richard Nixon was really blown out of the White House, you could begin with the infamous Nazi chemical/pharmaceutical cartel, IG Farben. The cartel that pushed Hitler over the top into power in Germany.

One of its lasting legacies is the multinational corporation ballooning out into titanic proportions. Farben didn’t just buy smaller companies, it forged favorable agreements with huge corporations all over the world: Standard Oil (Rockefeller); Rhone-Poulenc; Imperial Chemical Industries; Du Pont; Dow.

During World War 2, Josiah Du Bois, representing the US federal government, was sent on a fact-finding mission to Guatemala. His comment: “As far as I can tell the country is a wholly owned subsidiary of Farben.”

What Farben stood for was an attempt to remake the planet in terms of power.

Farben held important cards. It employed brilliant chemists who, in some ways, were far ahead of its competitors. Farben was all about synthetics. Rubber, oil, dyes, pharmaceuticals.

Farben saw itself as a modern version of the old alchemists. Transforming one substance into another. It came to believe that, with enough time, it would be able to make anything from anything. It envisioned labs in which basic chemical facts would be changed so that, in practice, elements and compounds would be virtually interchangeable.

This was in line with the Nazi obsession to discover the lost secrets of the mythical Aryan race and then reconstitute it with selective breeding, genetic engineering, and of course the mass murder of “lesser peoples.”

On one level, there was the idea of chemical transformations, and on another level, the transformation of the human species.

It was really all one piece. The Nazi ideology was the glue.

It was the picture of scientism—the philosophy that asserts science should absolutely rule all facets of life. Nazi Germany showed the world what that philosophy looks like in practice. Farben had prisoners shipped from Auschwitz to its nearby facility, where horrendous medical/pharmaceutical experiments were carried out on them.

At the end of World War 2, the Farben executives were put on trial and, despite the efforts of Telford Taylor, the chief US prosecutor, the sentences handed out were light.

There was a reason for this. A new world was coming into being, and mega-corporations and cartels were at the heart of it. They would be the engines driving the global economy and pillaging the natural resources of the planet. It was colonialism with a different face, the East India company running on technology and industry and a planetary reach beyond anything ever attempted.

So the Farben moguls, and those like them, were seen by many as designers of the new “peace.”

Consider the total volume of international trade of goods today—the largest 300 corporations in the world are responsible for an unbelievable percentage of it…as high as 25%.

So now you see the reason why these treaties like GATT and NAFTA and CAFTA have been launched. Mega-corporations want to roam free. They want to be able to inject money into any entity in the world and suddenly remove it at will. They certainly want to be able to ship goods from one nation to another without paying tariffs, which otherwise would cost them an extraordinary amount of money. For these corporations, nations don’t really exist anymore—they are convenient fictions. These corporations don’t want any restrictions on their plundering of the Global Village.

Farben envisioned and planned for this kind of licentious freedom. It saw itself as more than a German cartel. It was already international, and it was moving toward domination.

However, more powerful forces would overtake it—and I’m not just talking about American soldiers. In the sphere of international influence, there are the Plan A and Plan B people. The Plan A controllers (think Rockefeller dynasty, among others) opted for a “softer, gentler” approach, a more covert program, whereby, over a long period of time, the world population would be brought under a global management system, in which mega-corporations would play the central role. The Plan B people, Nazis and their allied interests, wanted crushing force and violence to achieve a somewhat similar goal in a much shorter period of time—with Germany as the leading prow of the movement.

It is in the arena of pharmaceutical domination that one of Farben’s goals has endured. Two of its original components, Bayer and Hoechst, have survived and prospered. And many other drug companies have copied the basic model.

For a number of years, I’ve researched and published on this subject. Death, maiming, destruction, poisoning—these are correct assessments of the overall effects of drug-based medicine. Judging solely by these effects, one could say that war by other means has continued after 1945. And the fronts of devastation have spread.

On the mega-corporate front, the plan for world control remains the Rockefeller template. “Free trade.” This plan was advanced, ceaselessly, for 40 years until, on January 1, 1995, the World Trade Organization was fully formed and took charge of the criminal rules of global commerce: the crowning moment.

However, back in the early 1970s, the whole operation had almost been derailed. One man, a crook, a president, a liar, an insecure parody of a head of state, Richard Nixon, went off script. He REALLY went off script.

In an effort to bolster US companies and protect them from foreign competition inside the United States, Nixon began erecting tariffs on a range of goods imported into the US.

If this Nixon economic plan spread to other countries, the entire global program to install “free trade” and mega-corporate emperors on their thrones for a thousand years could crash and burn.

Nixon was a Rockefeller man. He was owned by them. He’d been rescued from financial ruin by The Family, and now he was in the White House undermining their greatest dream. You can’t overstate the degree of the betrayal, from the Rockefeller point of view. You simply can’t.

Something had to be done. The president had to go. This was the real motivation behind Watergate. This was the real op. Yes, there were sub-motives and smaller contexts, as in any major op, but the prime mover was: get Free Trade back on track, and get suitable revenge on the puppet in the White House who went off the script.

Any historian who overlooks this is an outright fool or a deceiver.

Whether the Watergate break-in was planned to serve the higher goal or was pounced upon, after the fact, as the grand opportunity, is beside the point. It was there, and it was used. It became the starting point for the Washington Post, its publisher, veteran editor, and two cub reporters to break Richard Nixon into pieces.

And if the Rockefeller people needed an inside man to report on the deteriorating mental state of the president as he heated up in the pressure cooker, they had Henry Kissinger, who was another Rockefeller operative.

The Washington Post was owned by Katharine Graham, who was herself a very close friend of the Rockefeller Family. Years later, she would be awarded a medal of honor by the University of Chicago, a an institution founded by John D. Rockefeller. On her death, a paid heartfelt obituary was inserted in the NY Times by the trustees, faculty, and staff of Rockefeller University, where she had served on the University Council.

And she and Nixon already hated each other by the early 1970s.

The managing editor of the Washington Post, Ben Bradlee, was an old hand at writing promotional material, having worked in Europe crafting releases for a CIA front group. A former Naval intelligence man, he liked one of his cub reporters, Bob Woodward, who had also worked for the Navy in intelligence.

When Woodward came to Bradlee with a story about a man in a parking garage who was passing secrets from the White House/FBI about Watergate, we are supposed to believe that Bradlee naturally responded by giving the green light to a major investigation. Woodward and Carl Bernstein, another cub, would undertake it—with nothing more than Bradlee’s reputation and the future survival of the Post and Katharine Graham’s empire on the line if the cubs got it wrong.

We are supposed to believe Bradlee gave the green light, without knowing who the man in the garage was, without knowing whether Woodward could be trusted, without even getting permission from Graham to move ahead.

Bradlee, a grizzled veteran of Washington, understanding exactly what Washington could do to people who told secrets out of school, just said to Woodward and Bernstein, “You’d better be damned sure you’re right, because otherwise we’re all in trouble.”

Two untested cub reporters set loose in a cage with tigers.

The odds of that happening were nil. Bradlee had to know a great deal from the beginning, and he had to have Katharine Graham’s signal to move. The series of breaking stories would be spoon-fed to the unsuspecting young reporters. They would be consumed by their ambition to advance their careers. Bradlee was confident because he had the essentials of the scandal in hand—all the way up to Nixon, the target—well in advance of his two reporters.

To have proceeded otherwise—Bradlee was simply not that kind of fool. Whatever Deep Throat, the man in the garage, was dishing out to Woodward didn’t really matter. Bradlee already had it in his pocket. Deep Throat was merely a contrivance to allow the story to expand and grow by steps, and to permit Woodward and Bernstein to believe they were peeling layers from an onion.

The man behind the curtain was David Rockefeller.

After the whole scandal had been exposed and Nixon had flown away, in disgrace, from the White House for the last time, Rockefeller addressed a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce of the European Community (October, 1975). He was there to allay their fears about Nixon’s betrayal of the new economic world order. There was really very little he needed to say. David had already created (1973) the free-trade Trilateral Commission. And a new puppet, Gerald Ford was in the White House, and Ford had appointed David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller, as his vice president.

David told the European attendees, “Fortunately, there are no signs that these anti-[free] trade measures [of Nixon] are supported by the [Ford] Administration.”

And that was that. The global mega-corporate colossus was back on track.

The temporary rip in the Matrix had been repaired.

On a far lower level of power politics, everyone and his brother was consumed with the contrails of the scandal that had driven away Nixon and his colleagues. People were congratulating each other on the expunging of a corrupt conspiracy from public life.

The real players, of course, were still in place, more powerful than ever. David Rockefeller and his aides were preparing for an even greater coup. They had chosen an obscure man with zero name recognition to be the next president of the United States. Jimmy Carter. Carter would function to forward the goals of the Trilateral Commission in bold view of anyone who knew the score.

And every president since Carter, regardless of party affiliation, has supported and extended those Globalist-corporate goals. No questions asked. Obama, who fatuously remarked during his 2008 election campaign that NAFTA “needs to be revisited,” has taken his cues like any other puppet.

When, from this perspective, you examine the global takeover of land and resources by GMO agribusiness, the destruction of small family farms, the plundering of natural resources in the Third World, the use of UN “peacekeepers” and “humanitarian groups” and intelligence agencies to create a wedge, for corporations, into these areas, you see the hand of the Rockefeller plan.

When you see the destruction of currencies and the escalation of insupportable debt, the incursion of a bewildering number of UN-affiliated groups sinking their teeth into local communities all over the planet to “manage sustainable development,” you see the plan.

On the approaching anniversary of Watergate, you can see that the trashing of Nixon, who like every president since, was put in place to serve his masters, is an opportunity to notice the Plan Behind the Curtain.

Obama? Merely the latest willing front man. A third-rate hustler.

The innocuous-sounding “free trade” policy is the number-one priority of every American president. He must do two things: rarely speak of it, and allow it to move forward. That’s all. In return, he gets to act as if he’s the most powerful man in the world.

But if he wobbles and considers taking up a position against free trade (corporate domination of the planet), he can look back and see what happened to Richard Nixon. He can learn from that example.

He can recite the famous words of Zbiggie Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission and David Rockefeller’s intellectual flunkey: “The nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.”

Like Jimmy Carter, a future president can espouse the most wide-ranging humanitarian philosophy and ascend to a cloud of beautiful altrusim, admired by all. As long as he sticks to the plan.

If not, two reporters coming out of nowhere, wet behind the ears, eager for advancement, will magically learn of his missteps and demolish him.

IRS Gate news swells as Benghazi news fades

2013-05-15T15:47:00.001-04:00

Mission accomplished, when you get in trouble change the subject. When accused of a major crime confess to a lesser one. The problem is, this one is not as bad a Benghazi but it is major too. What will they do to change the subject from this one? Number of targeted groups swells to 500... IRS ASKED FOR FACEBOOK POSTS, READING LISTS, PRIVATE THOUGHTS... CLAIM: OBAMA CAMPAIGN CO-CHAIR ATTACKED ROMNEY WITH LEAKED DOCS... IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo... 'Thin' IG report only skims surface... GOP Rep: Impeachment Not 'Off The Table'... Prominent Catholic Prof. Claims IRS Audited Her After Speaking Out Against Obama... Demanded to Know Who Was Paying Her... I WAS NOT INVOLVED

Holder grilled on Hill...
'I Can't Say As Matter Of Fact' Who Authorized Subpoena...
'Ongoing matter about which I know nothing'...
Calls congressman's conduct 'shameful, unacceptable'...
Dem. Congressman Brings Crying Baby to Hearing...

NOT ME: Holder points finger at deputy for AP phone taps...

Atty Gen 'not sure' how often media records seized...

ALBERTO GONZALES: Bush Admin. Refused to Pursue Media in Leak Probes...

The top 20 Benghazi lies

2013-05-15T11:09:00.001-04:00

The top 20 Benghazi lies

Tuesday, May 14, 2013 at 4:10 PM EDT

As the Benghazi lies keep unfolding, Glenn felt it important to highlight the most important and revealing falsehoods that have been fed to the American people so far. Sadly there were so many to choose from he could only narrow it down to 20.

Here are the top 20 Benghazi lies…

#1. “Our current best assessment based on the information we have at present is that in fact what this began as was a spontaneous, not a premeditated, response to what had transpired in Cairo.” — Susan Rice

The testimony now proves that the administration knew in advance.

#2. “What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.” — President Obama

#3. “But the entire reason that this has become the, you know, political topic it is is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.” — Stephanie Cutter (Obama’s campaign spokesperson)

#4. “That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video, sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.” — President Obama

Important because the President’s defense has been ‘we corrected it’ and called Benghazi an act of terror two days later. This was after that.

#5. “I know there are some who ask, why don’t we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.” — President Obama

So it’s still the “video” and claiming people are calling for speech to be limited.

#6. “Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.” — Hillary Clinton

…how many times did they try to go down this road?

#7. “We can all condemn this reprehensible video.” — Victoria Nuland

That’s 3 members of the State Department…1 political operative…and the President.

#8. “Find the video that has been so offensive to Muslims to be disgusting and reprehensible.” — Jay Carney

Seriously?

#9. “To address the video circulating on the Internet that has led to these protests.” — Hillary Clinton

Wow.

#10. “Was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video.” — Susan Rice

Well, if nothing else, she is persistent.

#11. “And it is in response, not to United States policy, not to obviously the administration, not to the American people. It is in response to a video.” -
Jay Carney

…sigh.

#12. “Now we do not yet have indication that it was preplanned or premeditated.” – Jay Carney

Really? Because we actually know that you had information that the attack was premeditated days before the attack took place. One of the people in Benghazi called the State Department with concerns warning of the attack.

Oops.

#13. Reporter: “And CBS has learned that the U.S. mission in Libya reportedly ‑‑ repeatedly asked for better security before last month’s attack on the American consulate in Benghazi. A State Department officer says there were 13 confirmed security threats in the six months before the attack. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed three weeks ago.”

“Well, we weren’t told they wanted more security and we did not know they wanted more security again.” — Joe Biden

That’s cute, Joe.

#14. “The White House and State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two ‑‑ of these two institutions were changing the word consulate to diplomatic facility because consulate was inaccurate.” — Jay Carney

…odds Jay Carney has this job a year from now?

#15. “And make no mistake: We will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.” — President Obama

Well…the video guy is in prison — no terrorists from this attack yet though.

#16. “You had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character who is extremely offensive video directed at Mohammed and Islam. We had nothing to do with the video.” — President Obama

The video? Again? Come on guys…

#17. “It’s not a matter of blaming, that’s just the facts. Sometimes intelligence has to catch up with the reality on the ground. This was one of those cases.” — David Axelrod

Doesn’t the intelligence normally come from information on the ground? Throwing the CIA under the bus is never the smart choice, David.

#18. “First I pretty the faux outrage from the RNC and the Republican Party.” — Stephanie Cutter

Somehow this is one of the masterminds behind Obama’s re-election.

#19. “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they would go kill some Americans?” — Hillary Clinton

Something tells us it’s starting to make a difference to Hillary (and her 2016 presidential hopes).

#20. “Let’s be clear: These protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region.” – Jay Carney

Seriously, what do we think — a week? a month? How much longer does Carney have as Press Secretary?

So what’s the truth? Glenn gives a full rundown of where we stand and what we know about the Benghazi attacks HERE.

U.S.trained Congolese troops rape 97 women and 33 girls, some as young as 6 years old

2013-05-14T18:22:00.001-04:00

If U.S.Trained Troops in the Congo Rape 6-Year-Olds, How Do We Train Troops?

AP

Connor Simpson 10:20 AM ET

Troops of the Congolese Army trained by a U.S. Special Forces team went on to commit mass rape and murder of women and children while fleeing rebel forces last year, according to a new United Nations report, raising questions not just about these particular atrocities but surrounding the United States's Africa Command operations in general.

The U.N. revealed on Monday that some Congolese forces committed "mass rape, killings, and arbitrary executions and violations resulting from widespread looting," according Al-Jazeera. The accusation drawing the most attention is that troops raped 97 women and 33 girls, some as young as 6 years old, in the town of Minova while fleeing rebel fighters over a two-day period in November 2012. So far only 11 Congolese soldiers have been arrested by the Congolese military prosecutor's office, two for murder and two for rape, according to the report. The other charges haven't been explained.

The Washington Post reports in today's paper that "members of the 391st Commando Battalion, a unit created in 2010 with extensive support from the U.S. government," took part in the atrocities. The U.S. Special Forces spent eight months training the 750 person battalion in an effort to "professionalize Congo's ragtag military" two years ago. Military commanders lost control of their troops as they were fleeing in defeat from M23 rebel fighters, and that's when the atrocities began. Stars and Stripes outlines how this is only the latest incident that may change how the U.S. military operates in Africa:

The atrocities underscore the dilemma policymakers face as they determine whether to engage with unreliable militaries in volatile parts of Africa. For example, in the wake of last year’s coup in Mali, led by a U.S-trained Malian soldier, AFRICOM officials have acknowledged that future training must be more focused on values and rule of law, not just tactics.

State Department spokeswoman Hilary Renner said some U.S.-trained soldiers "may be implicated in these rapes," in a statement. "We condemn these crimes unequivocally and call for a full and credible investigation."

Tanzanian troops arrived in Congo over the weekend as a new U.N. intervention group attempts to make good on new peacekeeping promises in the nation.

Google Zeitgeist: REPORT: Bilderberg merging with GOOGLE under the stewardship of Schmidt...

2013-05-14T08:57:00.001-04:00

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Microsoft, Google, Facebook, were their founders part of ‘1984’ at startup or did their wealth and power draw them in?

In other words, were they chosen and sponsored by the new world order elites to fulfill their roles in setting up the new world order before they founded their companies or after?

Google-Berg: Global Elite Transforms Itself For Technocratic Revolution

Authoritarian, anti-democratic power networks are being re-branded as trendy, philanthropic-style forums

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones Infowars.com May 13, 2013

Eric Schmidt. Image: Wikimedia Commons

The secretive Bilderberg Group is currently undergoing a major transformation that will see it and other high profile networks merge under the banner of Google as the elite accelerates its plan to consolidate its technocratic agenda.

This past weekend, Infowars reporters Paul Joseph Watson and Jon Scobie visited the luxury Grove Hotel in Watford, UK, site of the 2013 Bilderberg Group conference set to take place June 6-9, a clandestine annual gathering of over 100 of the world’s most influential power brokers in the fields of politics, academia, technology, business and banking.

The investigation was prompted by our sources, who advised us to visit the Grove in advance of Bilderberg 2013. This is part one of what promises to be a developing story as the pieces of the jigsaw fall into place backed up by years of Bilderberg tracking and research.

What we discovered was groundbreaking and represents one of if not the most important development in Bilderberg’s 59 year history.

Put simply, Bilderberg is merging with Google under the stewardship of Google CEO Eric Schmidt, a regular Bilderberg attendee. Google’s annual Zeitgeist conference, which has been based at the Grove since 2007, immediately precedes the Bilderberg Group conference by a matter of days.

Backed up by prior research, we were able to confirm in conversations with hotel managers and others that the Grove is now a central base for Google’s agenda to control the global political and technological landscape.

The talk in the Grove is not of Bilderberg, that is barely a footnote, the real excitement centers around Google Zeitgeist, which was described by the London Independent as, “a cuddlier version of the Bilderberg Group, the supposedly shadowy network of financiers that holds a private annual assembly, recast in the image of our new tech masters.”

Bilderberg is indeed being recast as ‘Google-Berg’ – partly because of efforts on behalf of activists to tear away the veil of Bilderberg’s much cherished secrecy, and partly as a means of re-branding authoritarian, undemocratic secret gatherings of elites as trendy, liberal, feel-good philanthropic-style forums like Google Zeitgeist and TED.

In reality, behind the scenes Google is using such forums as proving grounds on which to form the consensus that shapes the globe. We were told directly that the organizers behind the so-called “Arab Spring,” which began in Tunisia and Egypt, which as we have documented is in fact a series of contrived western-backed color revolutions masquerading as organic uprisings, were recruited by Google and subsequently attended the Zeitgeist conference at the Grove.

It’s also well documented that the man responsible for kick-starting the “revolution” in Egypt, which led to the installation of a Muslim Brotherhood dictatorship which the west can now use as a justification for further intervention, was Google employee Wael Ghonim.

Google’s growing influence within both the British and American governments is also well documented. Eric Schmidt was a campaign advisor and a major donor to Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns. He was also reportedly offered the post of Treasury Secretary within the Obama administration. In Britain, Google representatives have met no less than 23 times with Conservative Party officials since the general election in 2010. David Cameron addressed the inaugural 2006 Zeitgeist conference before going on to become Prime Minister four years later. British Chancellor George Osborne paid a visit to Zeitgeist just weeks before he also attended Bilderberg 2011 in St. Moritz, Switzerland.

The crossover between Zeitgeist and Bilderberg has deepened in recent years, with the London Telegraph comparing the power of the Google confab to the World Economic Forum in Davos, “attracting figures of global significance to talk and to network.”

Former US President Bill Clinton, groomed by the Bilderberg Group, has also given speeches at Zeitgeist, as has fellow Bilderberg attendee Prince Charles. Another Telegraph report described Zeitgeist as, “one of the most high-powered gatherings of business leaders, thinkers and those that are considered to generally shape the global future.”

Google is clearly positioning itself to become a force more powerful than governments in controlling and monitoring people’s behavior across the globe through all manner of different means, from cars that drive themselves (and are constantly tracked by a centralized Google database), to Google Glass which is akin to having a Google microchip in your forehead, to Google’s deep involvement in manipulating mass movements through social media as they did in Egypt and Tunisia.

The Grove Hotel is a perfect staging ground for such machinations given its role in World War 2 as a “secret wartime HQ for the London, Midland & Scottish Railway” named “Project X”.

The direction in which this is all heading can clearly be surmised from remarks made by Eric Schmidt himself, who has repeatedly made it clear that he thinks privacy is a relic of the past and plans to turn Google into the ultimate Big Brother that makes George Orwell’s 1984 look like a children’s fairy tale.

“We don’t need you to type at all. We know where you are. We know where you’ve been. We can more or less know what you’re thinking about.”
“I actually think most people don’t want Google to answer their questions [...] They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next.”
“If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”
“We need a [verified] name service for people,” he said. “Governments will demand it.” (Chinese-style Internet control).
“We know everything you’re doing and the government can track you.”
“We will know your position down to the foot and down to the inch over time…Your car will drive itself, it’s a bug that cars were invented before computers…you’re never lonely…you’re never bored…you’re never out of ideas.”

In numerous speeches, including those made at Google Zeitgeist, Schmidt has outlined his vision for a collectivist, permanently networked world in which individuality and privacy are ostracized and those who refuse to sign up to the new religion of transhumanism are shunned as sub-human savages.

That is the primary agenda now being formulated by Google Zeitgeist luminaries in concert with the Bilderberg Group, which shares many of the same members.

A Busy Time at the Grove

Our source told us that there were “four or five big conferences” coming up at the Grove in May, June and July, but intimated that Google Zeitgeist was clearly considered the biggest, with the 227 room hotel not even large enough to accommodate all the guests and administrative staff required to be in attendance, adding that they had to be put up in London hotels.

Huge temporary structures, watched by security guards, were also being constructed on grounds near to the hotel when we visited. These are set to be used for Google’s ‘Big Tent’ event, which is a more public showcase than their private ‘Zeitgeist’ confab. Whether the facilities will also be used by the Bilderberg Group remains to be seen.

The source emphasized that Grove staff had been told not to disclose any information about the Zeitgeist conference and that Google only released information they wanted the public to know. However, the upcoming confab was the talk of the bar and both employees and guests were clearly excited about it.

The source said that security for the event was the same as when heads of state would visit and that the hotel was coordinating with “state security” to run the conference, which inevitably means that taxpayer money will be used to fund the operation, as it is admittedly being used to provide security for Bilderberg. He added that the likes of Google and Bilderberg chose the Grove as a venue because security was far easier to provide compared to hotels in London which are surrounded by high-traffic streets.

Bilderberg’s 2013 Agenda

In terms of Bilderberg’s agenda for the 2013 confab, early indications from our inside source have thrown up a number of different issues that will be up for discussion before Bilderberg instructs its members to implement the agreed upon consensus in each of their fields of influence.

Bear in mind that the motivation behind Bilderberg’s scheming can probably best be encapsulated by remarks made by Bilderberg luminary Henry Kissinger which recently came to light thanks to Wikileaks.

“Before the Freedom of Information Act, I used to say at meetings, ‘The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.’ [laughter] But since the Freedom of Information Act, I’m afraid to say things like that,” said Kissinger.

At least some if not all of the following issues will be discussed and agreed upon at Bilderberg 2013.

- Targeting Iran’s nuclear processing facilities for destruction via air strikes within the next 3 years if Tehran refuses to give up its nuclear program.
- Prolonging the war in Syria by arming the rebels and overturning recent military victories by Assad’s forces.
- The threat of a global pandemic, caused in part by rising resistance to antibiotics, which given the role of some of the pharmaceutical companies represented at Bilderberg in “accidentally” releasing viruses is somewhat rich.
- The manufacturing revolution of 3D printing and ways to control it and prevent the democratization of production.
- So-called “cyber resilience,” which means more state control over the Internet. There is much talk of “Digital Wildfires” – they are scared stiff about losing control over information dissemination.
- Setting up a Ministry of Truth for the Internet similar to that advocated by Bill Clinton. Controlling what can be published on the Internet.
- Advancing so-called “smart cities” that spy on every aspect of public behavior. Installing systems like Intellistreets that record street conversations. Rolling out the landscape of the technocracy.
- The threat caused to social stability by declining living standards and wealth.
- A desperate last gasp move to prevent Britain from leaving the EU and crushing the dream of a centralized European federation.
- More bailouts to prop up the euro.
- Minimal economic growth in 2013.
- Increasing the amount of power obtained by central banks under the guise of “bank reform”.
- Organizing more aggressive powers of tax collection
- Managing a growing credit bubble that threatens runaway inflation in Europe.

We will expand more on Bilderberg’s 2013 agenda as and when more information is obtained from our sources.

View a selection of photos from The Grove, site of Bilderberg 2013 and Google Zeitgeist below.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

IRS bombshell explodes Benghazi coverage, mission accomplished!

2013-05-13T23:53:00.001-04:00

How do you get out of a jam? Change the subject. Looks like it’s working. But what do they have planned to change the subject now from the enemies list scandal? Washington IRS officials targeted conservatives... 55-questions sent to tea party group; Demands for donor lists, names of all volunteers... BOOK: IRS retaliates against outspoken business leaders... Tea Party groups threaten to sue... Kentucky activist to IRS: 'Apology not accepted'... Probe Expands To Groups Opposed To Gov't, Teaching Constitution... Scrutiny Deeper Than Thought... McConnell: 'Just The Beginning'... Agency accused of leaking confidential tax documents during election... Scandal politics sweep Capitol Hill... FLASHBACK: Senior White House official briefed reporters on Koch brothers taxes... Top IRS official knew of tea party targeting for year, didn't reveal... REUTERS: KNEW IN 2011... DC office targeted conservatives... Probe Expands To Groups Opposed To Gov't... Pelosi: 'Opportunity' To Scrutinize 501(c)(4)s, 'Overturn Citizens United'... GOVT TAPS PRESS PHONE RECORDS FOR MONTHS

Pressure mounts on Boehner to appoint select committee on Benghazi—why hasn’t he already done it?

2013-05-13T18:09:00.001-04:00

This should tell you something, if there was a true opposition party Obama would never even have been a candidate and would have been impeached long ago for any number of treasonous and unconstitutional and unlawful acts he's committed!

Boehner has been the invisible man! The three monkeys in one man…

Pressure mounts on Boehner to appoint select committee on Benghazi

May 11, 2013 | Posted in News | No comments

House Speaker John Boehner is facing mounting pressure to create a special or select committee to investigate the Benghazi terror attacks in which four Americans were killed.

The House resolution to form a special committee now has at least 139 co-sponsors who are putting Boehner in the difficult position of leading efforts to get the White House to release emails on Benghazi-gate but not agreeing to the demands of many rank-and-file Republicans.

The resolution is sponsored by Virginia Rep. Frank Wolf who suggested to Boehner in a forceful, four-page letter Thursday that the Obama administration perhaps failed to adequately prevent the deaths of the Americans killed and injured in the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, and that not appointing the committee could make the Republican-led House “complicit in that failure.”

An ABC News story said the CIA’s explanation of the Benghazi events changed 12 different times before being made public.

Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said five days after the attacks, while making the rounds on the Sunday talk shows, that the strikes appeared to be “spontaneous” and sparked by protests elsewhere in the Middle East about an anti-Islamic video.

However, references to “Islamic militants” and terror attacks in the original CIA reports were scrubbed from Rice’s final talk points.

Wolf said that after the ABC News report the number of co-sponsors increased to 144, about 60 percent of the House Republican Caucus.

The pressure to form such a committee also increased after three career State Department employees and self-proclaimed “whistle blowers” testified Wednesday about Benghazi before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Affairs.

Wolf argues a select committee is needed to strengthen subpoena powers and so one chairman or director can bring together the expertise of the different standing committees.

“If you don’t use the subpoena power, people will not come in and testify, because if you’re 50 years old and you’re a federal employee, you have two kids, maybe two college tuitions, you have a mortgage on your house in Arlington County, you’re not going to risk your career,” Wolf told conservative talk radio host Hugh Hewitt on Friday.

He also said somebody from the Armed Services Committee should be included on the panel because the Defense Department is involved in the Benghazi matter. And the Intelligence Committee should be included because the CIA and the office of the Director of National Intelligence are also involved.

Boehner on Thursday again declined to commit to appointing a committee, saying he has “confidence” in the committees already holding investigations.

Such committees have been appointed to investigate Watergate and the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Beyond the issue of whether State Department officials and White House deputies changed the CIA memo for political reasons, in the height of Obama’s re-election effort, are issues of whether the U.S. provided adequate security at the compound and made full attempts to repel the attacks and rescue Americans.

Republican Sens. John McCain, Arizona, and Lindsey Graham, South Carolina, renewed their call after the Wednesday hearing for a select committee.

Graham, who with McCain had led Senate Republican efforts to get to the bottom of the Benghazi issue, told The Hill that he has urged Boehner to create the committee.

“I’ve raised it to him, I’ve talked to him,” he told the newspaper. “It’s his decision to make, but we’re making a big mistake by not doing a select committee.”
VIA foxnews

Facebook posts report UN Tanks on the move and mobilization of local militias in Maine

2013-05-13T17:41:00.001-04:00

This may or may not be true, I’m posting it to try to get confirmation and to sound the alarm in case it is true. Know anything about it please reply or leave a comment or email me.

REPORTED – UN Tanks & Supplies On the Move – Local Militias Mobilized – Maine

May 12, 2013

If you have pictures, video, or audio of the events happening in Maine, please send them to media@secureourfreedom.net

IMPORTANT UPDATE 5/13/13 1216MST
We remain unable to confirm if this story is true or not. We continue to receive conflicting reports. Maine Militia members deny the claims, while other members confirm them.

As of this moment, Secure Our Freedom is taking the side of this being a false claim. We will continue to monitor to situation and update accordingly, but we believe it to be a false alarm.

We are receiving unconfirmed early reports of UN movement in Maine.

Reports include connex trailers and tanks being moved along I-95 (between Bangor & Portland), and UN equipment being moved VIA shut down railways.

There are some reports of local Militias mobilizing.

Some reports are coming in from several sources that indicate 10 UN tanks were being stored at Belfast and have since disappeared overnight.

Secure Our Freedom will monitor this situation very closely and keep things up to date.

UPDATE 5/12/13 2139MST

We have just received this screenshot of a Facebook status in a local Maine group. Names have been edited out for privacy.

UPDATE 5/12/13 2212MST

Various confirmations continue to come in VIA Facebook. The following screenshot came from the Secure Our Freedom National Facebook page.

UPDATE 5/12/13 2223MST

Multiple reports are coming in of activity just South of Portland, ME.

UPDATE 5/13/13 0911MST

Secure Our Freedom is continuing to investigate these claims. We have local ME staff on the ground talking to local militia sources this morning who all confirm they have received orders to gear up. We are in the process of contacting local police departments.

UPDATE 5/13/13 1017

Confirmations continue to come in VIA Facebook. We understand that this is not hard evidence, however multiple sources continue to confirm.

1 comment

TheHutMaster May 13, 2013 9:57 am Log in to Reply
Folks, when will the gasbags in Washing ton STOP these LIES! “It is for your saftey” Huh? UN Tamks in and around Maine? Ya, that makes me all warm and fuzzy Mr. Obla Bla. It tells us that you know your days as King are numbered and it is time for yet another False Flag event.
Well, We The People see right thought yey another LIE and it is time for you to leave the great Office Of the President. You are a fake and you must be jailed for your treasonious crimes. And oh yea, Hillarry as well.
God Bless the REPUBLIC of the United States

UFO over Quincy: It’s the government but they won’t identify who or why!

2013-05-13T16:51:00.001-04:00

This is eerie as The X-Files. What are they testing? Are they practicing future missions, if so, what is the objective? Why won’t they say any more than government surveillance?

Hmmm, government surveillance, that doesn’t leave me with a warm and fuzzy feeling! How about you?

Mission Classified: Manned Government Surveillance Plane Hovers Over U.S. Town for Weeks Video

Mac Slavo SHTF Plan May 13, 2013

According to residents of Quincy, Massachusetts a low flying plane has been hovering over their town non-stop for the last several weeks, leaving many puzzled as to why it’s there.

No one in the Federal government is talking, and the FAA says they are aware of the “authorized” flight pattern but are not releasing additional details, other than to say, “we have to be very careful this time.”

Suggesting that the government is conducting surveillance is often disregarded as conspiracy theory, but in this case, it may be right on target.

Normally, we could dismiss a simple flyover as a one-off event. In this particular instance, however, the unmarked plane has been circling the same town repeatedly, with residents reporting that it passes over every 5 – 8 minutes, and it does so at odd hours – sometimes for extended periods in the middle of the night.

One local city council member has been fielding calls from concerned constituents:

It’s not as if the flights are secret. You can stand in your front yard and look at them. So, the fact that they won’t confirm it’s law enforcement and we don’t need to worry about it is a little concerning to me.

A local news source, however, claims there’s nothing to see here:

Residents here say they haven’t seen it since the rain moved in. Before that it was circling the city non-stop.
Who’s behind it? What is it doing? Only the Feds seem to know…
Residents have seen it at all hours of the day, right over the roof tops so long as the weather’s clear.…
Sources tells Newscenter5 the flights are government surveillance – the mission is classified.
But residents should not be concerned.

Move along and pay no attention to the military surveillance plane making rounds over your town – it’s there to protect you:

What kind of ”top secret” mission utilizes a low-flying aircraft overtly circling in such a way that residents of the town can see it on a regular basis?

And what did the FAA mean when they said they, “have to be be very careful this time?”

Is this yet another government psy-op? Or is there something else going on in Quincy, Massachusetts?

Video: “We have to be very careful this time”

This article was posted: Monday, May 13, 2013 at 2:04 pm

CIA Director Petraeus rejected final Benghazi talking points version as “useless”, shortly afterwards resigned due to infidelity

2013-05-13T15:46:00.001-04:00

Was Petraeus outed as a warning to others for not towing the line? How was the information made public. If they had this information on him as a way to control him, how are they keeping him in check now? Do they have more stuff on him or have they threatened to Breitbart him or family members?

ABC: Petraeus called final Benghazi talking points “useless” the day before Rice’s full Ginsburg; Update: Transcript added

posted at 11:01 am on May 12, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

One of the mysteries in the Benghazi scandal has been the role of David Petraeus, who was then the Director of the CIA but was forced to resign in a personal scandal shortly thereafter. While the White House and State Department tried to cobble together talking points to explain away the terrorist attack that took four American lives, what did Petraeus do? According to new information reported for the first time by Jonathan Karl on ABC News’ This Week earlier this morning, Petraeus rejected the final version as “useless” — and then threw the issue to the White House:

We already knew that Petraeus was stunned by the revisions; now we know he rejected them personally. ”I would just as soon not use them, but it’s their [the White House] call.” That would contradict the meme over the last few days that this was an intramural fight between State and CIA with the White House just serving as bystanders. The CIA Director called the “demonstration” talking points useless the day before Susan Rice went on five Sunday talk shows, but the White House apparently disagreed. They, evidently, found the false narrative very useful.

Earlier on today’s show, John McCain demanded a select committee to investigate the cover-up, and specifically called for Hillary Clinton to return to testify:

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., this morning described the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi controversy as a “cover up,” following exclusive reporting by ABC News that showed the State Department was involved in editing the CIA’s Benghazi talking points used in the days after the attack on the American diplomatic compound in Libya last year.
“I’d call it a cover-up,” McCain said this morning on “This Week.” “I would call it a cover-up in the extent that there was willful removal of information which was obvious.” …
McCain also singled out former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who he suggested would have been aware of the State Department’s emails requesting changes to the talking points.
“I think the secretary of state has played a role in this,” McCain said. “She had to have been in the loop some way, but we don’t know for sure.”
McCain said Clinton should return to Capitol Hill to testify again, calling for a Congressional select committee to further investigate the issue.

House Intelligence Committee chair Mike Rogers told Fox News Sunday that she won’t be alone in offering testimony, because more whistleblowers are asking to step forward:

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Sunday he believes “more whistleblowers” will come forward with information on the deadly attack last year on diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya.
“I do think we are going to see more whistleblowers. I know certainly my committee has been contacted, I think others committees [have been contacted] as well,” Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said on “Fox News Sunday.” …
“I will tell you, we have had people come forward because of the testimony and say, we would also like to talk, we feel a little bit intimidated by this, but have information we think is valuable,” Rogers said.

Maybe a select committee should hear more from David Petraeus. How did his deputy end up approving talking points he himself would have rejected? Who in the White House decided to run with them anyway?

Update: Here’s the transcript from the brief exchange, courtesy of ABC News:

JON KARL, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, clearly, there’s a credibility question that the White House has to deal with because this directly contradicts what they have said about this. But you, you know, Martha, mentioned in the interview with Senator Reed that the White House has had tried to have it both ways, both saying that they immediately called it an act of terror and saying they couldn’t do that in these talking points because they couldn’t prejudice the investigation.
You know, there’s problems on both sides with this. But there is one very important point here, which is in all 12 revisions of these talking points originally drafted by the CIA, they begin by saying that the attack in Benghazi started as a spontaneous reaction to Cairo. That was demonstrably false.
RADDATZ: And took out all of the al Qaeda references–
KARL: That was never true. And then they went on and took out all of the al Qaeda references–
RADDATZ: But they would say they didn’t know that at the time.
KARL: Right.
RADDATZ: About those. How about CIA Director David Petraeus? How did he respond to these talking points? And I know you have new information on that.
KARL: Yeah, this is fascinating. Because Mike Morrell, who was the deputy director, was the one that ultimately signed off on this one. Petraeus finally saw the final version of the talking points. This is the Saturday afternoon before Susan Rice’s appearances on the Sundayshows. He looks at these and says they’re essentially useless. And direct quote from his e-mail. He says, I would just as soon not use them. But it’s their call, meaning the White House’s call.
RADDATZ: And they got the talking points out there.

Who overruled Petraeus on the talking points? Who thought they knew better than the Director of the CIA, whose annex was overrun in the second attack, what happened on the ground? I doubt very seriously that the overruling was done by Morrell or anyone at State except Hillary Clinton — and her personal briefing from Hicks during the attack should have put her in Petraeus’ camp on the uselessness of the talking points.

Why a government-orchestrated distraction event is highly likely to occur in the next 7 days

2013-05-13T13:58:00.001-04:00

The IRS dumped the story that conservative groups were targeted so as to suck all the news coverage away from Benghazi, that’s how damaging the Benghazi scandal is. If that doesn’t work look out!

By Gordon King on May 12, 2013

False Flag-O-Meter reaches the red zone

Mike Adams NaturalNews May 12, 2013

This is a short but urgent warning: A false flag event, an act of war, a bombing or some other headlines-grabbing orchestrated event is very likely to occur in the next seven days precisely because the Obama administration is under intense fire right now and needs a quick distraction. In stage magic, it’s called the “art of misdirection.” In politics, it’s called the “Clinton method.”

This is exactly what Bill Clinton did over and over again during his administration: Any time he was about to be raked over the coals for some political scandal, he would simply order the bombing of another “terrorist factory” somewhere around the globe. Magically, the Clinton News Network (CNN) would shift coverage to this heroic act of “national defense” and stop asking questions about his scandal back at home. That would give the Clinton administration enough time to intimidate, threaten or murder whoever might have been involved. (Vince Foster, remember?)

Right now, Hilary Clinton and President Obama are facing the possible downfall of their political careers over the Benghazi cover-up. Thanks to recent testimony, we now know that the Obama administration actually ordered the stand-down of U.S. military forces, directly causing the death of a U.S. ambassador as well as those in the embassy who attempted to save his life.

This is a scandal many times more explosive than Watergate. As the Benghazi investigation unfolds, it may very well end up in the forced resignation of Obama himself.

“Greenlighting” a pre-planned operation

To avoid that from happening, Clinton, Obama and all the other globalist minions in Washington D.C. are trying to figure out what false flag scheme they have ready to go right now. They desperately need to pull the trigger on something: a bombing, a mass shooting, a hundred dead kids bleeding out on public sidewalks or something that can distract the media (and the public) from asking too many questions on Benghazi.

Hence the red zone of the False Flag-O-Meter. It’s now sitting in very dangerous territory, and the worse the scrutiny gets over Benghazi or the recent revelations that the IRS targeted conservative groups and Jews for punitive scrutiny during the 2012 elections, the more likely a false flag event becomes.

Just so you understand real history here, false flags are the primary way governments affect sweeping policy changes. They are acts of political theater played out for the purpose of causing enough real mayhem and carnage — and blaming the right culprits — so that the public will demand government action. This plays right into the hands of government which incessantly wants to concentrate power and destroy civil liberties. Every crisis that unfolds allows it to move one step closer to its goal of dictatorial police state control.

Watch for a major event in the next 7 days

Understanding this, there is a high probability of a false flag event occurring within the next seven days: A staged terror attack on a U.S. embassy, a shooting on U.S. soil, a bombing of a government building, someone blowing up a bridge… anything to get the attention off Benghazi-gate.

FBI agents are no doubt scurrying across the country right this very minute, taking inventory of all their pre-planned terror plots and trying to determine which one they can make “real” at short notice. The FBI, in case you didn’t know, openly plots and carries out terror attacks all across the USA in order to show that it’s “stopping terrorism.” This has been confirmed by the New York Times, which rarely admits anything true about terror plots.

Whatever it is, this false flag event needs to be visually and emotionally shocking. So expect children to be sacrificed as part of it. Nothing grabs headlines on CNN faster than the blood of children, and that’s what Hilary Clinton needs right now more than anything else: a powerful, revolting distraction from her own abject criminality.

And believe me, these people would order a thousand children killed if it was necessary to save their political careers. Have no illusions about the kind of power-addicted monsters who are running the U.S. government today. There is nothing they won’t do to weasel out of being caught in a devastating lie.

I hope I’m totally wrong about this prediction, but just in case you may want to be extra vigilant for the next week or so, and if something does happen, don’t believe the White House narrative which is almost 100% guaranteed to be complete fiction.

DHS conditioning police to accept premise that everyone from homeschoolers to patriots and constitutionalists – “rightwing extremists” are suspected terrorists

2013-05-13T12:27:00.001-04:00

The ‘war on terror’ was conceived by the globalists as a way to attack the American citizenry and bring them into submission to the new world order.

That’s why they used Muslims to initiate it but went out of their way not to identify terrorists as Muslims to the consternation of many Americans.

Now you know why the government so adamant in it’s stance in not identifying the enemy as Muslim terrorists, the terrorist is you!

The school kids are further conditioned to accept the police state and the ‘evils’ of gun ownership! How many kids will accept the premise that gun ownership is bad because a teachers says so, or because a student is expelled for pointing his finger, or drawing a picture of a gun, etc.…

DHS=KGB, it was not created to protect the people of the homeland, it was created to protect the government from the people of the homeland!

Homeland Security Funded Exercise Portrayed Homeschoolers as Terrorists

Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com May 11, 2013

Taken on its own, the KOMO 4 News report below out of Seattle paints a stark and frightening picture of police battling “angry parents” in a simulated shooting at a school. The practice of police training to take on everything from homeschoolers to patriots and constitutionalists – “rightwing extremists” in government parlance – is anything but a rarity. Such exercises are now a prominent feature of the expanding police state.

In 2002, Alex Jones covered school shooting police exercises targeting homeschoolers, a topic included in his film, Police State Trilogy. Since that time, the effort to malign homeschooling parents as extremists and terrorists has only increased.

Police State Exercises Now Part of Public Education Landscape

In 2004, cops in Muskegon, Michigan conducted a “mock attack” on a school bus as part of a terrorism response exercise. The terrorists portrayed in the exercise were not fanatical Muslims or even phantom rightwing extremists – they were said to be fanatical homeschoolers.

According to the Muskegon Chronicle, the exercise was a simulated “attack by a fictitious radical group called Wackos Against Schools and Education who believe everyone should be homeschooled,” Homeschool World reported in September, 2004.

The simulated attack was funded by the Department of Homeland Security.

Prison Planet.com reported:

The mock attack was funded by a Homeland Security grant and required the participation of students to act bloody and injured, also involving hospitals, morgues and mannequins painted up to look like dead children, as parents were ordered to dash to emergency rooms frantic in the belief that their child had perished.
The Muskegon Area Intermediate School District later had to apologize for characterizing homeschoolers as terrorists after hundreds of complaints poured in.
Stereotypes consistently propped-up by the media demonize homeschoolers as hicks, retards and extremists, despite the fact the local and national spelling bees are routinely won by homeschooled children.
The ceaseless attack on homeschooling is an attempt to neutralize any alternatives parents have to placing their children in the state run re-education gulags known as the “public school system.”

“Michigan is the epicenter of the agenda to mould all schools into youth internment centers, indoctrinating all children to accept the presence of surveillance cameras, biometric scanning to access buildings and buy food, ID tracking cards and men in uniforms pointing guns at them as normal,” Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones wrote on November 6, 2008. “Allied to this is the openly stated agenda not to educate but to dumb down students and brainwash them with bizarre humanist rhetoric about the evils of the family, all in preparation for their smooth acquiescence into enslaved adulthood as a downtrodden worker bee under the control matrix of the elite.”

But it is not simply homeschoolers who are portrayed as terrorists in government school exercises.

In 2011, Pottawatamie County, Iowa, and Homeland Security conducted an exercise simulating a school shooting. The shooter was portrayed as a “white teen boy, whose family is involved in anti-illegal immigration rallies” and supports the Second Amendment. The father of the shooter was portrayed as a member of an “underground white supremacist group,” according to an email sent to Infowars.com.

School children are now routinely subjected to unannounced exercises. In a Michigan school in 2006, militarized cops took students “from the classroom into the halls, patted down by officers and asked what they had in their pockets.” The Associated Press reported that some of the children “were so scared, they just about wet their pants.”

“In the years since 9/11 and the Columbine school shootings, there has been a concerted effort to make school emergency drills much more ‘realistic’ and much more intense,” writes Michael Snyder. “Unfortunately, the fact that many of these drills are deeply traumatizing many children does not seem to bother too many people. Do we really need to have ‘active shooter’ drills where men point guns at our kids and fire blanks at them?”

Snyder documents numerous instances where school officials, in coordination with local militarized police often operating with Department of Homeland Security grants, have relocated children during mock terror drills and active shooter scenarios. Schools also routinely engage in lockdown drills, an activity that naturally acclimates young minds to accept an ever-encroaching police state.

“Schools have become hi-tech prisons,” Steve Watson wrote in 2007. “Children all across America and the UK are being conditioned to accept that they are not free and that they must submit to draconian laws and measures for their own safety… Everyday we post reports from mainstream news sources documenting this disturbing trend.”

Homeschooling: Part of Domestic Terror Construct

The demonization of Americans who are opposed to interning their children in public reeducation facilities predates the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and the attacks of September 11, 2001.

According to Time Magazine, the rhetoric that supposedly contributed to the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City came from “well known-elements of far-right thought: tax protesters, Christian homeschoolers, conspiracy theorists… and self-reliant types” in opposition to the federal government.

Lew Finch, the superintendent of schools in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, went further and directly placed the blame for the bombing on homeschoolers. “There is a dedicated, very well organized, very well financed movement in America that is very anti-public schools, very anti-government,” he told the Des Moines Register on May 4, 1995. “The ultimate example of that sentiment is the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City.”

“We will continue to see armed men terrorize our children, aim guns at their head and indoctrinate them to accept living under tyranny unless parents and teacher organizations band together to file huge lawsuits against those responsible and we vehemently denounce the insidious Sovietization of the public school system,” Watson and Jones noted.

Homeschool parents and organizations, as well, would be wise to combat insidious government propaganda that likens them to terrorists. Left unopposed, this massive brainwashing effort will convert an entire generation into believing that homeschooling is not only evil and socially harmful, but it breeds terrorists.

The goal is to completely eradicate parent directed education and the threat it poses to public indoctrination mills that train children to passively participate in their own destruction while simultaneously worshipping government.

Families blame White House for 2011 SEAL Team 6 tragedy

2013-05-10T23:34:00.001-04:00

Why did it happen? To silence them! The raid that supposedly killed OBL was a hoax and BHO couldn’t risk ‘loose lips’!

Parents of Aaron Vaughn speak out on circumstances leading to helicopter crash

Families blame WH for 2011 SEAL Team 6 tragedy

Navy seal team six became a household name after members of that elite unit (supposedly) took out Osama bin Laden in May have 2011.

But the same unit suffered tragedy just three months later when a helicopter carrying thirty American troops most of the members of seal team six was blasted out of the sky by Taliban forces in Afghanistan.

Mystery Benghazi, Mystery Babylon!

2013-05-10T13:15:00.001-04:00

I doubted the US media would ever actually cover Benghazi but it’s so egregious they apparently think they must in order to be able to fool anyone anymore into thinking they are remotely objective.

The press is absolutely essential for the new world order to realize their centuries long dream. They control it and thereby control us.

If the public begins to doubt what they are being fed by the press every hour of every day they may begin to think for themselves and seek others sources of information.

If that happens it’s over for the new world order! So, they’ll bite the bullet on this, give just enough coverage to it as is possible and try to limit the damage to a minimum.

The current administration is not essential to their plans, after all, they control both parties, but they won’t find a more perfect puppet than the Kenyan communists, the Muslim who hates everything America stands for! So they will try very hard to have him escape.

They will probably pull it off after all they are smarter than us and they have supernatural help.

Ephesians 6:12 King James Version (KJV)

¹²For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.