The United Nations environmental program, established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established in 1988, created one of the greatest deceptions--of which there are many--in modern history. All of the mainstream media outlets, including NPR (or maybe especially NPR) are on board.
What's the deception? The U.N. asserts that anthropogenic carbon dioxide influences atmospheric CO2 levels which in turn raises global temperatures, however, evidence from ice cores clearly shows the opposite: that increased CO2 levels follow increased temperatures by a few centuries, approximately 400 years. In other words, CO2 levels respond to changes in temperature, and not the way the IPCC summary --for policy makers and press--on climate change claims.
What do we know about the possible ill health effectsfrom exposure to the transmitting antennas for our wireless communications? If you rely on the mainstream media, next to nothing. Electromagnetic (EMF) pollution (especially bymicrowaves) is hardly ever discussed. It's often asserted that there are not enough studies to reliably assess high frequency EMF pollution but that's simply not true. The truth is that by 1990, there were more than 10,000 publications on the danger of EMF/RFR, and today, there are probably twice that many. It's just that the telecommunications industry doesn't want to risk trillions of dollars in profit, thus the negative effects of EMF pollution are still denied by official science. Keep in mind, the cell phone industry has funded 87% of the research on this subject.
“It may be possible – and tempting – to exploit for strategic political purpose the fruits of research on the brain and on human behaviour. Gordon J.F. MacDonald, a geophysicist specialising in problems of warfare, has written that artificially excited electronic strokes ‘could lead to a pattern of oscillations that produce relatively high power levels over certain regions of the earth…In this way, one could develop a system that would seriously impair the brain performance of very large populations in selected regions over an extended period.’
No matter how deeply disturbing the thought of using the environment to manipulate behaviour for national advantages to some, the technology permitting such use will very probably develop within the next few decades.” -- Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era:
Moreover, the military knew the effects of EMFs as far back as the 1970s, after compiling 2300 studies to show the effects of microwaves on humans.
These antennas are found on all wireless communications devices, such as cell towers, WiMax systems, internet routers, cell and cordless phones, smart meters, smart boards, ebook readers not to mention, baby monitors. You can find out how many antennas and towers are located within a 4-mile radius of your address at Antennasearch.
“Antennas are the actual signal emitters for cellular, paging and other radio services. Antennas can be placed on towers or be stand alone and placed on top of offices, condos, churches, light poles, signs, etc. Stand alone Antennas are small and difficult to spot as they are easily hidden/camouflaged.
Towers are tall structures (typically over 200 ft) used for Cellular, Paging and other radios services. Towers can contain multiple antennas owned by various companies.
World-renowned neurosurgeon and research scientistDr. Lief Salford's (Lund University, Sweden) research findings--since 1988-- show blood brain barrier leakage in thousands of rat brains exposed to much lower doses of microwave radiation than cell phone usage, leading to increased albumin (neurotoxin) uptake, memory loss and damage of up to 2% of brain cells. Dr. Salford said that today, "two-thirds of the world's population volunteer as guinea pigs in the world's largest biological experiment."
Is Wifi making your kid sick?
Then, if the smart meters, cell towers, etc aren't bad enough, our domestic law enforcement is being encouraged to use "non-lethal" directed energy weapons on us. In order to avoid violation of international defense/agency treaties, the Department of Defense uses the Department of Justice to test "non-lethal" weapons classified as "crowd control", in their "non-lethal" electromagnetic weapons program. In 1993, the National Institute of Justice Initiative on Less than Lethal Weapons recommended that local and state police departments in America utilize psychotronic, electromagnetic, and other mind control weapons against American citizens involved in "domestic disturbances," an open-ended term that can include pretty much anything. The Washington Postreported, “The Pentagon and the DOJ have agreed to share state-of-the-art military technology with civilian law enforcement agencies, including exotic non-lethal weapons."
“Short term research will be completed to adopt military technology to use by domestic law enforcement including laser microwave and electromagnetic weapons."
History teaches us that waiting for legislation and officials to protect our health is like closing the barn door after the horses escape. History teaches us that public health almost always loses to powerful commercial interests. Now that we have the information at our fingertips, there is no excuse for ignorance.
Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette by Robert Kane,a former top Motorola engineer, traces the history of cell phone development (in which he was involved) and analyzes the cell phone radiation bioeffects research base from 1950 to 1996.
“Talking on a cellular phone can be likened to holding a microwave oven to one's head."
For thousands of years, water has been seen as a free public good, with no price attached, but that's changing right before our eyes thanks to insatiable corporate greed. Their monopolistic exploitation of water – the world's most important raw material – in order to provide fabulous returns to investors from a captive market of consumers will eventually make water, like gold, too expensive for everyone but the wealthiest of the psychopathic elite if this global water cartel gets its way. Unfortunately, although, there is life without gold, there is no life without water...I bet you didn't know that.
What's more, by using a little-known loophole--the bottled water loophole-- in the 2006 Great Lakes Compact that allows water to be labeled a "commodity," our government supports the plundering of our water supply. Not only does Nestle Company siphon water for it's bottled water brand, it exports fresh water out of Lake Michigan and ships it to China at a "240 times markup!" Their profit: an estimated $500,000 to $1.8 million per day. That's right. Our government representatives are allowing these multinationals all the cheap water they can get in order to make large profits. If we don't fight to protect the most valuable resource we have, that is, water,
And guess how much Nestle pays for the millions, perhaps billions, of gallons of water it drains? One hundred dollars annually. And let's not forget Texas billionaireT. Boone Pickenswho is “the largest individual water owner in America, with rights over enough of the aquifer to drain an estimated 200,000 acre-feet a year, at least until the land goes dry.”
It gets even better. Not only is our government involved in this water securitzation scheme, the United Nations is the brainchild of this scam. UNESCO's Intergovernmental Council of the International Hydrological Program's document HS 15322explains how the "UN plans to secure resources to use at their disposal. Through the International Monetary Fund (IMF) under-developed countries are forced to sell their resources to the global Elite as “full cost recovery” to the global central bankers. Once those resources are under the complete control of the creditors, they become assets to be reallocated back to the enslaved nations for a price."
With the securitization of water, it makes water sources under central privatization cost more and become less accessible to those who desperately need it. In other words, pursuit of water security means whoever gets the water, chooses who lives and who dies.
“The one water-export method that has been taking off is bottled water. It is among the fastest-growing and least-regulated industries in the world. In the 1970s, the annual volume of water bottled and traded around the world was 300 million US gallons (about 1 billion liters). By 1980, the figure had climbed to 650 million US gallons (about 2.5 billion liters), and toward the end of the decade, 2 billion US gallons (7.5 billion liters) of bottled water were being consumed in countries around the world.
But in the past five years [10 years ago], the volume of bottled water sales has skyrocketed, and in 2000, 22.3 billion US gallons (84 billion liters) of water were bottled and sold. Moreover, one-quarter of all the water bottled was traded and consumed outside its country of origin.
Among the brand name products are Perrier, Evian, Naya, Poland Spring, Clearly Canadian, La Croix, Purely Alaskan, and many more. Nestle is the world market leader in bottled water, with no fewer than 68 brands, including Perrier, Vittel, and San Pellegrino. As a past chairman of Perrier put it: "It struck me ... that all you had to do is take the water out of the ground and then sell it for more than the price of wine, milk, or for that matter, oil."
While bottled water may have started out as a pampered Western consumer affectation, Nestle has found a growing market niche for bottled water in nonindustrialized countries where safe tap water is rare or nonexistent. In these countries, its main product line is Nestle Pure Life, a low-cost purified tap water with added minerals. Marketed on a platform of "basic wholesomeness," Nestle Pure Life has sold well in Pakistan and Brazil, as have some of the corporation's other bottled water products in China, Vietnam, Thailand, and Mexico
[...]
“If the OPEC model were followed, the countries containing large supplies of fresh water in the form of lakes, rivers, and glaciers would constitute such a cartel.
Studies by the highly respected Russian hydrologist Igor Shiklomanov, described by Peter Gleick in his book Water in Crisis, identify the countries with the most fresh water in the world. Twenty-eight of the world's largest fresh water lakes, he writes, account for 85 percent of the volume of all lake water, including Russia's Lake Baikal, Africa's Lake Tanganyika, and Lake Superior on the U.S.-Canadian border.
As the world's largest lake system, the Great Lakes together account for 27 percent of global lake volumes. The world's largest 25 rivers include: 11 in Asia (the Ganges, Yangtze, Yenisei, Lena, Mekong, Irrawaddy, Ob, Chutsyan, Amur, Indus, and Salween); 5 in North America (the Mississippi, St. Lawrence, Mackenzie, Columbia, and Yukon); 4 in Latin America (the Amazon, Parana, Orinoco, and Magdalena); 3 in Africa (the Congo, Niger, and Nile); and 2 in all of Europe (the Danube and the Volga).
I'm not really sure what the protocol is when posting a quote from someone commenting through Facebook on another website. For instance, should I post their name? Or do I even have the right to post the quote in the first place? So I'll just post the link for the article from where the quote [below] originated because I think this quote is very revealing.
“Out here in Oregon Nestle some how managed to wrangle access to the Columbia river for a new water bottling facility. My husband is a Water Rights Examiner, licensed in Oregon and Washington. I know how difficult it is for citizens to obtain water. In many areas water rights are not available to them. They are hotly contested and we've had guns drawn on us when out doing Water Rights surveys. Then along comes Nestle and they procure a Water Right for billions of gallons, for profitizing?!!! Oregon and Washington citizens have been raped by Nestle. Please don't buy Nestle water. If we don't unite to show our outrage now, they will get control of all the water."
Last night, President Obama, in his State of the Union address, stated our nation must do more to fight climate change, urging lawmakers to use market based solutions, and promising executive actions if they did not comply. However, market-based "solutions" to global warming will only line the pockets of the wealthy, while making the poor bear the costs- without even tackling the causes of global warming. In other words, it's a scheme, and a very profitable one.
According to Christopher C. Horner, author of the book 'Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed' Enron came up with the term, "cap and trade". That, right there, should be enough to make you question the whole concept of market-based solutions to global warming or climate change. Effectively, this approach will only further impoverish those already in poverty, and profit those who already win in this fixed global casino of ours. In the European Union this system is known as the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
It's not that global warming is not real, it's that global warming is not anthropogenic (man-made), and not as catastrophic, as Oscar winning, Al Gore makes it out to be (the oceans are going to rise 20 feet, yet Al buys a $9 million ocean front home?). As for "An Inconvenient Truth", just do a little research to find out how much Al Gore, who is worth 50 times more than he was when he Vice President, stands to profit from market based solutions to global warming. Filthy rich comes to mind
"Al Gore likes to say that mankind puts 70 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day. What he probably doesn't know is that mother nature puts 24,000 times that amount of our main greenhouse gas -- water vapor -- into the atmosphere every day, and removes about the same amount every day. While this does not 'prove' that global warming is not man-made, it shows that weather systems have by far the greatest control over the Earth's greenhouse effect, which is dominated by water vapor and clouds." -- Dr. Roy W. Spencer
"With help from friends at Goldman Sachs, Gore has established a network of organizations to promote the “climate crisis”—and keep himself in the spotlight. Gore’s crusade already has had an enormous impact on corporate decision-making and government policies.[...]As for Al Gore, the former U.S. vice president brings emotional fervor to his carbon crusade. He travels the country displaying charts and graphs, quoting scientific experts, and appealing to philosophers and religious leaders to save the planet from global warming. But he says nothing about his business partners who yearn to trade on the emerging carbon market. We know little about his former political associates who now staff the “climate crisis” advocacy groups. And the media pays no attention to the companies offering “carbon advisory services” that will profit from federal carbon emission controls."-- Deborah Corey Barnes, Capital Research Center
Under protest from US Congress, the EU is dead set on charging a carbon tax for all flights flying in and out of any EU airports, that is, flights that fly over international waters. However, the fact that they do not own the airspace doesn't stop the EU from imposing their tax. A United Nations organization called ICAO, which regulates global airlines has promised to figure out a way to calculate the carbon emissions for air travel, but has not produced anything as of yet, so the EU will take unilateral action if a global solution is not reached at The United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization multinational meeting in September on the airlines issue.
The nonprofit group Transport and Environment found that last year, airlines in the U.S. collected as much as a billion dollars from its passengers to comply with a European Union law that has yet to go into effect.
"...in the complex chain of relationships in the carbon market, no-one wants to take responsibility when things go wrong. Even if it means people are being driven out of their homes.
For years, we have been warned about the looming danger of overpopulation: billions of people scrambling for space on a planet that’s running out of oil, food, land, water, etc. Guess what? It's all a big lie. The staggering truth is that people are having too few children, gradually slowing population growth. That's right. The world’s population will peak at about 9-10 billion in the next 50 years, and then begin shrinking.
John Lennon: "I think it's a bit of a joke the way people have made this overpopulation myth. I don't really believe it, you know, I think whatever happens will balance itself out...I think we've got enough food and money to feed everybody. There is a natural balance. I think there is enough room for us. I don't believe in overpopulation. I think it's kind of a myth that's thrown out to keep your mind off Vietnam and Ireland, and all the important subjects."
Dick Cavett: "I think you're wrong."
John Lennon: "Oh, I don't care."
According to the Economist, since 2007, thanks to the weak economy Americans are having fewer babies than even the French and the British, not enough to maintain the size of the US population without immigration. The US birthrate right now is 1.9 births per woman when 2.1 births per woman is necessary to sustain the population on its own. It's only because of immigration that the birthrate is still growing. Furthermore, according to Pew Research, in the 18-34 year old demographic, one in four adults have returned to live with their parents since the economic downturn.
Not too long ago, children were desirable simply because the more you had, the more you had to work the family farm therefore, each child had a positive economic value. Today, each child is financial burden. The cost of raising a child from birth to age 17 is $300,00 according to the Department of Agriculture, $1.1 million to raise a child if you're a middle-class couple.
“In 1970, the global average was 6.5 children per woman. Today it’s 2.5. The replacement rate, that is the average number of children the average woman needs to have in order to keep the population constant, is 2.1. As a result, he said, 97 percent of the world's population is in countries where fertility rates are in the negative numbers, and as a result, a “demographic disaster” is looming." -- Jonathan Last, author of “What To Expect When No One’s Expecting: America’s Coming Demographic Disaster“
As college costs and student loan debt soar--college tuition has increased 1000% since 1965--and unemployment rises, college graduates, crushed by student loan debt, are deciding not to have kids. In recent years, student loan debt has skyrocketed from $100 billion to nearly $1 trillion, creating another potential debt bubble burst for the American economy.
So what is Agenda 21 (Sustainable Development, including: Smart Growth, the Grand Boulevard Initiative, Climate Action Plans, Carbon Taxes, Cap-and-Trade, etc) and what does it have to do with overpopulation and demographics? It is the United Nation's vision for a centrally managed global society under the noble banner of saving the earth. Buried in the pages of this proposal are measures that can be taken to insure a world with less human resource depletion and "sustainable development" of which the key element is population control which basically promotes a culture of death, not only at the beginning of life, but towards the end as well. What with euthanasia and the push for the legalization of physician-assisted suicide taking place in at least three states: Connecticut, New Jersey and Vermont...hey, it's a great way to take care of the aging population now that the baby boomers are reaching their twilight years.
“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."
- excerpt, UN Agenda 21
Under the guise of protecting the environment, "sustainable development" has become the rage in land use planning, zoning, and in virtually every other facet of daily life. The scary part is that it's taking hold in local communities all across America in the form of "stakeholder" councils to advance Agenda 21 to transform cities and towns into "sustainable communities." The primary tool used to spread this agenda is the "consensus process," which is used to gain the appearance of public support. This process is designed to take the public policy-making function away from elected officials and replace it with councils of non-elected officials, while giving the appearance of broad public input into the decision-making process.
Codex Alimentarius (Latin for "food code")--now enforceable through the World Trade Organization (WTO)--is inextricably linked to Agenda 21. It is a set of regulations that aim to outlaw health information and supplements, limiting access to natural therapies on a worldwide scale--basically anything that doesn't profit Big Pharma. Behind the Codex Alimentarius Commission is the United Nations and the World Health Organization working in conjunction with the multinational pharmaceutical cartel and international banks.
“The Codex Alimentarius Commission was established under heavy influence of the pharmaceutical industry in 1963 following resolutions passed at the Eleventh Session of the Conference of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1961, and at the Sixteenth World Health Assembly in 1963. (More on the history of codex here) From its very beginning CAC's clear intention was to protect corporate interests in the global pharmaceutical and food markets.
The bottom line is that despite the doomsday predictions of Malthus and his Malthusian theory being proven a colossal failure, his ideas are still being taken seriously and still being hyped and promoted by the elite multinational powerbrokers, financiers and billionaires who run our country behind the scenes, and who benefit from the idea that there are too many useless eaters using up the world’s resources. In other words, the clear message is "the real enemy then is humanity itself."
“Malthus indicates another kind of apologetic use for the population principle. If an existing social order, an elite group of some sort, is under threat and is fighting to preserve its dominant position in society, then the overpopulation and shortage of resources arguments can be used as powerful ideological levers to persuade people into acceptance of the status quo and of authoritarian measures to maintain it. The English landed interest used Malthus’ arguments thus in the early nineteenth century.
And this kind of argument is, of course, even more effective if the elite group is in a position to create a scarcity to demonstrate the point.
What is it about the apparently "random", indiscriminate killing of a large number of human beings in a rather upscale part of our nation? That is, Denver, Colorado.
Jeff Kass, author of “Columbine: A True Crime Story,” and article in the Examiner, "Columbine and Aurora Theater Shootings Evil Twins?" concluded it might have something to do with a "culture of honor". A search for the common denominators in school shootings across the country drove me to spend 10 years researching my book “Columbine: A True Crime Story.”
I believe a concept known as “culture of honor” is one of the key factors that compelled a core group of school shootings.
The South and the West of the United States have a “culture of honor” that infuses people with the belief that if you feel your honor has been violated, you feel it is appropriate to retaliate with violence. I argue that school shooters, who often see themselves as outsiders, feel their honor has been violated.
While, that may partially factor into what's behind the - relatively speaking - frequently occurring bloodbaths in Colorado, I believe, based on the research of Bill Zabel, Evan Long, and Rolf Zaeschmar that something far more sinister may underlie these occurrences, perhaps, a "culture of heraldry", in all its various states of definition.
Let me explain using the Columbine massacre as a template. According to Zabel, Denver Colorado, is home to a vast number of either, employees of defense contractors - Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Comcast, which has a division in the Littleton area that houses NSA offices, and supposedly, does a lot of classification stuff - and former and active military intelligence, CIA, and FBI agents, including Dylan Klebold's father, Thomas Klebold, who Zabel saw in a BBC clip, in full uniform after the incident, on the scene. The BBC caught three vehicles, headed by a state trooper car, followed by a big panel black van followed by a green minivan. The camera pans the passenger side of the green mini-van there he saw Thomas Klebold, who he spoke to during the hearing.
Eric Harris' father, Wayne, was a decorated Air Force pilot and intelligence operative who moved from Air Force base to Air Force base. His last stop before he retired and the family moved to Littleton was Plattsburgh Air Force Base. At Plattsburgh, Harris complained to friends that he was being forcefully drugged on the base and one researcher/scientist at the base told an alternative news organization that he was one of the many "guinea pigs" of an MKULTRA-type project being run at the base. Harris had been born in Kansas, where his father worked at a Boeing plant involved in black operations/projects. When they moved to Littleton, his "retired" father took up a job with FlightSafety, Inc. (Which would later train one of the alleged 9/11 hijackers), a military contractor. There, he taught people how to fly large refueling jets -- a type of aircraft used mostly, if not only, by people in the military. Aurora is home to a large Defense Department satellite intelligence operation at Buckley Air Force Base.
In the military, you have a top-down tiered system. The first team is the front team. The second team is cleanup. The third team is the most secretive team, the administrative team. They handle the media, the victims, local law enforcement. In other words, three teams working in layers. Harris and Klebold, were the main actors, possibly set up for two years to do this. Then you have the real shooters, the trenchcoat mafia, and then the black-op military cleanup team. The public, semi-public, and the private team. Even mainstream media "activist" Michael Moore admits to the overwhelming presence of the military industrial complex in the Denver area.
If Columbine was a cover-up, and all the evidence points to that being the case, the complicity of some of the parents, students, and the Columbine/Littleton population would be required. For most of us, that idea is absurd; however, as Zabel pointed out, the Columbine community is primarily an evangelical “Christian” group; however, once inside many of the homes, he found Satanic literature, and symbols. In other words, he found a very present occult "side" to the town and school.
From the news footage of that day, Bri Pasquelle, who had been in the library at the time, said, “Oh my God, the parents were involved.” On April 23, 1999, Bri Pasquelle said on Fox News, “the guy that shot in our direction looked like Dylan Klebold, only older.”
It was also reported that several of the teachers at Columbine may have been complicit. Judy Greco, the special-ed teacher, according to Zabel, is an admitted Wiccan who stated that she used a military-grade device to put her class under a "trance", and she helped Klebold and Harris with the basement tapes that are still sealed to this day.
The discrepancies between the "official" story, and actual eyewitness testimony, government documents, especially the 11,000 page report (11K), abound, as is starting to occur in the Batman movie massacre.
Eyewitness accounts, and government documents in the Columbine case report several additional shooters (The Denver Rocky Mountain News reported that dozens of witnesses reported that there were "five-to-eight" shooters); additional dead; additional injured; time line discrepancies; evidence not consistent with official reports; and the destruction of evidence - including all of the output from the fire alarm and water sprinkler system, all of the videotape evidence, all of the receipts from the school store and cafeteria because they have a time-roll on them, etc.
Other interesting bits of information:
At approximately, 4:30 PM, a 4-star general pops out of the sewer grate that connected to a tunnel that led to the school's underground, right there in the news footage that was seen on local news, but edited for CNN.
A mock lock-down shooting event drill one week prior to the event.
"Men in black"-style feds were seen in the halls of the school at 9 AM -- two hours before the start of the shooting.
The shooting that allegedly ended at noon, when the two boys were said to have committed suicide in the library (Which no one saw), the Denver Post reported that shots rang out inside the school at 3:45 PM.
NATO vans were observed at the school by a number of witnesses, as were high-ranking military officials, including that four-star general.
The final report stated that Harris and Klebold brought 95 bombs into the school, including large, heavy 20-pound propane tanks, which were, according to initial reports, "too sophisticated" for them to have built. It would appear to be absolutely impossible for two boys to transport 95 bombs into the school and plant them without being caught.
Sheriff John Stone, who also reported being "outgunned by the shooters", told CBS News while being interviewed,
“My investigators have destroyed the official timeline leading up to and during the massacre including the associations and movement of the suspects.”
Why? Possibly, to cover a wide time-frame, because cops always leave a narrow time-frame open within a couple of minute to a half hour because it’s all but impossible to pinpoint an exact time.
What about the footage in Michael Moore’s Columbine? Those tapes went to the FBI lab at Quantico before the public ever saw them. Rich Price of the FBI, on the news, said, “We enhanced the footage from the cafeteria". According to Zabel, trained in film and video post production, if you blow that footage up on an avid workstation, you can see little pixels around Harris and Klebold that when they move, in slow motion, change color, which they should not if they were in that frame originally as they were walking around that cafeteria.
Moreover, after Zabel finished reading law enforcement reports, he discovered that they were all typed up. Why is that a problem? He found out that in order to be authentic, or used in court, reports must be handwritten by witness or victim, signed and dated. Out of 2,000 witnesses, only a dozen handwritten testimony remained.
In the witness typed statements, in statement after statement, it was stated the shooting started at 11:21 A.M as if they all knew the exact time. Witnesses almost never know the exact time, down to the minute.
In addition, all of the autopsy reports are sealed.
It's also interesting to not that, regarding the Batman movie shooting, the Denver Post reports that Colorado university staged an identical exercise the same day in which students were trained how to react to a gunman firing at people in a movie theater.
Is the Batman movie massacre distracting us from anything important?
The United Nations prepares its final push to ratify a controversial gun treaty. Support for gun control is always galvanized when a "random" mass shooting occurs somewhere.
As the United Nations prepares its final push to ratify a controversial gun treaty, the U.S. Senate is set to approve the measure which critics say will not only give away U.S. sovereignty but directly attack the individual gun rights of American citizens, according to a report published Thursday at Stand Up America.
Operation Mountain Guardian - 107 Agencies To Stage A Mumbai Terror Attack On Denver. The DHS Fused with Police and Medical Response Teams including the Main Aurora Local Government Emergency Response Agencies
Columbine Cause
Was the "Batman movie" shooter mind controlled?
Scopolamine, also known as "The Devil's Breath." It's a substance so intense that it renders a person incapable of exercising free will. The first few days in the country were a harrowing montage of freaked-out dealers and unimaginable horror stories about Scopolamine. After meeting only a few people with firsthand experience, the story took a far darker turn than we ever could have imagined.
Click to enlarge
Image from Denver Airport mural.
Note gas mask, multiple weapons and rainbow colored spectrum of light shining overhead, which is exactly what theaters use to project images on a screen.
Read more...
Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall reading, hearing, and/or watching about wave after wave of child abuse reports from all over the globe regarding the United Nation's huge problem with pedophilia.
In 2001, the United Nations International Police Task Force fired a whistle-blower after she told her superiors about a massive pedophile-prostitution ring being run out of the U.N. Peacekeeping Mission in Bosnia. Finally, in 2002, news trickled out on the sex abuse and rape against West African refugee children by U.N. "peacekeepers" and aid workers.
So, why didn't the United Nations' massive pedophilia scandalreceive the media attention that was given to the Catholic Church pedophile scandal? Could it have something to do with U.S. government contractor DynCorp, who has so many connections to the sex-slave world.
In 1999 in Bosnia, a U.S. policewoman who worked for DynCorp was fired after telling of an alleged sex-slave ring operating on one of the bases there. The U.S. policewoman, Kathryn Bolkovac, settled a lawsuit. Her story recently wasfeaturedin the film “The Whistleblower.”
Bolkovac’s case followed a similar episode in which another employee, Ben Johnston, blew the whistle on DynCorp employees and supervisors for allegedly engaging in sex with 12- to 15-year-old children and selling them to each other as slaves.
After all, the United Nations subsidized DynCorp pedophilia continues. Dyncorp stock is currently owned by 108 funds/institutions, including Allstate Insurance Co., Bank of America, Bank Of New York Mellon Corp,, Bear Stearns, Blackrock Inc., California Public Employees Retirement System, Credit Suisse …
"In order for a refugee to make a report, they would have to go through the same persons who themselves are perpetrators of sexual exploitation. Most staff appear to connive to hide the actions of other staff."
Is the solution to our problems, a machine vision of the world? A self-organizing model, based on an underlying order of nature - that was completely disproved in 1981 - and taken from the cold and logical world of machines, where humans are reduced to mechanistic nodes? Or, has the environmental movement been hijacked by "right winged think tanks" and "cold war technocrats" who were using the balance of nature as a political trick? In other words, is this idea of the "balance of nature", "equilibrium" "web of life" "self-regulating Eco-system" an attempt by the powerful to maintain the status quo?
I know that when I heard it on the radio, and then read the article, my emotional response - considering that an increasing number of Americans are falling into poverty everyday, and the continuous military operations around the world that the US insists are important - blinded me to the date that this article was published. However, because I never post anything without confirming it from three independent credible sources, I discovered that what's being broadcast on talk radio, and circulating on the Internet as "verifiable truth" is nothing but back-fence talk, more than likely generated by foes of President Obama.
Therefore, if you come across this "dispatch" that accuses President Obama of donating $100 billion to the United Nations, take note of the date, and the lack of links to any reliable source. In other words, it's not true.
As drones become pervasive inside America, Bill Clinton thinks the United Nations or the U.S. government should create an agency to control the "misinformation" on the Internet. We're not supposed to know that our government is going to employ the use of drones to to carry out civilian and law-enforcement functions on us.
You see, since warfare is the only means to maintain the hierarchical society of the Ruling Elite, of which Bill belongs, Bill has the "right" to misinform, whereas, we, the muzzled masses, do not.
Did you know about the International Tribunal that found former President George H.W. Bush guilty of 19 war crimes in his Iraq war? Because of his war's "destruction of Iraq, killing at least 125,000 persons directly by its bombing while proclaiming its own combat losses as 148, and because it destroyed the economic base of Iraq and because its acts are still inflicting consequential deaths that may reach hundreds of thousands."
It's true. On February 29, 1992, at the Martin Luther King Jr. Auditorium in New York, a 22 member International War Crimes Tribunal representing 5 continents, before a public meeting of 1,500 people (completely blocked out by the media in America) headed by former United States Attorney General, Ramsey Clark, wrapped up 12 months of gathering and reviewing evidence of the the Initial Complaint of the Commission of Inquiry dated May 6, 1991 against President George H. W. Bush, Vice President J. Danforth Quayle, Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, and others named in the Complaint charging them with 19 separate crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity in violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the First Protocol thereto, and other international agreements and customary international law.
The Tribunal found George Bush and others in his administration guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Okay, am I the only one who missed this historic event?
Many of the traits that we either have or admire in other people...that make us human - loyalty, trustworthiness, faithfulness, a tendency to seek out heroes, etc. - unfortunately, also makes us more likely to ignore evidence that contradicts what we believe to be true. In fact, the evidence to the contrary can manifest itself as large as an elephant, yet we still ignore. In other words, our humanness makes us vulnerable to master manipulators who may very well be less than human.
This brings me to why I believe in the co-option of the left. The modern liberal – typically associated with the Democratic Party - fears the extremes of wealth and poverty under unrestrained capitalism; thinks all citizens are entitled to the basic necessities of life; champions the protection of the environment, and puts the welfare of all people above the ability of a few to profit enormously from what we’ve been led to believe is the “free market”.
Unlike the Republicans - who, regardless of their status in life, seem to support the less humanitarian, less "bleeding heart" values of those who dwell at the apex of society - the positions that the Democrats usually take, make the Democratic Party, in particular, more threatening to the powerful and wealthy. Simply put, the Democrats [used to] believe in speaking truth to power, whereas the ruling class is not interested in truth...only in growing and keeping all of their their wealth and power to themselves.
Therefore, it makes sense, that if the elitists want(ed) to secure their power base, throwing the Democrats/progressives/liberals off their scent...even better, engaging them in the task of defending/supporting their "cause" just might make their road a little easier. So, why not push their agenda through the Democratic Party; albeit, much more covertly than they do, through the Republican Party.
How?
That's simple, when you consider the aforementioned traits that make us human. It's all about making good use of timing; infiltration, semantics (Orwellian doublespeak); consensus making - placement of "change agents" or "facilitators" and "divide and conquer" technique (Delphi technique), and let's not forget the Hegelian dialectic (problem-reaction-solution), and/or psychological warfare. In other words, deceiving the liberals by embedding their operations in issues that appeal to the left.
The evidence for this transformation is right in front of our eyes. Ever since President Clinton took office, the Democratic Party has gradually moved so far to the right that it's transformed into the Republican party. Moreover, from "the environment" to "family planning", the issues or causes that the Democrats have traditionally supported have been, more or less, co-opted by the ruling class to mask their true motives.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me pick up on some interviews that you’ve given this week as you’ve been touring, talking about your book, “The Age of Turbulence.” You said this: “I think Bill Clinton was the best Republican president we’ve had in a while.” Republican?
MR. GREENSPAN: I’m sure he doesn’t like that joke, but if you look at his record compared to what I think appropriate policy ought to be, he’s for free trade, he’s for globalization, he was for welfare reform, fiscal restraint and—true enough, he’s not a Republican. I’m sorry, President Clinton, I didn’t mean to say that. But I must say, I had to follow an awful lot of your particular guidelines and found them very compatible with my own.
Remember DADT/DOMA-signing President Clinton promising that NAFTA wouldn't hurt a bit? Welfare Reform Act of 1996? Repeal of Glass-Steagall Act? DADT?
Fast forward a bit and we have President Bush 2.0 Obama who is a master at cloaking his almost neo-con "actions" in moderate, democratic rhetoric. Obama, who Jeremy Scahill called "Blackwater's New Sugar Daddy" has upgraded America’s network of overseas detention facilities or ‘black sites’; approved the assassination of American citizens; signed a defense bill that blocks his bid to close Guantanamo Bay; supports a 3-year extension of Patriot Act surveillance; extending the Bush-era tax cuts for two years, etc. Sure President Obama throws a bone to his base every once in a while, just like the Clinton administration did, but, for the most part, it's just a bone. Unless he's got some super secret strategy I'm unaware, President Obama is as "Republican" as former President Clinton.
Regarding the co-opting of issues, take global warming, of which a very strong argument can be made proving it's not man-made. To be sure, the issue of global warming falls under the category of a "liberal" cause; however, if you dig deep enough and research Agenda 21, "sustainable development" and Global Biodiversity Assessment (the blueprint for Agenda 21) you will find a huge profit motive whose carbon reducing methods exploit all of us, but especially, those who have the least.
In the US, tighter controls on levels of consumption, and standards of living, intrusive carbon taxes, tolls, massive land grabs, conservation easement, zoning restrictions, energy audits, forcing small business to become energy efficient, etc. are supposed to take place. Some already have.
"... an ‘agricultural world’ in which most human beings are peasants, should be able to support 5 to 7 billion people, probably more if the large agricultural population were supported by an industry-promoting agricultural activity. In contrast, a reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be one billion…” -- U.N. Global Biodiversity Assessment Report, states at page 773:””Whittaker and Likens (1975)
Former President Kennedy defined a liberal as the following:
“ ...someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a 'Liberal', then I’m proud to say I’m a 'Liberal'.
Granted, as a 'Liberal', he didn't make it far, and maybe that's why he was our second to last liberal president. Former President Johnson was probably our last.
Read more...
Global Warming Doomsday Called Off gives very good scientific information on the subject, seldom found.
Over the last few years, how many times have you heard the following questions: Are the temperatures we're experiencing unusual? Is the climate becoming more variable or extreme? What role does human activity play in the current global warming trend? Does global warming even exist?
Well, in answer to the last question, if it does exist, it's probably not anthropogenic (man-caused) according to Glaciologist Jorgen Peder Steffensen, curator of the Neils Bohr Institute, Department of Geophysics, and scads of other scientists who up until recently, were under a gag-order. As Steffensen said, those who came to the "global warming is man-made" conclusion, conducted an extremely poor experiment. They started observing meteorology at the coldest spot in the last 10,000 years - only 140 years ago - so, of course, the 20th century temperature spike looks like an anomaly. Moreover, when you start following the money (carbon trading: potential multi-trillion dollar business), it becomes all too clear as to why the "global warming is man-made" conclusion was constructed.
Steffensen, extracted ice core samples from Greenland, which bear the fingerprints of climactic conditions over the last 120,000 years. From that sample, the temperature data revealed longer periods with much higher temperatures than we experience today. The coldest point occurred 140 years ago in what they call the "little ice age". Other core samples, from Greenland and elsewhere around the globe, in addition to using other methods such as carbon-14 dating from organic matter from peat bugs and tree-rings confirm the pattern. In other words, major fluctuations in climate are normal, and the recent warming may be a natural consequence of leaving the little ice age in 1875, the lowest point we've had over the last 10,000 years.
Former senior official of the United Nations and billionaire industrialist, otherwise known as the Godfather of the international environmental movement, Maurice Strong, who played a major role in organizing the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, Sweden in 1972, thus launching the "Green movement" is the "wizard behind the curtain" regarding the global warming scam.
He organized the U.N. sponsored conferences, including Kyoto, Japan in 1997 (Kyoto treaty on greenhouse gas emissions, aimed at fighting global warming) and he was instrumental in establishing the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change). In 2005, Strong stepped down from his UN post because he was involved in the food for oil scandal. Evidence later showed that Strong, in 1997, while working for Kofi Annan, endorsed a check for $988,885, made out to “Mr. M. Strong,” issued by a Jordanian bank. Strong is also one of the nine directors on the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX)which describes itself as “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.” Climate scientist, Dr. Benjamin Santer, supposedly Strong's right-hand man, altered a crucial United Nations report on climate change to convey the misleading impression that there is a "discernible human influence on climate".
And we can't forget Al Gore, appointed poster boy and expert on global warming. Not only is Gore a partner in Hara Software, who helps companies manage their "carbon footprints," and who admittedly stands to rake in between 10% to 50% of the trillion dollar business its supposed to become in the next few years, but he and David Blood (former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management) co-founded Generation Investment Management (GIM), in 2004 “to take financial advantage of new technologies and solutions related to combating global warming”.
In November 2009, Gore minimized the significance of the so-called "Climategate" scandal that grew out of confirmed reports that the top scientists at the Climate Research Unit (CRU) in England, possessor of the world's largest temperature-data set, had secretly and repeatedly manipulated scientific evidence in order to conceal or destroy data that contradicted their claims.
"The vicious cycle of political violence in Rwanda is due to a lack of a system for a peaceful competition for and transfers of power between the political elites."
Genocide update: 2010 October - UN report into 1993-2003 conflict in DR Congo says Rwandan forces took part in attacks on Hutu civilians which - if proven in court - could amount to genocide.
Rwandan Forgives Aggressors, Builds Community Center:
Rwandan native Frederick Ndabaramiye (below) was only 15-years old, when in 1998, four years after the the 100-day genocide in 1994, Hutu rebels dragged him from a bus, killed his 18 fellow passengers, cut off his hands, and left him for dead".
The Hutus who pulled him from the bus were from a paramilitary group called the Interahamwe, armed with machetes and nail-spiked bats. They demanded he kill the other passengers to save his own life, and he refused. “Kill me first,” he said.
Frederick watched as the rebels slaughtered the 18 passengers before his eyes. “They killed them one by one by machete,” he said.
The rebels told him they were going to give him a message. He thought they would give him a letter or something, he said, but they pinned his arms to a log and cut off his hands.
He pleaded for just two fingers, he said. The rebels ignored his wish. They left him there to die.
But Frederick, blood gushing from his arms, managed to stumble from the scene. He was discovered by two girls who, despite their fear, bandaged him and helped him to a hospital, he said. His recovery took a full year.
Most of Frederick’s family had been killed in the genocide. It was in an orphanage that Frederick befriended a young teacher, Zachary Dusingizimana. Together, the two shed themselves of their hate, embraced forgiveness, and wanted to help other survivors do the same.
In 2005, the two founded the Ubumwe Community Center for maimed and disabled survivors. The center takes in orphans off the streets, provides wheelchairs for the crippled, offers personal counseling to coping survivors, and teaches job skills, like craft-making.
From original post 12/2008:
(Left)human remains at Nyamata, scene of many massacres that occurred in 1994, leaving between 800,000 and 1,071,00 Tutsis, including some Hutus, slaughtered to death, and many more, mutilated, maimed or physically scarred for life,
Incomprehensible as it may seem, in 1994 - at a time when gutters along side the only functioning hospital in Kigali, Rwanda, literally ran red with blood, and ravaged bodies and body parts littered the streets - paying to have your children shot in open pit latrines was considered merciful. Why? In order to spare them the horror and torture of being hacked to death by machete, and or watching your family hacked to death.
Sparing no one, Hutu killing squads went on a rampage - the Interahamwe (those who attack together) and the Impuzamugambi (those with a single purpose) - butchering as many civilians as they could find, leaving a massacred humanity in their wake. Babies and children were literally snatched from their mother's arms, and ripped to shreds for all to see. The reverse was also true.
"My mother hid me in the latrine. I saw through the hole. I watched them hit her with machetes. I watched my mother's arm fall into my father's blood on the floor and I cried without noise in the toilet". -- 9-year old Tutsi girl explaining how she stayed alive, as her family was massacred at the hands of the killing squads.
Rwandan genocide was not the result of ancient tribal hatreds, or as Ed Koch, explained at the time, “tribal warfare involving those without the veneer of Western civilization” further justifying the apathy of developed nations by confirming the stereotype of African savages. Rather it was the confluence of many factors, including the silence and inaction of the international community, in particular, France, (the main culprit), Belgium and America, who paralyzed the United Nations, who ended up abandoning the U.N. peacekeeping force already on the ground. The aforementioned nations knowingly pursued their foreign policies through genocide. The U.S. (on record), deliberately chose not to use the word “genocide” because that would have obliged us to intervene.
"Perhaps there is no better case than Rwanda of state killing in which colonial history and global economic integration combined to produce genocide. It is also a case where the causes of the killing were carefully obscured by Western governmental and journalistic sources, blamed instead on the victims and ancient tribal hatreds.
A country the size of Belgium, with a population of 7 million people (overpopulated according to most reports but Belgium supports over 10 million people), Rwanda experienced in 1994 one of the worst genocides of the twentieth century. Some 800,000 people, mostly but not exclusively Tutsis, were slaughtered by the Hutu-run state. Contrary to media and many government reports, the genocide was the result of Rwanda’s political and economic position in the capitalist world system. It involved such monetary factors as its colonial history, the price of coffee, World Bank and International Monetary Fund policies, the global interests of Western nations, particularly France, the interests of international aid agencies, and Western attitudes towards Africa" — Richard H. Robbins, Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism, p.269
Statements such as "Genocide is irrelevant in such places" spoken by President Mitterrand of France at the time of Rwandan genocide, is symbolic of western civilization's attitude toward more than half of the world's population, who live on less than $2 per day (3.8 billion). As long as those of us who are "more equal" continue to think and feel this way about those who are "less equal", genocide will occur now, and in the future.
Humanitarian efforts and charity, while extremely important, as they directly and immediately relieve suffering, are not enough to attain true equity. We need to change the mindset and the policies that clearly oppress and seize opportunity and possibility from those who we are content to let live in conditions we would not allow for our pets. In other words, cutting a check for less than 1% of our GDP and uttering platitudes about the "plight" of the poor does very little but clear our collective conscience about the people who live without the basics necessities central to any notion of human dignity.
*True equity requires that people in comparable situations be treated equally with no distinctions made based on race, religion, gender, ethnicity, or class. The lack of equity we see today is a result of learned stereotypical thinking, and subtle, nuanced policy decisions made centuries ago that we continue to "improve" upon as our technology advances that conspires to keep half the world without. In other words, lack of equity is a politically determined choice.
"We are not born equal. Equality and equity are the result of choice and of human organization." -- Hannah Arendt
This year, the World Food Programme asked for additional money to accommodate an additional 100 million people who are being pushed into hunger by rising food prices, adding to the 840 million people worldwide who went to bed hungry every single night last year. They have collect only $2 billion of the $22 billion it needs to feed 967 million people.
Concurrently, at the G 20 summit, over $8 trillion taxpayer dollars, globally, has been activated to bankroll the fundamental underlying design of an international economy that is not working, mostly due to the corruption embedded throughout its structure...this same structure that contributes to keeping half the world living in relatively inhumane conditions.
Not only that, through no fault of their own, the "less equal", excluded from financial "boom" times, end up suffering the most profound of consequences as a result of this current global financial crisis.
For those who fail to see the injustice of the way the world is divided, perhaps the instability, violence, terrorism, disease, etc that such dire circumstances tend to produce, which when placed in a continuously shrinking world, threatens the "more equal" part of the population, evermore, will provide the impetus to change the way we currently accept half the world
Three days ago marked the 60th anniversary of the 1948 Convention on Prevention of Genocide. The Genocide Prevention Task Force, co-chaired by Madeline Albright, urged president-elect Barack Obama to make the prevention of genocide a national priority, pressuring him to create, in particular, the "Inter-Agency Atrocities Prevention Committee" based on the 34 recommendations put forward in the paper presented to the United Nations entitled: "Preventing Genocide: A Blueprint for US Policy-makers".
The genocide alarm is ringing loud and clear, right now. It's warning us that the mass murder of civilians is occurring in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), where 5.4 million people have already lost their lives since 1998...and that the level of violence could possibly escalate to what we saw in 1994. Evidence is strong that Rwandan and Congolese governments, including many who played a role in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, are supporting and provoking Tutsi and Hutu ethnic militias fighting in eastern Congo. The battle has driven 250,000 civilians from their homes in the past three months. Meanwhile the 17,000"strong" United Nations peacekeeping missions are doing very little to alleviate the suffering and plunder in Congo. *If any of this sounds familiar, it may be because I was inspired to blog this topic by the speech - markingWorld Aids Day - given by Dr. James Orbinski at the City Club of Cleveland Read more...
In the fast-growing human trafficking web, most of us are aware of the exploitation of the poverty stricken for sex, however, impoverished human beings are also trafficked for the removal of their organs.
This illegal trade in body parts is largely dominated by kidneys - 10% of kidney transplants are from trafficked organs - because they are in greatest demand. China, India, Pakistan, Egypt, Brazil, Philippines, Russia are some of the world's leading providers of trafficked organs.
Trafficked organs are either sold domestically, or exported to be transplanted into patients from the US, Europe, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and especially Israel.
A new, binding international treaty is needed to prevent trafficking in organs, tissues and cells (OTC), protect victims and prosecute offenders in this exploitation of the deeply impoverished, according to a joint study launched today by the United Nations and the Council of Europe.
It calls for the prohibition of financial gain from the human body or its parts as the basis of all legislation on organ transplants, adding that organ donation should be promoted to increase availability, with preference given to OTC donation from the deceased.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Special Adviser on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women Rachel Mayanja said she hoped the UN General Assembly would lay the groundwork for such a treaty expeditiously.
“This is the study that we have just launched, we hope that the study will be presented to the Assembly, and that the issue will be put on the agenda so that they can start working and debating this issue,” she told a news briefing in New York. “We would like, of course, to see work on a convention, a binding convention, start as soon as possible.”
Arthur Caplan, co-author of the study and Chair of the Department of Medical Ethics and Director of the Center for Bioethics of the University of Pennsylvania, stressed that money for body parts exploited the poor, who do not improve their situation post-sale or work their way out of poverty.
“The poor person is usually illiterate, not given any choice in the sense that they have no other job or occupation to make the sale, they wind up sicker, they wind up with no one paying attention to them, they sometimes wind up dead, they usually wind up regretting from the studies that we’ve seen that they did the sale because they have no follow-up,” he said.
“What looks like perhaps a chance to take somebody out of poverty winds up being a situation in which the deeply impoverished are exploited for the sale, because there is no other way for them to make a living, they can only do it once, and the people who deal with the sellers don’t care about them,” he added. “Then it violates medical ethics to be involved in practices where you harm people just so they can sell a body part.”
Summing up the legal pillars of a proposed treaty, co-author and Public Prosecutor of Austria Carmen Prior said: “Prevention, protection and prosecution.”
Trafficking in OTC should be clearly distinguished from trafficking in human beings for the removal of organs, a small part of the wider problem, the report says, pointing to widespread confusion in the legal and scientific communities between the two types of trafficking, which require different solutions.
It notes the possibility of a high number of unreported cases of both crimes, due to low risks and huge profits for perpetrators. OTC trafficking often takes the form of what is known as “transplant tourism”, with recipients travelling, usually from wealthier nations, to acquire organs in countries where measures to prevent the crime or protect live donors are not in place or not implemented.
It is estimated that 5 per cent to 10 per cent of kidney transplants performed annually around the world are the result of trafficking.
The report calls for the collection of reliable data on trafficking in OTC and in human beings for organ removal, separated by sex to assess if the problem impacts women and men differently.
The Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, and the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, already contain appropriate measures to combat trafficking in human beings for organ removal.
In the last half hour to 45 minutes (it's now 10:30 AM EST), CNN reported on the following stories:
Swishing where women get together to swap gorgeous clothes and party at the same time, designed to "encourage people to think about the life of their clothes".
An essay contest to win "free" tickets to Presidential inauguration where a donation is highly encouraged (The theme of the essay is "What the Inauguration Means to You." Essays are due by 1/8/2009).
What do all these stories have in common? That's right. They all involve white people.
At the same exact time, the BBC was reporting (yes, I was listening to both) on the aforementioned Christmas Massacre in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Yesterday, I compared Obama to Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda, essentially praising him for what he's accomplished in Rwanda, however I neglected the dark side of that leadership - except to mention the spillover of Rwandan genocide into Congo - and that is the exploitation of Congo, where over 5.4 million Congolese deaths can be traced to Kagame's regime.
The death toll and carnage is far greater in Congo, than Darfur, yet numerous celebrities, such as George Clooney, Brad Pitt, and Don Cheadle have joined in to raise money and focus media attention on the terrible tragedy of Darfur, which is wonderful, but what about the Congolese? Surely, there are other celebrities out there...
And, why is CNN reporting on what amounts to a woman's free-for-all over large sacks of designer frocks, instead of reporting real news? Could it be an issue of complicity involving Western companies, who profit immensely from genocide who sponsor media conglomerates?
I mean, what's more important? The life of 65-million dark-skinned people or the massive mineral wealth, that these 65-million people live amidst? If you chose "massive mineral wealth", you win free tickets to witness the giant plunder of, paradoxically, the richest country on earth.
This support of militias takes the form of arms transfers, financial assistance, military advice and training and safe harbor for those who flee the Congolese national government. In fact, several United Nations reports have accused Rwanda and Uganda of siphoning off Congo's mineral wealth with the complicity of Western companies
1,250 Congolese citizens die every day. That’s 38,000 each month
Over ¾ of the population is now malnourished
No access to healthcare except what the Catholic Church provides.
Rebels routinely hack off limbs and the lips of civilians
Tens of thousands of children have been abducted to be fighters and sex slaves, and another 26,000 people have fled into the forests and a further 6,000 have sought sanctuary around churches.
Brutal, mass rapes effect victims’ from 4-years old to 80, and subsequently disowned by their own families after being raped.
As our Commander-in-Chief, George W. Bush, and U.S. Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson propose three, very expensive ($700 billion), non-reviewable - "may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency," - pages of legislation, in an ongoing effort to bail out Wall Street perpetrators and profiteers from the financial crisis they've created, at the expense of Main Street, raising the government's debt ceiling to $11.3 trillion, our country, along with Japan and other European countries are reneging on their pledges to "bail out" ten million children from starving to death.
The UN has already warned that traditional donors, including the US, Japan and some European Union members, have reneged on aid pledges, creating a funding gap of more than $30bn.
In his final U.N. address, President Bush made no mention of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), according to Jeffrey Sachs, who said that 10 million children will die if they do not receive the pledges, on CNN this morning.
Mr. Sachs told a UN panel that $72bn a year (from international community),
"...is not an outlandish price tag. The US Congress is about to vote $1 trillion for Wall Street this week..."
Some may rationalize that it's OK to abandon our pledges to other countries because we must take care of our own before we can reach out to others. However, the amount the U.S. pledged this year is infinitesimally small compared to the amount pledged to bail out Wall Street, especially when what will end up being a $trillion bail-out, may, in the end, put us (future generations) in the position of desperately needing a bail-out. Karma, anyone? Except, it will not be us...it will be our grandchildren and great grand-children who will pay the price.
If President Bush is so concerned with international terrorism, why does he continue to ignore the conditions (extreme poverty and violence) that breed terrorists? Between the escalating cost of food and decline of funding, the already impoverished areas around the world will plunge precipitously into hopeless despair.
"There is no doubt that the maintenance of peace and security is almost impossible in an environment deprived of the minimum of decent living conditions. Poverty and destitution beget tensions that eventually lead to breach of international peace and security." Dr Khaled Al Attiyah, Minister of State for International Cooperation,
Although, it's true we cannot save the world, that doesn't mean we should exacerbate what is already a devastating situation for so many global citizens, and when we inevitably increase the severity - reckless policy, war, our own brand of terrorism etc. - of the problems these people face...problems we couldn't imagine in our worst nightmares, we should recognize and take responsibility for our "contribution". Not only is it our moral duty as the most powerful nation in the world, it is our only option if we wish to hold onto that global title.
Read more...
