The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Seemingly so simple, but these twenty-eight words have been constantly misconstrued, circumvented, or flat out ignored.

So what?  It’s just a bunch of old-school rhetoric spewed out by some powdered-wig sporting fundamentalists over two hundred years ago.  Move along; nothing to see here.

Or is it something more than that?  Not to hide my bias (not that I could; why else write a treatise on the 10th?), I find it horribly relevant today.

This amendment, the tenth and last of the Bill of Rights, can be seen as a conclusion to the Constitution as it was originally written; sort of a catch-all for anything not covered in the rest of the document.  To fully understand its significance, one first must understand the intent of the framers for the Constitution.  Here are a couple of quotes that might help out:

“A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.”

-Thomas Jefferson

“A republic is the best of governments.”

-John Adams

“Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution.”

-James Madison

The point is, the founders were pretty united by two ideas:

1.  Rights are innate to man, not granted by the government.

2.  Local politics are the best politics, because the public has more control over them (the basis for a Republic over a Democracy).

The first point, that our rights are innate and not granted by government, is a simple notion with severe ramifications (I’ll leave the religious question out of it, for now).  If it is true, then there are things that we, as humans, have a right to; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness come to mind.  Any government infringing on these rights (no matter how cool their “Che” pictures look) is violating the very nature of mankind.  If, on the other hand, it is not true; then all rights are arbitrary and may be enforced or repressed at the will of whoever happens to be in power.  I’ll take “true” for 304 million, Alec.

The second point, that local politics are the best politics, makes all kinds of sense if you think about it (it actually makes sense even if you don’t think about it, but it’s best that you do instead of just mindlessly following along like a zombie without cool powers and a thirst for brains).  Not only does a person have more relative clout in a local election (one vote in a town of 10,000 voters is 0.01% of the vote, whereas one vote among 131,000,000 voters is only about 0.00000076%), they also hold the advantage of having lived around the person running for office.  In essence, it makes it much harder for a politician to “image build.”  Kind of like when Jesus said, “a prophet is not without honor except in his hometown” (oh no, the J-word!).  Basically, unless we’re talking about Jesus, we would know the person running for office and know that they can’t walk on water; regardless of what their PR guys tell you.

So, what does this all have to do with the 10th Amendment?  Well, once we understand that the Constitution was not meant to grant the Federal government power but to limit the scope of the Federal government’s power, we can look at it in a proper light.  In a nutshell, it says that whatever isn’t laid out in the Constitution is left in the hands of the People and their States.  Think about that for a minute.  It means that whatever rights you think you have and whatever powers you think the government ought to have, barring what’s already written down in the Constitution, are supposed to be dealt with at the State or interpersonal level.  The House of Representatives and the Senate are not supposed to be the major law-making bodies in these United States; the State and local legislatures are supposed to be.

Now, for those of us who grew up post horse-and-buggy days, this seems like a foreign concept.  We vote for President, maybe Senators, and call it a day- er, decade.  Whereas I could wax grumpy about people not getting involved locally, I won’t because I can hardly blame them.  These days, most laws are handed down from on high, while the local-yokels are there to try to bend them to suit our needs (or their own needs, if you live in California).  People don’t get involved in local politics because they don’t see the relevance; and I’m not sure that they’re wrong.  At least in practise.

But journey with me now into a magical realm, ruled by the 10th Amendment.  All taxes go to your local government first, and most of them stay in your town.  You and your neighbors decide what the rules are for schooling your children, funding your parks, police, fire, and city services.  You decide where the roads need to be improved, bridges built, and monuments erected (PM me if you need a pic of me in a Superman suit for your town square; I’ve got like a dozen of them and they’re not moving on eBay).  Want universal health care for your city or state?  Go for it!  Next to no government intervention in life and business?  You’re the boss!  But wait, where’s the Federal government?  Don’t worry; they’re busy doing the only things they’re allowed to, like having a military and managing our (limited) international role.

OK, wake up.  We’re not in dreamland anymore.  The good news is, a lot of the above is still possible even under the current paradigm (I hate using that word; let’s pretend I said “zeitgeist”).  The difference is, a lot of your tax money is going to the Federal government first and the local governments a distant second, third, or fiftieth.  It’s not that government isn’t supposed to provide for schooling, welfare, health care, and the like; it’s that the Federal government is not supposed to.  Those sorts of decisions were intended to be made on the State and local levels, where the people with the most at stake have the most control.

How do we fix it?  Repealing the 16th Amendment would be a good start (that’s a whole ‘nother article for a whole ‘nother time), but it takes something both bigger and simpler than that.  We need to change the way we think about our country and the type of government it has.  Would you call us a Democracy?  I think most Americans would.  There’s an old joke that says, “Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.”  We need to stop looking at our country as a simple majority rule system.  We were set up far better and more elegantly than that.

We are a Republic.  Our rights are our own, and the government is set up to ensure those rights do not get trampled.  We and our neighbors determine our own destiny.  We have all of the strengths of a large nation, but all of the virtues of a small town.  We flex global and act local.  Until we can get back to these concepts, America is doomed to slip from what made it great into the mediocrity epidemic throughout the rest of the world.  The choice, and the burden, is ours.

Skipper Kagamaster writes from Colorado Springs, CO.

Since my 2008 campaign for the presidency I have often been asked, “How would a constitutionalist president go about dismantling the welfare-warfare state and restoring a constitutional republic?” This is a very important question, because without a clear road map and set of priorities, such a president runs the risk of having his pro-freedom agenda stymied by the various vested interests that benefit from big government.

Of course, just as the welfare-warfare state was not constructed in 100 days, it could not be dismantled in the first 100 days of any presidency. While our goal is to reduce the size of the state as quickly as possible, we should always make sure our immediate proposals minimize social disruption and human suffering. Thus, we should not seek to abolish the social safety net overnight because that would harm those who have grown dependent on government-provided welfare. Instead, we would want to give individuals who have come to rely on the state time to prepare for the day when responsibility for providing aide is returned to those organizations best able to administer compassionate and effective help – churches and private charities. 
Now, this need for a transition period does not apply to all types of welfare. For example, I would have no problem defunding corporate welfare programs, such as the Export-Import Bank or the TARP bank bailouts, right away. I find it difficult to muster much sympathy for the CEO’s of Lockheed Martin and Goldman Sachs. No matter what the president wants to do, most major changes in government programs would require legislation to be passed by Congress. Obviously, the election of a constitutionalist president would signal that our ideas had been accepted by a majority of the American public and would probably lead to the election of several pro-freedom congressmen and senators. Furthermore, some senators and representatives would become “born again” constitutionalists out of a sense of self-preservation. Yet there would still be a fair number of politicians who would try to obstruct our freedom agenda. Thus, even if a president wanted to eliminate every unconstitutional program in one fell swoop, he would be very unlikely to obtain the necessary support in Congress.

Yet a pro-freedom president and his legislative allies could make tremendous progress simply by changing the terms of the negotiations that go on in Washington regarding the size and scope of government. Today, negotiations over legislation tend to occur between those who want a 100 percent increase in federal spending and those who want a 50 percent increase. Their compromise is a 75 percent increase. With a president serious about following the Constitution, backed by a substantial block of sympathetic representatives in Congress, negotiations on outlays would be between those who want to keep funding the government programs and those who want to eliminate them outright – thus a compromise would be a 50 percent decrease in spending!

While a president who strictly adheres to the Constitution would need the consent of Congress for very large changes in the size of government, such as shutting down cabinet departments, he could use his constitutional authority as head of the executive branch and as commander in chief to take several significant steps toward liberty on his own. The area where the modern chief executive has greatest ability to act unilaterally is in foreign affairs. Unfortunately, Congress has abdicated its constitutional authority to declare wars, instead passing vague “authorization of force” bills that allow the president to send any number of troops to almost any part of the world. The legislature does not even effectively use its power of the purse to rein in the executive. Instead, Congress serves as little more than a rubber stamp for the president’s requests.

If the president has the power to order U.S. forces into combat on nothing more than his own say-so, then it stands to reason he can order troops home. Therefore, on the first day in office, a constitutionalist can begin the orderly withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq and Afghanistan. He can also begin withdrawing troops from other areas of the world. The United States has over 300,000 troops stationed in more than 146 countries. Most if not all of these deployments bear little or no relationship to preserving the safety of the American people. For example, over 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the U.S. still maintains troops in Germany.

 
Domestically, the president can use his authority to set policies and procedures for the federal bureaucracy to restore respect for the Constitution and individual liberty. For example, today manufacturers of dietary supplements are subject to prosecution by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or Federal Trade Commission (FTC) if they make even truthful statements about the health benefits of their products without going through the costly and time-consuming procedures required to gain government approval for their claims. A president can put an end to this simply by ordering the FDA and FTC not to pursue these types of cases unless they have clear evidence that the manufacturer’s clams are not true. Similarly, the president could order the bureaucracy to stop prosecuting consumers who wish to sell raw milk across state lines.

A crucial policy that a president could enact to bring speedy improvements to government is ordering the bureaucracy to respect the 10th Amendment and refrain from undermining state laws. We have already seen a little renewed federalism with the current administration’s policy of not prosecuting marijuana users when their use of the drug is consistent with state medical-marijuana laws. A constitutionalist administration would also defer to state laws refusing compliance with the REAL ID act and denying federal authority over interstate gun transactions. None of these actions repeals a federal law; they all simply recognize a state’s primary authority, as protected by the 10th amendment, to set policy in these areas.

In fact, none of the measures I have discussed so far involves repealing any written law. They can be accomplished simply by a president exercising his legitimate authority to set priorities for the executive branch. And another important step he can take toward restoring the balance of powers the Founders intended is repealing unconstitutional executive orders issued by his predecessors.

Executive orders are a useful management tool for the president, who must exercise control over the enormous federal bureaucracy. However, in recent years executive orders have been used by presidents to create new federal laws without the consent of Congress. As President Clinton’s adviser Paul Begala infamously said, “stroke of the pen, law of the land, pretty cool.” No, it is not “pretty cool,” and a conscientious president could go a long way toward getting us back to the Constitution’s division of powers by ordering his counsel or attorney general to comb through recent executive orders so the president can annul those that exceed the authority of his office. If the President believed a particular Executive Order made a valid change in the law, then he should work with Congress to pass legislation making that change.

Only Congress can directly abolish government departments, but the president could use his managerial powers to shrink the federal bureaucracy by refusing to fill vacancies created by retirements or resignations. This would dramatically reduce the number of federal officials wasting our money and taking our liberties. One test to determine if a vacant job needs to be filled is the “essential employees test.” Whenever D.C. has a severe snowstorm, the federal government orders all “non-essential” federal personal to stay home. If someone is classified as non-essential for snow-day purposes, the country can probably survive if that position is not filled when the jobholder quits or retires. A constitutionalist president should make every day in D.C. like a snow day!

A president could also enhance the liberties and security of the American people by ordering federal agencies to stop snooping on citizens when there is no evidence that those who are being spied on have committed a crime. Instead, the president should order agencies to refocus on the legitimate responsibilities of the federal government, such as border security. He should also order the Transportation Security Administration to stop strip-searching grandmothers and putting toddlers on the no-fly list. The way to keep Americans safe is to focus on real threats and ensure that someone whose own father warns U.S. officials he’s a potential terrorist is not allowed to board a Christmas Eve flight to Detroit with a one-way ticket.

Perhaps the most efficient step a president could take to enhance travel security is to remove the federal roadblocks that have frustrated attempts to arm pilots. Congress created provisions to do just that in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. However, the processes for getting a federal firearms license are extremely cumbersome, and as a result very few pilots have gotten their licenses. A constitutionalist in the Oval Office would want to revise those regulations to make it as easy as possible for pilots to get approval to carry firearms on their planes.

While the president can do a great deal on his own, to really restore the Constitution and cut back on the vast unconstitutional programs that have sunk roots in Washington over 60 years, he will have to work with Congress. The first step in enacting a pro-freedom legislative agenda is the submission of a budget that outlines the priorities of the administration. While it has no legal effect, the budget serves as a guideline for the congressional appropriations process. A constitutionalist president’s budget should do the following:

1. Reduce overall federal spending
2. Prioritize cuts in oversize expenditures, especially the military
3. Prioritize cuts in corporate welfare
4. Use 50 percent of the savings from cuts in overseas spending to shore up entitlement programs for those who are dependent on them and the other 50 percent to pay down the debt
5. Provide for reduction in federal bureaucracy and lay out a plan to return responsibility for education to the states
6. Begin transitioning entitlement programs from a system where all Americans are forced to participate into one where taxpayers can opt out of the programs and make their own provisions for retirement and medical care
If Congress failed to produce a budget that was balanced and moved the country in a pro-liberty direction, a constitutionalist president should veto the bill. Of course, vetoing the budget risks a government shutdown. But a serious constitutionalist cannot be deterred by cries of “it’s irresponsible to shut down the government!” Instead, he should simply say, “I offered a reasonable compromise, which was to gradually reduce spending, and Congress rejected it, instead choosing the extreme path of continuing to jeopardize America’s freedom and prosperity by refusing to tame the welfare-warfare state. I am the moderate; those who believe that America can afford this bloated government are the extremists.”

Unconstitutional government spending, after all, is doubly an evil: it not only means picking the taxpayer’s pocket, it also means subverting the system of limited and divided government that the Founders created. Just look at how federal spending has corrupted American education.

Eliminating federal involvement in K–12 education should be among a constitutionalist president’s top domestic priorities. The Constitution makes no provision for federal meddling in education. It is hard to think of a function less suited to a centralized, bureaucratic approach than education. The very idea that a group of legislators and bureaucrats in D.C. can design a curriculum capable of meeting the needs of every American schoolchild is ludicrous. The deteriorating performance of our schools as federal control over the classroom has grown shows the folly of giving Washington more power over American education. President Bush’s No Child Left Behind law claimed it would fix education by making public schools “accountable.” However, supporters of the law failed to realize that making schools more accountable to federal agencies, instead of to parents, was just perpetuating the problem.

In the years since No Child Left Behind was passed, I don’t think I have talked to any parent or teacher who is happy with the law. Therefore, a constitutionalist president looking for ways to improve the lives of children should demand that Congress cut the federal education bureaucracy as a down payment on eventually returning 100 percent of the education dollar to parents. Traditionally, the battle to reduce the federal role in education has been the toughest one faced by limited-government advocates, as supporters of centralized education have managed to paint constitutionalists as “anti-education.” But who is really anti-education? Those who wish to continue to waste taxpayer money on failed national schemes, or those who want to restore control over education to the local level? When the debate is framed this way, I have no doubt the side of liberty will win. When you think about it, the argument that the federal government needs to control education is incredibly insulting to the American people, for it implies that the people are too stupid or uncaring to educate their children properly. Contrary to those who believe that only the federal government can ensure children’s education, I predict a renaissance in education when parents are put back in charge.

The classroom is not the only place the federal government does not belong. We also need to reverse the nationalization of local police. Federal grants have encouraged the militarization of law enforcement, which has led to great damage to civil liberties. Like education, law enforcement is inherently a local function, and ending programs such as the Byrne Grants is essential not just to reducing federal spending but also to restoring Americans’ rights. Obviously, a president concerned with restoring constitutional government and fiscal responsibility would need to address the unstable entitlement situation, possibly the one area of government activity even more difficult to address than education. Yet it is simply unfair to continue to force young people to participate in a compulsory retirement program when they could do a much better job of preparing for their own retirements. What is more, the government cannot afford the long-term expenses of entitlements, even if we were to reduce all other unconstitutional foreign and domestic programs.

As I mentioned in the introduction to this article, it would be wrong simply to cut these programs and throw those who are dependent on them “into the streets.” After all, the current recipients of these programs have come to rely on them, and many are in a situation where they cannot provide for themselves without government assistance. The thought of people losing the ability to obtain necessities for them because they were misled into depending on a government safety net that has been yanked away from them should trouble all of us. However, the simple fact is that if the government does not stop spending money on welfare and warfare, America may soon face an economic crisis that could lead to people being thrown into the street.

Therefore, a transition away from the existing entitlement scheme is needed. This is why a constitutionalist president should propose devoting half of the savings from the cuts in wars and other foreign spending, corporate welfare, and unnecessary and unconstitutional bureaucracies to shoring up Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and providing enough money to finance government’s obligations to those who are already stuck in the system and cannot make alternative provisions. This re-routing of spending would allow payroll taxes to be slashed. The eventual goal would be to move to a completely voluntary system where people only pay payroll taxes into Social Security and Medicare if they choose to participate in those programs. Americans who do not want to participate would be free not to do so, but they would forgo any claim to Social Security or Medicare benefits after retirement.

Some people raise concerns that talk of transitions is an excuse for indefinitely putting off the end of the welfare state. I understand those concerns, which is why a transition plan must lay out a clear timetable for paying down the debt, eliminating unconstitutional bureaucracies, and setting a firm date for when young people can at last opt out of the entitlement programs.

A final area that should be front and center in a constitutionalist’s agenda is monetary policy. The Founders obviously did not intend for the president to have much influence over the nation’s money – in fact, they never intended any part of the federal government to operate monetary policy as it defined now. However, today a president could play an important role in restoring stability to monetary policy and the value of the dollar. To start, by fighting for serious reductions in spending, a constitutionalist administration would remove one of the major justifications for the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies, the need to monetize government debt.

There are additional steps a pro-freedom president should pursue in his first term to restore sound monetary policy. He should ask Congress to pass two pieces of legislation I have introduced in the 110th Congress. The first is the Audit the Fed bill, which would allow the American people to learn just how the Federal Reserve has been conducting monetary policy. The other is the Free Competition in Currency Act, which repeals legal tender laws and all taxes on gold and silver. This would introduce competition in currency and put a check on the Federal Reserve by ensuring that people have alternatives to government-produced fiat money.

All of these measures will take a lot of work – a lot more than any one person, even the president of the United States, can accomplish by himself. In order to restore the country to the kind of government the Founders meant for us to have, a constitutionalist president would need the support of an active liberty movement. Freedom activists must be ready to pressure wavering legislators to stand up to the special interests and stay the course toward freedom. Thus, when the day comes when someone who shares our beliefs sits in the Oval Office, groups like Young Americans for Liberty and Campaign for Liberty will still have a vital role to play. No matter how many pro-freedom politicians we elect to office, the only way to guarantee constitutional government is through an educated and activist public devoted to the ideals of the liberty.

For that reason, the work of Young Americans for Liberty in introducing young people to the freedom philosophy and getting them involved in the freedom movement is vital to the future of our country. I thank all the members and supporters of YAL for their dedication to changing the political debate in this country, so that in the not-too-distant future we actually will have a president and a Congress debating the best ways to shrink the welfare-warfare state and restore the republic.

This essay originally appeared in Young American Revolution, the magazine of Young Americans for Liberty.

 
——————————————————————————–

HR 1207: Federal Reserve Transparency Act Fact Sheet

• The Federal Reserve enjoys a monopoly over the flow of our money and credit but has never been completely transparent and accountable to Congress since its creation in 1913.
• Since 1913, our dollar has lost more than 95% of its purchasing power.
• In addition to an over $11 trillion national debt (with each American’s share being more than $36,000), Congress, the Treasury, and the Federal Reserve have put us on the hook for almost $13 trillion in bailouts and loans.
• Yet, the Fed refuses to tell Congress which financial institutions have received these funds.
• On February 26, 2009, Congressman Ron Paul introduced HR 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, which would deliver answers to the American people about how our money is being used.
• HR 1207, which is currently in the House Financial Services Committee, has received the support of over one-third of the House of Representatives within a few short months of its introduction.
• HR 1207 amends section 714 of Title 31 of the U.S. Code to remove the restrictions on how the Government Accountability Office (GAO) can audit the Federal Reserve.
• With these limitations gone, the Fed’s discount window operations, funding facilities, open market operations, and agreements with foreign central banks and governments would all finally be open to congressional oversight.
• The GAO would be required to audit the Fed by the end of 2010 and to report its findings to Congress.
• The Senate version is S 604, the Federal Reserve Sunshine Act.
• Call Congress at (202) 224-3121 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              (202) 224-3121      end_of_the_skype_highlighting and urge your representative and senators to support HR 1207 and S 604.
Visit www.CampaignforLiberty.com for more information on our efforts to bring transparency and accountability to the Federal Reserve.

Paul Craig Roberts
Infowars.com
March 24, 2010

Editor: When Paul Craig Roberts gave us permission to post this article, he indicated to Alex Jones that it would probably be his last. Regular readers of PCR’s outstanding columns will be disappointed to hear that he is bowing out for the time being. Alex will discuss the reasons behind this on tomorrow’s show. Roberts has also told us that he will probably appear as a guest on The Alex Jones Show later next week to expand on why he has decided to “sign off,” as he puts it in the following article.

There was a time when the pen was mightier than the sword. That was a time when people believed in truth and regarded truth as an independent power and not as an auxiliary for government, class, race, ideological, personal, or financial interest.
    

 As the pen is censored and its might extinguished, I am signing off.
 
Today Americans are ruled by propaganda. Americans have little regard for truth, little access to it, and little ability to recognize it.

Truth is an unwelcome entity. It is disturbing. It is off limits. Those who speak it run the risk of being branded “anti-American,” “anti-semite” or “conspiracy theorist.”

Truth is an inconvenience for government and for the interest groups whose campaign contributions control government.

Truth is an inconvenience for prosecutors who want convictions, not the discovery of innocence or guilt.

Truth is inconvenient for ideologues.

Today many whose goal once was the discovery of truth are now paid handsomely to hide it. “Free market economists” are paid to sell offshoring to the American people. High-productivity, high value-added American jobs are denigrated as dirty, old industrial jobs. Relicts from long ago, we are best shed of them. Their place has been taken by “the New Economy,” a mythical economy that allegedly consists of high-tech white collar jobs in which Americans innovate and finance activities that occur offshore. All Americans need in order to participate in this “new economy” are finance degrees from Ivy League universities, and then they will work on Wall Street at million dollar jobs.

Economists who were once respectable took money to contribute to this myth of “the New Economy.”

And not only economists sell their souls for filthy lucre. Recently we have had reports of medical doctors who, for money, have published in peer-reviewed journals concocted “studies” that hype this or that new medicine produced by pharmaceutical companies that paid for the “studies.”

The Council of Europe is investigating the drug companies’ role in hyping a false swine flu pandemic in order to gain billions of dollars in sales of the vaccine.

The media helped the US military hype its recent Marja offensive in Afghanistan, describing Marja as a city of 80,000 under Taliban control. It turns out that Marja is not urban but a collection of village farms.

And there is the global warming scandal, in which NGOs. the UN, and the nuclear industry colluded in concocting a doomsday scenario in order to create profit in pollution.

Wherever one looks, truth has fallen to money.

Wherever money is insufficient to bury the truth, ignorance, propaganda, and short memories finish the job.

I remember when, following CIA director William Colby’s testimony before the Church Committee in the mid-1970s, presidents Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan issued executive orders preventing the CIA and U.S. black-op groups from assassinating foreign leaders. In 2010 the US Congress was told by Dennis Blair, head of national intelligence, that the US now assassinates its own citizens in addition to foreign leaders.

When Blair told the House Intelligence Committee that US citizens no longer needed to be arrested, charged, tried, and convicted of a capital crime, just murdered on suspicion alone of being a “threat,” he wasn’t impeached. No investigation pursued. Nothing happened. There was no Church Committee. In the mid-1970s the CIA got into trouble for plots to kill Castro. Today it is American citizens who are on the hit list. Whatever objections there might be don’t carry any weight. No one in government is in any trouble over the assassination of U.S. citizens by the U.S. government.

As an economist, I am astonished that the American economics profession has no awareness whatsoever that the U.S. economy has been destroyed by the offshoring of U.S. GDP to overseas countries. U.S. corporations, in pursuit of absolute advantage or lowest labor costs and maximum CEO “performance bonuses,” have moved the production of goods and services marketed to Americans to China, India, and elsewhere abroad. When I read economists describe offshoring as free trade based on comparative advantage, I realize that there is no intelligence or integrity in the American economics profession.

Intelligence and integrity have been purchased by money. The transnational or global U.S. corporations pay multi-million dollar compensation packages to top managers, who achieve these “performance awards” by replacing U.S. labor with foreign labor. While Washington worries about “the Muslim threat,” Wall Street, U.S. corporations and “free market” shills destroy the U.S. economy and the prospects of tens of millions of Americans.

Americans, or most of them, have proved to be putty in the hands of the police state.

Americans have bought into the government’s claim that security requires the suspension of civil liberties and accountable government. Astonishingly, Americans, or most of them, believe that civil liberties, such as habeas corpus and due process, protect “terrorists,” and not themselves. Many also believe that the Constitution is a tired old document that prevents government from exercising the kind of police state powers necessary to keep Americans safe and free.

Most Americans are unlikely to hear from anyone who would tell them any different.

I was associate editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal. I was Business Week’s first outside columnist, a position I held for 15 years. I was columnist for a decade for Scripps Howard News Service, carried in 300 newspapers. I was a columnist for the Washington Times and for newspapers in France and Italy and for a magazine in Germany. I was a contributor to the New York Times and a regular feature in the Los Angeles Times. Today I cannot publish in, or appear on, the American “mainstream media.”

For the last six years I have been banned from the “mainstream media.” My last column in the New York Times appeared in January, 2004, coauthored with Democratic U.S. Senator Charles Schumer representing New York. We addressed the offshoring of U.S. jobs. Our op-ed article produced a conference at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. and live coverage by C-Span. A debate was launched. No such thing could happen today.

For years I was a mainstay at the Washington Times, producing credibility for the Moony newspaper as a Business Week columnist, former Wall Street Journal editor, and former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. But when I began criticizing Bush’s wars of aggression, the order came down to Mary Lou Forbes to cancel my column.

The American corporate media does not serve the truth. It serves the government and the interest groups that empower the government.

America’s fate was sealed when the public and the anti-war movement bought the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory. The government’s account of 9/11 is contradicted by much evidence. Nevertheless, this defining event of our time, which has launched the US on interminable wars of aggression and a domestic police state, is a taboo topic for investigation in the media. It is pointless to complain of war and a police state when one accepts the premise upon which they are based.

These trillion dollar wars have created financing problems for Washington’s deficits and threaten the U.S. dollar’s role as world reserve currency. The wars and the pressure that the budget deficits put on the dollar’s value have put Social Security and Medicare on the chopping block. Former Goldman Sachs chairman and U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson is after these protections for the elderly. Fed chairman Bernanke is also after them. The Republicans are after them as well. These protections are called “entitlements” as if they are some sort of welfare that people have not paid for in payroll taxes all their working lives.

With over 21 per cent unemployment as measured by the methodology of 1980, with American jobs, GDP, and technology having been given to China and India, with war being Washington’s greatest commitment, with the dollar over-burdened with debt, with civil liberty sacrificed to the “war on terror,” the liberty and prosperity of the American people have been thrown into the trash bin of history.

The militarism of the U.S. and Israeli states, and Wall Street and corporate greed, will now run their course. As the pen is censored and its might extinguished, I am signing off.

Robert Singer
Infowars.com
February 26, 2010

In an effort to explain our escalating financial crisis, an American Nightmare (an Environmental Dream), the pundits are focusing their angst on the 44th POTUS, who might very well go down as the single most inept president in all of American history. (How to Squander the Presidency in One Year, David Michael Green)

The decision to have Obama preside over the greatest financial calamity since the Great Depression was made five years ago.  Barack Obama is not inept, greedy or stupid and he isn’t one of  “us”.

He rose from obscurity to power with his top economics adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, the co-founder of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission and he travels in the same circles as other members of the super-secret Skull & Bones Society at Yale University, who pretend to be running for president every four years.

The decision to have Obama preside over the greatest financial calamity since the Great Depression was made five years ago; the November election was a formality. (Why Joseph Biden will be the Next Vice President of the United States)

To believe otherwise, is to ignore the Bradley/Palin effect and the decision by John McCain to wait until his concession speech to shed the image of a nasty “grumpy old man.”

In September 2008, when the Obama campaign seemed to be slumping and their candidate’s long-standing lead in the polls had evaporated, the senator’s supporters openly worried that a potential victory might be slipping away. Then, providence joined the campaign: the failure of the giant investment bank Lehman Brothers followed by a global financial meltdown in the month of October.

And, “speaking of change”, escalating the war in Afghanistan and Iraq and his policies on Guantanamo, state secrets, renditions, executive power, bail-outs and the stimulus packages are for the most part identical to those of George W. Bush.

However, the policies at the Federal Reserve have changed…inexplicably, monumentally and historically:

As of October 2008, the men behind the Federal Reserve, all connected to the House of Rothschild, are no longer giving up what’s left of their real wealth so the middle class can live the American Dream, a nightmare for the planet.

Brian Deese, special assistant to president Obama for economic policy, in his first government position, shuffles back and forth from the West Wing to the Treasury Department rewriting the rules of American “capitalism” as he dismantles the US Housing, Automobile Industry and the American Dream. (The 31-Year-Old in Charge of Dismantling G.M., David E. Sanger)

Deese’s First Rule: Withdraw Credit and Liquidity:

Causing spending to fall even further, forcing companies to cut back on inventory and staff – Creating even more unemployment…263,000 jobs eliminated bringing the total to 39 million Americans who are no longer working or looking for work. (The September Employment Rate is 90%)

And that’s before the recently announced “planned three-year budget freeze on government discretionary spending.”

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913

One of the most important domestic acts in the nation’s history took the power to create money from the people and gave it to the robber barons of our filtered history books in theory for profit.

The Federal Reserve was instrumental in the development of America into a world power.

The United States, in its first decades, was a land of small farms and nearby towns with few cities of any consequence. The young nation seemed far more interested in becoming a successful experiment in democracy, rather than an economic power.

A central bank, necessary for a consumer society, large cities, a common medium of exchange, and a mechanism to regulate that medium were greeted with hostility, since many of the nation’s leaders disdained the urban life.

Anyone who spoke against the “Creature from Jekyll Island” by G. Edward Griffin was silenced.

Presidents Garfield and McKinley, outspoken champions of “sound” money and opponents of a central bank, were suspiciously silenced permanently.

The conflict between rural values and urban reality ended when Woodrow Wilson “unwittingly ruined his country” and signed into law the legislation that put “the growth of the nation . . . and all our activities in the hands of a few scoundrels (men).”

Once those scoundrels got control of the supply of money in the Franklin Roosevelt Administration, they began to buy government securities at the rate of ten million dollars a week for 10 weeks, and created one hundred million dollars in new (checkbook) currency, which alleviated the critical famine of money and credit, and the factories started hiring people again.” (Secrets of the Federal Reserve, Eustace Mullins)

Now those scoundrels remain in control of the supply of money in the Barack Obama Administration, they are making generous interest payments to the banks for “parking” their TARP and other government taxpayer bailout money, which is aggravating the critical famine of money and credit, and the factories started laying people off (263,000 people in September bringing the total to 39 million Americans who are no longer working or looking for work).

One of the more absurd notions that found its way into the history books and the writings of economic experts, is that somehow these Robinhood barons (swindlers and scoundrels of history) were made wealthier by manipulating the Monopoly money they created out of “thin air” used to “alleviated the critical famine of money and credit” so the factories could start hiring people again and finance our consumer society.

In 1910, the men behind the Federal Reserve Rockefeller, Kuhn, Loeb and Morgan, all connected to the Rothschild’s global financial empire, owned or controlled one-sixth of the world’s real wealth—gold, silver and raw materials—not the fiat currency we call money.

And their real wealth, where is it now?

Used up, as in consumed, by the middle class so former members of the Third Estate (serfs and slaves) could have houses, cars, RVs, TVs and DVDs—the affordable things we take for granted which put the planet, according to the GEO4, a massive United Nations Report, at the “unknown points of no return.” (Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité – Providence, Miracle or What Really Happened)

The swindler’s and scoundrel’s wealth, not yours or mine, was eventually “cut, mined and hauled away,” so that Americans could “trash the planet” with that cheap stuff until October 2008.

Money control, Gustav Stolper wrote in “This Age of Fables” is, “the supreme and most comprehensive of all governmental controls and the 1838 quote:

“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws” (Incorrectly attributed to Mayer Amschel Rothschild who died in 1812).

Reflects the “maxim” of the House of Rothschild.

However, “money lenders of the Old World” cannot be talking about profits unless you believe The Rothschilds didn’t understand that they were about to give up $500 trillion of real wealth in exchange for $500 trillion pieces of worthless fiat currency.

During the last 100 years, those swindlers and scoundrels were able to distort the structure of relative prices; generate misallocations of labor and capital throughout the economy; rationalize new governmental interventions in the face of the market “instability” manipulate the patterns of and the profits from international trade which resulted in the Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression, the stagflation of the 1970s, the dot-com and the housing market bubbles and unprecedented prosperity for the middle class.

Would we have a financial crisis to go with our environmental crisis if Wilson hadn’t ruined the country when he gave away the people’s right to print their own money and we had our own bank?  No.

North Dakota is the only state in the union to own its own bank. The Bank of North Dakota (BND) was established by the state legislature in 1919 specifically to free farmers and small businessmen from the clutches of out-of-state bankers and railroad men.

The state of North Dakota, one of only two states (along with Montana) expected to meet its budget in 2010. North Dakota was also the only state to actually gain jobs in 2009 while other states were losing them. Since 2000, North Dakota’s GNP has grown 56 percent, personal income has grown 43 percent and wages have grown 34 percent. North Dakota in 2009, had a budget surplus of $1.3 billion, the largest it ever had – in a state with a population of 700,000. (The North Dakota Model for Capitalizing Community Banks, Ellen Brown)

North Dakota, a land of small farms and towns more interested in remaining a successful experiment in democracy rather than an economic power.

At this point, it is advantageous to consider the efforts of writer Andrew Hitchcock:

“The Rothschilds have been in control of the world for a very long time, their tentacles reaching into many aspects of our daily lives, and are the hidden hand behind all the social cataclysms in history: The French and American Revolution, the Civil War, World Wars, the Industrial Revolution, the Federal Reserve (and our consumer society).”

John Sherman, a Rothschild protégé in a letter sent to New York bankers on June 25, 1863 in support of the then proposed National Banking Act, wrote:

“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favors that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantages…will bear its burden without complaint, and perhaps without suspecting that the system is inimical to their best interests.” (World War II And Pound, 1940-1945: The Anti-Semite Revealed, Ellen Cardona)

In other words, the “few that understand the system”, without a 20th century environmental perspective of the middle class “trashing the planet”, would not be capable of comprehending a system that would put the planet at the “unknown points of no return” because the environmental damage and pollution was the goal and not the unintended consequences of the Industrial Revolution and our consumer society.

The Federal Reserve isn’t evil because they print our money and make us pay interest on it; they are evil because they are in a metaphysical war with mother-earth (Gaea).

October 2008 marked the last day the “lender of last resort” would give up what’s left of their real wealth, used to con us into shopping for useless toxic stuff, to weaken their opponent, mother-earth. (Ominous Signs Are Aligned: Not A Particularly Good Sign (11-09))

J. Speer-Williams
Infowars.com
February 4, 2010

About to lose your home? Have you lost your home? Can you make the interest payments on your credit cards? Can you afford to maintain your car, your family’s incidental needs, your children’s health, or even buy enough food, gasoline or heating fuel?

How did such a sad state of affairs come about in our country, once the most affluent in the history of the world?

We have been massively betrayed by our national “leaders.”

And as if that was not bad enough our high level national leaders are appallingly ignorant of the basics in economics and finance, in addition to being traitors to their oaths of office, and to the American people.

Our elected politicians and appointed bureaucrats in Washington have become no more than highly paid, but ugly and atrocious actors, pretending to represent the American people.

But the American people be damned! It’s the International Monetary/Banking Cartel our fraudulent leaders represent.

Giving trillions of dollars to the ultra rich, while increasing taxes on our ever diminishing affluent, then exporting jobs and creating inflation, until all of us are tapped-out, has long been the standard operating procedure in Washington.

Since the inception of the Banking Cartel’s Federal Reserve System, in 1913, our courts, congresses and presidents have come under lock-down to a relatively small, but powerful group of foreign plutocrats; but, former President Bill Clinton worked overtime for this crime syndicate.

With the backing of the stealthy Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, and a compliant republican controlled congress, Clinton signed on to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), both of which essentially destroyed our ability to be a self-sufficient nation, and caused a tremendous exodus of jobs out of the US.

Ross Perot, forced out of the presidential race of 1996, warned us about the dangers of both GATT and NAFTA, but the International Banking Cartel wanted both Trojan horse “trade” agreements forced on America, in order to eliminate her as a beacon of hope and light in a dark world. In the Cartel’s One World Order there is to be parity amongst all nations – all equally poor.

Among Clinton’s worse crimes against humanity, however, were his repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, and the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act .

From the time of these sweeping deregulations of the private banking fraternity until 2002, the once illegal practice of packaging and trading in the toxic paper known as derivatives had reached monstrous proportions of about $102 trillion, enough to destroy the real basic economies of the entire world.

But by September of 2008, the once illegal practice of trading in derivatives had reached $530 trillion to 1.5 quadrillion dollars, amounts and figures well beyond human comprehension.

This black hole of derivatives is now about ten to thirty times the gross domestic products of the whole world, meaning it’s about ten to thirty times what is needed to throw all societies of Earth into a neo-feudalism.

Derivatives, sometimes called Asset Backed Securities are nothing more than financial contracts that DERIVE their falsely perceived value from other weak, underlying securities, mortgages, or other financial instruments.

There was so much blatant fraud from brokerage houses and investment bankers, for so long, it was virtually impossible that the financial kingpins, and US government regulators of the financial services industry, not to have known how the world-wide packaging, grading and trading in derivatives would eventually crash national economies.

But even so, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, not only gave his stamp of approval to the derivatives scam, he constantly campaigned in congress for legislation that would permit the international and mega-scaled trading of derivatives.

Alan Greenspan, Bill Clinton, and Clinton’s Secretaries of Treasury – Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers – should all be indicted and held accountable for their crimes against humanity, as their pernicious derivatives have caused so much insidious harm in thousands of obvious and subtle ways.

But instead, Clinton is portrayed by the Cartel’s corporate media as a centrist or New Democrat of Moderation, rather than the criminal Cartel puppet he was and still is.

Greenspan, the more obviously embedded alien agent of the dark, is today treated as a National Treasure, and grand old man of finance.

Robert Edward Rubin went back to Wall Street, from where he came, to further the Banking Cartel’s agenda in America.

After Lawrence Henry Summers committed his crimes in the Clinton administration, he has been appointed by President Obama to be on his White House economic staff.

Greenspan, Rubin, Summers, Clinton, and many others all claim ignorance in causing the greatest financial crises in recorded history.

But to now have Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner try to fill up, or combat in any way, this international black hole of funny money, with real debt dollars of bailout and “stimulus” packages, all paid for by tax-paying Americans is not only insane to its extreme, it is criminally on a scale never known to mankind.

And still to this very day, there have been no real regulations from our congress, or our financial regulators, or even serious presidential proposals made to curb the criminal excesses the Banking Cartel’s Wall Street banks or their Federal Reserve System.

Thank you very much Messrs. Clinton, Bush and Obama, you have all allowed the dark financial oligarchs of the world to continue to privatize their unethical, dirty profits; but are socializing their loses, thus starving to death about a billion people, while making peasants of the rest of us in the process.

Even junior plutocrat Warren Buffet said America will become a nation of sharecroppers, one he helped to make.

And according to estimates of the National Law Center on Homeless and Poverty, on any given night, between 700,000 and about two million Americans are without beds on which to sleep.

This controlled demolition of the world’s economy has been purposely confused by the International Monetary/Banking Cartel’s corporate media with their “word play” of avoiding the pejorative term “derivatives,” with their repeated use of various red herrings: Swaps, credit default swaps, futures, mortgage backed securities, hedge funds, options, forward contracts, warrants, or assets are all used to mislead and to confuse the American public, as the word “derivative” is incriminating.

But then again, practically everything our national leaders do is incriminating, as there is a profound difference between what they say, what they do, and what the American people need and want.

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 21, 2010

A video of Ron Paul calling out the CIA at the Campaign for Liberty Regional Conference in Atlanta, Georgia, earlier this week has gone viral on the internet. In the video, Paul declared the CIA “runs everything” and is the dark force behind illegal invasions and occupations around the world. He said we need to get rid of the agency.

The CIA has committed thousands of illegal and immoral acts around the world, including almost unfathomable mass murder and countless acts of terrorism and torture.

“The CIA and the big corporations were, in my experience, in step with each other,” writes former CIA agent John Stockwell. “the CIA had been running thousands of operations over the years… there have been about 3,000 major covert operations and over 10,000 minor operations… all designed to disrupt, destabilize, or modify the activities of other countries… But they are all illegal and they all disrupt the normal functioning, often the democratic functioning, of other societies.”

The CIA recruited Nazi war criminals. It is not known as the “Cocaine Import Agency” for nothing (see video below). It has engaged in assassination and covert chemical and biological warfare.

The late Steve Kangas (who allegedly committed suicide in a 39th floor bathroom at One Oxford Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, immediately outside the offices of foundations run by known CIA operative Richard Mellon Scaife) compiled in the 1990s the following disturbing list of CIA crimes around the world:

1929

The culture we lost — Secretary of State Henry Stimson refuses to endorse a code-breaking operation, saying, “Gentlemen do not read each other’s mail.”

1941

COI created — In preparation for World War II, President Roosevelt creates the Office of Coordinator of Information (COI). General William “Wild Bill” Donovan heads the new intelligence service.

1942

OSS created — Roosevelt restructures COI into something more suitable for covert action, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Donovan recruits so many of the nation’s rich and powerful that eventually people joke that “OSS” stands for “Oh, so social!” or “Oh, such snobs!”

1943

Italy — Donovan recruits the Catholic Church in Rome to be the center of Anglo-American spy operations in Fascist Italy. This would prove to be one of America’s most enduring intelligence alliances in the Cold War.

1945

OSS is abolished — The remaining American information agencies cease covert actions and return to harmless information gathering and analysis.

Operation PAPERCLIP – While other American agencies are hunting down Nazi war criminals for arrest, the U.S. intelligence community is smuggling them into America, unpunished, for their use against the Soviets. The most important of these is Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s master spy who had built up an intelligence network in the Soviet Union. With full U.S. blessing, he creates the “Gehlen Organization,” a band of refugee Nazi spies who reactivate their networks in Russia. These include SS intelligence officers Alfred Six and Emil Augsburg (who massacred Jews in the Holocaust), Klaus Barbie (the “Butcher of Lyon”), Otto von Bolschwing (the Holocaust mastermind who worked with Eichmann) and SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny (a personal friend of Hitler’s). The Gehlen Organization supplies the U.S. with its only intelligence on the Soviet Union for the next ten years, serving as a bridge between the abolishment of the OSS and the creation of the CIA. However, much of the “intelligence” the former Nazis provide is bogus. Gehlen inflates Soviet military capabilities at a time when Russia is still rebuilding its devastated society, in order to inflate his own importance to the Americans (who might otherwise punish him). In 1948, Gehlen almost convinces the Americans that war is imminent, and the West should make a preemptive strike. In the 50s he produces a fictitious “missile gap.” To make matters worse, the Russians have thoroughly penetrated the Gehlen Organization with double agents, undermining the very American security that Gehlen was supposed to protect.

1947

 
 
 
 Crack the CIA.
 
Greece — President Truman requests military aid to Greece to support right-wing forces fighting communist rebels. For the rest of the Cold War, Washington and the CIA will back notorious Greek leaders with deplorable human rights records.

CIA created — President Truman signs the National Security Act of 1947, creating the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Council. The CIA is accountable to the president through the NSC — there is no democratic or congressional oversight. Its charter allows the CIA to “perform such other functions and duties… as the National Security Council may from time to time direct.” This loophole opens the door to covert action and dirty tricks.

1948

Covert-action wing created — The CIA recreates a covert action wing, innocuously called the Office of Policy Coordination, led by Wall Street lawyer Frank Wisner. According to its secret charter, its responsibilities include “propaganda, economic warfare, preventive direct action, including sabotage, antisabotage, demolition and evacuation procedures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.”

Italy — The CIA corrupts democratic elections in Italy, where Italian communists threaten to win the elections. The CIA buys votes, broadcasts propaganda, threatens and beats up opposition leaders, and infiltrates and disrupts their organizations. It works — the communists are defeated.

1949

Radio Free Europe — The CIA creates its first major propaganda outlet, Radio Free Europe. Over the next several decades, its broadcasts are so blatantly false that for a time it is considered illegal to publish transcripts of them in the U.S.

Late 40s

Operation MOCKINGBIRD — The CIA begins recruiting American news organizations and journalists to become spies and disseminators of propaganda. The effort is headed by Frank Wisner, Allan Dulles, Richard Helms and Philip Graham. Graham is publisher of The Washington Post, which becomes a major CIA player. Eventually, the CIA’s media assets will include ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service and more. By the CIA’s own admission, at least 25 organizations and 400 journalists will become CIA assets.

1953

Iran – CIA overthrows the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in a military coup, after he threatened to nationalize British oil. The CIA replaces him with a dictator, the Shah of Iran, whose secret police, SAVAK, is as brutal as the Gestapo.

Operation MK-ULTRA — Inspired by North Korea’s brainwashing program, the CIA begins experiments on mind control. The most notorious part of this project involves giving LSD and other drugs to American subjects without their knowledge or against their will, causing several to commit suicide. However, the operation involves far more than this. Funded in part by the Rockefeller and Ford foundations, research includes propaganda, brainwashing, public relations, advertising, hypnosis, and other forms of suggestion.

1954

Guatemala — CIA overthrows the democratically elected Jacob Arbenz in a military coup. Arbenz has threatened to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned United Fruit Company, in which CIA Director Allen Dulles also owns stock. Arbenz is replaced with a series of right-wing dictators whose bloodthirsty policies will kill over 100,000 Guatemalans in the next 40 years.

1954-1958

North Vietnam — CIA officer Edward Lansdale spends four years trying to overthrow the communist government of North Vietnam, using all the usual dirty tricks. The CIA also attempts to legitimize a tyrannical puppet regime in South Vietnam, headed by Ngo Dinh Diem. These efforts fail to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese because the Diem government is opposed to true democracy, land reform and poverty reduction measures. The CIA’s continuing failure results in escalating American intervention, culminating in the Vietnam War.

1956

Hungary — Radio Free Europe incites Hungary to revolt by broadcasting Khruschev’s Secret Speech, in which he denounced Stalin. It also hints that American aid will help the Hungarians fight. This aid fails to materialize as Hungarians launch a doomed armed revolt, which only invites a major Soviet invasion. The conflict kills 7,000 Soviets and 30,000 Hungarians.

1957-1973

Laos — The CIA carries out approximately one coup per year trying to nullify Laos’ democratic elections. The problem is the Pathet Lao, a leftist group with enough popular support to be a member of any coalition government. In the late 50s, the CIA even creates an “Armee Clandestine” of Asian mercenaries to attack the Pathet Lao. After the CIA’s army suffers numerous defeats, the U.S. starts bombing, dropping more bombs on Laos than all the U.S. bombs dropped in World War II. A quarter of all Laotians will eventually become refugees, many living in caves.

1959

Haiti — The U.S. military helps “Papa Doc” Duvalier become dictator of Haiti. He creates his own private police force, the “Tonton Macoutes,” who terrorize the population with machetes. They will kill over 100,000 during the Duvalier family reign. The U.S. does not protest their dismal human rights record.

1961

The Bay of Pigs — The CIA sends 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Castro’s Cuba. But “Operation Mongoose” fails, due to poor planning, security and backing. The planners had imagined that the invasion will spark a popular uprising against Castro -– which never happens. A promised American air strike also never occurs. This is the CIA’s first public setback, causing President Kennedy to fire CIA Director Allen Dulles.

Dominican Republic — The CIA assassinates Rafael Trujillo, a murderous dictator Washington has supported since 1930. Trujillo’s business interests have grown so large (about 60 percent of the economy) that they have begun competing with American business interests.

Ecuador — The CIA-backed military forces the democratically elected President Jose Velasco to resign. Vice President Carlos Arosemana replaces him; the CIA fills the now vacant vice presidency with its own man.

Congo (Zaire) — The CIA assassinates the democratically elected Patrice Lumumba. However, public support for Lumumba’s politics runs so high that the CIA cannot clearly install his opponents in power. Four years of political turmoil follow.

1963

Dominican Republic — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Juan Bosch in a military coup. The CIA installs a repressive, right-wing junta.

Ecuador — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows President Arosemana, whose independent (not socialist) policies have become unacceptable to Washington. A military junta assumes command, cancels the 1964 elections, and begins abusing human rights.

1964

Brazil — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the democratically elected government of Joao Goulart. The junta that replaces it will, in the next two decades, become one of the most bloodthirsty in history. General Castelo Branco will create Latin America’s first death squads, or bands of secret police who hunt down “communists” for torture, interrogation and murder. Often these “communists” are no more than Branco’s political opponents. Later it is revealed that the CIA trains the death squads.

1965

Indonesia — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Sukarno with a military coup. The CIA has been trying to eliminate Sukarno since 1957, using everything from attempted assassination to sexual intrigue, for nothing more than his declaring neutrality in the Cold War. His successor, General Suharto, will massacre between 500,000 to 1 million civilians accused of being “communist.” The CIA supplies the names of countless suspects.

Dominican Republic — A popular rebellion breaks out, promising to reinstall Juan Bosch as the country’s elected leader. The revolution is crushed when U.S. Marines land to uphold the military regime by force. The CIA directs everything behind the scenes.

Greece — With the CIA’s backing, the king removes George Papandreous as prime minister. Papandreous has failed to vigorously support U.S. interests in Greece.

Congo (Zaire) — A CIA-backed military coup installs Mobutu Sese Seko as dictator. The hated and repressive Mobutu exploits his desperately poor country for billions.

1966

The Ramparts Affair — The radical magazine Ramparts begins a series of unprecedented anti-CIA articles. Among their scoops: the CIA has paid the University of Michigan $25 million dollars to hire “professors” to train South Vietnamese students in covert police methods. MIT and other universities have received similar payments. Ramparts also reveals that the National Students’ Association is a CIA front. Students are sometimes recruited through blackmail and bribery, including draft deferments.

1967

Greece — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the government two days before the elections. The favorite to win was George Papandreous, the liberal candidate. During the next six years, the “reign of the colonels” — backed by the CIA — will usher in the widespread use of torture and murder against political opponents. When a Greek ambassador objects to President Johnson about U.S. plans for Cypress, Johnson tells him: “Fuck your parliament and your constitution.”

Operation PHEONIX — The CIA helps South Vietnamese agents identify and then murder alleged Viet Cong leaders operating in South Vietnamese villages. According to a 1971 congressional report, this operation killed about 20,000 “Viet Cong.”

1968

Operation CHAOS — The CIA has been illegally spying on American citizens since 1959, but with Operation CHAOS, President Johnson dramatically boosts the effort. CIA agents go undercover as student radicals to spy on and disrupt campus organizations protesting the Vietnam War. They are searching for Russian instigators, which they never find. CHAOS will eventually spy on 7,000 individuals and 1,000 organizations.

Bolivia — A CIA-organized military operation captures legendary guerilla Che Guevara. The CIA wants to keep him alive for interrogation, but the Bolivian government executes him to prevent worldwide calls for clemency.

1969

Uruguay — The notorious CIA torturer Dan Mitrione arrives in Uruguay, a country torn with political strife. Whereas right-wing forces previously used torture only as a last resort, Mitrione convinces them to use it as a routine, widespread practice. “The precise pain, in the precise place, in the precise amount, for the desired effect,” is his motto. The torture techniques he teaches to the death squads rival the Nazis’. He eventually becomes so feared that revolutionaries will kidnap and murder him a year later.

1970

Cambodia — The CIA overthrows Prince Sahounek, who is highly popular among Cambodians for keeping them out of the Vietnam War. He is replaced by CIA puppet Lon Nol, who immediately throws Cambodian troops into battle. This unpopular move strengthens once minor opposition parties like the Khmer Rouge, which achieves power in 1975 and massacres millions of its own people.

1971

Bolivia — After half a decade of CIA-inspired political turmoil, a CIA-backed military coup overthrows the leftist President Juan Torres. In the next two years, dictator Hugo Banzer will have over 2,000 political opponents arrested without trial, then tortured, raped and executed.

Haiti — “Papa Doc” Duvalier dies, leaving his 19-year old son “Baby Doc” Duvalier the dictator of Haiti. His son continues his bloody reign with full knowledge of the CIA.

1972

The Case-Zablocki Act — Congress passes an act requiring congressional review of executive agreements. In theory, this should make CIA operations more accountable. In fact, it is only marginally effective.

 
 
 
John Stockwell: The CIA’s “Third World War.” 
 
Cambodia — Congress votes to cut off CIA funds for its secret war in Cambodia.

Wagergate Break-in — President Nixon sends in a team of burglars to wiretap Democratic offices at Watergate. The team members have extensive CIA histories, including James McCord, E. Howard Hunt and five of the Cuban burglars. They work for the Committee to Reelect the President (CREEP), which does dirty work like disrupting Democratic campaigns and laundering Nixon’s illegal campaign contributions. CREEP’s activities are funded and organized by another CIA front, the Mullen Company.

1973

Chile — The CIA overthrows and assassinates Salvador Allende, Latin America’s first democratically elected socialist leader. The problems begin when Allende nationalizes American-owned firms in Chile. ITT offers the CIA $1 million for a coup (reportedly refused). The CIA replaces Allende with General Augusto Pinochet, who will torture and murder thousands of his own countrymen in a crackdown on labor leaders and the political left.

CIA begins internal investigations — William Colby, the Deputy Director for Operations, orders all CIA personnel to report any and all illegal activities they know about. This information is later reported to Congress.

Watergate Scandal — The CIA’s main collaborating newspaper in America, The Washington Post, reports Nixon’s crimes long before any other newspaper takes up the subject. The two reporters, Woodward and Bernstein, make almost no mention of the CIA’s many fingerprints all over the scandal. It is later revealed that Woodward was a Naval intelligence briefer to the White House, and knows many important intelligence figures, including General Alexander Haig. His main source, “Deep Throat,” is probably one of those.

CIA Director Helms Fired — President Nixon fires CIA Director Richard Helms for failing to help cover up the Watergate scandal. Helms and Nixon have always disliked each other. The new CIA director is William Colby, who is relatively more open to CIA reform.

1974

CHAOS exposed — Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh publishes a story about Operation CHAOS, the domestic surveillance and infiltration of anti-war and civil rights groups in the U.S. The story sparks national outrage.

Angleton fired — Congress holds hearings on the illegal domestic spying efforts of James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence. His efforts included mail-opening campaigns and secret surveillance of war protesters. The hearings result in his dismissal from the CIA.

House clears CIA in Watergate — The House of Representatives clears the CIA of any complicity in Nixon’s Watergate break-in.

The Hughes Ryan Act — Congress passes an amendment requiring the president to report nonintelligence CIA operations to the relevant congressional committees in a timely fashion.

1975

Australia — The CIA helps topple the democratically elected, left-leaning government of Prime Minister Edward Whitlam. The CIA does this by giving an ultimatum to its Governor-General, John Kerr. Kerr, a longtime CIA collaborator, exercises his constitutional right to dissolve the Whitlam government. The Governor-General is a largely ceremonial position appointed by the Queen; the Prime Minister is democratically elected. The use of this archaic and never-used law stuns the nation.

Angola — Eager to demonstrate American military resolve after its defeat in Vietnam, Henry Kissinger launches a CIA-backed war in Angola. Contrary to Kissinger’s assertions, Angola is a country of little strategic importance and not seriously threatened by communism. The CIA backs the brutal leader of UNITAS, Jonas Savimbi. This polarizes Angolan politics and drives his opponents into the arms of Cuba and the Soviet Union for survival. Congress will cut off funds in 1976, but the CIA is able to run the war off the books until 1984, when funding is legalized again. This entirely pointless war kills over 300,000 Angolans.

“The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence” — Victor Marchetti and John Marks publish this whistle-blowing history of CIA crimes and abuses. Marchetti has spent 14 years in the CIA, eventually becoming an executive assistant to the Deputy Director of Intelligence. Marks has spent five years as an intelligence official in the State Department.

“Inside the Company” — Philip Agee publishes a diary of his life inside the CIA. Agee has worked in covert operations in Latin America during the 60s, and details the crimes in which he took part.

Congress investigates CIA wrong-doing — Public outrage compels Congress to hold hearings on CIA crimes. Senator Frank Church heads the Senate investigation (”The Church Committee”), and Representative Otis Pike heads the House investigation. (Despite a 98 percent incumbency reelection rate, both Church and Pike are defeated in the next elections.) The investigations lead to a number of reforms intended to increase the CIA’s accountability to Congress, including the creation of a standing Senate committee on intelligence. However, the reforms prove ineffective, as the Iran/Contra scandal will show. It turns out the CIA can control, deal with or sidestep Congress with ease.

The Rockefeller Commission — In an attempt to reduce the damage done by the Church Committee, President Ford creates the “Rockefeller Commission” to whitewash CIA history and propose toothless reforms. The commission’s namesake, Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, is himself a major CIA figure. Five of the commission’s eight members are also members of the Council on Foreign Relations, a CIA-dominated organization.

1979

Iran — The CIA fails to predict the fall of the Shah of Iran, a longtime CIA puppet, and the rise of Muslim fundamentalists who are furious at the CIA’s backing of SAVAK, the Shah’s bloodthirsty secret police. In revenge, the Muslims take 52 Americans hostage in the U.S. embassy in Tehran.

Afghanistan — The Soviets invade Afghanistan. The CIA immediately begins supplying arms to any faction willing to fight the occupying Soviets. Such indiscriminate arming means that when the Soviets leave Afghanistan, civil war will erupt. Also, fanatical Muslim extremists now possess state-of-the-art weaponry. One of these is Sheik Abdel Rahman, who will become involved in the World Trade Center bombing in New York.

El Salvador — An idealistic group of young military officers, repulsed by the massacre of the poor, overthrows the right-wing government. However, the U.S. compels the inexperienced officers to include many of the old guard in key positions in their new government. Soon, things are back to “normal” — the military government is repressing and killing poor civilian protesters. Many of the young military and civilian reformers, finding themselves powerless, resign in disgust.

Nicaragua — Anastasios Samoza II, the CIA-backed dictator, falls. The Marxist Sandinistas take over government, and they are initially popular because of their commitment to land and anti-poverty reform. Samoza had a murderous and hated personal army called the National Guard. Remnants of the Guard will become the Contras, who fight a CIA-backed guerilla war against the Sandinista government throughout the 1980s.

1980

El Salvador — The Archbishop of San Salvador, Oscar Romero, pleads with President Carter “Christian to Christian” to stop aiding the military government slaughtering his people. Carter refuses. Shortly afterwards, right-wing leader Roberto D’Aubuisson has Romero shot through the heart while saying Mass. The country soon dissolves into civil war, with the peasants in the hills fighting against the military government. The CIA and U.S. Armed Forces supply the government with overwhelming military and intelligence superiority. CIA-trained death squads roam the countryside, committing atrocities like that of El Mazote in 1982, where they massacre between 700 and 1000 men, women and children. By 1992, some 63,000 Salvadorans will be killed.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t

1981

Iran/Contra Begins — The CIA begins selling arms to Iran at high prices, using the profits to arm the Contras fighting the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. President Reagan vows that the Sandinistas will be “pressured” until “they say ‘uncle.’” The CIA’s Freedom Fighter’s Manual disbursed to the Contras includes instruction on economic sabotage, propaganda, extortion, bribery, blackmail, interrogation, torture, murder and political assassination.

1983

Honduras — The CIA gives Honduran military officers the Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual – 1983, which teaches how to torture people. Honduras’ notorious “Battalion 316″ then uses these techniques, with the CIA’s full knowledge, on thousands of leftist dissidents. At least 184 are murdered.

1984

The Boland Amendment — The last of a series of Boland Amendments is passed. These amendments have reduced CIA aid to the Contras; the last one cuts it off completely. However, CIA Director William Casey is already prepared to “hand off” the operation to Colonel Oliver North, who illegally continues supplying the Contras through the CIA’s informal, secret, and self-financing network. This includes “humanitarian aid” donated by Adolph Coors and William Simon, and military aid funded by Iranian arms sales.

1986

Eugene Hasenfus — Nicaragua shoots down a C-123 transport plane carrying military supplies to the Contras. The lone survivor, Eugene Hasenfus, turns out to be a CIA employee, as are the two dead pilots. The airplane belongs to Southern Air Transport, a CIA front. The incident makes a mockery of President Reagan’s claims that the CIA is not illegally arming the Contras.

Iran/Contra Scandal — Although the details have long been known, the Iran/Contra scandal finally captures the media’s attention in 1986. Congress holds hearings, and several key figures (like Oliver North) lie under oath to protect the intelligence community. CIA Director William Casey dies of brain cancer before Congress can question him. All reforms enacted by Congress after the scandal are purely cosmetic.

Haiti — Rising popular revolt in Haiti means that “Baby Doc” Duvalier will remain “President for Life” only if he has a short one. The U.S., which hates instability in a puppet country, flies the despotic Duvalier to the South of France for a comfortable retirement. The CIA then rigs the upcoming elections in favor of another right-wing military strongman. However, violence keeps the country in political turmoil for another four years. The CIA tries to strengthen the military by creating the National Intelligence Service (SIN), which suppresses popular revolt through torture and assassination.

1989

Panama — The U.S. invades Panama to overthrow a dictator of its own making, General Manuel Noriega. Noriega has been on the CIA’s payroll since 1966, and has been transporting drugs with the CIA’s knowledge since 1972. By the late 80s, Noriega’s growing independence and intransigence have angered Washington… so out he goes.

1990

Haiti — Competing against 10 comparatively wealthy candidates, leftist priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide captures 68 percent of the vote. After only eight months in power, however, the CIA-backed military deposes him. More military dictators brutalize the country, as thousands of Haitian refugees escape the turmoil in barely seaworthy boats. As popular opinion calls for Aristide’s return, the CIA begins a disinformation campaign painting the courageous priest as mentally unstable.

1991

The Gulf War — The U.S. liberates Kuwait from Iraq. But Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, is another creature of the CIA. With U.S. encouragement, Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. During this costly eight-year war, the CIA built up Hussein’s forces with sophisticated arms, intelligence, training and financial backing. This cemented Hussein’s power at home, allowing him to crush the many internal rebellions that erupted from time to time, sometimes with poison gas. It also gave him all the military might he needed to conduct further adventurism — in Kuwait, for example.

The Fall of the Soviet Union — The CIA fails to predict this most important event of the Cold War. This suggests that it has been so busy undermining governments that it hasn’t been doing its primary job: gathering and analyzing information. The fall of the Soviet Union also robs the CIA of its reason for existence: fighting communism. This leads some to accuse the CIA of intentionally failing to predict the downfall of the Soviet Union. Curiously, the intelligence community’s budget is not significantly reduced after the demise of communism.

1992

Economic Espionage — In the years following the end of the Cold War, the CIA is increasingly used for economic espionage. This involves stealing the technological secrets of competing foreign companies and giving them to American ones. Given the CIA’s clear preference for dirty tricks over mere information gathering, the possibility of serious criminal behavior is very great indeed.

1993

Haiti — The chaos in Haiti grows so bad that President Clinton has no choice but to remove the Haitian military dictator, Raoul Cedras, on threat of U.S. invasion. The U.S. occupiers do not arrest Haiti’s military leaders for crimes against humanity, but instead ensure their safety and rich retirements. Aristide is returned to power only after being forced to accept an agenda favorable to the country’s ruling class.

Research related links

1. Israel Accused Of Massive War Crime Atrocities
2. Keeping track of the empire’s crimes
3. Ron Paul Warns That U.S. Will Support Israeli Attack On Iran
4. Hans Blix Would Testify Against Bush-Cheney War Crimes
5. Pre-9/11 Movies – Additions to the 9/11 Timeline as of December 15, 2009
6. BCCI and Terrorism Finance – Additions to 9/11 Timeline as of March 23, 2008
7. Obama will not prosecute Bush and Cheney for 9/11, war crimes
8. Ron Paul: 300 Million Taxpayer Dollars Spent to Undermine Iranian Government
9. Report Pushes Passage Of Thought Crimes Bill
10. Hate Crimes Bill Double Jeopardy: Hate Crimes Bill Dual Sovereignty
11. Author: Some in Congress calling for war crimes trials
12. Members of Congress May Commit Only Great Crimes

Written by (Author ) World Jan 11, 2010

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 12, 2010

Contrary to his election campaign promises, Obama has issued dozens of signing statements.

Obama has issued another executive order, this time establishing a so-called “Council of Governors.”

The order, signed on January 11, further diminishes the sovereignty of the states and builds on a framework for possible martial law. The executive order was completely ignored by the corporate media.

“By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1822 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property,” the order reads.

The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security.

In other words, the Pentagon and Homeland Security will give hand-picked governors their marching orders under the guise of “synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States,” a direct violation of Posse Comitatus.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009; 12:00 AM

MONDAY, Jan. 26 (HealthDay News) — Almost half of tested samples of commercial high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) contained mercury, which was also found in nearly a third of 55 popular brand-name food and beverage products where HFCS is the first- or second-highest labeled ingredient, according to two new U.S. studies.

HFCS has replaced sugar as the sweetener in many beverages and foods such as breads, cereals, breakfast bars, lunch meats, yogurts, soups and condiments. On average, Americans consume about 12 teaspoons per day of HFCS, but teens and other high consumers can take in 80 percent more HFCS than average.

“Mercury is toxic in all its forms. Given how much high-fructose corn syrup is consumed by children, it could be a significant additional source of mercury never before considered. We are calling for immediate changes by industry and the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] to help stop this avoidable mercury contamination of the food supply,” the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy’s Dr. David Wallinga, a co-author of both studies, said in a prepared statement.
In the first study, published in current issue of Environmental Health, researchers found detectable levels of mercury in nine of 20 samples of commercial HFCS.

And in the second study, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), a non-profit watchdog group, found that nearly one in three of 55 brand-name foods contained mercury. The chemical was found most commonly in HFCS-containing dairy products, dressings and condiments.

But an organization representing the refiners is disputing the results published in Environmental Health.

“This study appears to be based on outdated information of dubious significance,” said Audrae Erickson, president of the Corn Refiners Association, in a statement. “Our industry has used mercury-free versions of the two re-agents mentioned in the study, hydrochloric acid and caustic soda, for several years. These mercury-free re-agents perform important functions, including adjusting pH balances.”

However, the IATP told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that four plants in Georgia, Tennessee, Ohio and West Virginia still use “mercury-cell” technology that can lead to contamination.

IATP’s Ben Lilliston also told HealthDay that the Environmental Health findings were based on information gathered by the FDA in 2005.

And the group’s own study, while not peer-reviewed, was based on products “bought off the shelf in the autumn of 2008,” Lilliston added.

The use of mercury-contaminated caustic soda in the production of HFCS is common. The contamination occurs when mercury cells are used to produce caustic soda.

“The bad news is that nobody knows whether or not their soda or snack food contains HFCS made from ingredients like caustic soda contaminated with mercury. The good news is that mercury-free HFCS ingredients exist. Food companies just need a good push to only use those ingredients,” Wallinga said in his prepared statement.

More information

The U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry has more about mercury and health.

SOURCE: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, news release, Jan. 26, 2009

Petitions, boycotts and lawsuits needed to halt latest manifestation of prison planet being constructed around humanity

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Radio talk show host Alex Jones is calling for petitions, boycotts and lawsuits en mass in an effort to block the nationwide implementation of full body scanners that represent a total violation of privacy, a health risk, and the next wave of tyranny being metered out against the American people and the people of the world under the phony pretext of fighting terrorism.

“Our long journey into domestication and dependency on the scientific dictatorship is accelerating, our entire society is being turned into a massive surveillance grid, it has been designed to persecute the people,” Jones warned on his show yesterday, adding that the scanners were the latest manifestation of the prison planet being constructed around humanity.

Allied with the contrived global warming movement, terrorism is the other prong of the pincer being used to crush freedom and advance totalitarianism in the developed world as Homeland Security follows the plan it was created to carry out – the gradual implementation of martial law in America characterized by the kind of stifling security we now see in airports being introduced into our daily lives in shopping malls, public schools, and many other buildings.

Jones warned that those who refuse the body scan and opt for a pat down will be subject to a strip search and treated like terrorists.

“We’re being trained like dogs….you’re the people they want to train to accept this, you’re the milk cows, you’re the cattle, you’re the once proud free people being trained to accept this,” said Jones, adding that the funding was already in place for body scanners at all U.S. airports in early 2009 before the Christmas Day incident magically arrived to provide the perfect pretext to push ahead with pull implementation.

“Magically that happens and they begin beating the drum within hours of it, see we must have the body scanners, it was all set, it was all rigged, every TV network, every station had their talking points,” said Jones, adding that body scanners were instantly promoted as the solution, allied with calls to renew the rapidly expiring Patriot Act.

(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)

The fact that the aborted plane bombing attack also provided the perfect justification to expand U.S. military operations into the Arabian Peninsula in the name of fighting Al-Qaeda, a process already well underway before the bombing attempt, makes the suspicious circumstances surrounding the December 25 incident all the more alarming.

As we have documented, The FBI has repeatedly changed its story in a haphazard effort to accommodate eyewitness testimony from passengers that conflicts with the official version of events.

At first the FBI denied that a second man was arrested in connection with the incident but later admitted a second man was handcuffed after Flight 253 passenger and eyewitness Kurt Haskell said he saw an Indian man being led away by authorities after sniffer dogs had found something in his luggage.

Officials then claimed that the man had not been on Flight 253 at all and was not connected with the incident, but had to reverse their statement again just days later when other eyewitnesses emerged, admitting that the man had been on the plane.

The fact that the FBI is apparently protecting accomplices involved with the bombing attempt, and thereby keeping the official story within the script necessary to pin the attack on a lone man from Yemen who was inspired by Al-Qaeda, blatantly suggests that the facts are being manipulated to fit a pre-conceived geopolitical agenda.

Jones stated that if the body scanners were allowed to be implemented, it would not be long before travelers were forced to wear taser bracelets before they even enter an airport that allow officials to deliver an electric shock to anyone they deem suspicious on a whim. Homeland Security has already been busy exploring the possible roll out of such devices.

“A senior government official with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has expressed great interest in a so-called safety bracelet that would serve as a stun device, similar to that of a police Taser®. According to this promotional video found at the Lamperd Less Lethal, Inc. website, the bracelet would be worn by all airline passengers,” reported the Washington Times.

In the UK, the level of detail produced by the body scanners is such that their implementation would break child pornography laws, specifically the Protection of Children Act 1978, under which it is illegal to create an indecent image or a “pseudo-image” of a child.

“They do not have the legal power to use full body scanners in this way,” said Terri Dowty, of Action for Rights of Children, adding there was an exemption in the 1978 law to cover the “prevention and detection of crime” but the purpose had to be more specific than the “trawling exercise” now being considered,” reports the Guardian.

Those vigorously pushing for the widespread rollout of body scanners in the aftermath of the highly suspicious Christmas Day bombing attempt have been found to have their own financial motives.

“Since the attempted bombing of a US airliner on Christmas Day, former Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff has given dozens of media interviews touting the need for the federal government to buy more full-body scanners for airports,” reports the Boston Globe.

“What he has made little mention of is that the Chertoff Group, his security consulting agency, includes a client that manufactures the machines. Chertoff disclosed the relationship on a CNN program Wednesday, in response to a question.”

Approaching the issue from a health angle, despite official assurances that the scanners are safe, there are many concerns about the physical impact of firing radiation at the body, especially if the individual has had previous x-ray scans, mammograms, or is a frequent flyer.

Dr. John Gofman, Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology at University of California, Berkeley, maintains that there is no safe dose of ionizing radiation. Gofman argues that radiation from medical diagnostics and treatment is responsible for 50 per cent of cancers of 60 per cent of heart disease cases amongst Americans.

“The fact, that X-ray doses are so seldom measured, reflects the false assumption that doses do not matter…[but] they do matter enormously. And each bit of additional dose matters, because any X-ray photon may be the one which sets in motion the high-speed, high energy electron which causes a carcinogenic or atherogenic [smooth muscle] mutation. Such mutations rarely disappear. The higher their accumulated number in a population, the higher will be the population’s mortality rates from radiation-induced cancer and ischemic heart disease,” states Gofman.

In addition to all these issues, full body scanners would not even have stopped the Christmas Day bomber from boarding Flight 253, according to a British MP who helped design the machines.

“I must advise the Prime Minister – and the British public – that the scanners are not a “silver bullet,” said Ben Wallace, who worked on the scanners at defense research organization QinetiQ. “You would be mistaken to think that they would counter the new threat.”

“The millimetre wave technology is harmless, quick and can be deployed overtly or covertly. But it cannot detect chemicals or light plastics.”

December 30, 2009
Ray McGovern 

In the past, I have alluded to Panetta and the Seven Dwarfs. The reference is to CIA Director Leon Panetta and seven of his moral-dwarf predecessors — the ones who sent President Barack Obama a letter on Sept. 18 asking him to “reverse Attorney General Holder’s Aug. 24 decision to re-open the criminal investigation of CIA interrogations.”

Did Allen Dulles and other “cloak-and-dagger” CIA operatives have a hand in killing President Kennedy and then covering it up?

Panetta reportedly was also dead set against reopening the investigation — as he was against release of the Justice Department’s “torture memoranda” of 2002, as he has been against releasing pretty much anything at all — the President’s pledges of a new era of openness, notwithstanding. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “CIA Torturers Running Scared.”]

Panetta is even older than I, and hearing is among the first faculties to fail. Perhaps he heard “error” when the President said “era.”

As for the benighted seven, they are more to be pitied than scorned. No longer able to avail themselves of the services of clever Agency lawyers and wordsmiths, they put their names to a letter that reeked of self-interest — not to mention the inappropriateness of asking a President to interfere with an investigation already ordered by the Attorney General.

Three of the seven — George Tenet, Porter Goss and Michael Hayden — were themselves involved, in one way or another, in planning, conducting or covering up all manner of illegal actions, including torture, assassination and illegal eavesdropping.

In this light, the most transparent part of the letter may be the sentence in which they worry: “There is no reason to expect that the re-opened criminal investigation will remain narrowly focused.”

When asked about the letter on Sunday TV shows on Sept. 20, Obama was careful always to respond first by expressing obligatory “respect” for the CIA and its directors.

With Bob Schieffer on “Face the Nation,” though, Obama did allow himself a condescending quip. He commented, “I appreciate the former CIA directors wanting to look out for an institution that they helped to build.”

That quip was, sadly, the exception to the rule. While Obama keeps repeating the mantra that “nobody is above the law,” there is no real sign that he intends to face down Panetta and the Seven Dwarfs — no sign that anyone has breathed new life into federal prosecutor John Durham, to whom Holder gave the mandate for further “preliminary investigation.”

What is generally forgotten is that it was former Attorney General Michael Mukasey who picked Durham two years ago to investigate the CIA’s destruction of 91 tapes of the interrogation of “high-value detainees.”

Durham had scarcely been heard from when Holder added to his job-jar the task of conducting a preliminary investigation regarding the CIA torture specialists. These are the ones whose zeal led them to go beyond the already highly permissive Justice Department guidelines for “harsh interrogation.”

Durham, clearly, is proceeding with all deliberate speed (emphasis on “deliberate”).  Someone has even suggested — I trust, in jest — that he has been diverted to the search for the money and other assets that Bernie Maddow stashed away.

In any case, do not hold your breath for findings from Durham anytime soon. Holder appears in no hurry. And President Obama keeps giving off signals that he is afraid of getting crosswise with the CIA — that’s right, afraid.

Not Just Paranoia

In that fear, President Obama stands in the tradition of a dozen American presidents. Harry Truman and John Kennedy were the only ones to take on the CIA directly.

Worst of all, evidence continues to build that the CIA was responsible, at least in part, for the assassination of President Kennedy. Evidence new to me came in response to things I included in my article of Dec. 22, “Break the CIA in Two.”

What follows can be considered a sequel that is based on the kind of documentary evidence after which intelligence analysts positively lust.

Unfortunately for the CIA operatives who were involved in the past activities outlined below, the temptation to ask Panetta to put a SECRET stamp on the documentary evidence will not work. Nothing short of blowing up the Truman Library might help some.

But even that would be a largely feckless “covert action,” copy machines having long since done their thing.

In my article of Dec. 22, I referred to Harry Truman’s op-ed of exactly 46 years before, titled “Limit CIA Role to Intelligence,” in which the former President expressed dismay at what the Central Intelligence Agency had become just 16 years after he and Congress created it.

The Washington Post published the op-ed on Dec. 22, 1963, in its early edition, but immediately excised it from later editions. Other media ignored it. The long hand of the CIA?

Truman wrote that he was “disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment” to keep the President promptly and fully informed and had become “an operational and at times policy-making arm of the government.”

The Truman Papers

Documents in the Truman Library show that nine days after Kennedy was assassinated, Truman sketched out in handwritten notes what he wanted to say in the op-ed. He noted, among other things, that the CIA had worked as he intended only “when I had control.”

In Truman’s view, misuse of the CIA began in February 1953, when his successor, Dwight Eisenhower, named Allen Dulles CIA Director. Dulles’s forte was overthrowing governments (in current parlance, “regime change”), and he was quite good at it.

With coups in Iran (1953) and Guatemala (1954) under his belt, Dulles was riding high in the late Fifties and moved Cuba to the top of his to-do list.

Accustomed to the carte blanche given him by Eisenhower, Dulles was offended when young President Kennedy came on the scene and had the temerity to ask questions about the Bay of Pigs adventure, which had been set in motion under Eisenhower.

When Kennedy made it clear he would NOT approve the use of U.S. combat forces, Dulles reacted with disdain and set out to mousetrap the new President.

Coffee-stained notes handwritten by Allen Dulles were discovered after his death and reported by historian Lucien S. Vandenbroucke. They show how Dulles drew Kennedy into a plan that was virtually certain to require the use of U.S. combat forces.

In his notes Dulles explained that, “when the chips were down,” the new President would be forced by “the realities of the situation” to give whatever military support was necessary “rather than permit the enterprise to fail.”

Additional detail came from a March 2001 conference on the Bay of Pigs, which included CIA operatives, retired military commanders, scholars and journalists. Daniel Schorr told National Public Radio that he had gained one new perception as a result of the “many hours of talk and heaps of declassified secret documents”:

“It was that the CIA overlords of the invasion, Director Allen Dulles and Deputy Richard Bissell, had their own plan on how to bring the United States into the conflict.… What they expected was that the invaders would establish a beachhead … and appeal for aid from the United States. …

“The assumption was that President Kennedy, who had emphatically banned direct American involvement, would be forced by public opinion to come to the aid of the returning patriots. American forces, probably Marines, would come in to expand the beachhead.

“In fact, President Kennedy was the target of a CIA covert operation that collapsed when the invasion collapsed.”

The “enterprise” which Dulles said could not fail was, of course, the overthrow of Fidel Castro. After mounting several failed operations to assassinate him, this time Dulles meant to get his man, with little or no attention to what the Russians might do in reaction.

Kennedy stuck to his guns, so to speak; fired Dulles and his co-conspirators a few months after the abortive invasion in April 1961; and told a friend that he wanted to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.”

The outrage was mutual, and when Kennedy himself was assassinated on Nov. 22, 1963, it must have occurred to Truman that the disgraced Dulles and his outraged associates might not be above conspiring to get rid of a President they felt was soft on Communism — and, incidentally, get even.

In his op-ed of Dec. 22, 1963, Truman warned: “The most important thing … was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisions.” It is a safe bet that Truman had the Bay of Pigs fiasco uppermost in mind.

Truman called for CIA’s operational duties [to] be terminated or properly used elsewhere.” (This is as good a recommendation now as it was then, in my view.)

On Dec. 27, 1963, retired Admiral Sidney Souers, whom Truman had appointed to lead his first central intelligence group, sent a “Dear Boss” letter applauding Truman’s outspokenness and blaming Dulles for making the CIA “a different animal than I tried to set up for you.”

Souers specifically lambasted the attempt “to conduct a ‘war’ invading Cuba with a handful of men and without air cover.”

Souers also lamented the fact that the agency’s “principal effort” had evolved into causing “revolutions in smaller countries around the globe,” and added:

“With so much emphasis on operations, it would not surprise me to find that the matter of collecting and processing intelligence has suffered some.”

Clearly, CIA’s operational tail was wagging its substantive dog — a serious problem that persists to this day.

Fox Guarding Hen House

The well-connected Dulles got himself appointed to the Warren Commission and took the lead in shaping the investigation of JFK’s assassination.

Documents in the Truman Library show that he then mounted a small domestic covert action of his own to neutralize any future airing of Truman’s and Souers’s warnings about covert action.

So important was this to Dulles that he invented a pretext to get himself invited to visit Truman in Independence, Missouri. On the afternoon of April 17, 1964, Dulles spent a half-hour trying to get the former President to retract what he had said in his op-ed. No dice, said Truman.

No problem, thought Dulles. Four days later, in a formal memo for his old buddy Lawrence Houston, CIA General Counsel from 1947 to 1973, Dulles fabricated a private retraction, claiming that Truman told him the Washington Post article was “all wrong,” and that Truman “seemed quite astounded at it.”

No doubt Dulles thought it might be handy to have such a memo in CIA files, just in case.

A fabricated retraction? It certainly seems so, because Truman did not change his tune. Far from it.

In a June 10, 1964, letter to the managing editor of Look magazine, for example, Truman restated his critique of covert action, emphasizing that he never intended the CIA to get involved in “strange activities.”

Dulles and Dallas

Dulles could hardly have expected to get Truman to recant publicly. So why was it so important for Dulles to place in CIA files a fabricated retraction? My guess is that in early 1964 he was feeling a good bit of heat from those suggesting the CIA might have been involved somehow in the Kennedy assassination.

Indeed, columnists were asking how the truth could ever come out with Allen Dulles on the Warren Commission. Prescient.

Dulles feared, rightly, that Truman’s limited-edition op-ed might yet hit pay dirt and raise serious questions about covert action. Dulles would have wanted to be in position to flash the Truman “retraction,” with the hope that this would nip any serious questioning in the bud.

The media had already shown how co-opted — er, I mean “cooperative” — it could be.

As the de facto head of the Warren Commission, Dulles was perfectly positioned to exculpate himself and any of his associates, were any commissioners or investigators — or journalists — tempted to question whether the killing in Dallas might have been a CIA covert action.

Did Allen Dulles and other “cloak-and-dagger CIA operatives have a hand in killing President Kennedy and then covering it up? The most up-to-date — and, in my view, the best — dissection of the assassination appeared last year in James Douglass’s book,  JFK and the Unspeakable.

After updating and arraying the abundant evidence, and conducting still more interviews, Douglass concludes the answer is Yes.

November 28, 2009

The United States does not control its own destiny. Rather it is controlled by an international financial elite, of which the American branch works out of big New York banks like J.P. Morgan Chase, Wall Street investment firms such as Goldman Sachs, and the Federal Reserve System. They in turn control the White House, Congress, the military, the mass media, the intelligence agencies, both political parties, the universities, etc. No one can rise to the top in any of these institutions without the elite’s stamp of approval.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon removed the dollar’s gold peg.

This elite has been around since the nation began, becoming increasingly dominant as the 19th century progressed. A key date was passage of the National Banking Act of 1863, when the system was put into place whereby federal government debt was used to collateralize bank lending. Since then we’ve paid the freight through our taxes for bank control of the economy. The final nails in the coffin came with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

In 1929 the bankers plunged the nation into the Great Depression by constricting the money supply. With Franklin D. Roosevelt as president, the nation struggled through the decade of the 1930s but did not pull out of the Depression until the industrial explosion during World War II.

After the war came the Golden Age of the U.S. economy, when the working man, protected by strong labor unions, became a true partner in the prosperity of the industrial age. That era lasted a full generation. The bankers were largely spectators as Americans led the world in exports, standard of living, science and space exploration, and every measure of health, longevity, and culture.

Roosevelt had kept the bankers subservient to the interests of the economy at large. The Federal Reserve was part of the New Deal team, and interest rates were held at historic lows despite a large federal deficit. One main impact was the huge increase in home ownership. After World War II, the G.I. Bill allowed home ownership to grow further and millions of veterans to attend college. The influx of educated graduates led to productivity growth and the emergence of new high-tech industries.

But the bankers were laying their plans. In the early 1950s they got the government to agree to allow the Federal Reserve to escape its subservience to the U.S. Treasury Department and set interest rates on its own. Rates rose throughout the 1950s and 1960s. By the time of the interest rate hikes of 1968, the economy was slowing down. Both federal budget and trade deficits were beginning to replace the post-war surpluses. High interest rates were the likely cause.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon removed the dollar’s gold peg, allowing the huge inflation resulting from oil price increases that the international bankers engineered through control of U.S. foreign policy when Henry Kissinger was national security adviser and secretary of state. Nixon’s opening to China resulted in early agreements, also overseen by banking interests, to begin to transfer U.S. industry to overseas producers like China which had cheap labor costs.

By the mid-1970s, the U.S. had been taken over by a behind the scenes coup-d’etat that included events in 1963 when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by a conspiracy that could only have been instigated by the highest levels of world financial control. In the election of 1976, David Rockefeller succeeded in placing fellow Trilateral Commission member Jimmy Carter in the White House, but Carter upset the banking community, thoroughly Zionist in orientation, by working toward peace in the Middle East and elsewhere.

I was working in the Carter White House in 1979-80. Unbeknownst to the president, Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, another Rockefeller protégé, suddenly raised interest rates to fight the inflation the bankers had caused by the OPEC oil price deals, and plunged the nation into recession. Carter was made to look weak and uninformed and was defeated in the election of 1980 by Republican candidate Ronald Reagan. It was through the “Reagan Revolution” that the regulatory controls over the banking industry were lifted, mainly in allowing the banks to use their fractional reserve privileges in making mortgage loans.

Volcker’s recession shattered American manufacturing and hastened the flight of jobs abroad. Under the “Reagan Doctrine,” the U.S. military embarked on an unprecedented mission of world conquest by attacking one small nation at a time, starting with Nicaragua. Global capitalism was also on the march, with the U.S. armed forces its own private police force. With the invasion of Iraq under George H.W. Bush in 1991, mainland Asia was revealed as the principle target.

The economy was floated by productivity gains through computer automation and a huge sell-off of assets through the merger-acquisition bubble of the late 1980s which ended in a recession. This resulted in the defeat of Bush by Bill Clinton in the election of 1992. Clinton was able to create another bubble through a strong dollar policy that attracted foreign capital.

The dot-com bubble that resulted lasted all the way through to the crash of December 2000. Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force led the way in the destruction of the sovereign state of Yugoslavia, whereby the international bankers took over the resource wealth of the entire Balkan region, and the U.S. military gained forward bases for further incursions into Asia.

Do we need to say that none of this was ever voted on by the American electorate? But they bought into it nevertheless, both with their silence and through participation in a generally favorable job market in the emerging service occupations, particularly finance.

By the time George W. Bush was inaugurated president in January 2001, the U.S. was facing a disaster. $4 trillion in wealth had vanished when the dot.com bubble collapsed. NAFTA caused even more American manufacturing jobs to disappear abroad. The Neocons who were moving into key jobs in the Pentagon knew they would soon have new wars to fight in the Middle East, with invasion plans for Afghanistan and Iraq ready to be pulled off the shelf.

But the U.S. had no economic engine available to generate the tax revenues Bush would need for the planned wars. At this moment Chairman Alan Greenspan of the Federal Reserve stepped in. Over a two year period from 2001-2003 the Fed lowered interest rates by over 500 basis points. Meanwhile, the federal government removed all regulatory controls on mortgage lending, and the housing bubble was on. $4 trillion in new home loans were pumped into the economy, much of it through subprime loans borrowers could not afford.

The Fed began to put on the brakes in 2003, but the mighty work of re-floating a moribund economy had been accomplished. By late 2006 another recession loomed, but it would take two more years before the crisis of October 2008 brought the entire system down.

The impact on the job market was immediate and profound. By the time Barack Obama was elected president in November 2008, the U.S. was mired in seemingly endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the worst recession since the Great Depression was picking up speed. In order to prevent total disaster, the Bush administration ended its eight years of catastrophic misrule with a flourish, by allocating over $700 billion in financial system bailouts to cover the bad loans the banks had been making since Greenspan gave the housing bubble the green light.

It is now November 2009. Since Barack Obama was inaugurated in January, unemployment has soared from 7.9 percent to 10.2 percent. A few hundred billion dollars were allocated for “stimulus” purposes, but most of that went to pay unemployment benefits and to keep state and local governments from laying off more employees.

A fraction has been distributed for highway improvements, but largely through the bank bailouts the federal deficit has been running at an annual rate of $1.5 trillion, by far the largest in history, with the national debt now topping $12 trillion. Ironically, those Americans who still have productive jobs continue to grow in efficiency, with productivity up over five percent in the last year.

So much federal money has been spent that the Obama administration has been struggling to make its health care proposals budget-neutral through a raft of new taxes, fees, and penalties, and by announcing in recent days that the government’ first priority must now shift to deficit reduction. The word “austerity” has been mentioned for the first time since the Carter administration. Yet Congress voted $655 billion in military expenditures to continue fighting in the Middle East. A U.S. military attack on Iran, possibly in conjunction with Israel, would surprise no one.

So where do we now stand?

At present, the Federal Reserve is trying to prevent a total economic collapse. Interest rates are near-zero, to the chagrin of foreign investors in U.S. Treasury securities, and close to half of new Treasury debt instruments have been bought by the Federal Reserve itself as a way of providing free money for federal government expenditures.

But the U.S. economy shows no signs of coming back, with no economic driver emerging that could bring it back. For all the talk about alternative energy, there has been no significant growth of any home-grown industry that could possibly make up so much lost ground in either the short or the long-term.

The industries in the U.S. that are holding up are the military, including arms exports, universities that are attracting large numbers of students from abroad, especially China, and health care, especially for the aging baby boomer population. But the war industry produces nothing with a long-term economic benefit, and health care exists mainly to treat sick people, not produce anything new.

None of this provides a foundation that can bring about a restoration of prosperity to 300 million people when the jobs of making articles of consumption are increasingly scarce. On top of everything else, since government inevitably looks to its own requirements first, the total tax burden continues to increase to the point where the average employee now pays close to 50 percent of his or her income on taxes of all types, including federal and state income taxes, real estate taxes, payroll taxes, excise taxes, government fees, etc. Plus the cost of utilities continues to rise steadily and threatens to skyrocket if cap-and-trade legislation is passed.

The Obama administration has no plans to deal with any of this. They have projected a budget for 15 years hence that shows the budget deficit decreasing and tax revenues going way up, but it is all lies. They have no roadmap for getting us there and no plans for following the roadmap if it portrayed a realistic goal. And yet the U.S. military is still trying to conquer Asia. It is madness.

And it is madness because the big decisions are not made by the U.S., by Congress, or by the Obama administration. The U.S. has, for half-a-century, been marching to the tune played by the international financial elite, and this fact did not change with the election of 2008. The financiers have put the people of this nation $57 trillion in debt, according to the latest reports, counting debt at the federal, state, business, and household levels. Interest alone on this debt is over $3 trillion of a GDP of $14 trillion. Failure of our political leadership to deal with this tragedy over the past three decades is nothing less than treason.

But then again, at some point the decision was made that the U.S. and its population would be discarded by history, the economic status of the nation reduced to a shadow of what it once was, but that its military machine would be used for the financial elite’s takeover of the world until it is replaced by that of some other nation. All indications are that the next country up to bat as military enforcer for the financiers is China.

There you have it. That, in my opinion, is the past, present, and future of this nation in a nutshell. Great evils have been done in the world in the last century, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

Except…. and that’s what each person caught up in these travesties must decide. What are you going to do about it?

In mulling over this question, it would be wise to recognize that the dominance of the financial elite has largely been exercised through their control of the international monetary system based on bank lending and government debt. Therefore it’s through the monetary system that change can and must be made.

The progressives are wrong to think the government should go deeper in debt to create more jobs. This will just create an even deeper hole of debt future generations will have to crawl out of.

Rather the key is monetary reform, whether at the local or national levels. People have lost control of their ability to earn a living. But change could be accomplished through sovereign control by people and nations of the monetary means of exchange.

This control has been stolen. It is time to take it back. One way would be for the federal government to make a relief payment to each adult of $1,000 a month until the crisis lifted. This money could be earmarked for goods and services produced within the U.S. and used to capitalize a new series of community development banks. I have called this the “Cook Plan.”

The plan could be funded through direct payment from a Treasury relief account without new taxes or government borrowing. The payments would be balanced on the credit side by GDP growth or be used by individuals to pay off debt. It would be direct government spending as was done with Greenbacks before and after the Civil War without significant inflation.

Another method increasingly being used within the U.S. today is local and regional credit clearing exchanges and the use of local currencies or “scrip.” Use of such currencies could be enhanced by legislation at the state and federal levels allowing these currencies to be used for payment of taxes and government fees as well as payment of mortgages and other forms of bank debt. The credit clearing exchanges could be organized as private non-profit regional currency co-operatives similar to credit unions.

These would be immediate emergency measures. In the longer run, sovereign control of money and credit must be returned to the public commons and treated as public utilities. This does not mean exclusive government control to replace bank control. As stated previously, it would be done in partnership between government and private trade exchanges. Nor does it mean government takeover of business, industry, or the banking system, though all should be regulated for the common good and fairly taxed.

This program would lead to a new monetary paradigm where money and credit would be available by, as, when, and where needed, to facilitate trade between and among legitimate producers of goods and services. In this way trade and commerce will come to serve human freedom, not diminish it as is done with today’s dysfunctional partnership between big government trillions of dollars in debt and big finance with the entire world in hock.

Such a change would be a true populist revolution.

I was pleased last week when we won a vote in the Financial Services Committee to include language from the Audit the Fed bill HR1207 in the upcoming financial regulatory reform bill.  As it stands now, if HR 3996 passes, because of this action, the Federal Reserve’s entire balance sheet will be opened up to a GAO audit.  We will at last have a chance to find out what happened to the trillions of dollars the Fed has been giving out.
Finally, the blanket restrictions on GAO audits of the Fed that have existed since 1978 will be removed.  All items on the Fed’s balance sheet will be auditable, including all credit facilities, all securities purchase programs, and all agreements with foreign central banks.  To calm fears that we might be trying to substitute congressional action for Fed mischief in tinkering with monetary policy, we agreed to a 180 day lag time before details of the Fed’s market actions are released and included language to state explicitly that nothing in the amendment should be construed as interference in or dictation of monetary policy by Congress or the GAO.  This left no reasonable objections standing and the amendment passed with a vote of 43 to 26.

This was a major triumph for transparency and accountability in government.  With unprecedented turmoil in the financial markets, the people are demanding to know and understand the extent of the Federal Reserve’s involvement in the creation of out-of-control business cycles, who they are helping, and how.  We need information.  The excuses for not giving out this information are flimsy at best, and the passage of this amendment is a major step to finally getting at the truth.

Of course I could not have done this without the help and support of many other members who have been strong allies in this fight.  Having over 300 cosponsors was obviously helpful. However, as great as this victory is, we have to remember that this amendment is attached to a bill that would give sweeping new powers to the Federal Reserve. The Fed has taken its mandate to maintain stable prices and full employment and used its immense power to help elite friends at the great expense of everyone else.  The answer is not to increase their powers and ability to interfere in the economy, but that is what the legislation will do.  It is a disaster waiting to happen, and unfortunately it looks as if it will pass.

At least with the Audit the Fed amendment attached to the bill, the Fed will not be able to do its destructive work in secret. The people will know exactly who the beneficiaries are of this immoral system of money management.

James Corbett
The Corbett Report
Friday, November 20, 2009

A hacker has leaked thousands of emails and documents from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University that appear to show how climate change data was fudged and the peer review process skewed to favor the manmade climate change hypothesis.

The link to the data appears to have been posted to a number of climate science websites yesterday by an anonymous hacker or insider going by the name “FOIA,” an apparent allusion to the Freedom of Information Act in the United States. One of the first sites where the 62 MB file was posted was The Air Vent. It was soon picked up by Watts Up With That, Climate Audit and other climate science sites.

The information contained in the leaked emails and documents are as shocking as they are damning of the scientists who have been most vocal about the manmade global warming scare. Some of the excerpts include this email, purportedly from Phil Jones to researchers including Michael Mann of “Mann’s hockey stick” fame:

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@xxxxxxxxx,mhughes@xxxxxxx, mhughes@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxxxxx,t.osborn@xxxxxxxxxDear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow.

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.

Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil

And this excerpt in which researchers appear to discuss ways to discredit James Saiers of the Geophysical Research Letters journal because he seems to be sympathetic to climate realists:

M,

This is truly awful. GRL has gone downhill rapidly in recent years.

I think the decline began before Saiers. I have had some unhelpful dealings with him recently with regard to a paper Sarah and I have on glaciers — it was well received by the referees, and so is in the publication pipeline. However, I got the impression that Saiers was trying to keep it from being published.

Proving bad behavior here is very difficult. If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted. Even this would be difficult.

How different is the GRL paper from the Nature paper? Did the authors counter any of the criticisms? My experience with Douglass is that the identical (bar format changes) paper to one previously rejected was submitted to GRL.

T.

According to Investigate magazine out of Australia, Dr. Phil Jones has now confirmed that these emails do appear to be real.

The importance of this information will not be lost on The Corbett Report’s audience, as a recent interview I conducted with Tim Ball discussed the very issue of the Climate Research Unit and Phil Jones’ intense secrecy regarding their data:

Unsurprisingly, there has so far been deafening silence on this issue in the controlled corporate media, but in light of the upcoming Copenhagen Treaty talks, it is imperative that we have a true and open debate about climate change before we make potentially world-changing decisions based on this science. It is up to all of us to push this story and its staggering implications into the mainstream.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, November 16, 2009

The predictable response to criticism surrounding Obama’s botched bow to Emperor Akihito this weekend has been to claim that the outrage is a contrived creation of the political right-wing. However, the Japanese themselves are obviously just as embarrassed about the whole spectacle.

Despite the fact that Obama was widely criticized for bowing to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, an incident the White House ludicrously tried to deny even though it was plain as day on video, he again prostrated himself before royalty by awkwardly lurching forward at a near 90 degree angle to show his fealty to the Japanese Emperor and his wife at the Imperial Palace on Saturday.

Top Japanese newspapers like Kyodo have refused to print the image out of embarrassment. Video footage of the entire exchange shows Obama profusely bowing like a house servant no less than seven times in the space of under 30 seconds.

“Kyodo News is running his appropriate and reciprocated nod and shake with the Empress, certainly to show the president as dignified, and not in the form of a first year English teacher trying to impress with Karate Kid-level knowledge of Japanese customs,” writes a source quoted by ABC News’ Jake Tapper.

“Obama’s handshake/forward lurch was so jarring and inappropriate it recalls Bush’s back-rub of Merkel,” he adds.

Tapper’s source highlights the fact that it’s not just right-wingers in America who are unhappy about Obama’s body language.

“The bow as he performed did not just display weakness in Red State terms, but evoked weakness in Japanese terms….The last thing the Japanese want or need is a weak looking American president and, again, in all ways, he unintentionally played that part.”

Why is this important? On every single occasion, Obama has gone out of his way to display inferiority and fealty to foreign royalty. Not only is this considered a violation of state department protocol, which decrees that presidents bow to no one, it also goes against the grain of historical American opposition to Kings and Emperors.

Obama is communicating a strong message when he engages in this type of behavior. He is essentially re-affirming the fact that he does not serve the American people, and is displaying his loyal obedience to the global elite. For America’s first black president to present himself as a lowly house servant would when he meets foreign dignitaries is also a damning indictment of what he truly represents – not an icon of the final confirmation of black people throwing off the chains of slavery, but merely a front man put in place to pacify the masses while all along firmly taking his orders from the generationally inbred and virulently racist global elite.

No finer example was there of this than when Obama and his wife met the Queen and her notoriously racist husband, Prince Philip, earlier this year. Obama was seen groveling and hastily following barked out orders from Philip, the same man who trained in the Hitler Youth, attended funerals with top Nazis, and sympathized with Hitler’s attitudes towards Jews in the 1930’s.

Philip also helped start the World Wildlife Fund with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, who is closely affiliated with the founders of the Bilderberg international power group.

Philip has repeatedly expressed his desire to return to earth as a deadly virus in order to wipe out 80% of the population, the majority of whom would most likely be the numerous races of people he has consistently offended with racist jokes over the decades.

Obama also famously performed another bizarre bow in front of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. Photographs and video clearly show the President stooping to a near 90 degree angle to express his fealty to the 84-year-old monarch, an action “befitting a king’s subjects, not his peer,” according to the Washington Times. Subsequent denials by the White House only heightened the controversy.

As we have painstakingly documented in both The Obama Deception and Fall Of The Republic, Obama, billed as the people’s President, is in fact the ultimate puppet of the global elite. He is the black face of the new world order – carefully groomed and installed as president to neutralize the left-wing activists and provide justification to demonize conservative opposition to his policies as racism. Obama’s behavior in front of foreign royalty only confirms what we already knew – that he too is a subject of the real power structure that controls the world, and he is at their service to carry the ball for their agenda until such a time when his usefulness has been outlived.

Webster G. Tarpley
Infowars
November 15, 2009

In the wake of the massacre at Fort Hood Texas , two principal theories have emerged to explain the conduct of the accused shooter, identified by the U.S. Army as Major Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist of Jordanian-Palestinian ancestry. One of these theories is embraced by left liberals and other supporters and acolytes of the Obama regime, and argues that Major Hasan is a sincere and devout Muslim who was the victim of a tragic contradiction between his religious faith and the logic of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both the heritage of the odious Bush-Cheney regime. According to this version, Hasan must be viewed as a troubled and tormented individual who “snapped,” breaking down psychologically under the stress of his awful predicament. Here is how Obama summed up this approach: “Even within the extraordinary military that we have — and I think everybody understands how outstanding the young men and women in uniform are under the most severe stress — there are going to be instances in which an individual cracks.” (New York Times, 10 Nov and ember 2009) Calling Major Hasan a terrorist amounts, in this view, to racism and vindictive prejudice.

There remains the question of whether Major Hasan’s psychosis has been artificially produced through a program of brainwashing and heavy-duty “Clockwork Orange” psychological manipulation.

The other theory is the one advocated by assorted neocons, reactionaries, Islamophobes and others generally hostile to Obama. This account maintains that Major Hasan was a homegrown, self-starting Islamic terrorist, trumpeting his devotion to jihad and suicide bombing, seeking to make contact with “Al Qaeda,” and generally filled with hate for America , for freedom, and for his fellow soldiers. In this view, it is only the pervasive political correctness and multicultural obsession of the subversive-riddled and soft on terrorism Obama regime that prevented Major Hasan from being neutralized before he could act, and which prevents Obama and his Democratic allies from telling the truth after the fact.

These views are both superficial, naïve, and inadequate.[1] They amount to two prongs of an articulated campaign of media hysteria and mass manipulation designed on the one hand to prod the dithering Wall Street puppet Obama ­ who is having second thoughts about his own political survival — into an early decision in favor of massive escalation of the war in Afghanistan for the purpose of hastening the breakup of Pakistan, and thus threatening China. On the other hand, the delirium of Islamophobic hatred being ginned up against Major Hasan by the usual cast of reactionary radio ogres (Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Levin) seeks to accentuate and strengthen the racist and xenophobic elements in the militant anti-Obama opposition, in particular among the Tea Party movement. The decision to put the infamous Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his confreres on trail in New York City, plus the recent government seizure of numerous US mosques and other buildings on the grounds that they are Iranian assets, also contribute to a growing mood of anti-Moslem hysteria. This atmosphere is accentuated by the reckless and irresponsible actions of some Moslem groups which happen to be foundation-funded, and must thus be considered as part of the apparatus of US domestic social control.

The media narrative which is now being consolidated a week after the shootings is full of contradictions, embarrassed silences, and absurdities. A third and distinct approach to this case is therefore required, one which regards Major Hasan as a manipulated patsy in the context of a relatively sophisticated operation mounted by forces within the US intelligence community, using methods and assets which by now ought to have become familiar. Major Hasan can be seen as a mixture of Lee Harvey Oswald, legendary 9/11 “suicide pilot” Mohammed Atta, and Cho Seung-Hui (the alleged April 2007 Virginia Tech shooter). He also has elements of reputed Robert Kennedy assassin Sirhan Sirhan, and of John Hinckley Jr., who was involved in an attempt to kill President Reagan ­ both of whom survived the operations in which they were implicated. He thus represents a new cocktail of patsy ingredients. Until now, Islamic terrorists had come in collectivist groups, and not alone. Major Hasan by contrast is a troubled loner in the tradition of Oswald, at the same time that he embodies the religious fanaticism of Atta, along with some of his peccadilloes. Major Hasan is that novelty, a troubled Islamic fundamentalist loner, even though this is something of a contradiction in terms. Like Cho, Major Hasan emerges from the psychiatric clinic, in his case as a practicing psychiatrist, but as a shrink with egregious symptoms of his own. Like all patsies, Major Hasan combines the flamboyant and bombastic proclamation of his personal creed with a seeming immunity from bureaucratic countermeasures which would normally be automatic in shutting him down. Hasan is revealed as a fanatic, a misfit, and a quasi-psychotic or psychotic mental case in his own right ­ who could not subsist without protectors in high places of the US intelligence community.

In my 2005 book 9/11 Synthetic Terrorism, I argued that 9/11 and other recent terrorist attacks represented provocations cynically orchestrated by privately controlled rogue networks operating within the US intelligence agencies for purposes of mass political manipulation. Starting from an overview of terrorist actions from the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 through 9/11, I developed a method of analysis of state-sponsored false flag terrorism which distinguished the roles of fanatical, duped, or psychotic patsies like Oswald, of subversive moles ensconced as officials within government agencies, and of technicians or professional killers who actually create the observed effects, all commanded and coordinated from outside of government, and all operating within the atmosphere of mass brainwashing provided by the Wall Street media. I also highlighted the role of drills and exercises which are hijacked and turned into real-world terror attacks. In order to understand the Fort Hood massacre, it is indispensable to apply this method here as well.

TROOPS THOUGHT IT WAS A DRILL ­ DID MAJOR HASAN THINK SO TOO?

In investigations like this, it is generally a great mistake to fixate on the scapegoat dished up by the mass media. The more we focus on the Oswald of the day, the less we understand of what actually happened. Let us turn away from the TV pundits, and listen instead to the eyewitness testimony of the troops who were present at the shootings. Many of them are on record agreeing that the events of November 5 were initially interpreted by those on the scene as an exercise, as a drill. Emphasis will be added to bring out this central fact.

From ABC News we get the following testimony: Solider Keara Bono ‘told “Good Morning America” today that she initially thought the scene of Hasan standing up, praising Allah and starting to fire was a drill. She didn’t believe it was real even when she felt her own blood, she said. “Then I looked to my left and right and I saw people that were bleeding,” she said. That’s when Bono realized that Hasan’s rampage wasn’t a drill.’ (ABC News GMA)[2]

In the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel of 9 November 2009 we find: “Pfc. Amber Bahr of Random Lake [ Wisconsin ] heard someone yelling and ducked at the sound of gunfire, but she said she thought supervisors at Fort Hood were holding a drill last Thursday. She didn’t know she was under live fire until she heard people screaming.”[3] This story was based on an interview given to NBC’s Today show.

CBS News reported: “Two days after narrowly escaping death at Fort Hood and just hours after his release from the hospital, Corporal Nathan Hewitt still can’t believe what happened was real. The survivor spoke to CBS News Correspondent Don Teague about those fateful minutes. Even after being shot, Hewitt didn’t believe what was happening. He thought the gunfire was a training exercise and that he’d been hit by a rubber bullet. He says other victims thought the same thing.”[4]

ABC newsman Bob Woodruff found further corroboration of this general impression when he was allowed to interview shooting victims who were recovering in the hospital: “For many of the 43 people wounded when an Army psychiatrist allegedly went on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, the scene was unreal — it seemed like something out of a movie. Maybe it was a drill. .Capt. Dorrie Carskadon, a combat stress specialist from Wisconsin , who was at Fort Hood training for a deployment to Afghanistan , said she initially thought the shooting was a drill.”[5] Notice that this testimony comes from a field grade officer, a captain.

The Austin television station KXAN provides the following evidence: ‘Spc. Scott Hamrick and First Sergeant James McLeod made it out of the Soldier Readiness Processing Center alive after some maneuvering to get away from the suspect, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. “My initial thought is that it was a drill,” said Hamrick. “Because you know you’re always getting drilled for situations.” However, what Hamrick thought was a drill turned out to be something closer to war at home.’[6]

The Miami Herald furnished this account: ‘For Skip Blancett, the senior pastor at the First United Methodist Church of Killeen, news of the shooting left him anguishing for hours because his daughter, Hollye Davis, was at a building next door to where the gunman started firing. She and others were in lockdown for hours. Without a cellphone, she couldn’t call home. “They had no idea what was going on; everyone thought it was a drill at first,” Blancett said.’[7]

The idea that the shooting was part of a drill or exercise was so widespread that it had to be expressly countered in the first emergency announcement posted on the Fort Hood web site, which read: “Effective immediately. Fort Hood is closed. Organizations/units are instructed to execute a 100 per cent accountability of all personnel. This is not a drill. It is an emergency situation.”[8]

Based on this testimony, it seems clear that unannounced, surprise terror drills are standard operating procedure at Fort Hood and probably other military bases as well. They are frequent enough to be the first thing many soldiers, including at least one officer, thought was happening. Drills are designed to be as realistic as possible. But the acme of realism is reality ­ real killing, which can occur through small but decisive changes in the unfolding of the drill. We may therefore be dealing here with a drill which has been taken live or flipped live, as so often happens in terror incidents.[9]

This array of evidence allows us to pose the following question: If so many of the Army personnel on the scene thought at first that the incident was a drill, did Major Hasan also think he was attending a drill? Did he imagine that he was going to be an actor playing the assigned role of a member of the terrorist red team in a realistic exercise? In other words, was this inept, troubled and quasi-psychotic individual somehow under the impression that he was attending an officially sanctioned exercise of some routine type, until real bullets began to be fired by other more qualified shooters, thus taking the drill live? This might also help us to account for the extraordinary intensity of firing at the scene ­ well over 100 rounds. For this working hypothesis to stand up, we would have to show that there were other gunmen firing ­ gunmen who knew that the drill was turning into a real massacre. The additional shooters would according to the classification referred to above represent the technicians in this action ­ the trained killers who have the ability to do the things that the patsy is accused of doing. Interestingly enough, extra gunmen are exactly what we find.

ONE SHOOTER, OR THREE?

How many shooters were there? Early reports indicated that there were at least one, and perhaps two, in addition to Major Hasan. Dow Jones newswires reported at about 5 PM Eastern Time: “A second gunman is in custody after a shooting at the Army’s Fort Hood in Texas in which at least seven people were killed and 12 wounded, reports KCEN-TV of Waco. The report comes about two hours after a first suspect was captured, shortly after gunfire broke out.”[10] According to the Dow Jones report cited, shooting had occurred in two separate locations on the Fort Hood base: “The incident reportedly began at Fort Hood ’s theater and then moved to the Soldier Readiness Processing Center , Killeen City Public Information Officer Hillary Shine told Fox News.” According to an AP wire, these facts were also announced by an official Army spokesman at the base: “The spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Nathan Banks, says two shooters were apparently involved. There is no word yet on who they were, nor on identities of the dead. Banks says the second incident took place at a theater on the sprawling base.” [11] Many of the embarrassing reports about multiple shooters have been purged after the fact from websites, but a few have survived, as in the case of this Wisconsin radio station, where we read that the triple assassin theory had been embraced by the commander of the base: “Newsradio 620 WTMJ: Lt. General Bob Cone at Fort Hood confirms 12 dead, 31 hurt in shooting. Soldier gunman killed. 2 others in custody.”[12] During the later afternoon, cable television talked of three shooters, and in the London Daily Mirror account we find: “Twelve people were killed and 31 wounded when three gunmen in uniform opened fire at the US Army’s largest armoured base in Texas yesterday. One gunman was shot by civilian police and the two others held at Fort Hood .”[13]

GEN. CONE BRINGS MAJOR HASAN BACK FROM THE DEAD AFTER 8 HOURS

It was only in the late evening that the official lone assassin version of these events was assembled in another press conference by General Cone held about eight hours after the shooting had started: ” KILLEEN , Texas (KXAN/AP/MSNBC) – Twelve died and another 31 were hurt in a mass shooting on Fort Hood that stunned the nation on Thursday. Accused gunman Major Malik Nidal Hasan is alive and in stable condition, Lt. Gen. Bob Cone said at a Thursday evening news conference just outside the storied military post – the largest in the United States . Counter to initial reports, the 39-year-old psychiatrist – who was thought to be killed by local police – is hospitalized and not expected to die of multiple gunshots wounds sustained during the 1:30 p.m. attack. The local police officer who allegedly shot Hasan and injured him is in the hospital also in stable condition.”[14]

In the course of the day, we had thus gone from three shooters to only one. The separate shooting incident at the Howze theater on the post reported earlier had also been expunged in the process. Most remarkable of all was the ability of Major Hasan to come back from the dead after eight hours in which the world had been assured of his demise. Such resurrection is of course a physical impossibility for mere mortals. When individuals are alleged to have performed deeds which are physically impossible in the world as we know it, from Oswald’s feats of shooting to Atta’s (and Hani Hjanjour’s) feats of flying, we must become suspicious that intelligence agencies are assisting the probable patsies in hidden ways. Major Hasan is said to have fired more than 100 rounds using the two pistols he is alleged to have carried. This seems like a lot of shooting for a single person surrounded by scores of trained combat veteran soldiers, even if these latter had not been carrying their usual weapons.

The categorical imperative for every patsy is to get noticed, and to call attention to himself or herself pointedly and repeatedly, by hook or by crook. They must stand out so much that they will be remembered by many ordinary people after the process of their demonization has been launched. In order to fulfill their function, patsies must leave a trail of clues and evidence which will tie themselves and the larger target group they supposedly represent to the heinous actions they will shortly be accused of having committed. Oswald handed out leaflets sympathetic to Cuba and told a television audience that he was a Marxist. He went to the USSR, and tried to go to Cuba. Atta cultivated a frightening stare, and took time to argue ostentatiously about a parking place at an airport in Maine while he allegedly thought he was on his way to death. Major Hasan seems to have some of the same strange proclivities. On the day of the shooting, Major Hasan made sure there was no doubt about his religious loyalties by donning a trademark “Islamic” white robe and skull cap to go to his local Seven-Eleven, where he was sure to be filmed by the security cameras there. This footage was then played on all the networks for the next 48 hours. This gesture recalls the Koran Atta left in his car at Boston ’s Logan airport. When the FBI located Atta’s rented car, they found a copy of the Koran, airline schedules, terrorist literature and videotapes, and Atta’s crudely forged last will and testament in the luggage ­ all obviously and crudely left behind to make the necessary point. Atta’s will betrayed the amateurish attempt of some half-baked area specialist to sound Islamic

At Fort Hood , Major Hasan ‘told a colleague, Col Terry Lee, that he believed Muslims should rise up against American “aggressors.”‘ [15] Count de Borchgrave points out that Major Hasan had made at least one overtly ominous statement just before the shooting spree: ‘As the Virginia-born major told a female neighbor in his apartment complex, “I’m going to do good work for God.”‘[16] The neighbor would not forget that grim pledge anytime soon. Major Hasan was suspected of having authored internet postings that compared suicide bombers with soldiers who throw themselves on hand grenades to save others, although here we must be cautious, since these postings could have been made by imposters. All accounts agree that witnesses heard a shout of “Allahu Akbar” just before the firing started. Less clear is whether these words were spoken by Major Hasan. And if he did say them, was this a line from the scenario script of a drill?

MAJOR HASAN’S RANT TO MILITARY DOCTORS: “WE LOVE DEATH MORE THAN YOU LOVE LIFE”

The most elaborate attempts by Major Hasan to assert and establish a thoroughly Islamic profile for himself came in the form of a lecture at the Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda , Maryland . He was supposed to present a paper on an issue of medical or clinical interest, but instead elected to make a ranting speech about the oppression of Moslems in the US military and the dangerous consequences this was sure to have. Here are some relevant parts of the account published by Dana Priest in the Washington Post: ‘The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that to avoid “adverse events,” the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims. The title of Hasan’s PowerPoint presentation was “The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military.” Under a slide titled “Comments,” he wrote: “If Muslim groups can convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of the ‘infidels’; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc.” [sic] The last bullet point on that page reads simply: “We love death more then [sic] you love life!” Under the “Conclusions” page, Hasan wrote that “Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the Islam,” and that “Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly — will vary!” The final page, labeled “Recommendation,” contained only one suggestion: “Department of Defense should allow Muslims [sic] Soldiers the option of being released as ‘Conscientious objectors’ to increase troop morale and decrease adverse events.”‘[17]

Objections were made to Major Hasan’s tirade: “Students on a 2007-2008 master’s programme at a military college revealed that they had complained to faculty about Major Hasan’s alleged anti-American views. They included him giving a presentation that justified suicide bombing and telling classmates that Islamic law trumped the US Constitution.”[18] But nothing serious happened. According to National Public Radio’s Joseph Shapiro, the worst thing that happened was that Hasan was given a period of probation early in his postgraduate work because of his insistence on seeking to convert to Islam some coworkers and the soldiers he was treating.

The title of this speech, “The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military,” sounds very academic and not very Islamic at all. It seems to imply that Islam and the Koran are just a world view or Weltanschauung among others. It falls far short of the basic Islamic fundamentalist claim to represent the authority of absolute revealed truth. We are reminded of Mohamed Atta’s will and instructions for his own funeral, which Islamic experts have found to be replete with elements and formulations utterly alien to Islam.

The categorical imperative for every mole is to protect the relevant patsies from investigation or arrest until the terror event has occurred and it is time to round the patsies up as scapegoats. The part about “We love death more then [sic] you love life!” is blatant ID format “Al Qaeda” speak, and in a military setting this speech would normally be more than enough to trigger a probing investigation into Major Hasan’s activities and belief structure. But no serious consequences ensued, suggesting that Major Hasan was an asset who was being protected for the sake of some future mission which he was being groomed and prepared to perform.

Thus, while Hasan’s medical superiors were aware of him as a problem case, they chose to do nothing: a ” group of doctors overseeing Nidal Malik Hasan’s medical training discussed concerns about his overly zealous religious views and strange behavior months before the Army major was accused of opening fire on soldiers and civilians at Fort Hood , Texas . Doctors and staff overseeing Hasan’s training viewed him at times as belligerent, defensive and argumentative in his frequent discussions of his Muslim faith, a military official familiar with several group discussions about Hasan said. As a psychiatrist in training, Hasan was characterized in meetings as a mediocre student and lazy worker, a matter of concern among the doctors and staff at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences military medical school, the official said.” (AP, 11 November 2009 )[19] At the same time, the training of a psychiatrist involves intensive psychological profiling an depth analysis by professors as an integral part of the training. As a shrink among shrinks, Major Hasan’s psychology must have been well known to the military doctors who were his professors. This opens up an avenue for manipulating and controlling him which has not been present in other terrorism cases. Did one or more of the Major Hasan’s analysts have a sideline as terrorist controllers and mind benders working for the rogue network?

WALTER REED OFFICIALS ASKED: “WAS HASAN PSYCHOTIC?”

A more explicit and illuminating version of Major Hasan’s psychiatric review comes from National Public Radio. Here we find that he was variously evaluated as “disconnected, aloof, paranoid, belligerent, and schizoid.” This raised the problem of whether he was actually psychotic and thus suffering from severe mental illness: ‘Starting in the spring of 2008, key officials from Walter Reed Army Medical Center and the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences held a series of meetings and conversations, in part about Maj. Nidal Hasan.One of the questions they pondered: Was Hasan psychotic? Both fellow students and faculty were deeply troubled by Hasan’s behavior – which they variously called disconnected, aloof, paranoid, belligerent, and schizoid. The officials say he antagonized some students and faculty by espousing what they perceived to be extremist Islamic views. His supervisors at Walter Reed had even reprimanded him for telling at least one patient that “Islam can save your soul.” Hasan spent six years as a psychiatrist at Walter Reed, beginning in 2003, and he had a fellowship at USUHS until shortly before he went to Fort Hood in the summer of 2009. A committee of officials from both places regularly meets once a month to discuss pressing topics surrounding the psychiatrists and other mental health professionals who train and work at the institutions. Participants in the spring meeting and in subsequent conversations about Hasan reportedly included John Bradley, chief of psychiatry at Walter Reed; Robert Ursano, chairman of the Psychiatry Department at USUHS; Charles Engel, assistant chair of the Psychiatry Department and director of Hasan’s psychiatry fellowship; Dr. David Benedek, another assistant chairman of psychiatry at USUHS; psychiatrist Carroll J. Diebold; and Scott Moran, director of the psychiatric residency program at Walter Reed, according to colleagues and other sources who monitor the meetings.’[20] Why did this august panel not take any practical steps in regard to Major Hasan? This account blames bureaucratic inertia and political correctness founded on the fear of seeming to discriminate against Moslems. But these reasons need to be supplemented with another possibility: that a witting mole (or moles) was shielding Major Hasan from any sanctions so he could go on to greater things as a witting or unwitting agent provocateur and patsy.

One comment included in this NPR account was especially ominous: “Another official reportedly wondered aloud to colleagues whether Hasan might be capable of committing fratricide, like the Muslim U.S. Army sergeant who, in 2003, killed two fellow soldiers and injured 14 others by setting off grenades at a base in Kuwait .” Despite such real and present dangers, nothing was done.

MAJOR HASAN’S MOSQUE LINKED TO THE CIA’S CHECHEN TERRORISTS

A d v e r t i s e m e n t

In recent years, Major Hasan attended a mosque in Silver Spring Maryland which hosted fundraising for CIA covert operations against Russia : “Imam Faizul Khan ministered to Hasan when he worshiped at the Muslim Community Center in Silver Spring , Md . The Muslim Community Center has held fundraisers for Chechen jihadists, and promotes on its website a Shariah-based financial product offered by a Muslim Brotherhood front group under federal investigation.”[21] The essential element here is that the mosque was raising money for Chechen rebellion, which is notoriously a strategic tool of the United States and the United Kingdom against Russia . Perhaps such a fundraiser for Chechen terrorism might have been attended by Ilyas Achmadov, the de facto ambassador of the leading CIA-backed Chechen organization implicated in terrorism, who lives in Washington , DC at US taxpayer expense thanks to his sponsorship by Zbigniew Brzezinski, and the gray eminence of Obama’s foreign policy team.

The impression that Major Hasan was in fact a protected patsy is strengthened by reports that he frequented mosques which have figured in previous intelligence operations, and that he was in contact with an American-born Muslim cleric now living in Yemen who currently plays the role of one of the most bombastic agent provocateurs operating under the umbrella designation of “al Qaeda.”

ANWAR AWLAKI, PATSY MINDER FOR HANI HANJOUR OF 9/11 INFAMY

In earlier years, Hasan had worshipped with his mother at the radical Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church , Va. During 2001, he worshipped there alongside some of the 9/11 patsies, specifically those alleged to have been aboard the aircraft which allegedly struck the Pentagon. The dominant figure of this mosque was at that time a certain Anwar Awlaki or Awlaqi, who must be regarded as an intelligence agency operative and patsy-minder, the latter because of his role in supervising the alleged Pentagon suicide pilot Hani Hanjour and other 9/11 figures who frequented the mosque. Hanjour, whose purported feats of flying would if true have placed him above the Red Baron in the Valhalla of air aces, was in fact a pathetic and clumsy nebbish.

Just after the Fort Hood massacre, Awlaki used his website for a bombastic endorsement of Major Hasan and the Texas slaughter, evidently designed with Pavlovian technique to goad Islamophobic US reactionaries into a frenzy and give the radio ogres much grist for their mill. Here is the relevant report from the New York Times: ‘Mr. Awlaki, an American citizen born in New Mexico to Yemeni parents, wrote on Monday on his English-language website that Mr. Hasan was “a hero.” The cleric said, “He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people.” He added, “The only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the U.S. Army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.”‘[22] This was a piece of crude manipulation, and at the same time an engraved invitation to an anti-Moslem pogrom. The report went on: ‘But since leaving the U.S. in 2002 for London , and later Yemen , Mr. Awlaki has become a prominent proponent of militant Islam via his Web site, www.anwar-alawlaki.com. The Toronto Star reported last month that a group of young Canadians charged with plotting attacks against military and government targets were inspired, in part, by listening to Mr. Awlaki’s sermons online. In 2000 and 2001, Mr. Awlaki served as an imam at two mosques in the United States frequented by three future 9/11 hijackers. Khalid al-Midhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi attended the Rabat mosque in San Diego, where Mr. Awlaki later admitted meeting Hazmi several times but “claimed not to remember any specifics of what they discussed,” according to the report of the national 9/11 commission. Both Hazmi and another hijacker, Hani Hanjour, later attended the Dar al Hijra mosque in Falls, Church, Virginia after Mr. Awlaki had moved there in early 2001. The 9/11 commission report expressed “suspicion” about the coincidence, but said its investigators were unable to find Mr. Awlaki in Yemen to question him.’[23] We should notice the nice plug given here to Awlaki’s web site by the New York Times; his site traffic is sure to benefit enormously. Major Hasan had taken care to establish his devotion and fealty to Awlaki during the time leading up to the massacre. He left no doubt that he was a disciple of Awlaki: ‘Hasan’s eyes “lit up” when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki’s teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base in Texas, the scene of Thursday’s horrific shooting spree.’[24]

Major Hasan, it transpired, had also been exchanging emails with the fiery double agent he so much lionized; the imam-provocateur had fled abroad after 9/11and was now operating under “al Qaeda” cover from Yemen . According to one report: “two government officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case on the record, said the Washington-based joint terrorism task force overseen by the FBI was notified of communications between Hasan and a radical imam overseas, and the information was turned over to a Defense Criminal Investigative Service employee assigned to the task force. The communications were gathered by investigators beginning in December 2008 and continuing into early this year. That Defense investigator wrote up an assessment of Hasan after reviewing the communications and the Army major’s personnel file, according to these officials. The assessment concluded Hasan did not merit further investigation – in large part because his communications with the imam were centered on a research paper about the effects of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan and the investigator determined that Hasan was in fact working on such a paper, the officials said. The disclosure Tuesday of the defense investigator’s role indicated that the U.S. military was aware of worrisome behavior by the massacre suspect long before the attack. Just hours later, a senior defense official, also demanding anonymity, directly contradicted that notion. The senior defense official said neither the Army nor any other part of the Defense Department knew of Hasan’s contacts with any Muslim extremists. Military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies also are defending themselves against tough questions about what each of them knew about Hasan before he allegedly opened fire in a crowded room at the huge military base in Texas .” [25]

AWLAKI HELPED ENTRAP FORT DIX SIX, TORONTO DUPES

The decision of the Army to ignore Major Hasan’s correspondence with Awlaki is all the more astounding given Awlaki’s status as one of the premier terror impresarios of the age operating under Islamic fundamentalist cover. More than a mere ideologue, he is a recruiter and an entrepreneur of terror. His web site would not survive five minutes of concerted US cyber-attacks, but he is not disturbed in his role as a pied piper of patsies. In particular, Awlaki and his work were used to motivate and encourage groups of mentally impaired and suggestible young dupes who were entrapped into “terrorist plots” by busy FBI and Canadian RCMP agents during recent years, thus keeping the boogey man of Islamic terrorism in the public eye. ‘In addition to his contacts with Major Nidal Hasan, the radical American cleric, Anwar al Awlaki, served as an inspiration for men convicted in terror plots in Toronto and Fort Dix, New Jersey, according to government officials and court records reviewed by ABCNews.com.Despite his ties to other plots, including the one against the Army post at Fort Dix, some 20 e-mails between Awlaki and Major Hasan were dismissed as “innocent” by a military investigator working on the FBI’s Joint Terror Task Force in Washington, D.C….”He is not just a proselytizer but someone who is operational, with deep and longstanding connections to al Qaeda and has been for some time,” said a former senior American intelligence official who had access to classified information. Awlaki was characterized in court testimony as an inspiration by two of six Muslim immigrants convicted on conspiracy and other charges in a plot to kill U.S. military personnel at Fort Dix.In Toronto, members of the so-called Toronto 18 watched videos of Awlaki at a makeshift training camp where they allegedly planned an attack on the Canadian parliament and prime minister.’[26]

YET ANOTHER DELIBERATE FBI SNAFU

Just as in the 9/11 instance, the scandalous failure to connect the dots and round up the patsies was due to the non-feasance and malfeasance of the FBI, the criminally negligent agency which, according to 9/11 commission co-chair Gov. Thomas Kean, “failed and failed and failed,” but nevertheless escaped breakup after 9/11. Starting in 1996, the FBI had been aware that international terrorists were making a show of learning to fly passenger jets at U.S. flight schools, but took no action. According to a press report, the failure to inform Major Hasan’s superiors was the direct and specific responsibility of the FBI: “The Pentagon said it was never notified by US intelligence agencies that they had intercepted e-mails between of the alleged Fort Hood shooter and an extremist imam until after last week’s bloody assaults, raising new questions about whether the government could have helped prevent the attack. a person familiar with the matter said a Pentagon worker on the terrorism task force overseen by the Federal Bureau of Investigation was told about the intercepted e-mails several months ago. But members of the terror task forces aren’t allowed to share such information with their agencies, unless they get permission from the FBI, which leads the task force. In this case, the Pentagon worker, an employee from the Defense Criminal Investigations Service,, helped make the assessment that Major Hasan wasn’t a threat, and the FBI’s ‘procedures for sharing the information were never used,’ said the person familiar with the matter.”[27] Those involved in this decision by FBI and the Defense Department need to be probed as possible terror moles. This is reminiscent of the FBI’s Dave Frasca, who could not assemble and act on the pre-9/11intelligence he had on his desk. This was a new chapter of the story of FBI sabotage told by Colleen Rowley and documented at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui in 2006. If the FBI had rounded up the 9/11 patsies, the operation could not have occurred ­ not because the patsies were going to fly planes into buildings by themselves, but because the jailing of patsies before the fact would have made the targeting of the Moslem world impossible. In this sense, the same FBI rogue networks which made9/11 possible are still in place and still effectively sabotaging effective law enforcement.

MAJOR HASAN’S SECURITY CLEARANCE: SECRET

Major Hasan reportedly has a security clearance which allows him to receive secret information. All US Army officers are required to have at minimum a secret-level security clearance, and Major Hasan’s clearance might even have been at the more stringent top secret level. All indications are that Major Hasan’s clearance was never reviewed, despite his ostentatious antics. Major Hasan’s aberrant behavior should at the very least have put him in line for a National Agency Check or NAC. Newsweek writes that ‘extended NACs, which the officials indicated are more likely for would-be military officers, would include checks of local and state police records in jurisdictions where the subject lived, as well as credit-bureau and financial-record checks. In the event that some kind of “derogatory” information turns up during these checks, one of the officials said, field investigators are likely to be sent out to conduct interviews, and the procedure could also include an interview with the security-clearance applicant.’[28] This puts Major Hasan in a very special category, subject to special rules and surveillance which are enforced by specific agencies, and not by military physicians of whatever rank. Perhaps the most direct evidence that Major Hasan was a protected patsy was the fact that he could make incendiary speeches and correspond with self-proclaimed “al Qaeda” firebrands without having his security clearance reviewed, to say nothing of lifted.

As a well informed Stratfor letter to the editor posting points out: “The contacting of a foreign Islamic militant who openly espouses killing of Americans is, in and of itself, is a violation of U.S. security regulations with respect to individuals with security clearances. Hasan’s foreign contact should have been reported through the chain-of- command to his commander. Lt. Gen. Cone, in consultation with his G-2, Counter-Intelligence Staff Officer, Personnel Security Officer and the CID, could have immediately suspended Maj. Hasan’s security clearance subject to a local AR 15-6 investigation. Lt. Gen. Cone is responsible for force protection of assets in his command, not a DoD criminal investigator. A minimally competent investigation would have uncovered other comments and actions that would probably have resulted in adverse command action on Maj. Hasan’s security clearance and possibly led to charges being brought for conduct unbecoming an officer.”[29] But the usual rules were suspended for Majopr Hasan, indicating that he belonged to a special class of persons ­ patsies who were being groomed for future actions and therefore had to be kept out of trouble.

LIKE ATTA AND KSM, THE DEVOUT MAJOR HASAN LIKES STRIP CLUBS

Thanks to the investigative work of Daniel Hopsicker, it has been revealed that key 9/11 figure Mohammed Atta was no devout and puritanical Moslem, but a hedonist. The legendary Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), touted by the controlled media as the “9/11 mastermind,” was also devoted to alcohol, floozies, and nightlife. It is striking that Major Hasan, allegedly a rigid and doctrinaire Moslem, also conforms to this model. Patsies working for or manipulated by the de facto Islamic fundamentalist directorate of Anglo-American intelligence seem to share the same decadent western foibles. One of Major Hasan’s favorite relaxations was to attend the local strip club: ‘Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan came into the Starz strip club not far from the base at least three times in the past month, the club’s general manager, Matthew Jones, told FoxNews.com. Army investigators building their case against Hasan plan to interview Jones soon. “The last time he was here, I remember checking his military ID at the door, and he paid his $15 cover and stayed for six or seven hours,” Jones, 37, said. Jennifer Jenner, who works at Starz using the stage name Paige, said Hasan bought a lap dance from her two nights in a row. She said he paid $50 for a dance lasting three songs in one of the club’s private rooms on Oct. 29 and Oct. 30. She recalled that he arrived at about 6:30 p.m. and stayed until 2 a.m. She said he brought in a six pack of light beer, took only a few sips from one can and gave the rest to the strippers. “He preferred the blondes,” said Jenner, whose hair was dyed blond at the time. “He said he was a medic and that he was being deployed soon, but mostly he wanted to ask us questions.”‘[30] Needless to say, alcohol and strippers do not an Islamic fundamentalist make.

As for prominent 9/11 figure Atta, he was in fact not a practicing Moslem at all, but rather a devotee of alcohol, cocaine, call girls, and pork chops. Like Major Hasan, Atta preferred blondes, specifically pink strawberry ones. He cohabited with a 22-year old call girl who may also have been a sex operative for one of the intelligence agencies. Amanda Keller worked for a “lingerie model escort service” in Sarasota called Fantasies & Lace. Atta loved to attend topless bars, where he would order lap dances at the Pink Pony, or else stuff twenty dollar bills into the g-strings of the dancers at the Olympic Garden nightclub. He was also a regular at Harry’s Bar in Naples. Atta’s favorite nightspots were the Cheetah in Venice, and Margarita Maggie’s in Sarasota. FBI investigators showing around pictures of Atta after 9/11 found that he had been in a bar drinking Stolichnaya vodka for three hours quite recently; with him was accused suicide pilot Marwan al Shehhi, who preferred rum. Atta was also a frequent cocaine user. He would habitually snort rows of cocaine with a dollar bill. Are we therefore dealing here with two patsies from the same levy, two parallel patsy lives?

FROM ARMY-MCCARTHY TO ARMY-LIEBERMAN

The reactionaries of today yearn for the days of Senator Joe McCarthy (R-Wisconsin), who launched his campaign of red-baiting and witch-hunting some six decades ago. At the height of the Cold War, McCarthy launched the hysterical charge that the US Army had been massively infiltrated by agents of the international communist conspiracy. This led to the infamous and protracted Army-McCarthy hearings in the Senate, during which McCarthy’s influence reached its demagogic apex. Today, the neocons are still full of rancor and resentment over their wholesale ouster from the government through the end of the Bush-Cheney era, and the ascendancy of the Brzezinski-Nye-Soros faction of liberal imperialists who control Obama. Immediately after the shootings. Now, Senator Joe Lieberman has announced that he will use his homeland security subcommittee to investigate the failure of the intelligence agencies to connect the dots in the Fort Hood incident. Already, neocon web sites are contending that the US Army of the Obama era is thoroughly infiltrated by Islamic fundamentalists favorable to terrorism. Lieberman says he wants to know how the Army missed numerous warning signs about Hasan’s radical views. The Army-Lieberman hearings may soon launch an anti-Moslem witch hunt in the US military, fulfilling much neocon nostalgia. The best approach would be to empanel a genuinely independent board of inquiry to investigate the Fort Hood massacre. Care should be taken to avoid the begging of the question and the blatant conflicts of interest which made the recent Kean-Hamilton 9/11 commission such a mockery. Care should also be taken to keep the inevitable Lee Hamilton out of any board of inquiry, given his wretched track record of cover-up and misprision.

FORT HOOD MOSLEM CLERIC TO MAJOR HASAN: “THERE’S SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU”

The London Daily Telegraph interviewed Osman Danquah, a local Moslem clergyman, who had contact with Major Hasan. Osman Danquah had come to the conclusion that Major Hasan had debilitating mental problems, and was not suitable for any leadership roles ­ even though he was an Army officer of the middle rank. Citing several sources, this paper writes: ‘What does seem clear is that the army missed an increasing number of red flags that Hasan was a troubled and brooding individual within its ranks. “I was shocked but not surprised by news of Thursday’s attack,” said Dr Val Finnell, a fellow student on a public health course in 2007-08 who heard Hasan equate the war on terrorism to a war on Islam. Another student had warned military officials that Hasan was a “ticking time bomb” after he reportedly gave a presentation defending suicide bombers. Osman Danquah, the co-founder of the Islamic Community of Greater Killeen, said Hasan never expressed anger toward the army or indicated any plans for violence. But he said that, at their second meeting, Hasan seemed almost incoherent. “I told him, ‘There’s something wrong with you’. I didn’t get the feeling he was talking for himself, but something just didn’t seem right.” He was sufficiently troubled that he recommended the centre reject Hasan’s request to become a lay Muslim leader at Fort Hood .’[31]

The pathos Major Hasan’s existence is perhaps most clearly portrayed in his unsuccessful effort to find a wife of his own faith: ‘Relatives said that the death of Hasan’s parents, in 1998 and 2001, turned him more devout. “After he lost his parents he tried to replace their love by reading a lot of books, including the Koran,” his uncle Rafiq Hamad said. “He didn’t have a girlfriend, he didn’t dance, he didn’t go to bars.” His failed search for a wife seemed to haunt Hasan. At the Muslim Community Centre in the Washington suburb of Silver Spring, he signed up for an Islamic matchmaking service, specifying that he wanted a bride who wore the hijab and prayed five times a day.” Major Hasan returned repeatedly and obsessively to the same theme, according to a another acquaintance: “Adnan Haider, a retired professor of statistics, recalled how at their first meeting last year, a casual introduction after Friday prayers, Hasan immediately asked the academic if he knew “a nice Muslim girl” he could marry. “It was a strange thing to ask someone you have met two seconds before. It was clear to me he was under pressure, you could just see it in his face,” said Prof Haider, 74, who used to work at Georgetown University in Washington . “You could see he was lonely and didn’t have friends.[32]

WAS MAJOR HASAN BRAINWASHED?

Given the accumulated evidence that Major Hasan was possibly psychotic, there remains the question of whether this psychosis might have been endogenous and due to natural and spontaneous causes, or whether it had been artificially produced in him through a program of brainwashing and heavy-duty “Clockwork Orange” psychological manipulation by others. We cannot exclude the possibility that Major Hasan went out on November 5 consciously determined to kill, and may also have discharged his weapons. We thus have two possible scenarios: on the one hand Major Hasan the duped patsy caught totally by surprise when the shooting started, and on the other, Major Hasan the psychotic and criminally insane killer who possessed the will, if not necessarily the ability, for serious shooting. There may be evidence for both scenarios.. We should also point out that seeing Major Hasan is a psychotic killer in his own right does not in any way rule out the presence of additional and more capable shooters. We are reminded here of the case of Sirhan Sirhan, who appears to have fired at Robert Kennedy, but who also appears to have received a powerful assist from some other as yet unidentified more expert shooter who may have actually fired the lethal bullet.

MAJOR HASAN’S VIRGINIA TECH CONNECTION

Where would Major Hasan have been brainwashed? An obvious place to look would be the precincts of Virginia Tech, the home of Cho Seung-Hui, the alleged mass killer of 32 students and professors along with himself in April 2007. This incident involves far too many unanswered questions to be addressed in detail here. In any case, the fact that Major Hasan graduated from the alma mater of Cho should be enough by itself to raise some red flags. We should also recall that several additional homicides have occurred in and around Virginia Tech during the last year. In January 2009, a Virginia Tech doctoral student beheaded a fellow student in a campus cafe. In this incident, a female graduate student who had just arrived from China was killed when another graduate student she knew attacked her with a knife and decapitated her.[33] Beheadings are rare on American college campuses even today, so this is an extraordinary event indeed. In August 2009, two Virginia Tech University students were found murdered at a Jefferson National Forest campground that is a popular hangout for students. The bodies of David Lee Metzler, 19, of Lynchburg and Heidi Lynn Childs, 18, of Forest were found by a passerby.[34]

So what in the world is going on in or near Blacksburg , Virginia ? The report on the Virginia Tech slayings prepared by a special commission set up by Virginia Governor Tim Kane covers up the failure of mental health professionals in and around Virginia Tech to take effective action in regard to Cho, whom they had nevertheless recognized to be a profoundly disturbed and potentially highly dangerous personality. This report commits the usual fallacy of petition principi, begging the question, and assumes from the start that Cho was the sole shooter.[35] Because of this failure to account for numerous salient features of the Cho incident, this entire case must continue to be classified as unsolved. We must therefore conclude this essay merely by citing one of the many clues which the Virginia investigation chose to ignore, but which might begin to account for the extraordinary number of homicides observed in the area of Blacksburg Virginia . As a somewhat obscure website alleges in an unconfirmed report, “Blacksburg, VA houses a US government ABOVE TOP SECRET underground laboratory (in the side of a local Blacksburg mountain) that develops in conjunction with DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency], weapons such as human robotic mind control programming.”[36] Does such a facility exist, and what does it do? At this point, any further comment would be pure speculation.

We cannot be optimistic that, should he survive, a future trial of Major Hasan will clear up these questions, any more than criminal trials established the real facts in the cases of Sirhan Sirhan, Hinckley, McVeigh, or John Allen Muhammad. What does appear confirmed as of now is the existence of a mutating model of terrorism alongside the large-scale 9/11 or WMD paradigms of false flag manipulation seen and propagandized during the last decade. In this sense, Major Hasan represents the evolution of the figures of Cho, and also of Steven P. Kazmierczak, the Northern Illinois University shooter of February 2008. As I wrote last year, “The new model is Virginia Tech gunman Cho, a mentally disturbed or brainwashed mass killer. Another case was that of Steven P. Kazmierczak, who in mid-February 2008 shot 21 people and killed five of them at Northern Illinois University in Dekalb. Kazmierczak was described as being intensely concerned with “corrections, political violence, and peace and social justice.”[37]

Will the American public ever learn to see through and reject false flag operations, as many Spaniards were able to do after the Madrid bombs? Will Americans ever swear off the dangerous habit of being duped? Will opinion leaders ever master the rather elementary methods of rogue network, false-flag terrorism? Until this occurs and the gullibility of the public is reduced, such operations are likely to continue on scales both small and large, with incalculable consequences for the future of humanity.

[1] Another concept asserts that the 13 Army personnel were killed during the suppression of a mutiny occasioned by the overstretch of US forces caused by Obama’s contination of the Iraq war and escalation of the Afghan war. Almost a week after the massacre, no direct substantiation for this idea has emerged.
[2] http://mobile.abcnews.go.com/wireless/abcnews/section/US/9018559_2
[3] http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/69626847.html
[4] Don Teague, “Hood Eyewitness Remembers the Tragedy: Corporal Nathan Hewitt Thought Gunfire was a Drill, Until He Realized He was Bleeding,” at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/07/eveningnews/main5567562.shtml
[5] “Bob Woodruff Hears Soldiers’ Tales of Survival, Recovery,” http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/president-soldiers-families-flock-ft-hood-memorial/Story?id=9039151&page=1
[6]http://www.kxan.com/dpp/military/army/kxan_military_Hasan_family_contacts_attorney_11092009
[7] http://www.miamiherald.com/460/story/1321119.html
[8] http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/reports-of-mass-shooting-at-fort-hood/?src=twt&twt=nytimes
[9] My 9/11 Synthetic Terror provides a detailed discussion of how virtually every aspect of 9/11 corresponded to an exercise or drill which was then taken live.
[10] Dow Jones Newswires 11-05-091656ET at

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200911051656dowjonesdjonline000934

[11] www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ihGepAkECGoDagETVBMpPb3w7Y3gD9BPJO100
[12] Newsradio 620 WTMJ, November 5 at 2:01pm CST, at http://www.facebook.com/620wtmj accessed 13 November 2009.
[13] www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/11/06/brown-it-s-like-ww1-2-115875-21801278/
[14] 110514301257453645749>http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/military/military_kxan_texas_shooting
_on_ft._hood_2009110514301257453645749
[15] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-
Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
[16] http://www.newsmax.com/borchgrave/hasan_martyr/2009/11/09/283713.html
[17] Dana Priest, Washington Post, 10 November 2009 at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2009/11/09/AR2009110903618.html. See the slide show, which is posted with this article.
[18] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-
Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
[19] http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091111/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_fort_hood_shooting
[20] Daniel Zwerdling, “Walter Reed Officials Asked: Was Hasan Psychotic?” National Public Radio, November 11, 2009, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120313570
[21] World Net Daily, 10 November 2009 , at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115465
[22] “U.S. Monitored Fort Hood Suspect Before Shooting,” New York Times, 9 November 2009 at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33807907/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/?ns=us_news-the_new_york_times
[23] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33807907/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/?ns=us_news-the_new_york_times
[24] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-
Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
[25] http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_fort_hood_shooting
[26] ABC News, “From Yemen, Anwar Awlaki Helped Inspire Fort Dix, Toronto Plots
Despite Terror Connections, E-mails with Major Hasan Did Not Raise Red Flags” at http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/anwar-awlakis-terrror-ties/story?id=9055322

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/anwar-awlakis-terrror-ties/Story?id=9055322&page=1

[27] Yochi J. Dreazen and Evan Perez, “Army Wasn’t Told of Hasan’s Emails,” Wall Street Journal, 11 November 2009.
[28] Mark Hosenball, “Fort Hood Shooter: How Recently Was His Security Clearance Updated?” in Newsweek at http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/archive/2009/11/06/ft-hood-shooter-how-recently-
was-his-security-clearance-updated.aspx
[29] http://www.stratfor.com/content/hasan_case_1
[30] http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573052,00.html
[31] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-
Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
[32] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6521758/Fort-Hood-shooting-
Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September-11-terrorists.html
[33] http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/01/22/2009-01-22_virginia_tech_graduate_student_attacked_.html
[34] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/27/virginia-tech-students-fo_n_270892.html
[35] http://www.governor.virginia.gov/TempContent/techpanelreport.cfm
[36] http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=6409
[37] Webster G. Tarpley, Obama The Postmodern Coup ( Joshua Tree CA : Progressive Press, 2008), p. 71.

A review of Angels Don’t Play This HAARP by Dr. Nick Begich and Jeane Manning. Reprinted from Nexus, December 1995 – January 1996
Technonet, the protest form of the 1990′s: picketing on the information highways. For example, a fast-growing assortment of men and women around the world are using the Internet (started by the U.S. military for information transfer and exchange that would never be interfered with) to draw attention to a questionable military project in Alaska. These Internetting, e-mailing, faxing folks are blowing holes in the U.S. Department of Defense secrecy wall by using the government’s own system.

The printed-word part of the protest started when Dennis Specht, an antinuclear activist then living in Alaska, sent a news item to Nexus on the topic of HAARP — the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program. Then, an Alaskan political activist and science researcher in Anchorage, Nick Begich, networked with Patrick and Gael Crystal Flanagan, who are self-described “technomonks” living in Sedona, Arizona, and was told to check out that same Australian-based magazine. Begich was surprised to see an item from his hometown in Nexus and immediately headed to the local library to dig out the documents cited in the article.

That research led to articles and the book Angels Don’t Play this HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology, which is 230 pages of detailed information on this intrusive project. This article will only give highlights. Despite the amount of research (350 footnotes), at its heart it is a story about ordinary people who took on an extraordinary challenge.

HAARP Boils the Upper Atmosphere
HAARP will zap the upper atmosphere with a focused and steerable electromagnetic beam. It is an advanced model of an “ionospheric heater.” (The ionosphere is the electrically charged sphere surrounding Earth’s upper atmosphere. It ranges between about 40 to 600 miles above Earth’s surface.)

Put simply, the apparatus for HAARP is a reversal of a radio telescope: antennas send out signals instead of receiving. HAARP is the test run for a superpowerful radio-wave beaming technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere by focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto Earth and penetrate everything — living and dead. HAARP publicity gives the impression that the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Project is mainly an academic project with the goal of changing the ionosphere to improve communications for our own good. However, other U.S. military documents put it more clearly: HAARP aims to learn how to “exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes.” Communicating with submarines is only one of those purposes.

Press releases and other information from the military on HAARP continually downplay what it could do. Publicity documents insist that the HAARP project is no different from other ionospheric heaters operating safely throughout the world in places such as Arecibo, Puerto Rico; Tromsø, Norway; and the former Soviet Union. However, a 1990 government document indicates that the radio frequency (rf) power zap will drive the ionosphere to unnatural activities: “At the highest hf powers available in the West, the instabilities commonly studied are approaching their maximum rf energy dissipative capability, beyond which the plasma processes will ‘run away’ until the next limiting factor is reached.”

If the military, in cooperation with the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, can show that this new ground-based “Star Wars” technology is sound, they both win. The military has a relatively inexpensive defense shield and the university can brag about the most dramatic geophysical manipulation since atmospheric explosions of nuclear bombs. After successful testing, they would have the military megaprojects of the future and huge markets for Alaska’s North Slope natural gas.

Looking at the other patents which build on the work of a Texas physicist named Bernard Eastlund, it becomes clearer how the military intends to use the HAARP transmitter. It also makes government denials less believable. The military knows how it intends to use this technology, and has made it clear in their documents. The military has deliberately misled the public through sophisticated word games, deceit and outright disinformation.

The military says the HAARP system could:

give the military a tool to replace the electromagnetic pulse effect of atmospheric thermonuclear devices (still considered a viable option through at least 1986);
replace the huge Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) submarine communication system operating in Michigan and Wisconsin with a new and more compact technology;
be used to replace the over-the-horizon radar system that was once planned for the current location of HAARP with a more flexible and accurate system;
provide a way to wipe out communications over an extremely large area, while keeping the military’s own communications systems working;
provide a wide-area Earth-penetrating tomography which, if combined with the computing abilities of EMASS and Cray computers, would make it possible to verify many parts of nuclear nonproliferation and peace agreements;
be a tool for geophysical probing to find oil, gas and mineral deposits over a large area; and
be used to detect incoming low-level planes and cruise missiles, making other technologies obsolete.
The above abilities seem like a good idea to all who believe in sound national defense and to those concerned about cost-cutting. However, the possible uses which the HAARP records do not explain, and which can only be found in U.S. Air Force, Army, Navy and other federal agency records, are alarming. Moreover, effects from the reckless use of these power levels in our natural shield — the ionosphere — could be cataclysmic, according to some scientists.

One Alaskan puts it bluntly. A founder of the NO HAARP movement, Clare Zickuhr, says: “The military is going to give the ionosphere a big kick and see what happens.”

The military failed to tell the public that they do not know what exactly will happen, but a Penn State science article brags about that uncertainty. Macho science? The HAARP project uses the largest energy levels yet played with, by what Begich and Manning call “the big boys with their new toys.” It is an experiment on the sky, and experiments are done to find out something not already known. Independent scientists told Begich and Manning that a HAARP-type “skybuster” with its unforeseen effects could be an act of global vandalism.

HAARP History
The patents described below were the package of ideas which were originally controlled by ARCO Power Technologies Incorporated (APTI), a subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Company, one of the biggest oil companies in the world. APTI was the contractor that built the HAARP facility. ARCO sold this subsidiary, the patents and the second-phase construction contract to E-Systems in June 1994.

E-Systems is one of the biggest intelligence contractors in the world, doing work for the CIA, defense intelligence organizations and others. Eighteen billion dollars of their annual sales are to these organizations, with $800 million for black projects — projects so secret that even the United States Congress isn’t told how the money is being spent.

E-Systems was bought out by Raytheon, which is one of the largest defense contractors in the world. In 1994 Raytheon was listed as number 42 on the Fortune 500 list of companies. Raytheon has thousands of patents, some of which will be valuable in the HAARP project. Twelve patents are the backbone of the HAARP project, and are now buried among the thousands of others held in the name of Raytheon.

Bernard J. Eastlund’s U.S. Patent #4,686,605, “Method and Apparatus for Altering a Region in the Earth’s Atmosphere, Ionosphere, and/or Magnetosphere,” was sealed for a year under a government secrecy order.

The Eastlund ionospheric heater was different: the radio frequency (rf) radiation was concentrated and focused to a point in the ionosphere. This difference throws an unprecedented amount of energy into the ionosphere. The Eastlund device would allow a concentration of one watt per cubic centimeter, compared to others only able to deliver about one millionth of one watt.

This huge difference could lift and change the ionosphere in the ways necessary to create futuristic effects described in the patent. According to the patent, the work of Nikola Tesla in the early 1900′s formed the basis of the research.

What would this technology be worth to ARCO, the owner of the patents? They could make enormous profits by beaming electrical power, without wires, from a powerhouse in the gas fields to the consumer.

For a time, HAARP researchers could not prove that this was one of the intended uses for HAARP. In April 1995, however, Begich found other patents connected with a “key personnel” list for APTI. Some of these new APTI patents were indeed a wireless system for sending electrical power.

Eastlund’s patent said the technology can confuse or completely disrupt airplanes’ and missiles’ sophisticated guidance systems. Further, this ability to spray large areas of Earth with electromagnetic waves of varying frequencies — and to control changes in those waves — makes it possible to knock out communications on land or sea as well as in the air. The patent said:

“Thus, this invention provides the ability to put unprecedented amounts of power in the Earth’s atmosphere at strategic locations and to maintain the power injection level, particularly if random pulsing is employed, in a manner far more precise and better controlled than heretofore accomplished by the prior art, particularly by detonation of nuclear devices of various yields at various altitudes. . . .

“It is possible not only to interfere with third-party communications but to take advantage of one or more such beams to carry out a communications network even though the rest of the world’s communications are disrupted. Put another way, what is used to disrupt another’s communications can be employed by one knowledgeable of this invention as a communication network at the same time.

“Large regions of the atmosphere could be lifted to an unexpectedly high altitude so that missiles encounter unexpected and unplanned drag forces with resultant destruction. . . .

“Weather modification is possible by, for example, altering upper-atmosphere wind patterns by constructing one or more plumes of atmospheric particles which will act as a lens or focusing device. . . . Molecular modifications of the atmosphere can take place so that positive environmental effects can be achieved. Besides actually changing the molecular composition of an atmospheric region, a particular molecule or molecules can be chosen for increased presence. For example, ozone, nitrogen, and other concentrations in the atmosphere could be artificially increased. . . .” Begich found eleven other APTI patents. They told how to make “Nuclear-sized Explosions without Radiation,” power-beaming systems, over-the-horizon radar, detection systems for missiles carrying nuclear warheads, electromagnetic pulses previously produced by thermonuclear weapons and other “Star Wars” tricks. This cluster of patents underlays the HAARP weapon system.

Mental Manipulation
Related research by Begich and Manning uncovered bizarre schemes. For example, U.S. Air Force documents revealed that a system had been developed for manipulating and disrupting human mental processes through pulsed radio-frequency radiation (the stuff of HAARP) over large geographical areas.

The most telling material about this technology came from writings of Zbigniew Brzezinski (former National Security Advisor to President Carter) and J.F. MacDonald (Science Advisor to President Johnson and a Professor of Geophysics at UCLA), as they wrote about use of power-beaming transmitters for geophysical and environmental warfare. The documents showed how these effects might be caused, and the negative effects on human health and thinking.

The mental-disruption possibilities for HAARP are the most disturbing. More than 40 pages of the book, with dozens of footnotes, chronicle the work of Harvard professors, military planners and scientists as they plan and test this use of the electromagnetic technology. For example, one of the papers describing this use was from the International Red Cross in Geneva. It even gave the frequency ranges where these effects could occur the same ranges which HAARP is capable of broadcasting.

The following statement was made more than 25 years ago in a book which Brzezinski wrote while a professor at Columbia University:

“Political strategists are tempted to exploit research on the brain and human behavior. Geophysicist Gordon J. F. MacDonald specialist in problems of warfare says accurately timed, 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 behavior for national advantages, to some the technology permitting such use will very probably develop within the next few decades.”

In 1966, MacDonald was a member of the President’s Science Advisory Committee and later a member of the President’s Council on Environmental Quality. He published papers on the use of environmental-control technologies for military purposes. The most profound comment he made as a geophysicist was:

“The key to geophysical warfare is the identification of environmental instabilities to which the addition of a small amount of energy would release vastly greater amounts of energy.”

While yesterday’s geophysicists predicted today’s advances, are HAARP program managers delivering on the vision? The geophysicists recognized that adding energy to the environmental soup could have large effects. However, humankind has already added substantial amounts of electromagnetic energy into our environment without understanding what might constitute critical mass. The book by Begich and Manning raises questions. Have these additions been without effect, or is there a cumulative amount beyond which irreparable damage can be done? Is HAARP another step in a journey from which we cannot turn back? Are we about to embark on another energy experiment which unleashes another set of demons from Pandora’s box?

As early as 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski predicted a “more controlled and directed society” would gradually appear, linked to technology. This society would be dominated by an elite group which impresses voters by allegedly superior scientific know-how. Angels Don’t Play This HAARP further quotes Brzezinski:

“Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control. Technical and scientific momentum would then feed on the situation it exploits.”

His forecasts proved accurate. Today, a number of new tools for the “elite” are emerging, and the temptation to use them increases steadily. The policies to permit the tools to be used are already in place. How could the United States be changed, bit by bit, into the predicted, highly controlled technosociety? Among the “stepping stones” Brzezinski expected were persisting social crises and use of the mass media to gain the public’s confidence.

In another document prepared by the government, the U.S. Air Force claims:

“The potential applications of artificial electromagnetic fields are wide-ranging and can be used in many military or quasi military situations. . . . Some of these potential uses include dealing with terrorist groups, crowd control, controlling breaches of security at military installations, and antipersonnel techniques in tactical warfare. In all of these cases the EM (electromagnetic) systems would be used to produce mild to severe physiological disruption or perceptual distortion or disorientation. In addition, the ability of individuals to function could be degraded to such a point that they would be combat-ineffective. Another advantage of electromagnetic systems is that they can provide coverage over large areas with a single system. They are silent, and countermeasures to them may be difficult to develop. . . . One last area where electromagnetic radiation may prove of some value is in enhancing abilities of individuals for anomalous phenomena.”

Do these comments point to uses already somewhat developed? The author of the government report refers to an earlier Air Force document about the uses of radio-frequency radiation in combat situations. (Here Begich and Manning note that HAARP is the most versatile and the largest radio-frequency transmitter in the world.)

The United States Congressional Record deals with the use of HAARP for penetrating the Earth with signals bounced off the ionosphere. These signals are used to look inside the planet to a depth of many kilometers in order to locate underground munitions, minerals and tunnels. For 1996, the U.S. Senate has set aside $15 million to develop this ability alone: Earth-penetration tomography.

The problem is that the frequency needed for Earth-penetrating radiations is within the frequency range most cited for disruption of human mental functions. It may also have profound effects on migration patterns of fish and wild animals which rely on an undisturbed energy field to find their routes.

As if electromagnetic pulses in the sky and mental disruption were not enough, Eastlund bragged that the superpowerful ionospheric heater could control weather.

Begich and Manning brought to light government documents indicating that the military has weather-control technology. When HAARP is eventually built to its full-power level, it could create weather effects over entire hemispheres. If one government experiments with the world’s weather patterns, what is done in one place will impact everyone else on the planet. Angels Don’t Play This HAARP explains a principle behind some of Nikola Tesla’s inventions resonance which affects planetary systems.

Bubble of Electric Particles
Angels Don’t Play This HAARP includes interviews with independent scientists such as Elizabeth Rauscher. She has a Ph.D., a long and impressive career in high-energy physics, and has been published in prestigious science journals and books. Rauscher commented on HAARP: “You’re pumping tremendous energy into an extremely delicate molecular configuration that comprises these multilayers we call the ionosphere.”

The ionosphere is prone to catalytic reactions, she explained: if a small part is changed, a major change in the ionosphere can happen. In describing the ionosphere as a delicately balanced system, Dr. Rauscher shared her mental picture of it: a soap-bubble like sphere surrounding the Earth’s atmosphere, with movements swirling over the surface of the bubble. If a big enough hole is punched through it, she predicts it could pop.

Slicing the Ionosphere
Physicist Daniel Winter, Ph.D., of Waynesville, North Carolina, says HAARP high-frequency emissions can couple with the long-wave (low-frequency, or ELF) pulses the Earth grid uses to distribute information as vibrations to synchronize dances of life in the biosphere. Dan terms this geomagnetic action “Earth’s information bloodstream” and says it is likely that coupling of HAARP hf (high-frequency) with natural ELF (extremely low-frequency) can cause unplanned, unsuspected side effects.

David Yarrow of Albany, New York, is a researcher with a background in electronics. He described possible interactions of HAARP radiations with the ionosphere and Earth’s magnetic grid:

“HAARP will not burn ‘holes’ in the ionosphere. That is a dangerous understatement of what HAARP’s giant gigawatt beam will do. Earth is spinning relative to thin electric shells of the multi layer membrane of ionospheres that absorb and shield Earth’s surface from intense solar radiation, including charged-particle storms in solar winds erupting from the Sun. Earth’s axial spin means that HAARP in a burst lasting more than a few minutes will slice through the ionosphere like a microwave knife. This produces not a hole, but a long tear an incision.”

Crudely Plucking the Strings
“Second concept: As Earth rotates, HAARP will slice across geomagnetic flux . . . a donut-shaped spool of magnetic strings like longitude meridians [on maps]. HAARP may not ‘cut’ these strings in Gaia’s magnetic mantle, but will pulse each thread with harsh, out-of-harmony high frequencies. These noisy impulses will vibrate geomagnetic flux lines, sending vibrations all through the geomagnetic web.

“The image comes to mind of a spider on its web. An insect lands, and the web’s vibrations alert the spider to possible prey. HAARP will be a man-made microwave finger poking at the web, sending out confusing signals, if not tearing holes in the threads.

“Effects of this interference with symphonies of Gaia’s geomagnetic harp are unknown and, I suspect, barely thought of. Even if thought of, the intent [of HAARP] is to learn to exploit any effects, not to play in tune to global symphonies.”

Feverish Earth
Among other researchers quoted is Paul Schaefer of Kansas City. His degree is in electrical engineering and he spent four years building nuclear weapons. He says, “But most of the theories that we have been taught by scientists to believe in seem to be falling apart.”

Schaefer talks about imbalances already caused by the industrial and atomic age, especially by radiation of large numbers of tiny, high-velocity particles “like very small spinning tops” into our environment. The unnatural level of motion of highly energetic particles in the atmosphere and in radiation belts surrounding Earth is the villain in weather disruptions, according to this model which describes an Earth discharging its buildup of heat, relieving stress and regaining a balanced condition through earthquakes and volcanic action: “One might compare the abnormal energetic state of the Earth and its atmosphere to a car battery which has become overcharged with the normal flow of energy jammed up, resulting in hot spots, electrical arcing, physical cracks and general turbulence as the pent-up energy tries to find someplace to go.”

In a second analogy, Schaefer says: “Unless we desire the death of our planet, we must end the production of unstable particles which are generating the Earth’s fever. A first priority to prevent this disaster would be to shut down all nuclear power plants and end the testing of atomic weapons, electronic warfare and ‘Star Wars.’”

Meanwhile, the military builds its biggest ionospheric heater yet, deliberately to create more instabilities in a huge plasma layer — the ionosphere — and to rev up the energy level of charged particles.

Electronic Rain from the Sky
The military has published papers about electron precipitation from the magnetosphere (the outer belts of charged particles which stream toward Earth’s magnetic poles) caused by manmade very-low-frequency electromagnetic waves: “These precipitated particles can produce secondary ionization, emit x rays, and cause significant perturbation in the lower ionosphere.

Two Stanford University radio scientists offer evidence of what technology can do to affect the sky by making waves on Earth. They showed that very-low-frequency radio waves can vibrate the magnetosphere and cause high-energy particles to cascade into the Earth’s atmosphere. By turning the signal on or off, they could stop the flow of energetic particles.

Weather Control
Avalanches of energy dislodged by such radio waves could hit us hard. [The Stanford researchers'] work suggests that technicians could control global weather by sending relatively small “signals” into the Van Allen belt (radiation belts around Earth). Thus Tesla’s resonance effects can control enormous energies by tiny triggering signals.

The Begich/Manning book asks whether that knowledge will be used by war-oriented or biosphere-oriented scientists.

The military has had about 20 years to work on weather warfare methods, which it euphemistically calls weather modification. For example, rain making technology was taken for a few test rides in Vietnam. The U.S. Department of Defense sampled lightning and hurricane manipulation studies in Project Skyfire and Project Stormfury. And they looked at some complicated technologies that would give big effects. Angels Don’t Play This HAARP cites an expert who says the military studied both lasers and chemicals which they figured could damage the ozone layer over an enemy.

Looking at ways to cause earthquakes, as well as to detect them, was part of the project named Prime Argus, decades ago. The money for that came from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA, now under the acronym ARPA).

In 1994 the U.S. Air Force revealed its Spacecast 2020 master plan, which includes weather control. Scientists have experimented with weather control since the 1940′s, but Spacecast 2020 noted that “using environmental modification techniques to destroy, damage or injure another state [is] prohibited.” Having said that, the Air Force claimed that technological advance “compels a reexamination of this sensitive and potentially risky topic.”

Forty Years of Zapping the Sky?
As far back as 1958, the chief White House adviser on weather modification, Captain Howard T. Orville, said the U.S. Department of Defense was studying “ways to manipulate the charges of the Earth and sky and so affect the weather” by using an electronic beam to ionize or deionize the atmosphere over a given area.

In 1966, Professor Gordon J.F. MacDonald was Associate Director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the University of California, Los Angeles, was a member of the President’s Science Advisory Committee, and later a member of the President’s Council on Environmental Quality. He published papers on the use of environmental-control technologies for military purposes. MacDonald made a revealing comment: “The key to geophysical warfare is the identification of environmental instabilities to which the addition of a small amount of energy would release vastly greater amounts of energy.”

World-recognized scientist MacDonald had a number of ideas for using the environment as a weapon system and he contributed to what was, at the time, the dream of a futurist. When he wrote his chapter “How to Wreck the Environment” for the book Unless Peace Comes, he was not kidding around. In it he describes the use of weather manipulation, climate modification, polar ice-cap melting or destabilization, ozone-depletion techniques, earthquake engineering, ocean-wave control and brainwave manipulation using the planet’s energy fields. He also said that these types of weapons would be developed and, when used, would be virtually undetectable by their victims. Is HAARP that weapon? The military’s intention to do environmental engineering is well-documented.

U.S. Congress subcommittee hearings on Oceans and International Environment looked into military weather and climate modification conducted in the early 1970′s. “What emerged was an awesome picture of far-ranging research and experimentation by the Department of Defense into ways environmental tampering could be used as a weapon,” said another author cited in Angels Don’t Play This HAARP.

The revealed secrets surprised legislators. Would an inquiry into the state of the art of electromagnetic manipulation surprise lawmakers today? They may find out that technologies developed out of the HAARP experiments in Alaska could deliver on Gordon MacDonald’s vision, because leading-edge scientists are describing global weather as not only air pressure and thermal systems but also as an electrical system.

Small Input, Big Effect
HAARP zaps the ionosphere where it is relatively unstable. A point to remember is that the ionosphere is an active electrical shield protecting the planet from the constant bombardment of high-energy particles from space. This conducting plasma, along with Earth’s magnetic field, traps the electrical plasma of space and holds it back from going directly to the Earth’s surface, says Charles Yost of Dynamic Systems, Leicester, North Carolina. “If the ionosphere is greatly disturbed, the atmosphere below is subsequently disturbed.”

Another scientist interviewed said there is a superpowerful electrical connection between the ionosphere and the part of the atmosphere where our weather comes on stage: the lower atmosphere.

One manmade electrical effect power-line harmonic resonance causes fallout of charged particles from the Van Allen (radiation) belts, and the falling ions cause ice crystals which precipitate rain clouds.

What about HAARP? Energy blasted upward from an ionospheric heater is not much compared to the total in the ionosphere, but HAARP documents admit that thousandfold greater amounts of energy can be released in the ionosphere than injected. As with MacDonald’s “key to geophysical warfare,” “nonlinear” effects (described in the literature about the ionospheric heater) mean small input and large output.

Astrophysicist Adam Trombly told Manning that an acupuncture model is one way to look at the possible effect of multigigawatt pulsing of the ionosphere. If HAARP hits certain points, those parts of the ionosphere could react in surprising ways.

Smaller ionospheric heaters such as the one at Arecibo are underneath relatively placid regions of the ionosphere compared to the dynamic movements nearer Earth’s magnetic poles. That adds another uncertainty to HAARP: the unpredictable and lively upper atmosphere near the North Pole.

HAARP experimenters do not impress common sense Alaskans such as Barbara Zickuhr, who says, “They’re like boys playing with a sharp stick, finding a sleeping bear and poking it in the butt to see what’s going to happen.”

Could They Short-Circuit the Earth?
Earth as a spherical electrical system is a fairly well-accepted model. However, those experimenters who want to make unnatural power connections between parts of this system might not be thinking of possible consequences. Electrical motors and generators can be caused to wobble when their circuits are affected. Could human activities cause a significant change in a planet’s electrical circuit or electrical field? A paper in the respected journal Science deals with man-made ionization from radioactive materials, but perhaps it could also be studied with HAARP-type skybusters in mind: “For example, while changes in the Earth’s electric field resulting from a solar flare modulating conductivity may have only a barely detectable effect on meteorology, the situation may be different in regard to electric field changes caused by man-made ionization.”

Meteorology, of course, is the study of the atmosphere and weather. Ionization is what happens when a higher level of power is zapped into atoms and knocks electrons off the atoms. The resulting charged particles are the stuff of HAARP. Paul Schaefer, commenting on HAARP-type technologies, says, “One look at the weather should tell us that we are on the wrong path.”

Angels Don’t Play This HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology is about the military’s plan to manipulate that which belongs to the world: the ionosphere. The arrogance of the United States government in this is not without precedent. Atmospheric nuclear tests had similar goals. More recently, China and France put their people’s money to destructive use in underground nuclear tests. It was recently reported that the U.S. government had spent $3 trillion on its nuclear program since its beginnings in the 1940′s. What new breakthroughs in life science could have been made with all the money spent on death?

Begich, Manning and others believe that democracies need to be founded on openness rather than the secrecy which surrounds so much military science. Knowledge used in developing revolutionary weapons could be used for healing and helping mankind. Because they are used in new weapons, discoveries are classified and suppressed. When they do appear in the work of other independent scientists, the new ideas are often frustrated or ridiculed, while military research laboratories continue to build their new machines for the killing fields.

However, the book by Manning and Begich gives hope that the military-industrial-academic-bureaucratic Goliath can be affected by the combined power of determined individuals and the alternative press. Becoming informed is the first step to empowerment.

The book Angels Don’t Play This HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology is available from Earthpulse Press for $14.95 plus postage and handling ($1.50 U.S.; $4 international).

Dr. Nick Begich is an Anchorage, Alaska-based independent researcher and activist and former president of the Alaska Federation of Teachers and the Anchorage Council of Education. Jeane Manning is a reporter and editor residing in Vancouver, Canada. A decade of researching nonconventional energy technologies has culminated in her forthcoming book The Coming Energy Revolution (Avery Publishing Group, New York, 1996). She contributed to the book Suppressed Inventions and Other Discoveries (Auckland Institute of Technology Press, New Zealand). Begich and Manning are collaborating on the forthcoming book Towards a New Alchemy: The Incredible Inventions of Dr. Patrick Flanagan.