A letter to Gordon Brown

Dear Prime Minister

Airport Security Checks

On a recent flight from London Heathrow to Oslo, I and many others were forcibly reminded of the swingeing measures and procedures undertaken by security personnel at airports.

Our group consisted of many elderly people including ex-servicemen who were joining a coastal voyage at Bergen and wished to visit towns and villages on the Norwegian coast their naval units had helped liberate from the Germans at the end of WW2.

Under the current regime - which appears to be permanently in place - everyone seems to be regarded as a potential terrorist, even our group of frail 80-year-old’s, many of whom, after being put through the ordeal of intense searches, removal of belts and shoes and a bewildering procedure of half-undressing, were left physically shaken. One member of our party who was suffering from a liver condition requiring him to take regular doses of water was denied the bottle of mineral water he was visibly carrying in his regulation clear plastic bag. The 100ml allowance was hardly sufficient and liquids were only available for purchase from the in-flight staff some way into the flight.

Flying, in itself, can be a nerve-racking experience for the elderly and de-hydration becomes a natural effect of that worry. With the whole procedure repeated at Oslo for our onward transfer flight to Bergen, our colleague was visibly ill by the time we reached our destination.

I have personally heard of numerous instances of people being humiliated in public by having their trousers fall down in full view of other passengers after being told to remove their belts, while others have been treated by security staff like common criminals because they inadvertently happened to carry a tube of toothpaste in their night bag.

But what distresses me most is the reasoning upon which these unprecedented security measures have been based.

We are told that following the attacks of 9/11 in the US and the subsequent bombings in London on 7/7 that the world is a less safe place and a constant terrorist threat exists requiring high security measures to remain in place.

Are we expected to take your government’s word for that?

In depth analysis of those two seminal events by myself and thousands of others reveal countless unanswered questions and inconsistencies between the official version of events and what has been actually witnessed at first hand. The 9/11 Commission Report answers none of these glaring inconsistencies and we are left with the preposterous scenario of a group of Islamic terrorists, whose inabilities to even fly a Cessna let alone large commercial aircraft, being capable of penetrating NORAD defence systems (which were coincidentally engaged in an drill in which a similar scenario was being enacted) to pinpoint specific targets - particularly in the case of the Pentagon - with unbelievable dexterity, defying aeronautical science. Taken in tandem with the mountains of evidence which clearly identify fore-knowledge of an attack on 9/11 and the official version of events becomes a sham.

Likewise the official version of events regarding the London bombings is riddled with inconsistencies - let alone another identical drill simultaneously undertaken by Visor Consultants which focused on the exact same locations as those targeted by the supposed bombers - and any honest scrutiny based on media reports and personal eyewitness accounts makes one come to the considered conclusion that the suspects were unwittingly aided and abetted in their activities by British intelligence agencies. Where does leave your government?
Indeed, the restrictions on carrying liquids on board flights has stemmed from the equally questionable events of 10 August 2006 in which, you may recall, a supposed terrorist was to have mixed either triacetone triperoxide, diacetone diperoxide or hexamethylene tripeoxide diamine with a sports drink in an aircraft toilet, an impossible feat according to
Lieutenant-Colonel (ret) Nigel Wylde a former British Army Intelligence Officer, who declared that the volatility of the substances would make the whole process of creating a bomb from these materials wholly impossible.

Are these events real or concocted?

Before we start to humiliate swathes of the general public, including the elderly, having each and every one of us treated as a potential terrorist, should we not have a fair and transparent inquest into what really happened on 9/11, 7/7 and the many other so-called terrorist threats that have followed to see if there is any real justification for the continuation of these draconian security measures. Or is it - as I currently believe - little to do with a perceived terrorist threat and more to do with keeping the public under a firm state of control, as yet another means of reducing our rights as citizens in which the Labour government has played a monumental role during its reign.

Yours respectfully

The Osama bin Goldstein Show takes to the air - again!

On a day when thousands are thronging the streets of New York to remember the many who died six years ago in what is, so far, the biggest scam of the 21st century - there will no doubt be bigger ones to follow - Osama bin Goldstein has taken to the airwaves at this most fitting moment, lest we forget. How could we?

The endless disengenuous rhetoric from the US government’s IntelCenter is wearing exceedingly thin. In today’s show, we have bin Laden, three years on from his last series, looking no older, sitting at the same desk with the same stacks of papers in front of him, wearing the same white hat and shirt and yellow sweater. The only thing that has changed is his beard, which looks to have been dyed - a wholly uncommon practice for Muslims. But then, these so-called ‘radical Islamists’ are usually anything but, especially if they’re working for the CIA. Remember Mohammed Atta who had a penchant for pork chops, booze and women - a different sort of fundamentalism I would have thought!

In the show, Bin Laden introduces the pre-recorded martyrdom video of one of the 9/11 hijackers, Waleed al Shehri, who was supposedly one of the hijackers on American Airlines flight 11 that crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Are we are supposed to believe all this bunk, when al Shehri, at this moment, is protesting his innocence in a jail in Casablanca!

I sense, though that the US Intelligence producers of the bin Goldstein Show, are getting lazy. Although 3.5 minutes of the show is a straight repeat, the rest is boringly still frame and its that frozen visage of bin Goldstein that accompanies all of the new rhetoric. Despite the vast fund of the latest hi-tech televisual gizmos at the disposal of the US government intelligence (propaganda) machine, they couldn’t be bothered to synch the new bits of his speech to his adjusted facial movements. But then bin Laden’s been dead for years - hasn’t he?

If it wasn’t so serious, it would be laughable.

For a full and blow-by-blow account of the 9/11 anniversary and the incisive truths behind what really happened six years ago today, as always go to www.prisonplanet.com/

EU Superstate by Stealth

Brown is about to pull off a flanker - he hopes.

Although 40 backbenchers are vociferously objecting to the provisions in the new EU Reform Treaty - a supposedly toned-down version of the former EU constitution which was thrown out down by voters in France and Holland in their 2005 referenda, but which most European leaders admit is basically the same as the original version - Gordon Brown is sincerely hoping he can still avoid a referendum in Britain which those backbenchers and many others, including the British public dearly clamour for.

But with Parliament in Summer recess and the great British public enjoying their hols, it’s a good time for Brown to get most of the pre-prandial prep work done that is needed to get the Reform Treaty ready to be ratified by the house, without busy eyes picking the bones.

And busy eyes would indeed be needed since according to one source on the web “the text of the Reform Treaty is completely unintelligible unless it is read alongside the existing Treaties. Furthermore, the full impact of many of the amendments to the Treaties set out in the draft Reform Treaty needs further explanation. Finally, there has been much public discussion of whether or not the draft Reform Treaty is essentially identical to the EU’s Constitutional Treaty of 2004”.

Of course, at the last general election Labour promised a referendum on the EU constitution, but as we should know by now, promises such as these are worthless.

It’s this lack of transparency and the glib PR statements put out by Whitehall such as you will find at www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/EU_Reform_Treaty_10_Myths.pdf designed to fob off any opposition, that Brown hopes will allow him, as a good globalist dogsbody, to do his bit in helping to further establish this globalist-inspired dictatorial EU superstate.

In the August 30th edition of the Daily Mail, Christopher Booker rightly points his readers’ attention to everyday examples of what life under Brussels has brought us.

• The Home Improvement Pack
• Household Energy Performance Certificates
  
• The plethora of different coloured bins we have to use when disposing of our waste rendering its collection highly expensive
• The new confusing and cumbersome charging system for post now taking size into account
• The under-equipping of our forces while vast amounts of money are being diverted toward our contribution to the Eurofighter and the EU’s ‘Rapid Reaction Force’.
• The EU directive on the freedom of movement which sparked outrage this week when it was used to prevent the UK from deporting Chindamo, who will be released from prison next year after serving a 12-year sentence for brutally stabbing Mr Lawrence to death in December 1995.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Just Google ‘EU directives that effect Britain’ and you’ll soon see the vast amount of legislation that is imposed upon us in virtually every area of life.

Once Gordon’s done his bit, that centralised oppression from Brussels will only grow until our Houses of Parliament end up being merely a regional sub-office of the EU Super State, rubber-stamping that which emanates from across the Channel.

A Daily Mail poll showed that more than 80% of respondents wanted a referendum on the EU constitution, while 120 MP’s also believe that there should be one.

Of course Brown and his minders know full well that any such referendum would mirror those in France and Holland two years ago and that's why they are hell-bent on avoiding one.

Our political leaders ride roughshod over us these days, particularly when it comes to the amalgamation of nation states into larger economic and political blocs - all part of the gradual process to world government. Witness the behind-the-scenes secrecy at the recent North American Union summit in Montebello, Quebec on August 20th and 21st where the US army enforced a huge security perimeter around the meeting’s venue to prevent anyone, including the Council of Canadians action group, from airing any criticism over the issues of a united north American union that were being discussed.

As with the political, economic and legal melding of a European super state, the same amalgamation is taking place in north America between Canada, the US and Mexico and they’re going to do it whether you like it or not.

That’s why there is so little coverage of these key issues of national and international importance on the Six ‘O Clock News, which concentrates instead on human tragedy stories, shootings, youth violence and so on, in their police-state like bulletins keeping us permanently focussed in a navel-gazing diversion of fear.

So to keep yourself informed of what’s in store for the EU super state go to
www.statewatch.org/ and get yourselves informed.

Government Agroterrorism?

On hearing the first reports of the return of foot and mouth disease (FMD) to this country last week, I got that old feeling of deja vu.

We’ve been here before and it reminded me of those unanswered questions that surfaced during the last epidemic back in 2001 which finally resulted in thousands of cattle being slaughtered at a total cost to the economy of £9bn.

Those questions remain unanswered to this day:

• Why did a phial of the virus disappear from the government’s Porton Down laboratory just prior to the outbreak?
• Why was no action taken following the discovery of the disease in some sheep in Wales almost a month before the outbreak was officially acknowledged?
• Why were timber merchants approached by the then Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to supply timber for pyres in early February, long before the true nature of the epidemic had become evident? A government spokesman said that this was only a contingency plan, yet why did it envisage mass slaughter - even including healthy beasts - at such an early stage?
  

So, I would be treating the official reports with some degree of scepticism this time round, and indeed, less than a week after the outbreak was first reported, news came that a ‘drill’ mirroring the current incidence of FMD had been taking place just days before it was spotted in cattle at a farm at Woolford Farm, near Guildford, just a few miles from the Pirbright animal research facility - where strains of the FMD virus are kept - and Merial Animal Health labs which are located next door.

Well, isn’t that a co-incidence. A drill was also being staged just prior to the 2001 epidemic and don’t these drills always pop up at the same time as the real life event?

Remember the 7/7 London bombings when Visor Consultants were carrying out an identical scenario at the same time as the so-called London Bombers were supposedly doing it for real, and 9/11 when an identical drill of airliners crashing into buildings was being staged. It sounds like it’s all staged to me.


If it was staged, who stands to gain?

Well certainly not the farmers, who, having just emerged from a dreadful summer of very high rainfall, have the prospect of facing a freeze on all movements of their livestock, not to mention a cull, and the loss of their overseas markets.

But Merial would have a lot to gain. Orders of the vaccine have already been placed and if the epidemic escalates it could turn out to be a very lucrative bit of business. Remember Tamiflu, that worthless vaccine developed by Gilead Sciences Inc, doled out in vast quantities in answer to the Bird Flu scam - the firm that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had a financial interest in?



Of course, in order to place a liability smokescreen over any direct involvement, Merial, with the help of chief government paint and plastering agent, Lord Stevens, will no doubt put the blame on the virus escaping from their overflowing drains during the recent wet weather.

But when one looks at the ongoing antipathy of this government towards the very powerful countryside lobby - the Countryside Alliance - whose voice was loudly heard in London during 2002, there is most likely a vested interest by government to send another crippling blow to the agricultural industry, hoping that more farmers will be put out of business and others will throw in the towel. Government attempts to outlaw shooting and hunting are well known and this is just another weapon in their armoury.

In fact, it is just another blow for country dwellers generally as Simon Heffer so clearly pointed out in his piece in the London Telegraph today:

“It was a Leitmotif of the Blair government that it hated the countryside. There could be no other explanation for much of its behaviour. John Prescott, when he still held office, saw power as a vehicle for the propagation of class hatred: and, in his profound ignorance, he saw rural England especially as a place populated and exploited solely by his class enemies.

No road-building scheme could be too destructive, no housing development too massive, ugly or intrusive, that it would not serve right the supposedly Tory-voting middle classes whose own properties stood to be blighted by them.

He was not, of course, the only offender. The growing appetite to punish the motorist as a revenue-raising operation hit country people harder than most: not merely because we live in comparative isolation in many cases, but because the Government feels that public transport is a service fit to be provided only to those in urban areas. A similar view is taken of the need for post offices, so that businesses that have for years been a focus of rural life are now, in many cases, about to be obliterated.

An earlier attempt, not so far entirely successful, to wreck the rural economy was a consequence of the supremely ignorant campaign against foxhunting. And as for those other two staples of village life: the pub may be one of the 15 a week that closed permanently in 2005, despite planning regulations making it hard to use such buildings for residential purposes; and if the church is not redundant (as about 10 per cent of those built for the Church of England now are), it may share its incumbent with 10 or 15 other parishes.

So the foot and mouth outbreak, coming on top of all this decline and the recent savage losses caused by the floods, is a blow that many communities will find hard to bear. Just after the last outbreak, when the Government was trying (in another helpful pro-countryside measure) to limit the legal use of shotguns for sporting purposes, an MP asked how many fatalities or woundings had been caused by legally held weapons. The answer was that all, or almost all, such incidents appeared to have been farmers shooting themselves amid the wreckage of their livelihoods. Who is to say that there will not be such a toll this time?”

So will government doctrine eventually see the eradication of the land-owning Country Alliance lobby, turning their land over to big corporations intent on harvesting acres of GM crops and make vast profits while forcing country-folk out of their rural habitat into urban ghettos where they can be tracked and traced more easily?

I wouldn’t put it past them and their globalist minders!

Man-made Global Warming - a load of hot air

"Some of the leading scientists are now saying we may have as little as 10 years before we cross a kind of point-of-no-return, beyond which it's much more difficult to save the habitability of the planet in the future," Al Gore.

“Climate change is the most severe problem that we are facing today, more severe, even, than terrorism” Hon. David Anderson, Past Minister of the Environment, Canada.

These alarming declarations were made following the publication of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on global warming.



The Oregon Petition

The Oregon Petition was the third, and by far the largest, of five prominent efforts intended to show that a "scientific consensus" does not exist on the subject of global warming. The petition, compiled between 1999 and 2001, received 17,800 independently verified signatures from scientists disagreeing with the conclusions made by the IPCC report.

Yet not a word has ever emerged in the mainstream media about this petition. Nor had it when, a few years earlier, 15,000 scientists also expressed their misgivings over the widely touted global warming theories. As Media Research Center/MediaNomics reported in 1998 “Fifteen thousand scientists sign a petition proclaiming their skepticism toward currently fashionable global warming theories, and the networks are silent.

A politician holds a press conference to promote those same theories, and CBS, CNN, and NBC all trumpet the news, and don't even mention the 15,000 scientists who think it's all hot air".

What was it that these scientists were asserting?

In the preamble to their petition they stated:"There is no convincing scientific evidence, that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

Obviously, it seemed, the pro-global warmers didn’t want their interests shot to bits by this groundswell of contrary scientific opinion. The mainstream media have routinely failed to address the far more greatly compelling evidence from experts in the field that global warming, and more particularly man-made global warming, is a myth.

“There is no evidence of human cause to climate change” according to Professor Ian Clark at the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Ottawa, “but there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that nature is the cause”.

Let’s look at the facts for ourselves.



The myths

Rising temperature levels

There is no evidence to suggest that atmospheric temperature levels are currently rising at an alarming rate, indeed data from satellites and weather balloons taken over the past 25 years show, if anything, a very small rise, around 1/2ºC.

A lot of meteorological data, including temperature, is sourced in urban areas where the ambient temperatures are known to be appreciably higher than rural areas and as cities grow in size average readings increase. It appears that these unrepresentative urban-based ground figures have over-emphasised any temperature increase. But what little rise in average temperature that may have taken place in the last forty or fifty years must be set in context with the cooler period which existed through the 1940s to early 1970s.

On top of this, historical data clearly shows us that the climate is warming and cooling all of the time, a continual fact of life on Earth; if there is one constant factor, it’s that the climate is always changing.




It is a known fact that during the medieval warm period, higher average temperatures - some several degrees celsius - had allowed vineyards to flourish in Britain and the higher temperatures - far from being a threat to our way of life as the Gore camp would profess - actually saw a period of great cathedral building and a seeming thriving lifestyle. Conversely, the ‘Little Ice Age’ during the 17th and 18th centuries saw the River Thames completely iced over to the extent that markets took place on the frozen river. Again, life continued unabated.


The ‘Hockey Stick’ curve

One of the major pieces of evidence presented by the Al Gore camp - and one that has been adopted as a cornerstone by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), - that suggests that global warming is a phenomenon peculiar to the present time, is the ‘Hockey Stick’ graph produced in 1998 as part of the MBH98 (Mann, Bradley & Hughes) report. This shows a sudden average global temperature rise following a long period of fairly stable lower temperatures. But whether this seminal graph is the result of the bad computation of data or is deliberately doctored, it does not represent the scientific truth as shown above that temperatures have fluctuated widely over the past millennia and completely ignores the ’Little Ice Age’ and the Medieval Warm Period.





Melting ice caps and rising sea levels

We are constantly reminded that global warming will lead to melting ice caps and that, indeed, this is happening. However, Professor John Christy of the Department of Atmospheric Science at the University of Alabama points out that the evidence from temperature records of the Greenland ice caps, that go back thousands of years, clearly show that temperatures in that part of the world had been significantly higher just 1000 years ago, yet there is no evidence that there was any great melting event which might cause rising sea levels.

Professor Syun-Ichi Akasofu, Director of the International Arctic Research Centre rightly tells us that imagery from NASA’s meteorological satellites taken throughout the 1990s clearly shows a constant natural expansion and contraction of the polar sea ice. But the mass media constantly bombards us with sensational images of large chunks of ice breaking away from ice shelves, yet fail to make the distinction that this is a natural process, as natural as falling leaves in Autumn. What they don’t show is ice accreting, which it is also doing all of the time. Of course, that would hardly make a visual experience!

Sea levels also vary constantly as part of two natural processes, the local factor, that is the relationship of the height of the sea to the land, which is very often the result of the land rising rather than the sea falling and eustatic changes which are due to thermal changes within the sea - having nothing to do with melting ice - and which change over only a very long period of time.

Gore’s presentation specifically cited the Maldive Islands as being under severe threat from rising sea levels, yet intensive research there has shown quite the reverse, that the sea level around the islands is actually falling. So more misinformation.


The spread of tropical diseases

Another false assumption is that tropical diseases such as malaria would spread northward if there were even a modest rise in temperature. But according to Professor Paul Reiter of the Department of Medical Entomology at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, mosquitoes thrive in very cold temperatures and epidemics of malaria have been reported in such places as Archangel in the former Soviet Union in the 1920s. Yet the IPCC warns us that “mosquito species that transmit malaria do not usually survive where the mean winter temperature drops below 16-18ªC”. Clearly untrue.


Rising CO2 levels

CO2 is essential for life on earth and even though levels have risen slightly over the past few years, as part of a continuum of fluctuations, it has actually accelerated plant growth and is hardly a threat to life as the IPCC would claim. Furthermore, Professor Jan Veitzer at the University of Ottawa shows us that there is no direct correlation between higher CO2 levels and temperature. 450 million years ago, when the CO2 levels were ten times that of today, the earth was undergoing an extreme cold period, one of the coldest in the last half billion years.


But what correlation there seems to be between CO2 levels and temperature, is quite the opposite to that which is posited by the IPCC and its spokesman, Al Gore. Whereas they maintain that increased atmospheric CO2 will result in higher temperatures and global warming, no historical precedent for this exists at all.

It has been found that our oceans are the biggest reservoir of CO2. In cooler climatic conditions, the oceans absorb CO2, but in warmer conditions they expel it. Because our oceans are so vast and deep, this process of absorption and expulsion take many hundreds of years and data clearly shows that the oceans’ CO2 release reflects the earth’s temperature in the past. That differential is about 800 years. So, in fact, rather than CO2 being the cause of global temperature rise - as the IPCC and global warming lobby would have us believe - it is the result of past warming and a delayed one at that.


Greenhouse gases

But it is the source of that CO2 which, once again, we are misinformed about. We are constantly reminded about greenhouse gases, that is those gases which reside in the earth’s troposphere and keep the heat in, so to speak, making this planet habitable. We are led to believe that the amount of CO2 is much larger than it really is, yet CO2 accounts for only 0.54% of all greenhouse gases, by far the largest being water vapour, and of that small percentage most is caused by natural means with animals and bacteria producing annually 150 gigatons compared to just 6.5 gigatons from human activities. Dying vegetation produces even more, volcanos more still and as we have seen the oceans are the greatest contributor.

One of the greatest causes of global warming, we are told again and again, is our damaging contribution of CO2 to the greenhouse gases. But if that is so, how do we account for the past rises in CO2 during periods of the earth’s history when modern industry, cars and aeroplanes were completely absent? A further demonstration that the temperature/CO2 level correlation is faulty is that more recently, during the great period of industrial growth, between 1940 and 1970, there was a cooling period even though CO2 levels were rising slightly.


Extreme weather

To heighten the sense of concern over global warming, every flood, hurricane, drought, cold or hot spell is portrayed in the mass media as a manifestation of global warming. Yet meteorological data shows that these phenomena are always with us to some degree or another often occurring on a cyclical basis and historical records show that during the ‘Little Ice Age’ more extreme weather events took place.

Here is a list of just a few significant ‘extreme’ weather events in Britain over the past few hundred years taken from the Oxford book on Weather Facts.

Winter 1684 Coldest on record
November 1703 The Great Storm caused the loss of 8,000 lives
Autumn 1740 Coldest on record
Winter 1740 Second coldest on record
Winter 1814 Bitterly cold with a Frost Fair in London
Spring 1893 Warmest on record
December 1897 Extreme winds bring down Tay railway bridge
9 August 1911 Hottest day recorded in British history
28 June 1917 250mm of rain fall in one day in Bruton, Somerset
1921 Record dry year
28 January 1928 Westerly gales kill 26 in Scotland
6-7 January 1928 North Sea floods 1.8m above predicted tidal level in London
27-28 January 1940 Widespread freezing
8 May 1943 Deep snow in Scotland
Winter 1947 Long and intensely cold winter
1949 Second warmest calendar year on record
21 May 1950 Tornado runs from Berkshire to Norfolk, four killed by lightning
15-16 August 1952 Disastrous floods in Lynmouth, Devon
31 January to 1 February 1953 North sea floods cause death of 300 in Britain and 1,800 in the Netherlands
18 June 1955 279mm of rain falls in one day in Martinstown, Dorset
Winter 1963 Long and intensely cold winter, third coldest behind 1684 and 1740
1 November 1965 Fierce winds cause cooling towers to collapse in Ferrybridge, Yorkshire
15 January 1968 Westerly gales cause havoc in Glasgow, much structural damage
July to September 1968 Leeming, North Yorkshire records 35.7mm of rain in just 8.5 minutes
and so on...

So, once again, it seems that the media are deliberately forcing an erroneous global warming message down our throats by dwelling and hyping what are, in reality, natural events of a cyclical nature.



The realities

The sun

For many years, astronomers have been keeping an eye on our sun’s activity and the number of sunspots it emits in the belief that it could be the primary cause of temperature change and many other meteorological phenomena here on earth.

In 1893 British astronomer, Edward Maunder, found that, according to historical data, during the ‘Little Ice Age’ between 1500 and 1800, there was very little sunspot activity. This period has become known as the Maunder Minimum.

More recently solar physicist, Piers Corbin has even made a small fortune from using sunspot activity as a means of predicting warm weather, by placing bets with the bookie William Hill. His bets, based on the sun’s activity have come up trumps every time.

In 1991, senior scientists at the Danish Meteorological Institute decided to look at the historical data of sunspot activity and temperature during the last 150 years and what they found was a remarkable correlation between the two.



Then Professor Christianson went back a further 400 years and the link continued.


Further natural links

Clouds have a powerful cooling effect on earth. They are in large part formed by the bombardment of earth by sub-atomic particles - cosmic rays - which, when meeting with rising water vapour, form water droplets which in turn form clouds.

But when the sun is particularly active and the solar wind is strong, fewer cosmic rays bombard the earth, thus creating fewer clouds resulting in higher temperatures. Astro-physicist, Nir Shariv decided to compare his own records of cloud formation with Dr Jan Veitzer’s temperature records which went back 600 years and found a distinct correlation between the two sets of data.

Therefore it is a natural law of nature that climate is controlled by clouds which in turn are formed by cosmic rays which in turn are regulated by the sun’s activity.



Distortion and manipulation

We have already seen how the widely-used ‘Hockey Stick’ graph has been used to create a warning message that we are on the brink of a global climate catastrophe, by misrepresenting the preceding historical data.

A recent documentary hosted by Sir David Attenborough added to the general misinformation on the subject by taking a very small portion of recent data of temperature and CO2 and extrapolating from it a distorted picture of the future by completely ignoring the preceding historical data, which, if taken into account, gives a quite different picture.

Click on image to enlarge

The IPCC report on climate change is grossly distorted, accommodating only those views and data which fit the false hypothesis of its political proponents.

In a letter to the Wall Street Journal, Professor Frederick Seitz, former president of America’s National Academy of Sciences revealed that the IPCC panel had censored the opinions of many scientists. He went on to say that “this report is not what it appears to be - it is not the version that was approved by the contributing scientists listed on the title page”. Omitted from the final IPCC report was the statement “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed (climate) changes to the specific cause of increase in greenhouse gases”. “No study to date has positively attributed all or part (of the climate change observed to date) to anthropogenic (man-made) causes”. He concluded “I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report”.

Many of those scientists who disagreed with the final report still had their names in the title page in order to try and boost the report’s credibility.

We have also seen how, in Al Gore’s presentation on climate change, he completely mis-interprets the relationship between CO2 levels and temperature, implying that increasing CO2 creates increased temperatures, when in fact the reverse is true.

That deceit continued later in the same presentation when he showed the emotive image of what looked to be a stranded polar bear on a floating fragment of ice, implying that polar bears were under threat of extinction as the ice sheets disintegrate and disappear. The emotive image that he used, it was later found, had originated from a photograph taken by one Amanda Byrd who was holidaying in Alaska during August. Being the Arctic summer, such images were be easy to capture and the bear’s ability to swim back to the main ice sheet - which was kept conveniently out of view - was more than adequate.

This demonstrates the way in which a powerful lobby can contort and emotionalise a subject to its desire in front of an un-questioning audience that is either unwilling or just too lazy to check the validity of what is being presented to them.



Hypocrisy

But the whole man-made/global warming/climate change farce is made so obviously hollow by the lack of effort its own supporters make to try and set an example, but one that we, the general public and industry worldwide, are expected to adopt through our carbon footprints in every aspect of our daily lives.

The recent Live Earth series of concerts staged worldwide highlighted these inconsistencies:

• The event’s carbon footprint was 34,722 tons or nearly three times that if you factor in that of the television audience
• Many of the stars arrived at the various venues by their own private jets and by the very nature of their high-flying lifestyles, own a carbon footprint far in excess of the average person
• John Legend and Sheryl Crow both feature in TV commercials selling petrol-guzzling motors
• The multiple concerts generated huge amounts of rubbish, with the Wembley concert alone estimated to produce 59 tonnes of waste
• Al Gore, himself, lives a lavish carbon footprint-heavy lifestyle with a large energy-consuming home with several heated swimming pools.

The real modus operandi?

So given such a flagrant misrepresentation of the truth on a matter on which a vast number of scientists disagree and to which its own authors seem less than keen in setting a guiding example, why are we being fed a pack of lies? And why is it regarded as heresy to publicly oppose or show disagreement to what can only be described as a new religion?


The Report from Iron Mountain

Back in 1966 a government think-tank study was published, entitled The Report from Iron Mountain. Although much controversy exists over the authenticity of this document, which has since been published in book form, its recommendations seem to have a remarkable bearing on otherwise inexplicable current global policies. The book was published on the basis that it is a satire, yet its supposed authors were part of a study group set up during the Kennedy administration, commissioned by the Department of Defense under the then Defense Secretary, Robert McNamara and was produced by the Hudson Institute, situated at the base of Iron Mountain at Croton-on-Hudson, New York, and has more or less been authenticated by Kenneth Galbraith who was, at one time, closely associated with this group. Both the Hudson Institute’s director, Herman Kahn and McNamara were Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) members, a powerful organisation often regarded as the covert parallel US government and a foremost proponent of one-world government.

The study group’s remit was to find ways to ‘stabilise’ society once the threat of the Cold War had past, which, among other things, had been another manufactured ‘stabilising’ ruse itself. In the report the word ‘stabilise’ is synonymous with a perpetual form of government that can keep society under firm control and prevent it from rebelling. In other words, manufacturing means by which society would be cowed into submission, forever subservient to the state.

The conclusions of the report were that, although in the past wars had served that end goal of subservience well, making society conform through the threat that war posed, instilling a patriotism and allegiance to government, the coming prospect of a global government would imply total disarmament and an end to war. Thus a controlling substitute had to be found that would perpetuate allegiance to centralised government.

The panel made a number of recommendations, the seeds of which are becoming all too familiar today:

• A form of national service for those who engage in anti-social behaviour, where youths would be conscripted in ‘social improvement’ programmes, (a natural extension from the current system of ASBOs). In addition those unable to pay off debts, political dissidents and those accused of ‘hate-crimes’ would be conscripted into these forced ‘labour-batallions’.
• Dumbing down society by pre-occupying it with trivia and mindless diversions to stifle political debate with a suggestion that blood sports are staged to work off pent up human emotions
• Finding a credible global threat, whether entirely true or not. As the report pointed out: “Allegiance requires a cause; a cause requires an enemy. This much is obvious; the critical point is that the enemy that defines the cause must seem genuinely formidable”.

This is where global warming comes in. The sun’s current activity is providing an element of evidence that something is changing, albeit a natural cycle in earth’s relationship with the sun. Yet, false science has been summoned to support a scenario in which man’s activities are leading him toward a serious global threat. So, in order to avoid it, we must all comply to a new set of global rules. This will allow an opportunity for the globalists to usher in global taxation to penalise our pollution and have us succumb to harsh new environmental laws. Anyone dissenting will end up in labour-batallions. Academia must comply and all mainstream media must sing the global warming anthem with equal vigour and determination.

This is why the voices of those signatories to the Oregon Petition have largely gone unheard, while those supporting the mantra get mainstream coverage.

But the pro-global warming lobby gets more than just further control of our lives and more revenue from taxation, using the same rhetoric about man’s industry adding dangerous amounts of CO2 to the earth’s troposphere, it can also prevent third world countries from developing their industries, thus preventing them from building their economies. It is a repressive dogma.

Whether the Report from Iron Mountain is an authentic document or not, or is simply a satire as the mainstream media would have us believe, in all aspects of the recommendations on which the report advises, each is actually coming to fruition before our very eyes albeit, in some cases, in an embryonic form.



Conclusion

Put against this background of the global manipulation of mankind, the forced indoctrination of man-made global warming takes on a threatening spectre and one which our masters wholeheartedly want us to abide by. How far they will get with this will be interesting to see. Remember back in the 1970’s the scares of global cooling.

Click on image to enlarge

It is vital for us to remain informed and to take, with a very large pinch of salt, the column inches of mis-information the orchestrated mass media has to offer, whose guardians are all part and parcel of the same global élite as those for which The Report from Iron Mountain was prepared.

Given their vast arsenal of bio and electronic weaponry, security forces and financial control which could render us all bankrupt overnight, if this ruse fails you can be sure that some new tack will be waiting around the corner.


Some further sources of information

The Chilling Stars A new theory of climate change
By Henrik Svensmark & Nigel Calder

Global Warming Myth
Google Video

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=819419216365936273&q=The+Global+Warming+Myth+1&total=32&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=8

The Great Global Warming Swindle
Channel 4 documentary
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-3028847519933351566&q=The+Global+Warming+Swindle&total=296&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Junk Science: Global Warming Myth Busted
Google video
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-7459970000582089163&q=Junk+Science%3A+Global+Warming+Myth+Busted&total=3&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Climate Catastrophe Cancelled
A Friends of Science Production
Google video
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=1399900408121222150&q=Climate+Catastrophe+Cancelled&total=50&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

More staged terror?

Over the last weekend we have seen a resurgence of potential terror attacks on British soil.

First it was a smoking Mercedes in London’s Haymarket early on Saturday morning and shortly afterwards another Mercedes in nearby Cockspur Street. Both were said to contain patio-gas cannisters and a quantity of petrol and nails. Then, at Glasgow Airport on Saturday afternoon, a Cherokee Jeep bizarely crashed into a terminal building while one Asian man, ablaze, jumped out of the vehicle to the astonishment of holidaymakers.

The media immediately went to town, impressing readers and viewers of the potentially serious damage the two London cars could have caused, with Fox News exclaiming that “Had either device gone off it would have generated a huge fireball and a shockwave spreading over 400 yards in all directions”.

But not so, according to ex-CIA explosives expert, Larry Johnson, interviewed on MSNBC. When asked to evaluate the potential damage caused by the cars, should their contents have been detonated, he explained that although the cars themselves would have been seriously damaged, the collateral damage to the immediate environment would have been minimal, extending to within only a few feet of each Mercedes. The contents bore no relationship to the high explosives used in similar car bomb attacks in Iraq which currently occur on a daily basis and are far more powerful. In Johnson’s view the media were hyping these events in order to scare the public.

The suspected ringleader of these attacks has been named and is a brilliant neurologist, currently working at Paisley General Hospital in Scotland. It is believed that others involved in the attacks were also doctors and some have linked the timing of these attacks to the inauguration of Gordon Brown as Prime Minister last Friday. It is believed that these doctors could be linked to al Qaeda. Shock, horror, al Qaeda at large in the NHS!

How timely. As Paul Watson on infowars.com commented “Gordon Brown has swept into Downing Street with the aid of a new injection of the strategy of tension”.

If we were really at war with Islamic terrorists then surely the government would impose strict controls on their passage in and out of the country. But no, in fact quite the opposite, suspects seem to have the right to come and go freely.

It begs the question, were these just more government intelligence staged events involving unwitting patsies all destined to impart a message?

We have to remember the distinctions between the various types of ‘staged’ terrorism but in each we can pin a large measure of involvement both upon government whether directly or as a result of its actions.

1 Direct covert involvement by governments as in 9/11 and 7/7 where overwhelming evidence exists in the public domain of covert ‘inside’ participation from elements within government executed through the higher levels of its intelligence departments’ command, with the outcome from these events being used to set a political agenda.

2 Indirect covert involvement by governments as in many IRA attacks, both in mainland Britain and Northern Ireland, and confirmed by the confessions of Kevin Fulton, third parties are infiltrated into the higher ranks of the militant group by government intelligence agencies, directly offering technical assistance in bombings, again, the outcomes from which go to support that same government’s political agenda.

3. Backlash from government policies Terrorism caused directly by militant groups resulting from their disgust toward government policy as it affects them.

In all these instances, it is government which is ultimately to blame and it is they who are using the terrorism, however caused, to further their agendas.

In the wake of this current round of ‘staged’ or ‘real’ events - whether the perpetrators were consciously or unwittingly involved as useful stooges, one can bet that it will all be used to further restrict our freedoms and herald in ever more draconian legislation to keep us all incarcerated in Big Brother's Brave New World Order.

The Federal Reserve, Fiat Money and the Meltdown of the US Economy

This article is inspired by G. Edward Griffin’s book ‘The Creature from Jekyll Island’ which chronicles the creation of the American Federal Reserve System. I am a great admirer of Griffin’s work principally because of the highly researched and organised way in which he approaches his subject matter and the clear and concise way in which he presents his findings.





The following story I am about to tell really only acts as an overview to his book which, I suggest, should be vital reading for everyone and particularly those who want to get a true understanding of how corrupt our western banking systems are and the power that these cartels wield over our lives.

Part 1

This story reflects the vanity of human nature. It shows how the deviation from a path of self-control can lead to a situation that gets wildly out of hand, with all of the benefits falling into the hands of the wrong people, creating a system that works directly against our own interests and well-being. It also demonstrates the deceptive skills employed by the élite ‘Illuminati’ banking families, having us believe that their banking system is in our best interests when, in fact, they are deceiving us and maintaining that deception so that when we are embroiled in high interest rates or lose our standard of living through a market crash, we end up pointing the finger of accusation in the wrong direction.


Origins and types of money

Once upon a time the transaction of goods and services was conducted by barter with exchanges made by mutual agreement on their relative values. As time went by it became apparent that some goods were more essential to the daily needs of people than others - like wheat or cattle - and there was a constant demand for such items. Because these goods had an intrinsic value they could be used as commodity money.

As man came to discover and refine precious metals which had a rarity value in themselves, coins were minted and these were eventually used as a more convenient medium of exchange for goods and services. The value of these coins would be determined by weight.

The amount of actual coinage that a merchant, for instance, might possess at any one time, might well be far more than he actually needed for his immediate requirement, so a system developed whereby he would deposit some of his coinage with a goldsmith, who would hold it in his vaults and issue the owner with a written receipt, redeemable upon presentation at any time. Soon these promissory notes were circulated to third parties with whom our merchant may have had business dealings and they, themselves could, upon presentation to the goldsmith, obtain the payment due to them by the merchant. These paper receipts became our next stage of currency, receipt money.

If we suppose that the materials and labour required in building a cart are reckoned to be equal to an ounce gold coin - a price based upon the availability of the gold coin supply and availability of carts - then one cart would cost one ounce of gold. But if the amount of gold being mined and minted into coins increases, so that the available money supply increases, then the price of a cart will rise because of the greater wealth in general circulation. Clearly, supply and demand of gold and available goods maintain an equilibrium.

The common misconception that this system is limited to the amount of gold available as currency at any one time is a misnomer since any scarcity of available gold is offset by the increased value of what is in current supply. If gold coinage is plentiful the cost of the cart will rise, if gold coinage is in short supply the price will come down.

As long as this system is left alone and governments or banks don’t intervene by cutting corners or creating paper money that isn’t 100% backed to the same value by gold, then the economy will remain stable and everyone will benefit.

But man’s impatience with such well-disciplined systems and his age-old wish to make an expedient extra buck or two soon led to the imbalancing of the mechanism.


Enter fractional and fiat money

The extra bob or two for those unscrupulous abusers of the system had kept busy hands at work filing down coins - just a little - and then re-casting the accumulated filings into new coinage. Not only goldsmiths, but governments engaged in this activity on the coins received from the public as tax payments. Now there was more coinage in circulation, but its real worth had been compromised. More coinage meant higher prices because of the seeming increase in wealth, yet the wealth had not increased, hence our first acquaintance with inflation.

But worse than this was the realisation by goldsmiths that they could literally get an extra run for their money in a quite different way. Discovering that of the available gold in their vaults at any one time left in safekeeping on behalf of depositors, only a fraction (about 15%) was ever called for on any given occasion. This led unscrupulous goldsmiths’ to offer the other 85% that was unlikely to be called upon by depositors, as loans to others and charge interest for the privilege. This allowed a goldsmith to create further money out of that which was lying idle in his vaults. But wait. That money isn't rightfully his, it belongs to the depositor who has every reason to believe that his gold coins are left in safe keeping. So the depositors' gold he is issuing as loans is being used twice, creating a most devious slight of hand and once again devaluing the actual money supply in existence. The concept of fractional money, had arrived, a highly convenient and dishonest concept that has dominated the banking system up to our present day.

But still man’s insatiable desire for more money continued, especially during wars when the colossal cost of armaments had to be met at very short notice.

Fiat money first made its appearance in China during the time of Marco Polo, but was also used to disastrous ends in the American colonies. Under this system, money is conjured up out of nothing as it doesn’t have the backing of gold or anything of real tangible value. Fiat money is issued out of nothing and is declared legal tender by government, meaning that it has to be adopted as lawful tender. The flooding of a country’s economy with this worthless issuance dilutes the genuine gold-backed money in existence, so that prices inevitably rise because of the increase in money supply, but in reality everyone is worse off because their money buys less. This is inflation.

The government now has a new source of money with which to buy their armaments but it has to be paid for somehow. Whereas direct taxation would be highly unpopular with the masses, the issuance of fiat money and its devaluing effect on the money supply allows the books to be balanced through inflation - the decline of our purchasing power - the perfect hidden tax!

In colonial America this was demonstrated to disastrous effect when inflation became rampant and between 1775 and 1779 the money supply increased by 5000%! George Washington remarked in 1779 "that a wagon load of money would scarcely purchase a wagon load of provisions”.





With the drafting of the American Constitution and with the ravages of hyper-inflation fresh in the founders’ minds, it included the strong provision that the issuance of fiat money would be outlawed.

A hard lesson had been learned, but not for long.




Part 2

Modern banking comes into being

The banking business had its foundations in 14th century Europe and in many instances got off on the right foot with banks fully meeting their moral obligations by issuing paper receipts that were fully backed their by deposits. However, the craving for money among the banks’ clientele soon put pressure on them to find easier ways of creating it, rather than being tied to the value of their deposits. The long ride down the slippery slope had begun with a legacy to this day of booms and busts, bank failures and sporadic economic failures, resulting from the unbridled issuance of un-backed money, devaluing economies.

With the founding of the Bank of England in 1694, fractional-reserve banking became institutionalised. It was the world’s first central bank, introducing the partnership between bankers and politicians, a disastrous mix. This liaison would allow a revenue-hungry British government to obtain funds which were largely created out of nothing by the bank on which the government would pay interest, thus avoiding the unpopular resort of the government raising taxes. But, as we have seen, someone has to make up the financial imbalance and it is the average man and woman who ends up paying more for goods and services; the hidden tax, inflation.


Early American central banks

Even before the Constitution was drafted, America had its own central bank, the Bank of North America, taking as its lead the Bank of England practice of fractional-reserve lending; lending more money as promissory notes than it held in deposit, and its principal borrower was the government.

Predictably, America’s first venture into central banking became an exercise in fraudulence. Closing its doors in 1783, it was replaced with America’s second central bank, the First Bank of the United States. But lessons still were not being learned.

One of the most influential players in the First Bank’s operations were the Rothschilds of Europe. This infamously cunning family, whose influence has continued to covertly dominate world money and therefore world events to this day and to whom - along with the Rockerfellers, their American counterparts in crime - had devised methods which enabled them to exploit the banking system to their own ends and amass incredible fortunes. Their wealth was obtained though smuggling, urging governments to engage in wars from which they would hugely profit and - through their superior network of intelligence gathering - manipulate the stock markets to their own ends. Indeed, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s famous saying “Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws” couldn’t be more appropriate.

Their influence on the First Bank obviously showed and in the first five years of its existence, inflation - that covert tax - had devalued people’s money by 42%. Outrage in many quarters ensued and America’s second central bank closed down. But in its wake, smaller wildcat banks operating on the same flawed principals stepped in just as the 1812 war between America and Britain needed funding. Within two years the nation’s money supply had tripled, devaluing it by a further 66%!

Despite this rampant inflation, at the end of the war, rather than reign in the excesses of the wildcat banks, Congress merely sought to protect them and perpetuate the system by founding America’s third central bank, the Second Bank of the United States and it was business as usual for the fractional lending fraud. With its enhanced connections with the wildcat banks, which were situated right across America, the inflationary boom and bust cycles were now felt everywhere.

By 1820 the pendulum was beginning to sway back in favour of sound monetary control and the principal voice in this crusade was Democrat, Andrew Jackson. A period of battle between Jackson and the Second Bank’s head Norman Biddle followed, but in the end Jackson won and the Second Bank closed its doors.


Civil War and beyond

By the time the Second Bank had closed the country was entering a ‘bust’ cycle as the money supply was being limited following rapid inflation. But with now no central bank, bad old practices and some bad new ones dominated while no-one tackled the real cause of this continual financial disruption, fractional reserve banking. It was this continuing economic crisis and the weak state of the economy, making exports in the North uncompetitive, which really triggered the American Civil War and not the issue of slavery which is popularly touted as its driving force.

While the Confederate South and industrialised North enjoyed mutual trading, the South also successfully traded cotton to Europe which annoyed the North whose exports were deemed uncompetitive because of cheaper goods being imported from Europe. In order to counter this imbalance the North imposed protectionist embargoes on imported European goods which forced the southern states to have to buy from the North at higher prices. Also the North’s embargo on European imports was retaliated by Europe taking similar measures on imported cotton from the South causing outrage among the Confederates.





European money men and governments wanted to use this split between the North and South to weaken America for their own secret expansionist policies, thus America had now become embroiled in global economic politics with the Rothschild dynasty and the London-based House of Morgan being a significant cause, but more significantly they were the financial beneficiaries of the blood spilt during the Civil War.


The Jekyll Island Meeting

America’s banking industry, following the demise of the Second Bank, was a myriad of rules and regulations, controls and privileges, none of which struck at the heart of the boom and bust cycle, namely the proliferation of marginal reserve money. Banks together with the trusts and cartels that had grown up following the loss of a central bank, could still be prone to collapse under this chaotic economic system. There was a pressing need - particularly in New York where banking had largely become consolidated into two large rivals, the Rockerfellers and the Morgans - to resolve the problem, but in a way that would suit the bankers and not the well-being of the country or its economy.

What they wanted was a system that would create a lender of last resort to supply unlimited amounts of money should any of the banks suffer insolvency from runs and currency drains. They also wanted to stifle the competition so that a closely-knit banking cartel could operate in exclusivity with its affiliates agreeing to strict controls that would keep them interlocked. It was agreed that the federal government must be part of the new set up to provide that function of control.

One winter’s night in 1910, this coterie of bankers met on the remote Jekyll Island just off the coast of Georgia. They comprised of Abraham Piatt, Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury; Frank A Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York and representing William Rockerfeller; Henry P Davison, of the JP Morgan Company; Charles D Norton, president of JP Morgan’s First National Bank of New York, Benjamin Strong, head of JP Morgan’s Bankers Trust Company, Paul M Warburg, partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company and representing the British and French Rothschild banking dynasty and Senator Nelson W Aldrich the Republican senate ’whip’, chairman of the National Monetary Commission, associate of JP Morgan and father-in-law to John D Rockerfeller, Jr. It was here that the framework of the Federal Reserve was laid out, a system that would strangulate America for the next 100 years.

The idea had to be sold to Congress without making it appear that the Federal Reserve would in reality be a cartel - which would have brought strong opposition - so this new structure would be comprised of 12 regional institutions to give it the appearance of a decentralised organisation, whereas, in reality, it was to follow the model of the Bank of England.

The rather misleading title of the Federal Reserve was adopted; ‘Federal’ implying that it was an offshoot of government, and ‘Reserve’ implying that it was backed by reserves of tangible assets, both implied definitions being completely untrue.

The cartel needed a sympathetic champion who would see this new central bank become a reality and they found it in Woodrow Wilson, whose close intellectual minder, Colonel House, had intimate ties to the cartel. Because of Wilson’s unshakable faith in House’s abilities, the Colonel was regarded as the unseen President of the United States.

After much political skulduggery, the Federal Reserve Act under its presentational title of the Glass-Owen Bill passed into law on December 23, 1913. Some ameliorating amendments had been made, but the essential framework was there. America now had a central bank to out-class the iniquities of all of the former central banks as time would soon tell.



Part 3


The Federal Reserve had been born. With its falsely-sounding government title, it was believed that it would bring about monetary reform and prevent the spates of bank failures that had been plaguing the US economy. It was expected that it would be a central regulatory, presidentially-elected and senate-controlled body in which the public would be protected through a sharing of power, melding of interests, with a system of checks and balances so that according to Woodrow Wilson “the banks may be instruments, not the masters, of business and of individual enterprise and initiative”. But, in common with many of the rest of those who were involved in the passing of the Bill, they had little or no understanding of the real modus operandi of its proposers, the bankers, or indeed how their deceitful financial mechanism was to work.

The hidden intentions behind the forming of the Federal Reserve were:

• To stop the growing influence of the smaller banks, and concentrate the nation’s financial resources in the hands of the governing cartel by pooling their reserves into one large fund to protect themselves from currency runs and drains
• Reverse the trend of private capital formation and gain dominance over the industrial loans market
• Shift the liabilities of the cartel to the taxpayers.

The mechanism at work

The clearly defined, but publicly undeclared principles adopted by the Federal Reserve in practice work like this.

• The Federal Reserve System allows commercial banks to create chequebook money out of nothing. Therefore, the US dollar bill has no real value, is not backed by an equal quantity of gold or any other tangible asset - it is pure fiat money - which is created out of debt, which you could rightly argue is less than nothing!
• It is the lending of money which allow the banks to derive profit from the interest charged on the loan. So when a loan is granted to a borrower, it is first conjured out of nothing as a series of figures on a computer screen, then the amount of that loan is entered in the bank’s ledger as an asset as it is earning interest and should eventually be paid back.
• To keep the bank solvent, it must ensure that its loans - especially the larger ones - are not defaulted on, so every effort is made to keep those loans on the books and, at least, receive the interest from them. The maintenance of this state of affairs is usually achieved by increasing the size of the loans to potential defaulters, allowing the borrower additional capital to spend while maintaining the flow of interest repayments. This is called ‘rolling over the debt’. This way the bank’s book assets are maintained although the problem of the borrower’s inability to repay that loan is not solved, just merely postponed.
• Should that debt become unpayable even after the ‘rolling over’ procedure has been repeated, the Federal Reserve system comes into play. They convince Congress that to allow the borrowing company to die would not be in the national interest. Thousands of jobs might be lost and add a further burden to the economy. This action, with the sanction of Congress allows the Federal Reserve banking cartel to create fresh money out of nothing to allow the lending bank to write off the outstanding debt from its ledger, and that fresh money now flooding the economy, means higher prices because through the increased money supply, transferring the burden to the taxpayer as inflation - the result of higher prices charged for goods and services.

Examples of the Federal Reserve at work

Let’s see how this mechanism has worked in the real world and the damage it has caused to the American economy at the expense of this infamous banking cartel.

The Penn Central Railroad In 1970 it became bankrupt. The lending banks’ took over the directorship of the Penn Central while continuing to pour money into it - which in turn came from the Federal Reserve - so allowing dividends to be continued to be paid to shareholders giving them the impression that all was OK. At the same time the directors then began to offload their shares at unrealistic prices, so that when bankruptcy came, the recipients of those shares were left with nothing. As the final resort the Federal Reserve made its case to Congress that the need to keep the Penn Central alive was paramount to public interest. Congress then responded by issuing loan guarantees worth $125m, thereby underwriting the banks’ losses.

The losers were the shareholders, Joe Public because of a further influx of money supply helping up inflation, and the Railroad which eventually failed anyway, while the winners, as always, were the central banks who were laughing all the way to their collective front doors.

Lockheed The same year and the same story. This time Congress agreed to guarantee $250m in new loans and so the Fed Res banking cartel had ensured that Lockheed was now 60% deeper in debt than it had been before. But since the government was acting as guarantor, in order to ensure that Lockheed didn’t go bust, it made sure that it was granted lucrative no-bid defence contracts. The winners, once again were the banks, while the increased money supply kept the man in the street picking up the tab.

And so it went on.

New York City
Year: 1975, impending insolvency
Pretext: the curtailment of public services which would be a disgrace in the eyes of the world
Bailout: $2.3bn, doubling the size of New York City’s current debt
Beneficiaries: the banks continue to receive their interest.

Chrysler
Year: 1978, on the verge of bankruptcy
Pretext: to allow the company to fold would be a blow to the economy and reduce competition in the car industry
Bailout: $1.5bn
Beneficiaries: The banks’ previously uncollectable debt was now guaranteed by government backing ensuring the continued flow of interest.

Commonwealth Bank of Detroit
Year: 1972, insolvency, following large loans from the Chase Manhattan Bank to invest in risky high stakes ventures
Pretext: financial hardship to the public
Bailout: $60m loan from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) (an insurance arm of the Fed Res), plus federal guarantees of repayment
Beneficiaries: Commonwealth saved and sold to an Arab consortium, Chase saved converting its potential loss into government-backed assets.

Chicago Continental Illinois Bank (world’s seventh largest bank)
Year: 1982, insolvency following overseas banks withdrawing their deposits creating the world’s first electronic bank run
Pretext: it would be unthinkable to have such a leading bank fail
Bailout: $4.5bn by the FDIC in return for an 80% ownership in the bank.
Beneficiaries: CCI Bank is saved although the $4.5bn collateral being in the form of government stock, effectively made the CCI Bank government-controlled!

In all of these instances and scores of others, the Federal Reserve had acted as ‘lender of last resort’ and had saved each institution from insolvency, saving the banks’ continued ability to trade and coin in interest from its loans, but placing an enormous burden upon the general public through artificial money creation with the resulting inflation and devaluation the nation’s wealth.


The game goes global

But this whole scam wasn’t just being enacted on the American stage, it was going global. This time the stated pretext wasn’t just a banking system that would protect the American people, it was to be a banking system that would save the world from poverty, through facilitating international trade and stabilising exchange rates.

So, at Bretton Woods in New Hampshire in 1944 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was born. Acting as a global bank, like the Federal Reserve it would conjure money out of thin air and through the creation of the World Bank transfer that fiat money, described as loans, to third world, underdeveloped countries.

The Bretton Woods Meeting

This was no altruistic move on the part of this banking cartel. It’s true goal was that the ‘loans’ would stimulate the demise of free enterprise in these third-world countries, thus tying them to the central world bank and so embroiling them in perpetual debt. In reality the money wouldn’t go to those people who needed it most, the deprived, hungry and starving, but would be handed to their governments, many of which had been established with deliberate western coercion as crooked dictatorships. Nine times out of ten, these ‘loans’ would end up being used to expand government bureaucracy and be frittered away by the governing élite and/or be used to build their military status.

Since the money for these loans originated from the industrialised countries, principally the US, this manufacture of fiat currency covertly undermined that country’s wealth, but was doing nothing to alleviate the hardships of those in third-world countries to whom popular thought supposed it was to be designated. Once, again, the banks were the prime beneficiaries.


The ulterior motive

One of the prime intellectual driving forces behind the Bretton Woods agreement was John Maynard Keynes, economist and leading member of the Fabian Society.


The Fabians and Communists both shared the notion of a classless, stateless society, devoid of private enterprise, where the state would, in essence, control all. They differed only on the way this end should be achieved. The Communists favoured force, whereas the Fabians preferred a gradual coercion of nation states into this framework by stealth.

The creation of the World Bank and IMF was, in fact, a means of achieving this goal of centralised power, but on a global scale with a view to eventually creating a one world bank with a one world currency.

Strong nation states like the US, born on the ethos of free enterprise - the reverse of what was being proposed - were to be the prime lenders to third world nations, through the World Bank, thus bleeding their economies through inflation and devaluation of their currencies. As we see today, the dollar is being deliberately stripped of its world status through the unbridled issue of fiat currency, both in military spending and international loans - most of which have no hope of being repaid, the only beneficiaries being the banking and military-industrial cartels, who are literally hi-jacking the country. As the dollar finally collapses and America is brought economically to its knees, rescue will come in the form of a new, more broadly-based currency with a subsequent loss of sovereignty.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the coin, third-world and other less well developed nations are being enticed into this global collectivist web, by hooking their respective governments and despot leaders - more often than not covertly coerced into power by the very nations who are currently bankrolling them - on loans they will never repay, because of their innate desire for money and power, ensuring those funds are wasted and not put to use in helping their countries’ citizens. The IMF and World Bank are literally buying these countries with the wealth of the American and other Western industrialised nations to eventually bring them into a world collectivist, communist-style environment.

Now that the former Soviet bloc and China have been enticed into the IMF/World Bank web, they join Latin America and Africa who are already hopelessly embroiled in indebtedness to this global juggernaut of financial oppression, beholden to the one-world doctrine of those who have devised the system which grew out of the doctrines of Jekyll Island and Bretton Woods.



The future?

Today the US national debt is quoted as $8.8 trillion. Given an estimated population in the United States of just under 302.3 million, that equates to the share of debt per citizen of just in excess of $29,000! And this national debt has been increasing at the rate of $1.05bn per day since September 29, 2006.

The federal government payroll has increased dramatically while the manufacturing industry has declined, with more people receiving government paychecks than those paying income taxes. Add to this the entitlements, such as social security and medicare which, in 1992, represented 52% of federal outlays together with the 14% being soaked up in interest payments on debt and you see a country being bled dry.

National assets such as docks, ports and other major infrastructure have been sold off to foreign interests, environmentalism has led to millions of acres of timber and farm land to be taken out of production, while mandatory legislation in the workplace has been eroding the viability of much of the private sector.

Because of constant inflation, as the money supply is constantly topped up by more fiat money, the standard of living has declined in real terms and the number of Americans who own their homes has dropped. Over 90% of all Americans are officially broke by retirement age.


All part of the plan

It seems that just about every step is being taken to kill America. Why is this reckless state of affairs allowed to continue?

It appears that this is all part of a greater stratagem formulated many decades ago. The goal is one-world government in which all former nations are coerced into a global collectivist state with one central government, central bank and army. The building blocks of this horrific end game are already in existence. The IMF and World Bank are its financial progenitors, while the United Nations army is to be its military overseer and the United Nations the global governor. In this scenario, no sovereign state remains and to achieve this goal, preeminent, strong self-contained sovereign countries like America - and particularly America - with its legacy of free-enterprise and strong economy, must cease to exist if the world is to become one large collectivist state, which is the aim.

The effect of global monetary control is the key to this end goal and the assembly of regional global economic blocs (America - the NAFTA trade agreement currently in formation, Europe - the EU already in position and expanding and Asia - far eastern countries already looking to a common currency and economic amalgamation) are already forming as initial stepping stones to this end.

Diagram: acknowledgements to David Icke

Seen in this light, the destruction of the American economy, its constitution and spirit of free-enterprise, makes sense. It is seen as vital to weaken her both militarily and financially.

The Council on Foreign Relations - the American-based executive arm of the New World Order élites, working through the back door of the US government - is the prime mover in arranging this state of affairs. Its members' aspirations aren't bound to nation-state loyalty, but to world economic and political dominance. High US government positions are totally commandeered by CFR representatives, positioned in the heart of the administration, ideally poised in the driving seat to achieve this end.


Conclusion

And so we see that that fateful meeting in 1910 at Jekyll Island, was just one initial step in the long road to world financial dominance by a group of men, whose mechanism would eventually engulf the entire globe. The Federal Reserve System together with the IMF/World Bank is the outcome. The strangulation of the American economy through social handouts, the selling off of chunks of national infrastructure, the run-down of its manufacturing industry, the expansion of a financially burdensome government bureaucracy, the set-aside of millions of acres of agricultural land (touted as environmentalism), the flooding of the US with millions of Mexican immigrants providing cheap labour and the back-door amalgamation of Mexico and Canada along with the US into one large collectivist socialist state with a new common currency - the Amero - are the tools by which this can become reality, acting as another stepping stone toward the new global reality.

Back off Blair!

In one of Blair’s last speeches before standing down, he has dealt a parting blow at the media, branding it a “feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits,”.

But in addition he lambasted the alternative on-line media, blogs (such as this) and online forums saying that they "can be even more pernicious, less balanced, more intent on the latest conspiracy theory multiplied by five".

Obviously things are getting pretty hot for the likes of Blair and his minders who realise that their pernicious games are being laid fair and square for all to see by that very alternative media.

At the behest of those same minders, Blair’s ten-year stint in office has been nothing short of appalling, curbing most of our civil liberties and rights in the name of a phony international war on terror, banning public demonstrations in many areas in the capital, instigating, almost on a daily basis, more restrictions in the build-up of a police state which pokes its nose into every aspect of our lives, taking the country to war in Iraq on the back of trumped-up false evidence of WMD, getting caught with its trousers down in the cash-for-honours scam... the list goes on. And he has the arrogance to clamp down on an alternative media that is rightly bringing these gross injustices and breaches of executive power into public light!

The freely available flow of information on the web has been one of the greatest enabling tools that man has ever been given, a true democratic platform on which free debate and dissemination of un-censored news is available.

For once in the entire history of mankind can we now use this information to build up a picture of the realities of life, not the sanitised and spun versions of reality fed us by the mainstream media, who have, despite Blair's finger of accusation, been under the scrutiny of government and those who manage our government, for many a long year.

Through the Internet and web I have been able to disseminate a vast amount of alternative views on geopolitical affairs - some completely wide of the mark, but much of which helps me to identify and glean the truth behind many of the serious problems in the world today. In addition, the web’s resources have greatly helped me with my health, leading me to sources of information that the NHS would rather not inform me of, because it isn’t in the interest of those controlling elite who manage big pharma who in turn manipulate the health system.

Under Blair’s proposed media regulator, will all of this vital information simply evaporate, leading us into a new dark age?

You bet your life it will, because it’s current availability works against the interests of the global cartel of which Blair is one of its sorry scivvies, who want us to be kept uninformed, and merely their acquiescing lap dogs.

While the mainstream TV news in Britain now only concentrates on police state issues like paedophiles, ASBOs, curbs on this, that and everything else, interlaced with mindless drivel about pop superstars, and programming devoid of any serious, balanced debate about world or social affairs, concentrating instead on game shows and reality TV - all part of the deliberate dumbing-down of society to nullify brains and divert attention - the web, a few independent publishers' book titles and one or two independently produced magazines - who tell it like it really is - are all we have left to keep our minds informed and in balance.

Try to take that away Blair (or Brown) and you will have the wrath, outrage and opposition of honest and decent human beings to deal with, whose aim is to seek the truth in an attempt to make this place a better world. This is one step too far!