The Truth Behind The Energy Lie

Revolutionary Politics
Evidence of the suppression of energy technology.

The Big Print is Coming

A Lightning War for Liberty
by Michael Krieger
May 24, 2012

We are discreet sheep; we wait to see how the drove is going, and then go with the drove. We have two opinions: one private, which we are afraid to express; and another one – the one we use – which we force ourselves to wear to please Mrs. Grundy, until habit makes us comfortable in it, and the custom of defending it presently makes us love it, adore it, and forget how pitifully we came by it. Look at it in politics.
- Mark Twain

Humanity’s most valuable assets have been the non-conformists. Were it not for the non-conformists, he who refuses to be satisfied to go along with the continuance of things as they are, and insists upon attempting to find new ways of bettering things, the world would have known little progress, indeed.
- Josiah William Gitt

The media I’ve had a lot to do with is lazy. We fed them and they ate it every day.
- Michael Deaver (Former top aide to President Reagan)

Has The Fed Waited Too Long?

Those that know me understand clear as crystal that I don’t approve of massive money printing. I think it is theft, plain and simple, and represents an egregiously deceptive manner of transferring wealth from the poor to the wealthy and from the productive to parasitic financial oligarchs. That being said, the world we live in is being led by a bunch of crooked banksters and the Central Planners that do their bidding. At the top of the Central Planning global ponzi pyramid, is our very own Federal Reserve, headed by master Keynesian magician, the Wizard of Eccles, Ben Bernanke. For the vast majority of 2012, the Federal Reserve has been playing a very, very dangerous game. This game has been to pretend that they will not be printing any more money in an attempt to get commodity prices down as low as possible before they proceed with the inevitable. While they have done this on a smaller scale many times in the past, this particular game of chicken has in my opinion gone dangerously wrong. You see, ever since the 2008 debacle the Fed has been quite aggressive and more or less “ahead of the curve” when it has come to feeding new liquidity into the system…until now.

All of the prior programs were ready to go at the first hint of economic weakness. Even if they weren’t launched right away, the intention to print was made clear and this stabilized the system in the short-term. Not this time. This time the Fed realized that their models weren’t working. Employment continued to be weak as inflation picked up. Everyone was starting to complain about gasoline and the public was increasingly making the connection between Central Banking/fiat money and the rise in their cost of living. Occupy Wall Street emerged on the scene. All of these things put Bernanke and all his other vampire brethren on the defensive, and indeed in a box. They increasingly had to rely on less effective, more opaque means of providing liquidity. The Fed swaps to Europe was one example. The European LTRO was another. All of this has been done and all of it has now proven to be a failure. The periphery of Europe is in mired in an all out Depression and many of the BRIC countries are much closer to being in a collapse than many want to admit. That said, there is still this consensus that the U.S. is experiencing decent growth that will continue and perhaps accelerate into 2H12. Not only do I not agree with this, I think there is a good chance the U.S. is now experiencing negative growth. I think May represents the first month of real domestic weakness.

Stocks are Collapsing on Bad News

What I have noticed this quarter more than in any other in recent memory is that names are vaporizing on even the hint of bad news. Let me show you some frightening examples.

If the market was confident that this was just a blip I do not think these stocks would have responded this way and then barely rebounded. Similarly, there are many names that have put up strong results, only to have sold off on the news. HD, COH and RL come to mind. To me this is evidence of the market sniffing out economic weakness ahead, and more importantly a Fed that is behind the curve for the first time since 2008.

The BIG Print is Coming

Momentum is a strange thing in general, and social experiments as large and complex as massive economic systems are not immune to its mysterious ways. Once momentum gets going it is extremely difficult if not impossible to reverse in the near-term. This is why I have been pounding the table on China not doing anything as things unravel over there. In waiting so long to try to respond to their major slowdown, they have now seriously risked a hard landing, unless they have a plan (this is not clear as of yet) as I outlined in last week’s piece China Better Have a Plan.

Here in the U.S., I think that The Bernank’s plan was to pretend they didn’t need to print more money, get commodity prices down and then hope that the economy would respond favorably to that development. This wouldn’t have negated the need for more printing; however, it would have bought time and allowed for a potentially lesser degree of action. Instead, what has happened is that the global ponzi is completely and totally incapable of holding itself together without consistent and increasingly large infusions of Central Bank money. The debt burden is too large, the mal-investments too pervasive, the corruption too systemic. The whole house of cards that is the global economy will vanish into dust rather quickly without more and more printing. So what do you think they are going to do?

If I am correct, and the U.S. economy itself is now in the early stages of what will probably turn into a serious economic slowdown, then it will not be easily stopped with incremental Central Bank policies. The fact that they have waited this long and the fact that the global economy is in the midst of a serious slowdown tells me one thing. They are way behind the curve and by the time they realize this it will be too late to stem the momentum. That said, I do expect them to respond and the fact that things will have gotten much worse than they expected will mean a major response. I’m not talking operation twist part deux. I mean a serious print. Potentially the BIG ONE.

In this sort of scenario, the inflation hedges will sniff it out first. So I would expect the precious metals to bottom well before everything else does. In fact, we could be looking at a situation where the metals and their shares rebound sharply while the U.S. equity markets continue to decline. This could last many months. I want to point out that the GDX bottomed in October 2008 and was up 100% before the S&P 500 bottomed in March 2009. So over a five month period the GDX doubled while the SPX declined 25%. Don’t think that can happen again?

‘Big brother’ lamp posts can hear, see and bark ‘Obey!’ at you

Libertarian Review

America welcomes a new brand of smart street lightning systems: energy-efficient, long-lasting, complete with LED screens to show ads. They can also spy on citizens in a way George Orwell would not have imagined in his worst nightmare. With a price tag of $3,000+ apiece, according to an ABC report, the street lights are now being rolled out in Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh, and may soon mushroom all across the country.

Part of the Intellistreets systems made by the company Illuminating Concepts, they have a number of “homeland security applications” attached.

Each has a microprocessor “essentially similar to an iPhone,” capable of wireless communication. Each can capture images and count people for the police through a digital camera, record conversations of passers-by and even give voice commands thanks to a built-in speaker.

Ron Harwood, president and founder of Illuminating Concepts, says he eyed the creation of such a system after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the Hurricane Katrina disaster. He is “working with Homeland Security” to deliver his dream of making people “more informed and safer.”

If Cops Can't Taze a Pregnant Woman, The Terrorists Will Win

Freedom In Our Time

Thanks to a misbegotten ruling from a divided Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, police in nine states have been left at an insurmountable disadvantage when dealing with criminal suspects. At least, that’s what we’re told in a legal brief submitted to the Supreme Court by a coalition of police unions.

“It won’t be long before the word spreads through society’s criminal underworld that the Ninth Circuit hasn’t simply given them a `get out of jail free’ card, but a `never have to go to jail in the first place’ card,” warns the amicus brief. Rather than subduing criminals, “police officers will now be forced to walk away from people they have arrested.”

The ruling that is fraught with such awful implications, Brooks v. City of Seattle, involved a patently unnecessary Taser attack upon a woman who was seven months pregnant. The unarmed woman, who was not suspected of a violent crime, posed no threat to the three – yes, three – valiant officers who assaulted her. She was uncooperative, but did not offer any violent resistance.

Her sole “offense” was to refuse a demand that she sign a traffic ticket that was eventually dismissed.

In March 2010, the Ninth Circuit Court found that Seattle Police Officers Steven Daman, Juan Ornelas, and Donald Jones used excessive force when they committed their attack on Brooks and her unborn child – but that they were entitled to “qualified immunity” because the legal precedents dealing with the use of electro-shock torture on a pregnant woman were ambiguous in 2004.

The assailants were thus left in the clear -- but unsatisfied with their victory. With the support of organizations representing tens of thousands of police officers (including some 30,000 SWAT operators), the officers are appealing that ruling to the Supreme Court, claiming that any limitation on the discretionary use of tasers against non-violent “suspects” constitutes an unacceptable restraint on police discretion and a dire threat to that holiest of social considerations, “officer safety.”

In its brief on behalf of the officers, the Los Angeles County Police Chiefs Association (LACPCA) and the National Tactical Officers Association (NTOA) insist that refusing to allow police to use electro-shock torture against a pregnant woman would fatally undermine the principle of “pain compliance” on which social order – as they pretend to understand it – depends.

On November 23, 2004, Malaika Brooks was taking her son to school when she was stopped by Officer Ornelas, who claimed – wrongly, as it turned out – that she had been speeding. When he presented Brooks with a traffic ticket, she refused to sign it out of the concern that doing so would constitute an admission of guilt. She had done the same during a 1996 traffic stop in which the officer, who possessed some residual decency, simply handed her the little extortion note and walked away.

Ornelas, unfortunately, chose to escalate the encounter by calling for “backup.” A few minutes later, Officer Jones and Sgt. Daman arrived on the scene and began to threaten and berate Brooks. None of this was necessary: The officers were engaging in a tribal display of primate dominance, rather than carrying out a function related in any way to protection of person and property. When they threatened to kidnap – or, as they called it, “arrest” – Brooks, the woman informed them that she was “less than 60 days from having my baby.”

After huddling briefly, the three officers attacked Brooks. Ornelas seized her right arm and -- in the course of less than a minute – inflicted three “drive stun” charges to Brooks’s neck, shoulder, and thigh, an assault that left her with permanent scars. The three officers then dragged Brooks – who had been desperately clinging to the steering wheel, honking the horn, and screaming for help – from the car, threw her face-down and pinned her to the ground. She was handcuffed and then booked on charges of “Refusing to sign” a traffic citation – a misdemeanor – and resisting arrest.

A jury eventually found Brooks guilty of the first “offense,” and acquitted her of the second. The speeding citation was thrown out before Brooks went to court. Brooks filed suit against the officers for assault and violating her civil rights. The officers responded by invoking the well-established – and utterly specious – doctrine of “qualified immunity,” seeking a summary dismissal. The District Court dismissed the assault charge but found that the officers had committed a civil rights violation that nullified their claim to qualified immunity.

In his dissent, Judge Alex Kozinski maintained that Brooks “had shown herself deaf to reason, and moderate physical force had only led to further entrenchment…. Brooks was tying up two line officers, a sergeant and three police vehicles – resources diverted from other community functions – to deal with one lousy traffic ticket.”

Who was responsible for this “diversion” – Mrs. Brooks, who was merely being uncooperative, or Officer Ornelas and his comrades, who needlessly escalated a disagreement over “one lousy traffic ticket” to the point where potentially deadly force was used against someone accused of a trivial traffic offense, rather than an actual crime?

“The officers couldn’t just walk away,” complains Kozinski. “Brooks was under arrest.”

There was no substantive reason why the police couldn’t walk away – if they had been acting as peace officers, that is, rather than as armed enforcers of the revenue-consuming class.

If a police officer has the option of deploying a reliably deadly weapon in a situation of this kind, he also has the option of backing down and letting the court deal with the merits of the citation. But the position claimed by the officers – and accepted, in a qualified sense, by the Ninth Circuit Court – is that anything other than immediate and unqualified submission by a Mundane justifies the infliction of summary punishment by a police officer.

The amicus brief by the LACPCA and NTOA lament that the Ninth Circuit Court, while upholding the unqualified “authority” of police to arrest people at their discretion, “has deprived officers of any lawful way of enforcing that authority, at least when the suspect is not engaged in violence directed towards the officers” and has “unnecessarily limited the amount of force that can be used against a suspect who refrains from using violence against the police” (emphasis added).

What the police unions who filed that brief are demanding is an open-ended grant of unlimited “authority” to use “pain compliance” against people who passively resist abduction by police. The question of using violent means to subdue a violent criminal suspect is not implicated in any way by this case.

In their petition for certiorari, the officers – whose actions, remember, were upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court – complain that the ruling could “prohibit the use of any low-level physical force against an actually resisting suspect who does not present an imminent threat of harm to the officers, a result that could strip law enforcement of any reasonable and practical means of enforcing the law.”

To which a person whose mind is not hostage to totalitarian assumptions would reply: “And the problem with this is…?”

In a reasonably free society, police (actually, peace officers) would not presume to "enforce" the law; they would track down and arrest people plausibly suspected of committing crimes against person and property. They would not be permitted to violate the unconditional law of non-aggression by initiating force, or issue what they assume to be “lawful orders” to people who are not suspected of actual crimes. They certainly would not be permitted to employ “pain compliance” in any situation that didn’t involve legitimate defense against an actual aggressor.

Remarkably, in their amicus brief the officers who committed what should be prosecuted as a felonious assault on Brooks asserted that “it is well established that police officers need not use the least amount of force in effecting an arrest.”

Once again, we’re invited to believe that there would be apocalyptic consequences if police were inhibited in the use of disproportionate force to compel non-violent “suspects” to submit to their supposed authority.

Under the standard prescribed in the amicus briefs filed on behalf of the officers who assaulted Brooks, it’s difficult to find fault with the actions of Beaumont, California Police Officer Enoch Clark.

On February 21, Clark stopped a woman named Monique Hernandez on suspicion of DUI. When Clark tried to handcuff her, Hernandez resisted. Clark’s preferred method of “pain compliance” was a JPX device — a weapon that employs a gunpowder charge to fire a stream of pepper spray at roughly 400 miles an hour.

The JPX weapon is designed for use against armed assailants at a distance of 6 to 15 feet. Its payload of weaponized OC spray is propelled over that distance at less than three one-hundredths of a second, making it (in the words of the company’s promotional literature) “too fast to avoid…. The effect is immediate; there is no chance to resist.”

Clark – a veteran officer and chairman of the local police officers union -- fired his JPX gun into Hernandez’s right temple at a distance of roughly ten inches. The impact shattered the woman’s right eye and inflicted irreparable damage to her left eye as well.

The officer has been indicted on four felony charges. His attorney insists that the officer’s attack was justified in order “to gain compliance and in defense of his person.” If the claims made by and on behalf of the officers who assaulted Mailaka Brooks are sound – if police officers are not legally required to use minimal force when dealing with non-violent “suspects” – it’s difficult to see how Clark’s actions were improper, even though they resulted in Monique Rodriguez being permanently blinded.

“It was Brooks’s recalcitrance and resistance that prompted her treatment,” sniffs the officers’ petition for certiorari. “Under both state and federal law she did not have a right to resist her arrest,” which purportedly means that the officers were permitted – nay, required – to employ “pain compliance” techniques against her until she submitted.

Wouldn’t the same principle apply to the actions of Enoch Clark in dealing with the equally recalcitrant Monique Hernandez? His police union attorney certainly thinks so. And let us not forget that any effort to inhibit the police in their sacred mission to impose order would constitute an existential threat to our society.

Deny an intrepid hero in body armor the option of tasing a pregnant woman – or kicking her in the stomach hard enough to cause the near-term infant to defecate in the womb – a reign of terror will ensue, with the “criminal underworld” arising to devour us all.

Agenda 21 Brainwashing: “Integrating Population Issues Into Environmental Mass Media Coverage”

Explosive Reports
Jurriaan Maessen
April 17, 2012

During a discussion at the 1980 Bilderberg conference in Aachen, West-Germany, one participant stood up to make his case for depopulation and the third world. In the Bilderberg notes we read:

“The speaker (a German participant) went on to say that the leaders of the LDC’s understood that the oil price explosion had hurt the Third World much more than the industrialized countries. And they were beginning to see that they did not have at all the same interests as the oil-producing countries. What they did not perhaps fully understand was what a menace the population explosion was to their countries. It seemed that no one wanted to tell them that- neither the Catholic Church nor others. It would be nearly impossible to feed and employ the future world population at the rate it was growing. This had to be faced seriously; it could not be solved by talking about “gadgets and gimmicks.”, the German participant concluded.

The gadgets and gimmicks the Bilderberger referred to during the 1980 get-together were already in place during the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s en were to be expanded with painstaking accuracy by the global elite in the years and decades to come. To tackle the population problem and convincingly manufacture an ongoing crisis in order to justify their plans, they would have to find some pretext, any pretext, on the condition that it superseded nation-states for their own transnational designs.

CFR-head Richard N. Haass offers an insight into the true objective of the environmental argument in a 1991 Club of Rome document, ‘The First Global Revolution’:

“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a common enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.”

As we know, the globalists have decided long ago that the environmental debate is no longer a debate- it has been decreed that the “discussion is over” and everyone should better realize that man is the prime cause for global warming on the planet earth, or of any other natural calamity. As long as it serves the double purpose of the elite: to abolish nation-states in favor of a great global government, and reduce the world population in the same breath. The imagined threat of “international terrorism” being hardly sufficient to justify the drastic measures being implemented, another common enemy has presented itself, and that enemy is staring back at you in the mirror.

As numerous meteorologists and climatologists have testified to in recent years, their participation in the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been used to back a theory that they themselves did not support. And then there are the thousands of meteorologists of good name and standard, who out of scientific righteousness have stepped forward and presented their facts before the public and scientific community. But it is of no concern to the global elite. They have for a good long time, spanning the last couple of centuries at least, presided over the politics of eugenics and enforced its diabolical mechanisms with energy, cunning and precision. It is not an idle use of words, when we identify eugenicists as such, for however just and noble its cloaking makes them out to be, this supposed righteousness is merely a grotesque carnival-costume intended to shade its true countenance.

For an October 1975 ‘International Workshop on Environmental Education’, UN-representative Lars Emmelin writes: “The adult education effort seems to me most critical. First, because this element- now outside the formal channels of education- will continue to be the decision makers for the next 15 to 20 years, and it is within this period that the most critical and disruptive decisions will have to be made. We cannot afford to focus on youth and let the elders die off before changing our course, which, if time permitted, would be the most efficient way of institutions change.”

In choosing its course for mass-indoctrination, the 1975 workshop explores various ways in which the mass media can be used to “sensitize” the general public in accepting the UN’s long-term ambitions. Under the headline ‘The Media as Environmental Educators’ (page 4) several options are being presented by one of the participants in how the media can best be used:

“Discussing the role of media as motivators Sandman concludes that: “Four relatively effective kinds of environmental information are: basic ecological principles; prescriptions for environmental action; early warnings of anticipated problems; and assessments of blame for environmental degradation.”’, the report states.

During an ENESCO-conference in October 1977 held (bizarrely) in Soviet Russia, the Director-General of UNESCO, Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow, “paid tribute to the Soviet Union and to the spectacular results achieved since the October Revolution in all areas of economic, social and cultural life, particularly in education and science, and, more especially, in environmental education.”

You’re reading it right. Here the good Director-General is paying tribute to a then 60-year old regime responsible for murdering many millions of its own people in death camps and deliberate mass-scale starvation-operations. Yes, “environmental issues” were very high on the agenda of the USSR, very high indeed.

After having taken his hat off to his fellow-psychopath, the Director-General plunged into a long and melodious speech on the importance of the “environment-issue” in the decades to come:

“The objectives and strategies relating to the environment and to development had to be linked and coordinated. (…) It would be the task of education to make people aware of their responsibilities in this connection, but in order to do so it must first be reoriented and based on an ethos of the environment” And a little further on he states: “Environmental education should also promote attitudes which would encourage individuals to discipline themselves in order not to impair the quality of the environment and to play a positive role in improving it.”

It is true, under the intentionally vague ‘environment’-umbrella one can assemble all kinds of calamities and as many solutions to combat them.

“Work in this programme area”, the report continues, “will be intensified “in the line of the conference’s recommendations and move into a more operational fase. This means, among other activities, “making aid from UNESCO available to member states (of the UN) which would like to launch pilot projects”; considering a “bank” of experts on environmental education; augmenting “work in the exchange of experience, in training and in encouraging the production of teaching materials”; and strengthening the Secretariat and UNESCO’s infrastructure in general for the increased promotion of environmental education..”’

In the meeting, the chairman of the conference stressed that no means must or will be shunned in the coming propaganda war against the people:

“Some countries have also taken an interest, as part of in-service training activities, in the environmental education of various social and occupational categories of the population, such as factory workers, farmers, civil servants, etc. Marked progress has been made in the preparation of audio-visual and printed teaching materials concerning the environment, and the mass media are being increasingly used for sensitizing and informing broad sectors of the public about the environment.”

In a follow-up conference more than ten years later (this time in Moscow) the Secretary-General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, discusses “three levels of global education” in regards to the environment. The first, he states, is the “moral imperative” to reach as many people as humanly possible. The second level is “to harness school systems, non-formal learning and informal education to teach and learn about the global issues that shape and threaten the quality of our lives.” Arriving at the third and last level of global indoctrination, Mayor states: “The third level concerns the means at our disposal to project a global reach for education through both simple and highly advanced existing technologies. (…) the daily newspaper and radio have a crucial role to play in building bridges to the wider world. We must promote these media, defend and expand their freedom and appeal to their professionals at all levels to work with us for global education.”

We can hardly accuse the globalists of keeping their plans secret. At every possible UN event or brainstorm conference, they openly brag about their plans for the world in quite explicit ways. The Secretary-General continues about the steps that have to be taken in order to build a “new global perception”:

“Our first initiative would be to create a worldwide expert panel of scientists and educators to plan a global education curriculum of practical value and planetary scope.”

The Secretary-General forgets to mention here that just such a panel was created two years earlier by the very organization he presided over.

“Second, putting environmental education at the center of all curricula from kindergarten to higher studies and training the teachers and the administrators who can carry the massage into all schools.(..) Third, promoting a global civic education by devising teaching methods and materials that emphasize the ethics of worldwide community living.(…) Fourth, teaching the children of the wealthier countries about the conditions of their brothers and sisters in the developing world (…) Fifth, working with the mass media and telecommunication enterprises to produce and broadcast audio-visual packages that introduce audiences, particularly children and young people, to the great teachers of this world at al levels and in all cultures (…).”

“And finally”, the Secretary-General concludes, “let me make a very immediate and concrete proposal: building on the broadcast of this forum scheduled for tomorrow (…), to create global television learning networks on the issues of the human agenda for the next century. This would be an experiment in informal global education at its best.”

Under the term ‘Information Repackaging’, the UN has published several manuals on this subject, teaching their cronies how to most effectively influence public opinion. In a 1986 Manual for Repackaging of Information on Population Education, the UNESCO proposes “strategies for integrating population education into different subject areas”- one of these being playing into fears on the part of the population in regards to the subject of their home environment family:

“For instance, the effectiveness of fear appeals in changing attitudes and behaviour, such as the adverse effects of non- or limited access to education and housing facilities with more than two children, depends on the credibility of the source of information and the extent of general/public support to the message conveyed by a particular piece of information. Fear appeals directed to the welfare of people valued by the receiver of information (e.g. family members, close friends) are also effective.”

On page 37 of the manual, under the header “Selective Dissemination of Information (SDI)”, the strategy is further elaborated upon:

“One SDI package, for instance, focuses on the integration of population education into environmental education. The package contains materials which will help users understand the relationship between man and the environment, as well as provide insights and actual data on how to plan, teach and implement practical environment/population activities for everyday life.”

As we know, the above mentioned gadgets and gimmicks are being incrementally used in the mass media as the climate change propaganda machine is working overtime. Using the mass media to prepare the population for globalist supreme rule is not only an ambitious plan- it reveals the deceitful spirit behind the provided information, rivaling the work of Joseph Goebbels and his Department of Propaganda.

A March 2009 policy brief by the United Nations Population Division reveals that the long-term plan for worldwide population reduction is not going fast enough according to the social engineers, not by a long shot. Under the desperate headline “What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?” this particular policy brief gives an overview of the progress made by developing countries in regards to the globalists set goal of reducing population and proposes several ways of speeding up the death. Richly draped with graphic illustrations on the state of global population and the progress made by the UN to bring back fertility to “acceptable” levels, the policy brief advises an increased effort on the part of governments to commit to a strict family planning- policy and other measures designed to bring a halt to life.

“The reduction of fertility could be accelerated if effective measures were taken to satisfy the existing unmet need for family planning.”

After these recommendations, the authors plunge into a long, wailing lament about the slow progress of the desired culling of the population. They also blame a lack of commitment of the governments concerned and, as expected, they stress the need for a global intervention in order to avoid certain destruction.

This recent policy brief was just one out of many in regards to the long-term plan by the elite to significantly bring down the numbers of the existing earth population. From the moment the Rockefeller funded family planning-machine was widely kicked off in the 1960s and 70s, numerous meetings have been held in the last couple of decades where various strategies were discussed to implement population-reduction on as large a scale as possible. The strategies in question were especially directed towards the third world as the globalists had virtual carte blanche in the impoverished developing countries. The famous 1994 population conference in Cairo outlined some of the proposed strategies to be implemented. Then Secretary-General of the UN, Boutros Boutros-Ghali in his opening statement on the International Conference on Population and Development, stated that:

“I am not exaggerating when I say that not only does the future of the human society depend on this Conference but also the efficacy of the economic order of the planet on which we live.”

During a follow-up-meeting held in New York on December 1994, the United Nations’ participants came up with some practical solutions to the “population problem”– one of which is the integration of population issues with matters of “environment” and “human development”:

“Several priority areas were identified that needed immediate action by the participants. These included creation of awareness of the interrelationships between environment, population and development; advocacy; education; training; population management; gender concerns; monitoring and evaluation; and information dissemination and networking.”

Under the headline “Youth NGOs Agree to Integrate Environment and Population Issues in their Activities” were mentioned the following activities to “guide” the young into the right mindset by, again, mixing in environmental issues with population issues:

“Among the current issues identified by the Working Group as requiring priority attention were the problems dealing with population, environment and sustainable development. Hence, a Working Group Meeting of the Regional Consultation of Youth NGOs in Asia and the Pacific was held from 19-21 April 1995 at the UNESCO PROAP to discuss and shape a plan of action integrating issues on environment, population and development for consideration by the youth NGOs. (…) To help them develop a relevant plan of action, the participants were exposed and sensitized to the current policies and programmes adopted by FAO, UNEP, UNFPA, and UNESCO in the areas of population, environment and development.”

Further on the use of mass-media is being proposed as effective “carriers of population-information” to hammer dehumanization into the collective consciousness:

“With more than 2 billion radios in the world, roughly one for every three people, and growing number of televisions, the electronic media plays an increasingly important and influential role in building awareness of population and other development issues.”

The report continues with a prime example of predictive programming:

“Radio and television soap operas featuring family planning themes, popular songs on population-related issues, and phone-in question-and-answer sessions have all had an impact in different countries. The use of such media can be very important where literacy is low or where written information is not widely circulated. A TV soap opera series is credited with bringing thousands to family planning clinics in Mexico, and night-time drama series integrating family planning themes have proved successful in Egypt, Nigeria and Turkey.”

In a January 1994 preparation meeting for the Cairo conference called “Family Planning Communications Strategies Examined” it was discussed how best to use the media in order to create tolerance among the general public and “how attitudes and beliefs could be changed through the innovative use of traditional and mass media.”

“The meeting featured case studies and presentations by communication practitioners and covered a wide range of subjects, such as: the use of folk tradition and drama to organize community action in Egypt; the use of micro-communications to encourage acceptance of family planning in the Philippines; the use of traditional and modern media in Ghana; and the use of songs to propagate family planning messages in Latin America. The success in India and Mexico of radio and television soap operas and films on family planning subjects was also discussed.”

During the meeting the Executive Coordinator of the ICPD, Jyoti Shankar Singh, stressed the importance of using mass media to “convey family planning and reproductive health messages”:

“Electronic media, print media (and) interpersonal interventions were all part of the kind of comprehensive information, education and communication (IEC) strategies we need in pursuit of population goals.”

In another technical report Guidelines on Basic Education with special attention to Gender Disparities for the UN Resident Coordinator System the message is repeatedly conveyed that:

“It is important that information be disseminated through various channels including traditional means and packaged in various forms to allow both literate and illiterate persons to understand the key messages.”

In 1997 the UNFPA organized a Regional Media Seminar on Population and Development for the role of the mass media in (euphemistically called) ‘Information Repackaging’ for the Pacific islands. The UN officials boasted on the success of the seminar:

“The seminar brought together journalists in the print and radio media from 9 countries of the South Pacific to explore both the role and potential of mass media as a vehicle for population advocacy, information, education and communication. (…) The seminar explored the role of the media in developing and packaging population materials for identified target groups. The meeting also provided development partners with an opportunity to forge networks with media personnel and develop effective strategies to better address population and development goals and accelerate the implementation of the ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development) Programme of Action.”

In other words: every possible resource should be utilized for propagandizing different target audiences. But the people burdened with designing and implementing population education on a large scale emphasized the need for a common tongue and sequence of arguments with which the different UN-divisions sell the people on the idea of dehumanization.

“Mr. Michael Vlassoff, Senior Technical Officer, Technical and Evaluation Division, UNFPA, introduced the work of the Working Group on Policy-Related Issues. He explained that the Working Group had decided to address the “common advocacy” concern by drawing up a Statement of Commitment that would then be issued by all agencies and organizations involved in the IATF. The aim of such a statement would be to ensure that all UN agencies and organizations use the same language regarding population and development issues.”

The report goes on to list these arguments with which populations worldwide should be lured into embracing modern-day eugenics as a sensible policy:

“The “Statement of Commitment on Population and Development by the United Nations System”, drafted by the Working Group, is divided into three sections: a general introduction stressing the commitment by the UN agencies and organizations to implement ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development); a section on the linkages between population issues and other development issues; and a concluding section calling for global partnership in addressing these interrelated issues.”

In short- a great part of the 1990s was occupied with a coordinated mobilization of mass media for propaganda purposes by the global elite, a test case so to speak, before implementing the same strategies worldwide in the first decades of the 21st century. The great global warming swindle then was put into action, arriving just in time as the environmental issue to attach the basic message to: there are too many of us- and our numbers should be reduced before the planet is destroyed. Because the warming is global, the response should be so as well. However eloquently the message may be presented by hopelessly compliant media outlets, it is the tyrant’s voice we discern amidst the chatter- and all with ears to hear should educate their neighbor in this all-out information war. Let’s not forget what the elite who have funded the UN from the moment of its very conception have always aspired. In the words of the aristocratic fiend Prince Philip:

“If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

14 Propaganda Techniques Fox 'News' Uses to Brainwash Americans

Alternet

There is nothing more sacred to the maintenance of democracy than a free press. Access to comprehensive, accurate and quality information is essential to the manifestation of Socratic citizenship - the society characterized by a civically engaged, well-informed and socially invested populace. Thus, to the degree that access to quality information is willfully or unintentionally obstructed, democracy itself is degraded.

It is ironic that in the era of 24-hour cable news networks and "reality" programming, the news-to-fluff ratio and overall veracity of information has declined precipitously. Take the fact Americans now spend on average about 50 hours a week using various forms of media, while at the same time cultural literacy levels hover just above the gutter. Not only does mainstream media now tolerate gross misrepresentations of fact and history by public figures (highlighted most recently by Sarah Palin's ludicrous depiction of Paul Revere's ride), but many media actually legitimize these displays.

Pause for a moment and ask yourself what it means that the world's largest, most profitable and most popular news channel passes off as fact every whim, impulse and outrageously incompetent analysis of its so-called reporters. How did we get here?

Take the enormous amount of misinformation that is taken for truth by Fox audiences: the belief that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that he was in on 9/11, the belief that climate change isn't real and/or man-made, the belief that Barack Obama is Muslim and wasn't born in the United States, the insistence that all Arabs are Muslim and all Muslims are terrorists, the inexplicable perceptions that immigrants are both too lazy to work and are about to steal your job.

All of these claims are demonstrably false, yet Fox News viewers will maintain their veracity with incredible zeal. Why? Is it simply that we have lost our respect for knowledge?

My curiosity about this question compelled me to sit down and document the most oft-used methods by which willful ignorance has been turned into dogma by Fox News and other propagandists disguised as media. The techniques I identify here also help to explain the simultaneously powerful identification the Fox media audience has with the network, as well as their ardent, reflexive defenses of it.

The good news is that the more conscious you are of these techniques, the less likely they are to work on you. The bad news is that those reading this article are probably the least in need in of it.

1. Panic Mongering. This goes one step beyond simple fear mongering. With panic mongering, there is never a break from the fear. The idea is to terrify and terrorize the audience during every waking moment. From Muslims to swine flu to recession to homosexuals to immigrants to the rapture itself, the belief over at Fox seems to be that if your fight-or-flight reflexes aren't activated, you aren't alive. This of course raises the question: why terrorize your own audience? Because it is the fastest way to bypasses the rational brain. In other words, when people are afraid, they don't think rationally. And when they can't think rationally, they'll believe anything.

2. Character Assassination/Ad Hominem. Fox does not like to waste time debating the idea. Instead, they prefer a quicker route to dispensing with their opponents: go after the person's credibility, motives, intelligence, character, or, if necessary, sanity. No category of character assassination is off the table and no offense is beneath them. Fox and like-minded media figures also use ad hominem attacks not just against individuals, but entire categories of people in an effort to discredit the ideas of every person who is seen to fall into that category, e.g. "liberals," "hippies," "progressives" etc. This form of argument - if it can be called that - leaves no room for genuine debate over ideas, so by definition, it is undemocratic. Not to mention just plain crass.

3. Projection/Flipping. This one is frustrating for the viewer who is trying to actually follow the argument. It involves taking whatever underhanded tactic you're using and then accusing your opponent of doing it to you first. We see this frequently in the immigration discussion, where anti-racists are accused of racism, or in the climate change debate, where those who argue for human causes of the phenomenon are accused of not having science or facts on their side. It's often called upon when the media host finds themselves on the ropes in the debate.

4. Rewriting History. This is another way of saying that propagandists make the facts fit their worldview. The Downing Street Memos on the Iraq war were a classic example of this on a massive scale, but it happens daily and over smaller issues as well. A recent case in point is Palin's mangling of the Paul Revere ride, which Fox reporters have bent over backward to validate. Why lie about the historical facts, even when they can be demonstrated to be false? Well, because dogmatic minds actually find it easier to reject reality than to update their viewpoints. They will literally rewrite history if it serves their interests. And they'll often speak with such authority that the casual viewer will be tempted to question what they knew as fact.

5. Scapegoating/Othering. This works best when people feel insecure or scared. It's technically a form of both fear mongering and diversion, but it is so pervasive that it deserves its own category. The simple idea is that if you can find a group to blame for social or economic problems, you can then go on to a) justify violence/dehumanization of them, and b) subvert responsibility for any harm that may befall them as a result.

6. Conflating Violence With Power and Opposition to Violence With Weakness. This is more of what I'd call a "meta-frame" (a deeply held belief) than a media technique, but it is manifested in the ways news is reported constantly. For example, terms like "show of strength" are often used to describe acts of repression, such as those by the Iranian regime against the protesters in the summer of 2009. There are several concerning consequences of this form of conflation. First, it has the potential to make people feel falsely emboldened by shows of force - it can turn wars into sporting events. Secondly, especially in the context of American politics, displays of violence - whether manifested in war or debates about the Second Amendment - are seen as noble and (in an especially surreal irony) moral. Violence become synonymous with power, patriotism and piety.

7. Bullying. This is a favorite technique of several Fox commentators. That it continues to be employed demonstrates that it seems to have some efficacy. Bullying and yelling works best on people who come to the conversation with a lack of confidence, either in themselves or their grasp of the subject being discussed. The bully exploits this lack of confidence by berating the guest into submission or compliance. Often, less self-possessed people will feel shame and anxiety when being berated and the quickest way to end the immediate discomfort is to cede authority to the bully. The bully is then able to interpret that as a "win."

8. Confusion. As with the preceding technique, this one works best on an audience that is less confident and self-possessed. The idea is to deliberately confuse the argument, but insist that the logic is airtight and imply that anyone who disagrees is either too dumb or too fanatical to follow along. Less independent minds will interpret the confusion technique as a form of sophisticated thinking, thereby giving the user's claims veracity in the viewer's mind.

9. Populism. This is especially popular in election years. The speakers identifies themselves as one of "the people" and the target of their ire as an enemy of the people. The opponent is always "elitist" or a "bureaucrat" or a "government insider" or some other category that is not the people. The idea is to make the opponent harder to relate to and harder to empathize with. It often goes hand in hand with scapegoating. A common logical fallacy with populism bias when used by the right is that accused "elitists" are almost always liberals - a category of political actors who, by definition, advocate for non-elite groups.

10. Invoking the Christian God. This is similar to othering and populism. With morality politics, the idea is to declare yourself and your allies as patriots, Christians and "real Americans" (those are inseparable categories in this line of thinking) and anyone who challenges them as not. Basically, God loves Fox and Republicans and America. And hates taxes and anyone who doesn't love those other three things. Because the speaker has been benedicted by God to speak on behalf of all Americans, any challenge is perceived as immoral. It's a cheap and easy technique used by all totalitarian entities from states to cults.

11. Saturation. There are three components to effective saturation: being repetitive, being ubiquitous and being consistent. The message must be repeated cover and over, it must be everywhere and it must be shared across commentators: e.g. "Saddam has WMD." Veracity and hard data have no relationship to the efficacy of saturation. There is a psychological effect of being exposed to the same message over and over, regardless of whether it's true or if it even makes sense, e.g., "Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States." If something is said enough times, by enough people, many will come to accept it as truth. Another example is Fox's own slogan of "Fair and Balanced."

12. Disparaging Education. There is an emerging and disturbing lack of reverence for education and intellectualism in many mainstream media discourses. In fact, in some circles (e.g. Fox), higher education is often disparaged as elitist. Having a university credential is perceived by these folks as not a sign of credibility, but of a lack of it. In fact, among some commentators, evidence of intellectual prowess is treated snidely and as anti-American. The disdain for education and other evidence of being trained in critical thinking are direct threats to a hive-mind mentality, which is why they are so viscerally demeaned.

13. Guilt by Association. This is a favorite of Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart, both of whom have used it to decimate the careers and lives of many good people. Here's how it works: if your cousin's college roommate's uncle's ex-wife attended a dinner party back in 1984 with Gorbachev's niece's ex-boyfriend's sister, then you, by extension are a communist set on destroying America. Period.

14. Diversion. This is where, when on the ropes, the media commentator suddenly takes the debate in a weird but predictable direction to avoid accountability. This is the point in the discussion where most Fox anchors start comparing the opponent to Saul Alinsky or invoking ACORN or Media Matters, in a desperate attempt to win through guilt by association. Or they'll talk about wanting to focus on "moving forward," as though by analyzing the current state of things or God forbid, how we got to this state of things, you have no regard for the future. Any attempt to bring the discussion back to the issue at hand will likely be called deflection, an ironic use of the technique of projection/flipping.

In debating some of these tactics with colleagues and friends, I have also noticed that the Fox viewership seems to be marked by a sort of collective personality disorder whereby the viewer feels almost as though they've been let into a secret society. Something about their affiliation with the network makes them feel privileged and this affinity is likely what drives the viewers to defend the network so vehemently. They seem to identify with it at a core level, because it tells them they are special and privy to something the rest of us don't have. It's akin to the loyalty one feels by being let into a private club or a gang. That effect is also likely to make the propaganda more powerful, because it goes mostly unquestioned.

In considering these tactics and their possible effects on American public discourse, it is important to note that historically, those who've genuinely accessed truth have never berated those who did not. You don't get honored by history when you beat up your opponent: look at Martin Luther King Jr., Robert Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln. These men did not find the need to engage in othering, ad homeinum attacks, guilt by association or bullying. This is because when a person has accessed a truth, they are not threatened by the opposing views of others.

This reality reveals the righteous indignation of people like Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity as a symptom of untruth. These individuals are hostile and angry precisely because they don't feel confident in their own veracity. And in general, the more someone is losing their temper in a debate and the more intolerant they are of listening to others, the more you can be certain they do not know what they're talking about.

One final observation. Fox audiences, birthers and Tea Partiers often defend their arguments by pointing to the fact that a lot of people share the same perceptions. This is a reasonable point to the extent that Murdoch's News Corporation reaches a far larger audience than any other single media outlet. But, the fact that a lot of people believe something is not necessarily a sign that it's true; it's just a sign that it's been effectively marketed.

As honest, fair and truly intellectual debate degrades before the eyes of the global media audience, the quality of American democracy degrades along with it.

The U.S. Internment Camp: Prison for a New American Century

Activist Post

The topic of civilian internment camps in the United States has been largely dismissed as a paranoid “conspiracy theory” by the mainstream media. Recent legislation and newly uncovered government documents, however, reveal the sad truth: The United States is quickly descending into a full-blown authoritarian police state.

NDAA 2012: Patriot Act Part Two

On December 31, 2011, while the majority of Americans were busy watching balls drop and drinking themselves into oblivion, President Obama quietly signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. This unprecedented legislation effectively codified the executive branch’s authority to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial, stripping them of their Constitutional right to due process and habeas corpus.

Under this legislation, if you are simply “suspected” of providing support to a group the government classifies as a terrorist organization—or an affiliate or associated force of said organization—you can be rounded up and detained until the end of the “War on Terror”—a war, according to policy makers, that has no end.

Over the course of this endless and prefabricated war, the government’s definition of “terrorist” has slowly shifted post 9/11 from Al Qaeda, a group of dubious power initially funded and supported by the CIA and the Pakistani ISI, to such “domestic terrorists” as Occupy Wall Street protestors, pro-life advocates and Ron Paul supporters. When the FBI set-up a band of dimwitted “anarchist” patsies to plant a fake bomb on a bridge, it became blatantly clear who the government now sees as the true enemy of the state. This has been the FBI’s modus operandi for quite some time.

The default argument against the existence of internment camps designed for Americans has always been that the United States government would never put its own citizens in prison camps–couldn’t happen. It’s unfortunate how quickly some people are willing to forget that our government has already done exactly that; during World War II, citizens of Japanese descent were rounded up and locked away, just for being of a certain ancestry. Now the question becomes: Would they do it again? Unfortunately, the answer seems to be “yes.”

A U.S. Army field manual, FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations, has been leaked to Public Intelligence that outlines in vivid detail exactly how these civilian internment camps are to be run.

Martial Law In America

This disturbing 326-page document is intended to provide guidance for commanders and staff on internment and resettlement (I/R) operations in order to effectively deal with I/R populations, including U.S. military prisoners, civilian internees, retained personnel and enemy combatants.

In the event of a “military or civil conflict” or “natural or man-made disaster,” the U.S. Army is to partner with both international and domestic agencies, including the United Nations, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA to support these I/R operations.

This field manual comes to light, coincidentally, just a few weeks after it was revealed that DHS and ICE are stocking up on several hundred million rounds of hollow point ammunition.

While the military undoubtedly has contingency plans for numerous war-time scenarios with and in foreign nations, this document reveals that these I/R facilities can be established within the United States. In section 2-40 of the manual, it states: The I/R tasks performed in support of civil support operations are similar to those during combat operations, but the techniques and procedures are modified based on the special OE associated with operating within U.S. territory and according to the categories of individuals (primarily DCs) to be housed in I/R facilities.

Currently, U.S. citizens are protected from the military enforcing civilian laws within the United States or its territories thanks to the Posse Comitatus Act. However, given Obama’s willingness to usurp Constitutional protections at the drop of a helmet, I’m not holding my breath that a second Obama term or another puppet administration won’t attempt to overturn Posse Comitatus in the future. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time.

While the passing of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012 was a dark day in American history, the methods of human control, discipline and degradation outlined in this official field manual go beyond the pale. We’ll touch on a few of the more egregious examples of the unconstitutional, liberty-stripping language contained within FM 3-39.40, but we encourage you to read the document for yourself here to get a full picture.

Inside the Camps

Complete with razor wire, guard towers, maximum security areas with individual cells and patrol roads, it is clear these civilian internment camps are not designed to merely protect displaced citizens from “natural or man-made disaster[s]”.

Once captured,soldiers working at the camps are to “process detainees using the ‘search, silence, segregate, speed, safeguard and tag (5 Ss and T)’ technique.” The most concerning of these is “silence.” Soldiers manning the camps must “prevent detainees from communicating with one another or making audible clamor such as chanting, singing or praying.” The soldiers are also to “silence uncooperative detainees by muffling them with a soft, clean cloth tied around their mouths and fastened at the back of their heads.” It goes even further:

6-16 Military police must not speak to detainees except to give orders or directions. Do not let detainees talk to or signal each other during the processing phase at any echelon. This prevents them from plotting ways to counter security, planning escapes, or orchestrating other undesirable activities. Detainees who refuse to be silent may require a muffle (an item used to prevent speech or outcry without causing injury to the detainee, such as cloth) in certain tactical situations. If it is suggested that this document is merely a contingency plan to deal effectively with a natural disaster, these barbarous tactics of control surely indicate otherwise. To make matters even more sinister, you will be outfitted with your very own “Detainee Identification Band” and issued an “Internment Serial Number.”

Civilian Internees essentially have zero rights once in military detention, and since the government is now in the business of classifying activists and protestors as potential national security threats, it only makes sense for them to attempt to not only silence dissidents, but re-educate them as well.

It goes like this: PSYOP officers “assist the military police force in controlling detainees and DCs” as well as “introduce detainees or DCs to U.S. and multinational policy.” These “PSYOP officers” are also trained to “develop PSYOP products that are designed to pacify and acclimate detainees or DCs to accept U.S. I/R facility authority and regulations”, “identify political activists”, and “plan and execute a PSYOP program that produces an understanding and appreciation of U.S. policies and actions.”

So, if you are forced into one of these camps with the belief that waging extrajudicial wars against sovereign nations without congressional approval is illegal and morally reprehensible, the PSYOP team at Camp FEMA will be happy to instruct you otherwise.

Furthermore, given the military’s vast creativity in developing so-called non violent weapons, the mind boggles at what “PSYOP products” they have in store for these I/R camps.

You will also be subject to state sponsored strip searches, forced immunizations, food rationing, and labor requirements. Step out of line? Section 6-99 informs us that:

If necessary, the military police commander or appointed officer can initiate general court-martial proceedings against detainees.

Basically, once detained, you can expect to have nearly every facet of your existence controlled and dictated by military forces. From food, clothing and money to recreation, labor, and health care, you are effectively a slave of the new American police state.

The following quote from section 6-10, sums up the entirety of American foreign policy: Detainees are treated humanely and as EPWs until their status is determined according to DOD policy.

Related:Restricted U.S. Army Internment and Resettlement Operations Manual

The Potentially Lethal Nature of 'Non-Lethal' Weapons Confirmed by New Research

Activist Post

Stun guns are coming under attack as two new studies reveal that supposedly non-lethal Tasers do in fact put citizens at a greater risk than without their use.

Electrophysiologist, Dr. Douglas Zipes, published an article for the The American Heart Association which covered 8 cases where a 50,000 volt Electronic Control Device (TASER X26) was used and victims lost consciousness. His conclusion is that this non-lethal weapon certainly can induce cardiac arrest.

The idea that literally short-circuiting someone's nervous system could not potentially lead to death is surprising, but now peer-reviewed scientific evidence, as well as lengthy investigation into real-world situations seems to support the many wrongful death claims that have been filed against police departments.

It is a fact that everyone from the elderly, to the deaf, to 10-year-old girls, have been tortured or killed by this Orwellian non-lethal weapon.

An extensive study has now been completed over a four-year period in 7 cities that highlights other troubling conclusions. A Michigan State University study carried out with federal funding from the National Institute of Justice is the most thorough and wide ranging to date.

Researchers set out to examine the effects of having 260,000 Electronic Control Devices being used by 11,500 law enforcement agencies throughout the United States. By taking a sample from large and mid-size cities such as Columbus, Ohio; Portland, Oregon; and Knoxville, Tennessee, some very disconcerting trends were observed.

The overall research was divided into two studies; the first to examine the rate of injury to those apprehended vs. apprehension by standard police methods; and the second study examined the rate of injury to the officer apprehending the suspect.

The conclusions were clear:

the researchers found citizens were injured 41 percent of the time when officers used a stun gun only during apprehension. By contrast, citizens were injured only 29 percent of the time when no stun gun was used (when stun guns were used with another restraint method, such as pepper spray or wresting the suspect to the ground, citizens were injured 47 percent of the time). The study looked at 13,913 use-of-force cases in seven cities. The researchers took into account a host of factors, including the amount of citizen resistance, influence of alcohol or drugs, and officer experience. Injuries ranged from cuts to broken bones.

In the second study, online now in Police Quarterly, the researchers found officers were injured 5 percent of the time when using a stun gun only. By contrast, officers were injured nearly 10 percent of the time when no stun gun was used. The study looked at 12,455 use-of-force cases in six cities. (Source)

Interesting to note is that a combination of non-lethal weapons is actually more dangerous.

Naturally, law enforcement will cite the second study of officer safety as paramount, but let us not forget that it is the duty of police to serve and protect citizens, not the other way around.

I don't say this out of lack of compassion for law enforcement put into stressful and dangerous situations, but they chose to serve the public and encounter danger with a degree of integrity and nobility.

The massive increase in the use of non-lethal weapons such as pepper spray, sound cannons, and even directed energy weapons has created a situation where those presumed to be innocent until found guilty may have their right to judge and jury replaced by that of only the executioner.

Now that the Pentagon has decided to offer free military hardware to every police force in the United States under the 1033 program, we should be well aware that when we come into contact with police, there is a serious risk of abuse.

Now that these studies have been made available to law enforcement, they are faced with a stark reality: if they are knowingly engaging in any activity that has been proven to increase the danger to citizens under their protection, they are in grave dereliction of duty. As summarized by criminologist and lead researcher for the MSU study, William Terrill:

'The findings are quite complex, in that citizen injuries increased but officer injuries decreased,' Terrill said. 'Police agencies have to balance the findings. They have to consider whether this is a trade-off they can accept.'

The larger question for citizens in a supposedly free nation is whether or not this is a trade-off WE can accept.

Potential False Flag Dirty Bomb Attack During NATO Summit?

Intel Hub

As the NATO Summit approaches, the possibility of a false flag attack or some sort of agent provocateur madness seems to increase on a daily basis.

Madison Ruppert, the founder of the alternative news outlet End the Lie, recently released a video breakdown documenting these very real possibilities.

“There is a large potential for something big to go on here.”



In a show of force and to the push the idea of fear, heavily armed security teams are set to make public appearances around downtown federal buildings throughout the week with hospitals being told to prepare for a potential dirty bomb attack.

This comes as Red Cross officials have claimed that they have received plans for a full scale evacuation of Chicago, a claim the city of Chicago will neither confirm nor deny.

Trucking.com recently published an article that details the fact that gates at highway check points are being checked to make sure they are in working order to close and reopen roads, usually only used during some sort of bio terrorism related attack.

To top it off, the Joliet Correctional Center, jail closed in 2002, is possibly going to be used to house those arrested during the NATO Summit.

Although officials claim that only those committing serious offenses would be put in the center, the fact remains that history has shown that most of the time the exact opposite happens during any sort of globalist, world government plotting meeting.

International Scientific Order Needed To Facilitate “The Big Die Off”, Top UN Adviser Says

Dprogram.net

In 2004, emeritus professor of physics at California State University and American representative to the UN, Roger Dittmann, stated that all policies related to Agenda 21 should be pursued with the aim of worldwide population reduction and population control. “The Big Die Off,” the professor eagerly added, “has already begun.”

In his presentation Sustainable Development, the New International Scientific Order, and UN Reform he gives his own definition of the term “sustainable development:”

“Economic (and other) development that leads to reduction in population toward an optimum level for maximization of the quality of life, i.e. environmentally benign development that reduces the birth rate,” Dittmann explains on page 14 of his lecture notes.

Furthermore, the emeritus professor writes bluntly that (capitals by Dittmann) “The Big Die Off has already begun (page 17).”

In order to facilitate such a massive “die-off,” the professor proposes (page 18) global governance to make sure the directives will be universally applied:

“Since this is a global effort, it requires global organization, both governmental and popular,” he writes.

Dittmann’s specific remark concerning this “big die off” echoes Paul Ehrlich’s remark just a few days ago in response to the elitist UK-based Royal Society report People and the Planet.

After the Royal Society report was published (listing among its “key recommendations” several measures to drastically reduce population) Ehrlich said:

“The question is: can you go over the top without a disaster, like a worldwide plague or a nuclear war between India and Pakistan? If we go on at the pace we are there’s going to be various forms of disaster. Some maybe slow motion disasters like people getting more and more hungry, or catastrophic disasters because the more people you have the greater the chance of some weird virus transferring from animal to human populations, there could be a vast die-off.”

Veiled threats from the most vicious of eugenicists the world has ever known. I don’t have to remind readers that all this talk of death and mass-death is becoming more common every day. Only recently I highlighted the case of University College’s Emeritus Professor John Guillebaud, patron of the UK-based “Population Matters”, who depicted among other things a machine-gun, a hospital bed, and a knife dripping with blood, as examples of “natural” population control as opposed to “artificial” methods such as contraception and family planning.



Back to Dittmann’s 2004 presentation. In his notes he also calls for a new “International Scientific Order” to make sure the entire scientific community is armed and ready to implement worldwide population reduction. Dittmann:

“Not only do people require organization about their (multiple) identities (including professional, scholarly, and scientific), they need international, even supranational affiliation, facing a common adversary.”