Category Archives: genocide

Ancient Australians and the Americas

There has been a theory during the past decade that stated that the ancient Olmecs of Mexico were descended from Africans or Australians because of statuary that was left over from their civilization.

Now there has been a discovery of a skeleton of an ancient woman that may provide an important link to the puzzle:

Cranial features distinctive to Australian Aborigines are present in hundreds of skulls that have been uncovered in Central and South America, some dating back to over 11,000 years ago.

Evolutionary biologist Walter Neves of the University of São Paulo, whose findings are reported in a cover story in the latest issue of Cosmos magazine, has examined these skeletons and recovered others, and argues that there is now a mass of evidence indicating that at least two different populations colonised the Americas.

He and colleagues in the United States, Germany and Chile argue that first population was closely related to the Australian Aborigines and arrived more than 11,000 years ago.

Cranial morphology

The second population to arrive was of humans of ‘Mongoloid’ appearance – a cranial morphology distinctive of people of East and North Asian origin – who entered the Americas from Siberia and founded most (if not all) modern Native American populations, he argues.

“The results suggest a clear biological affinity between the early South Americans and the South Pacific population. This association allowed for the conclusion that the Americas were occupied before the spreading of the classical Mongoloid morphology in Asia,” Neves says.

Until about a decade ago, the dominant theory in American archaeology circles was that the ‘Clovis people’ – whose culture is defined by the stone tools they used to kill megafauna such as mammoths – was the first population to arrive in the Americas.

Clovis culture

They were thought to have crossed the Bering Strait from Siberia into Alaska at the end of the last Ice Age, some 10,000 or so years ago, following herds of megafauna across a land bridge created as water was locked up in glaciers and ice sheets.

But in the late 1990s, Neves and his colleagues re-examined a female skeleton that had been excavated in the 1970s in an extensive cave system in Central Brazil known as Lapa Vermelha.

The skeleton – along with a treasure trove of other finds – had been first unearthed by a Brazilian-French archaeological team that disbanded shortly after its leader, Annette Laming-Emperare, died suddenly. A dispute between participants kept the find barely examined for more than a decade.

The oldest female skeleton, dubbed Luzia, is between 11,000 and 11,400 years old. The dating is not exact because the material in the bones used for dating – collagen – has long since degraded; hence, only the layers of charcoal or sediment above and below the skeleton could be dated.

“We believe she is the oldest skeleton in the Americas,” Neves said.

Luzia has a very projected face; her chin sits out further than her forehead, and she has a long, narrow brain case, measured from the eyes to the back of the skull; as well as a low nose and low orbits, the space where the eyes sit.

These facial features are indicative of what Neves calls the ‘generalised cranial morphology’ – the morphology of anatomically modern humans, who first migrated out of Africa more than 100,000 years ago, and made it as far as Australia some 50,000 years ago, and Melanesia 40,000 years ago.

New finds in seven sites

When Neves first announced his discovery of Luzia in the late 1990s, he faced criticism from a number of archaeologists, who claimed the dating was not accurate. He has since returned to excavate four other sites, and is still cataloguing skeletons from the most recent dig.

In total, there are now hundreds of skeletons with the cranial morphology similar to Australian Aborigines, found in seven sites – as far north as Florida in the United States to Palli Aike in southern Chile.

In 2005, he published a paper in the U.S journal,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, analysing the characteristics of a further 81 skeletons he recovered from one of four sites, in which he said strengthened his argument that there were migrations to the Americas from at least two major populations.

Not related to Native Americans

In June 2010 in the journal PLoS ONE, Neves and colleagues Mark Hubbe of Chile’s Northern Catholic University and Katerina Harvati from Germany’s University of Tübingen, showed that it was not possible for the Aborigine-like skeletons to be the direct ancestors of the Native Americans.

Nor was it possible for the two populations to share a last common ancestor at the time of the first entrance into the continent, they argued, based on the 57 cranial measurements that can be made on a skull.

So far, almost all DNA studies of Native Americans points to a single entry from Siberia. This may mean that the original population died out, or simply that DNA studies have been too narrow, argue a number of archaeologists.

I’m also curious as to why DNA studies have failed to trace the genetic ancestry of some of these tribes. Perhaps they have been too narrow in scope.

After all, to find otherwise would upset the known paradigm.

Did Australian Aborigines reach America first?

hat tip

The Politics of Fear

The 21st Century is one of William Gibson’s dystopic tales.

Or maybe Philip K. Dick, I can’t tell.

Anyway, one can’t deny the fear and anxiety that permeates the air like a thick cloud of smog.

Couple that with technology accelerating toward a Technological Singularity that seems to want to enslave all ordinary folk, well, one can see why people are slowly going insane.

At the center of this? Who knows? Theories go from the politicians, Bilderbergers, Freemasons, Trilateral Commission, to the Jesuits, Catholics, the CFR, all worshipping Lucifer!

The person studying the result of all this fear is Ignorance Isn’t Bliss and he’s made quite a few films on these subjects and my chicken scratchings hardly do him justice:

In the 21st Century we have two primary threats thrown at us. In the blue corner we have man-caused Global Warming, and in the red corner we have Islamic Terrorism. What are the risks and absurdities of each, and what is really driving these agendas?

The intention here isn’t to convince people they’re right or wrong about being liberal or conservative, but to point out how remarkable it is that each side of the agenda setters & policy makers have taken such staunch stances on these opposing issues, and to show the realities of the perceived threats..

These proclaimed threats are complex issues. The point here is to put them into perspective. What can we compare these issues to? How much do we know? What don’t we know? What makes sense? How far should we go? What should we jeopardize? What are the ascertainable risks?

These are the questions that need to be asked no matter the issue, especially if any given issue is to cost into the range of a trillion dollars per year, as regardless we all face total economic collapse. So hang up your preconceptions and political biases for a chance at a better understanding of many things. Let’s try to slow down for a minute, and try to assess what the non-Left/Right biased realities are, while discovering the unifying benefactor in pursuing both objectives as we’re being told to.

Ask yourself when haven’t you seen 2 people dramatize an event between them, and didn’t each have different stories as to what actually happened. Now consider, Democrats are supposed to be anti-war and pro-Global Warming mitigation. Republicans are opposite on both issues. This creates a small selection of scenarios: (1) One side is right about both, making the majority of the other side wrong about what they advocate (consider the odds of over 50 million people being totally wrong on both major issues). (2) Each side is right about what they promote, which makes them each wrong about what they argue against. (3) Each side is wrong about the intensity of what they advocate for, and are overall right about the lack of doomsday threat about what they argue against.

Odds are that either scenario 2 or 3 is the right answer. Then consider how hyped everything always is, and then crunch some odds numbers. Before we explore each issue, consider what is known in academia as the “Politics of Fear”.

A Primer On Fear

In the archetectualization of policy responses to perceived threats, few thinkers actually seem to address their statistical realities, nor do advocates of such policies. Should we listen wholeheartedly the strongest advocates of policy responses to any majors threats? The fact is, humans are aren’t very often ‘logical machines’ with emotions, instead humans are ‘emotional machines’ that think.

The fear reaction reflex is the most overpowering of all neural mechanisms. It’s a hard wired survival system, and when it goes into effect our cognitive abilities to rationally respond are almost quite literally physically incapable of rational thought. This is particularly the case if we don’t understand and acknowledge this inherent feature of quite literally all human brains. Without understanding this you’re almost powerless to suppress it when faced with complex fears.

[…]

There have been countless scholarly papers studying the media-driven Politics of Fear, but you wont hear about these on the news like you would the latest scholarly paper on global warming. Consider the intro of this paper by Frank Furedi:

Fear plays a key role in twenty-first century consciousness. Increasingly, we seem to engage with various issues through a narrative of fear. You could see this trend emerging and taking hold in the last century, which was frequently described as an ‘Age of Anxiety’. But in recent decades, it has become more and better defined, as specific fears have been cultivated.

Fear is often examined in relation to specific issues; it is rarely considered as a sociological problem in its own right. As Elemer Hankiss argues, the role of fear is ‘much neglected in the social sciences’. He says that fear has received ‘serious attention in philosophy, theology and psychiatry, less in anthropology and social psychology, and least of all in sociology’. This under-theorisation of fear can be seen in the ever-expanding literature on risk. Though sometimes used as a synonym for risk, fear is treated as an afterthought in today’s risk literature; the focus tends to remain on risk theory rather than on an interrogation of fear itself. Indeed, in sociological debate fear seems to have become the invisible companion to debates about risk.

Agenda’s tend to be pushed based on how much fear potential they carry, while the metrics of actual risk are ignored. The problem with all of this is the majority of issues trumpetted as primary items have been decreasing for decades, and not just because we’ve been afraid or because of insane funding for various things. In general, itis the issues that we’re most helpless against that are pushed the hardest. Issues like crime, school shootings, airplane crashes, airplane hijackings, terrorism, nuclear armageddon, and a pissed off planet frying us with CO2 that we breath out of our faces are all over-reported based on the actual ascertainable risks.  As fear expert David Altheide explains in his paper “Notes Towards A Politics Of Fear“:

The politics of fear relied on terrorism as a constant threat that can never be defeated; The term “terrorism” was used to encompass an idea as well as a tactic or method. Like the Mafia, it was everywhere and nowhere, all-powerful, but invisible. Crime helped shape the direction for terrorist victimisation. The politics of fear joined crime with victimisation through the “drug war,” interdiction and surveillance policies, and grand narratives that reflected numerous cultural myths about moral and social “disorder”. Numerous “crises” and fears involving crime, violence, and uncertainty were important for public definitions of the situation after 9/11. So perhaps it was natural that the terrorist attacks fed off this context of fear. The drug war and ongoing concerns with crime led to the expansion of fear with terrorism. News reports and advertisements joined drug use with terrorism and helped shift “drugs” from criminal activity to unpatriotic action. A $10 million ad campaign that included a Super Bowl commercial stated that buying and using drugs supports terrorism, or as President Bush put it, “If you quit drugs, you join the fight against terror in America.”

The Politics of Fear is going strong in 2010. The bruhaha over the mosque near the site of the old World Trade Center exemplify this by the inhabitants of New York City expressing their fear and anger with/of the Muslim community. Another example of the meme of fear and anger management by the political class/corporate media is the scheduled Koran burning in Florida on the September 11th anniversary.

Is this what Jefferson and Franklin had in mind when they formed the Republic 234 years ago?

Search within yourselves and answer that question.

The Global Meltdown of FEAR: Eliminated by 60+ visual aids.

One Use For Gitmo

From Red Ice Creations:

The U.S. has begun preparing tents at Guantanamo Bay for Haitians migrants in case of a mass migration spurred by the earthquake, a senior official at the base said Wednesday.

About 100 tents, each capable of holding 10 people, have been erected and authorities have more than 1,000 more on hand in case waves of Haitians leave their homeland and are captured at sea, said Navy Rear Adm. Thomas Copeman.

Authorities have also has tested the latrine facilities and gathered cots and other supplies, said Copeman, the commander of the task force that runs the detention center for terrorism suspects at Guantanamo, where the U.S. holds nearly 200 men.

The Haitian migrants would be held on the opposite side of the base as the detention center, separated by some 2 1/2 miles of water across Guantanamo Bay, and would have no contact with the prisoners.
U.S. immigration officials have said they will fast-track applications for a federal designation that will allow illegal Haitian immigrants to live and work temporarily in this country, but only if they were in the U.S. on the day of the Jan. 12 earthquake.

The U.S. base in southeastern Cuba is also being used to transport supplies and personnel to the aid effort in Haiti, about 200 miles away.
In the early 1990s, it housed tens of thousands of Haitian boat people were held at Guantanamo until they could be sent home.

You gotta love the US military. Always ready to incarcerate folks for quick warehousing.

Katrina, anyone?

US Prepares Gitmo For 1000s of Haitians

Haitian ‘Shock Doctrine’

Naomi Klein’s ‘Shock Doctrine‘ currently is being played out in Haiti:

The Orwellian-named mercenary trade group, the International Peace Operations Association, didn’t waste much time in offering the “services” of its member companies to swoop down on Haiti for some old fashioned humanitarian assistance disaster profiteering. Within hours of the massive earthquake in Haiti, the IPOA created a special web page for prospective clients, saying: “In the wake of the tragic events in Haiti, a number of IPOA’s member companies are available and prepared to provide a wide variety of critical relief services to the earthquake’s victims.”

While some of the companies specialize in rapid housing construction, emergency relief shelters and transportation, others are private security companies that operate in Iraq and Afghanistan like Triple Canopy, the company that took over Blackwater’s massive State Department contract in Iraq. For years, Blackwater played a major role in IPOA until it left the group following the 2007 Nisour Square massacre.

In 2005, while still a leading member of IPOA, Blackwater’s owner Erik Prince deployed his forces in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Far from some sort of generous gift to the suffering people of the US gulf, Blackwater raked in some $70 million in Homeland Security contracts that began with a massive no-bid contract to provide protective services for FEMA. Blackwater billed US taxpayers $950 per man per day.

The current US program under which armed security companies work for the State Department in Iraq—the Worldwide Personal Protection Program—has its roots in Haiti during the Clinton administration. In 1994, private US forces, such as DynCorp, became a staple of US operations in the country following the overthrow of Jean Bertrand Aristide by CIA-backed death squads. When President Bush invaded Iraq, his administration radically expanded that program and turned it into the privatized paramilitary force it is today. At the time of his overthrow in 2004, Aristide was being protected by a San Francisco-based private security firm, the Steele Foundation.

What is unfolding in Haiti seems to be part of what Naomi Klein has labeled the “Shock Doctrine.” Indeed, on the Heritage Foundation blog, opportunity was being found in the crisis with a post titled: “Amidst the Suffering, Crisis in Haiti Offers Opportunities to the U.S.” “In addition to providing immediate humanitarian assistance, the U.S. response to the tragic earthquake in Haiti earthquake offers opportunities to re-shape Haiti’s long-dysfunctional government and economy as well as to improve the public image of the United States in the region,” wrote Heritage fellow Jim Roberts in a post that was subsequently altered to tone down the shock doctrine language. The title was later changed to: “Things to Remember While Helping Haiti.”

During the past 24 hours, Haiti was hit with a 6.0 Richter ‘after-shock’ and the refugees leaving Port-Au-Prince are reaching staggering proportions. Death squads and price gouging ‘entrepreneurs’ are running rough-shod over the beleaguered population.

A perfect storm for ‘catastrophic capitalism!’

US “Security” Companies Offer “Services” in Haiti

Climate Chaos

When people talk about ‘climate change’ now-a-days, they usually mean ‘anthropocentric’ climate change, which means climate change influenced by human activity.

I used to be in the above crowd. Why not? 250 years of Industrial Revolution actions that dumped millions of tons of hydrocarbon waste into the atmosphere surely must have an effect? And to note, ‘acid rain’, ie rain that is essentially sulfuric acid has fallen on the western side of the Appalachian Mountains here in Upstate New York during the 1970s through the early 1990s, the result of which from the smoke-stacks of coal-fired power plants in the Mid-West.

What has changed my mind?

Let me first say this disclaimer; I am not an atmospheric scientist, just a half-assed informed layman.

In that capacity, after 2 1/2 years of research I have IMHO discovered that there is a global elite who stand to gain significantly (economically) from centralized global control of ‘climate change’ policy.

Now do I think that we, as a global society, should get away from using fossil fuels to power our economies and societies?

Sure. But there are too many reasons to list here.

And the poor nations of the Earth, who get short shrift from the First World Nations anyway, know that their economies still need fossil fuel technology, just to break even and make their loan payments to the IMF.

But the recent climate conferences in the Netherlands in the EU (CO15) were not derailed by poor nations (they did walk out at one point anyway), but was jinked by the US and China (is China Third World or First World now?):

Following a meeting in Brussels to discuss how to rescue the Copenhagen climate process, EU environment ministers emphasized the need for concrete, legally binding measures to combat global warming.

The European Union went to Copenhagen with the hope of achieving a broad commitment to at least a 20-percent cut in carbon emissions below 1990 levels within 10 years, but that and other firm goals failed to emerge in the final accord.

The two-week, United Nations-led conference ended on Saturday with a non-legally binding agreement to limit global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times, but did not lay out how to achieve that.

Despite months of preparation and strenuous diplomacy, the talks boiled down to an inability of the world’s two largest emitters, the United States and China, to agree fixed targets.

“Expectations and pressure on the United States have risen after Copenhagen … to really deliver,” Swedish Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren told a news briefing on Tuesday after Sweden, as EU president until December 31, chaired pan-EU talks.

Ministers from the EU’s 27 member states will meet again in January to discuss what role the EU can play in cobbling together a stronger agreement.

DASHED PLANS

The bloc went to Copenhagen with a unified position and a plan for financing emissions cuts in the developing world, with a commitment to spend around 7 billion euros ($10 billion) over the next three years to aid poorer countries.

But those aims were largely sidelined as the talks failed to produce a breakthrough. Carlgren described the summit as a “disaster” and a “great failure,” despite what he called Europe’s united efforts.

“Europe never lost its aim, never, never came to splits or different positions, but of course this was mainly about other countries really (being) unwilling, and especially the United States and China,” Carlgren said.

Britain on Monday blamed China and a handful of other countries of holding the world to ransom by blocking a legally binding treaty at Copenhagen, stepping up a blame game that has gathered momentum since the talks ended.

In a sharply worded response, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu rejected accusations that China had “hijacked” the climate talks and added: “The statements from certain British politicians are plainly a political scheme.”

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown described the summit as “at best flawed and at worst chaotic” and demanded an urgent reform of the process to try to reach a legal treaty when talks are expected to resume in Germany next June.

But Danish Climate Minister Connie Hedegaard, who quit as president of the talks midway through after being criticized by African countries for favoring wealthier nations in negotiations, said there was no point in getting depressed.

“What we need to do is to secure the step that we took and turn it into a result,” she told reporters as she arrived for the Brussels meeting on Tuesday. Asked whether Copenhagen had been a failure, she replied:

“It would have been a failure if we had achieved nothing. But we achieved something — a first step.

“It was the first time we held a process where all the countries were present, including the big emitters.”

In short, there must be a way to convert the worlds’ societies economies and technologies slowly and evenly with alternate tech over the next 50 years to shift away from fossil fuels. Is there sufficient wealth in the market to begin the change, or is technology being suppressed by the global financial/energy elites so only they have the power to begin the shift, if they feel like it?

If they see money in it, they will start the change.

And the elite aren’t as united as one would think.

EU calls for more U.S. involvement in climate works

hat tip

NWO Population Control Propaganda / Commercial Space Venture Uses Old Soviet Tech with Conflict of Interest?

The human-haters among us will surely rejoice in this article:

Leading figures from science and environmentalism have backed a call for population restraint policies to be adopted by every state worldwide as part of the battle against climate change.

 

popcontrol.81909 

The Optimum Population Trust says today (August 17, 2009) that the climate change talks which will culminate at Copenhagen in December must ensure that all countries adopt non-coercive policies to limit and stabilise population growth. Family planning programmes in poorer countries should be treated as “legitimate candidates for climate change funding”. Empowering women to control their own fertility would also have major humanitarian benefits for the poorest women and children in the world.

Successful population policies, which answered the unmet need for family planning, could mean nearly three billion fewer people in 2050, a difference equivalent to 44 per cent of current world population (6.8 billion), OPT says. “All environmental problems, and notably those arising from climate change, would be easier to solve with a smaller future population.”

Figures endorsing the statement include broadcaster and film-maker Sir David Attenborough; Professor Paul Ehrlich, author of the 1960s classic The Population Bomb; Gaia scientist James Lovelock; Jonathon Porritt, chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission until last month and a former director of Friends of the Earth; and Professor Chris Rapley, formerly head of the British Antarctic Survey.*
Roger Martin, chair of OPT, said: “The fact that such eminent individuals, several of them OPT patrons, have personally endorsed our statement should act as a wake-up call to those involved in the Copenhagen process. At the very least it should spur negotiators to start taking population growth seriously as a major driver of climate change. There’s not much point in labouring mightily to cut our carbon emissions if hard-won improvements are then routinely drowned out by rising numbers of people.”

 

The woman holding the placard stating “Kill Yourself” says it all, doesn’t it?

So far, people like her fit right in the elitists’ plans to spread this vile misinformation.

But there might come a day when they are considered ‘useless eaters’ by the same criminals they once embraced!

Feh! And it’s people like them who scoff at space programs!

The Campaign To Control World’s Population

Hmm, not only does Bigelow Aerospace figure on launching a stripped down version of NASA’s Orion capsule in 2013, a company named Excalibur Almaz Limited plans on updated old top-secret Soviet space technology to launch capsules and a small, manned space station in 2013:

An international company announced plans to launch a commercial space venture using spacecraft designed for a once classified Russian space program. Excalibur Almaz Limited plans to offer week-long orbital space flights beginning as early as 2013 with updated 1970’s era Reusable Return Vehicles, designed for flying to the USSR’s top-secret Almaz space station. Excalibur Alamaz’s press release said they would be “taking a big leap beyond the sub-orbital flight market targeted by most other private space companies.”

Excalibur Almaz (EA) is currently updating the spacecraft to conduct crew and cargo space missions for private individuals, corporations, academic institutions and national governments.JSC MIC NPO Mashinostroyenia (NPOM) of Russia originally built the spacecraft and EA has purchased both the rockets and modules for the Almaz space station, which was never flown. The RRVs went through nine flight tests, with two RRVs flown to orbit several times.

EA Founder and CEO Art Dula said, “Through cooperation with NPOM and with the support of leading space contractors around the world and an exceptionally strong management and advisory team, EA is in a unique position to initiate a new era of private orbital space exploration.”

Cosmonaut Vladimir Titov, advisor to EA in Russia, said, “With this announcement, the dream of private orbital space exploration may become a reality in the very near future.”

Former NASA astronaut LeRoy Chiao, a current member of the Augustine Commission, is the Executive Vice President for EA. (emphasis mine)

EA is headquartered in Isle of Man, British Isles, and support contractors are located in Moscow, Tokyo, Houston and Los Angeles.

EA’s spacecraft will consist of two parts: an RRV and an expendable service module to provide crewmembers with room to comfortably operate during spaceflight. EA said they will “update the Almaz RRVs with flight-proven technologies where appropriate, while retaining tested legacy systems to ensure safety and economy of operation. A critical feature of the RRVs is their reusability, which will reduce logistical, overhead and program costs for commercial access to space.”

EA plans for its spacecraft to be compatible with a number of launch vehicles and capable of being launched from worldwide sites.

I find it interesting that a former astronaut, and current member of the Augustine Commission is Executive Vice President of this company.

Can anyone spell “c-o-n-f-l-i-c-t  o-f  i-n-t-e-r-e-s-t  ?”

Once Classified Russian Rockets to be Used for Commercial Space Venture

Wichita UFO and other things

ufo2_embedded_prod_affiliate_81

 

Certainly looks like a black project machine to me. Of course the military denies it.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/1025246.html

_______________________________

Dale Vince, managing director of wind farm operator Ecotricity, said: “They [scientists] looked at all the broken parts of the turbine, the parts that were left standing at the top and examined the land around the bottom of the turbine looking for debris.

“But it was actually by examining the ring of bolts that hold the blade on that the examiners were able to say definitely it wasn’t a collision that caused this problem.”

Mr Vince said he expected a full explanation into the cause of the damage in two weeks.”There is a ring of about 30 bolts and they exhibit what examiners term as classic fatigue signs.

“They’ve ruled out bolt failure and are looking for the cause either side of the bolts in one of the components.”

He said manufacturers had checked 1,000 turbines of the same design all over the world and it was thought the problem was a “one-off“.

Rats. So much for for an aerial Chuthullu. Lovecraft would be disappointed.

http://www.ufoblogger.blogspot.com/2009/02/preliminary-result-showing-windmill.html

________________________________

The US military will be half machine and half human by 2015, a military expert told an audience on Wednesday.

Speaking before a group at the Technology Entertainment and Design (TED) conference, military expert Peter Singer said the implementation of robot soldiers was near.

“We are at a point of revolution in war, like the invention of the atomic bomb,” Singer said.

“What does it mean to go to war with US soldiers whose hardware is made in China and whose software is made in India?”

The US military has already made great strides in unmanning the battlefield. The US uses attack drones and bomb-handling robots, and custom war video games have been used as recruiting tools.

We’re bound and determined to build Terminator type shit, aren’t we?

We might as well all lay down in front of a subway train!

http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1634688/us_military_50_percent_robotic_by_2015/

____________________________________

Week of January 5th, 2009

As this year is getting under way, national and world news offers little in change, yet.

This past Friday (1/2), Wall Street wonks give a positive, though cautious analysis about the new year’s stock markets around the world, giving a boost to Asian and Eurozone exchanges this morning; (Asia)http://www.cnbc.com/id/19832390/ , (Eurozone)http://www.cnbc.com/id/19794221/ .

I’m not buying into this meme, due to the fact that in alot of states, state governments are levying more taxes and cutting services to low, middle income folks and not raising taxes on the rich folk. According to New York State governor, David Paterson, raising taxes on the rich is “unpalatable” and to be used as a last resort; http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/nyregion/21millionaire.html.

Leona Helmsley would approve.

On the world front, Zionist Israel is continuing its pogrom on the Palestinians, killing hundreds of civilians in order to get at Hamas “terrorists”; http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jan2009/gaza-j05.shtml .

World opinion is against Israel, of course, and using civilians as human shields is a shitty way for Hamas to get their message across. And of course, the Israeli government is backed wholeheartedly by Bu$hco, who is raking up mega-monopoly-money via the military-industrial-congressional complex from the slaughter not only in Gaza, but world-wide.

So what’s with a little exit plan profit taking?

The incoming Obama administration’s meme of spreading fiat currency around the country for infrastructure, school and green tech is hitting rough ground as some in Congress say that there’s not enough time to get an economic plan together by the Inauguration, but by the middle of February instead; http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/us/politics/05spend.html?bl&ex=1231304400&en=99a6130dae16eb41&ei=5087%0A .

There’s plenty more news I can comment on, but I still want the focus to remain on science and science-fiction in this ezine.

Have a good week folks and remember to convert to gold!

BAB/Dad2059  8)

_____________________________________________

Continue reading →

Chart of Change

For all of you US Government junkies who are fascinated with how much of our fiat funny-money is pumped into the military-industrial-congressional complex, here’s a handy-dandy historical chart that in fact traces our change from an isolationist republic during the 1940s into the globe-spanning neo-communist proto-world state we are now.

Enjoy.

Wall Stats.com: Death and Taxes

Hat tip to Ignorance Is Futile!

____________________________

“We’ve always been at war with Eastasia…”

Those famous words from Orwell’s ‘1984’ have received a lot of airplay and viral spreading via the ‘Tubes the past seven years, but they have stepped closer to reality than one would think recently as the Pentagon actually acknowledged finally that they’re planning ‘perpetual war’ for the next twenty to thirty years:

Under the auspices of the US department of defence and department of the army, the US military have just published a document entitled 2008 Army Modernization Strategy which makes for interesting reading against the current backdrop of deteriorating international fiscal, environmental, energy resource and security crises.

The 2008 modernisation strategy, written by Lieut Gen Stephen Speakes, deputy chief of staff of the US army, contains the first explicit and official acknowledgement that the US military is dangerously overstretched internationally. It states simply: “The army is engaged in the third-longest war in our nation’s history and … the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) has caused the army to become out of balance with the demand for forces exceeding the sustainable supply.”

Against this backdrop, the 90 page document sets out the future of international conflict for the next 30 to 40 years — as the US military sees it — and outlines the manner in which the military will sustain its current operations and prepare and “transform” itself for future “persistent” warfare.

The document reveals a number of profoundly significant — and worrying — strategic positions that have been adopted as official doctrine by the US military. In its preamble, it predicts a post cold war future of “perpetual warfare”.

According to its authors: “We have entered an era of persistent conflict … a security environment much more ambiguous and unpredictable than that faced during the cold war.”

It then goes on to describe the key features of this dawning era of continuous warfare. Some of the characteristics are familiar enough to a world audience accustomed to the rhetoric of the global war on terror.

“A key current threat is a radical, ideology-based, long-term terrorist threat bent on using any means available — to include weapons of mass destruction — to achieve its political and ideological ends.”

Relatively new, “emerging” features are also included in the document’s rationale for future threats.

“We face a potential return to traditional security threats posed by emerging near-peers as we compete globally for depleting natural resources and overseas markets.”

Finally, an admission for planning forever wars and above all, wars over dwindling resources.

It doesn’t make one feel better having your fears confirmed, eh?

The elitists have certainly made it plain that Orwell’s ‘1984’ and Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ aren’t just great prescient works of fiction, the bastards are using them as blueprints for total control of the planet’s population and resources.

Right under our very noses!

Essentially saying, “You fools, here are two works of literature that are telling you sheep what we are doing, and you’re too stupid to do anything about it!”

And to that, just what are we going to do about it?

US military plans the future as ‘perpetual warfare’

_________________________________________________________

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 91 other followers