7/7: An Historical Analysis - Tom Secker on GRTV

7/7: An Historical Analysis - Tom Secker on GRTV 
Sept. 21, 2011 | GlobalResearchTV

7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction Full Version

7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction Full Version 
Jan. 8, 2011 | 77Archive



Full version of investigative documentary 7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction. Examines many of the outstanding questions and conspiracy theories about the 2005 London Bombings. Available for download via http://blip.tv/file/3985398 and http://www.archive.org/details/77SeedsOfDeconstruction and http://stagevu.com/video/bzmyohjuatvm

7/7: Crime and Prejudice

7/7: Crime and Prejudice 
Sept. 11, 2011 | 77Archive



The most comprehensive documentary on 7/7 conspiracy theories and questions. 7/7: Crime and Prejudice explores the 7/7 cold case via new evidence from the recent inquests and discusses the war on terror in the context of numerous miscarriages of justice and acts of violence committed by the state.

The first section of the film examines the history of the British state's use of double agents, from the Victorian Anarchists through WW2 to the war in Northern Ireland. It concludes by examining contemporary cases of injustice and violence carried out as part of the war of terror against Muslims.

The second section of the film is a multi-dimensional study of the new evidence made available at the recent inquests. It looks at the evidence of a wider conspiracy and the fundamental flaws in the official narrative and the police investigation. It also discusses why the dialogue about 'intelligence failures' itself fails to address the very real possibility of state involvement in the attacks.

The final section of the film returns to the Anarchists and the case of Martial Bourdin, Britain's first suicide bomber, in 1894. The mythology surrounding Bourdin is used as a foundation for examining the numerous films, tv shows training exercises and real life events that either predicted 7/7 or were influenced by the attacks. The question of conspiracy theories is addressed through an original analysis unique to this film.

7/7 Crime and Prejudice combines a presentation of the cutting edge of July 7th research with a deeply contextual analysis that casts light on largely unexamined aspects of the war on terror.

For further information about 7/7 please visit the website of the July 7th Truth Campaign and their dedicated 7/7 Inquests blog:
http://julyseventh.co.uk/
http://77inquests.blogspot.com/

To watch or download 7/7: Crime and Prejudice in .avi format please visit these links:
http://stagevu.com/video/xqnboijxmgoo
http://movbay.org/t5u6062o0aa9.html
http://movreel.com/7k5hyr3zw7sm
http://www.vidbux.com/ifs9zkyrk4jz/7-7_Crime_and_Prejudice.avi.html
http://www.vidxden.com/mzs2mh1oel8z/7-7_Crime_and_Prejudice.avi.html

Seven Years Ago Today: Ludicrous Diversion,7/7 London Bombings, full length

Ludicrous Diversion,7/7 London Bombings, full length 
Jan. 14, 2011 | amy2x



On the 7th of July 2005 London was hit by a series of explosions. You probably think you know what happened that day. But you don't. The police have, from the onset of their investigation, chosen to withhold from the public almost every bit of evidence they claim to have and have provably lied about several aspects of the London Bombings. The mainstream news has willfully spread false, unsubstantiated and unverifiable information, while choosing to completely ignore the numerous inconsistencies and discrepancies in the official story. The government has finally, after a year, presented us with their official 'narrative' concerning the event.

Within hours it was shown to contain numerous errors, a fact since admitted by the Home Secretary John Reid. They have continuously rejected calls for a full, independent public inquiry. Tony Blair himself described such an inquiry as a 'ludicrous diversion'. What don't they want us to find out?

Why no sanctions on the United States? A long and bloody record of 'crimes against peace'

© Unknown
President Obama presents former U.S.
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
with a Presidential Medal of Freedom,
May 29, 2012, despite her role in and
public defense of the war crimes of
the Clinton administration.

Why no sanctions on the United States? A long and bloody record of 'crimes against peace'
July 5, 2012 | Best of Web | Richard Becker

July 1 marked the start of a new round of sanctions designed to destroy the economy of Iran, create widespread suffering among the Iranian people, and thereby effect regime change in that country. The ostensible reason for the sanctions is that Iran has a nuclear program, which Washington and its allies allege is leading to the development of nuclear weapons. The Iranian government has denied any such intention, stating that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

Iran is far from the first country to suffer from a cutoff or sharp reduction in trade due to sanctions. Over the past several decades, the U.S. - sometimes through the United Nations Security Council, sometimes in coordination with its imperialist allies, sometimes on its own - has imposed sanctions, embargoes and blockades on dozens of countries. Some of the sanctions regimes have lasted for decades, in the case of Cuba a half-century.

The justifications for imposing sanctions have included alleged human rights violations, lack of democracy, military aggression in violation of international law, and engaging in terrorist acts. But a giant asterisk must be attached here, with a notation reading: "Not applicable to the United States, its imperialist allies, surrogates and puppets."

At Washington's prompting, the UNSC imposed a blockade on Iraq in 1990. The blockade, which was enforced by the U.S. Navy, lasted 13 years and took over a million Iraqi lives, half of them children under the age of five years. The pretext for the most stringent sanctions regime in modern history was Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait in August 1990, after a long dispute between the two states. Iraq charged that Kuwait, which it had long claimed as part of its national territory, was stealing Iraqi oil and undermining its economy.

After Iraq was driven out of Kuwait by a six-week U.S.-led bombing campaign that destroyed most of the country's civilian infrastructure, the sanctions were kept in place. A new pretext was now needed and quickly found: Iraq's alleged "weapons of mass destruction."

Why are there no sanctions against the U.S.? Why are no U.S. leaders - past or present - currently occupying prison cells or awaiting trial?

Top U.S. officials were well aware of the devastating impact on the Iraqi population. When asked on CBS's "60 Minutes" in May 1996, whether the deaths of a half-million Iraq children due to the sanctions were "worth the price," U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Madeleine Albright replied, "we think the price is worth it." Albright's remarks actually constituted a confession to war crimes.

In 1998, President Bill Clinton declared that "some want to see the sanctions ended, I am not one of them," and signed the "Iraq Liberation Act," declaring the official policy of the U.S. to be what it had actually been all along: regime change in Iraq. The new justification was a supposed concern for "human rights."

Five years later, having not achieved its goal by other means, the U.S. invaded and occupied Iraq under the resurrected claims of Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction." It was not some "intelligence failure," as later claimed by neo-con and liberal imperialists alike.

The U.S. occupation cost a million more Iraqi lives and thousands of U.S. lives. At least 4.5 million Iraqis were displaced and Iraqi society torn apart. Torture was commonplace for the tens of thousands of Iraqis imprisoned. Taken together, the Twenty Years War the U.S. waged on Iraq killed, wounded or forced into exile more than one-third of Iraq's population. All of this death and destruction in a war justified on fabricated pretenses, also known as lies.

Then, there is the on-going U.S. war and occupation in Afghanistan, and the drone missile strikes killing people every day in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. In the 1990s, there was the bombing and blockade of the former Yugoslavia as well as Iraq, and in the 1980s the invasions and interventions in Central America and the Caribbean. And before that came Vietnam, Chile, Korea, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Congo, Iran, Guatemala, etc., etc. - a long and bloody history. Where the U.S. succeeded in overthrowing revolutionary or progressive governments, they were replaced with right-wing, police-state dictatorships.

None of the above countries threatened or could threaten the United States, meaning that all of those wars and interventions were the most serious violations of international law - crimes against peace.

Washington has sent hundreds of billions of dollars and vast amounts of military aid making possible Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestine. The U.S. has propped up and protected the most repressive and anti-democratic regimes in the world, like Saudi Arabia and the other hereditary monarchies in the Middle East.

And, of course, the U.S., which possesses thousands of nuclear warheads, is the only country that has actually used those weapons, destroying the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians near the end of World War II.

So why are there no sanctions against the U.S.? Why are no U.S. leaders - past or present - currently occupying prison cells or awaiting trial?

The answer is that the international "justice" system operates much like the domestic one. The rich administer punishment on the poor. The notion of "equal justice before the law" is as mythical internationally as it is domestically. Who ends up in prison or under sanctions has nothing to do with real justice and everything to do with real power.

The Obama administration and congressional leaders are today trying to win popular support for sanctions and other forms of intervention in Iran and Syria by presenting themselves as concerned about "human rights" and "democracy.

No one should be fooled.

Death toll from Pakistan drone attack rises to 19

Death toll from Pakistan drone attack rises to 19
July 7, 2012 | Reuters | Miran Shah


(Reuters) - The death toll from a drone strike in northeastern Pakistan has risen to 19, Pakistani intelligence officials said on Saturday.

Twelve people were originally reported dead in Friday's strike on a compound in the Dhattakel region in North Waziristan.

Public anger over U.S. drone attacks has helped inflame tensions between Pakistan and the United States.

Friday's strike took place a day after two trucks carried NATO supplies across the border into Afghanistan -- the first shipments since convoys were halted by Pakistan last November.

Pakistanis say the drone attacks kill civilians and encroach on Pakistani sovereignty. The United States says the attacks are highly selective and that few civilians are killed.

The CIA has stepped up operations in North Waziristan in recent weeks. The area is seen as a hub for militants crossing the porous border to fight U.S. forces and their allies in Afghanistan.

The resumption of the cross-border shipments to Afghanistan gave a boost to the uneasy partnership between Pakistan and the United States.

Pakistan agreed to the resumption after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apologized for an air attack that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last November.

(Reporting By Haji Mujtaba; Writing by Katharine Houreld; Editing by Ron Popeski)

A New Declaration of Independence

© unknown

A New Declaration of Independence
July 7, 2012 | SurvivalWeek.com

“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

When frustration and discontent make it necessary for people to change their government and exercise their rightful power to determine the government they want, respect for other people’s opinions requires that they explain why they are dissatisfied with their government.

We believe these truths are self-evident. We believe that all men are created equal. We believe they have natural rights, and that their inherent rights cannot be taken from them. Whether people believe in a Creator or not, we believe that these rights include Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Men create governments and consent to give them certain powers in order to protect and secure these rights for themselves. Whenever any government jeopardizes this goal, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government founded on those principles and to give it the powers they think will best protect and serve their Safety and Happiness. Prudence dictates that long standing governments should not be changed for trivial or fleeting reasons, and experience has shown that people are more likely to tolerate evil, while it is tolerable, than to change a familiar government. But when there is a long history of abuse and disobedience, which clearly shows a pattern of the Government overstepping its limits and depriving citizens of their liberty and heritage, it is their right and their duty to change their government and provide new safeguards for their future security. Americans have patiently suffered, and now it is time for them to restore their government. The history of the federal Government is a history of repeated failures, lies, and usurpations that demonstrate that it is no longer a government of the People, by the People, and for the People.
To prove this, here are some facts for earnest people to consider:

The Government has established elaborate districts and election laws designed to preserve the dominance of two interchangeable political parties. With rare exceptions, all of our representatives and government officials belong to these two political parties. Even though one-third of Americans are politically independent and almost everyone is unhappy with the results produced by these two parties, they maintain complete control of our government.

The Government overspends every year, and refuses to balance its budget.  It has created debts and obligations that threaten our security and prosperity and that will burden future generations from birth. To support its overspending, the Government borrows extensively from countries that may not have America’s best interest at heart and spends today the money it promised the People it would save for tomorrow.

The Government forces the People to use false money so that it and its friends can surreptitiously take wealth from us.  It uses our wealth to buy allegiance with countless programs operated under the guise of fairness, progress, or safety.  Baseless money is the root of profiteering, and causes inflation that robs the very people the Government claims to be helping.

The Government has created an indecipherable tax code that cannot be applied fairly. It creates tax rebates and insists that we should be grateful for its indulgence.

The Government passes legislation that will have sweeping consequences for all Americans by cutting outrageous and obviously unfair deals.  It approves laws written by and for special interests without reading them.  The Government exempts itself from laws it imposes on the rest of us.

The Government regulates our food, the air, water, farming, education, energy use, healthcare, housing and homeownership, business, industry, communications, labor, transportation, foreign policy, war and peace, and the currency.  Every year it issues volumes of complicated new rules that often conflict with state rules, stifle competition, and interfere with common sense, innovation, and individual freedom.  It manages with each new crisis, real or exaggerated, to expand its power.  It can imprison and take the property of anyone who fails to pay for its services. It owns one-fifth of the land in the United States, and has a nationwide system of courts, attorneys, police, and prisons to enforce the law and protect its interests.

According to the President’s Web site, “There are hundreds of federal agencies and commissions…” There are only three explanations for this state of affairs: we are savage people that must be restrained; we are stupid people incapable of solving our own problems; or the people who run the Government love power.

Many of our representatives are unable or unwilling to explain in plain English which section of the Constitution delegates to them authority for the laws they approve, and many of them believe there are no limits on the federal Government’s powers. The people who originally approved the Constitution of the United States of America feared it would lead to the same abuses they had just fought to end. They approved the Constitution only after being assured that it gave the federal Government limited power. The Constitution and the Founders’ thoughts are written in plain English, and everyone may judge whether the laws passed by the federal Government are Constitutional.

Government programs are always more expensive than originally estimated, and even failed or obsolete programs are continued.

A small number of people run the corporations and unions one day and then run the Government the next day. They can’t be objective under those circumstances or serve the best interests of the People. They serve only themselves and their friends.

The Government is giving and lending the public’s money to private companies to ensure success and profit. If the individuals running these companies are the best and the brightest, then they should be able to succeed on their own without favors [or safety nets] from the Government.

The Government is bailing out other countries, and the central bank does not have to show the public how it uses our money.

The Government enters into treaties, contracts, and relationships with foreign entities, and relinquishes authority to international bodies, undermining America’s sovereignty.

The Government has ruled that it can take private land from one owner and give it to another private owner if it prefers the new owner’s plans for the property.

The Government won’t allow dying people to smoke marijuana, but it says you are free to choose an abortion.

The Government’s current prohibition is fueling lawlessness and disorder, here and abroad, just like the last prohibition did. Despite the mayhem and the humiliation it causes, the Government persists in trying to control foolish and unhealthy behavior by jailing scores of otherwise innocent citizens.  Its approach has given the land of the free the world’s largest prison population.

We no longer have orderly Militias, but we have many laws that infringe on our right to keep and bear arms for our own security. History’s greatest atrocities were committed by armed governments, not armed citizens.
The Government spends billions of dollars each year to secure the homeland, yet half the time ordinary citizens stop the terrorists.  It is advising Americans to spy on each other.  Its agents violate the rights of travelers daily, and assault children, the sick, and the dying.  The Government’s money and influence is gradually transforming the police from an institution that serves and protects our communities into an apparatus capable of controlling us.

The Government’s military spending, not including the current wars, is equal to the military spending of the rest of the world combined. Why? We have oceans on either side of us, a mostly unpopulated wilderness to the north, a nation to the south barely able to defend itself against criminal gangs, and millions of people who love freedom.

The Government has given us a War on Terror, a War on Drugs, and a War on Poverty. None of these wars have ever won.

The Government has failed to secure our borders and points of entry, one of its Constitutional duties, despite the fact that its officials promised to faithfully execute the law, despite the fact that most Americans want secure borders, and despite the fact that other nations secure their borders.

The Government tells us that millions of Americans need help, and it has numerous programs to provide them the necessities of life. It does this at the same time that billions of dollars are spent every month to employ people overseas and millions of people, often at great personal risk, come here legally and illegally. Most of the people who come here find work and shelter, raise their families, and are grateful for the opportunities and freedom denied them in their own lands.

Those that come here illegally are often swindled and abused, live in deplorable conditions and fear, and never become American citizens or even assimilate like our grandparents did. Those that come here legally are often subjected to delays and bureaucratic absurdities while trying to become Americans. The Government is planning to sweep this under the rug again by “re-forming” the law.

More than a few of the people indiscriminately entering our country are vicious criminals bent on robbery, murder, or the destruction of our nation. The Government has chosen to forsake the American People’s security, and instead devotes its energy to proving its own supremacy.

The Government has given itself the power to watch us and listen to us without independent judicial approval.  It is developing new methods to monitor, track, and examine people without probable cause.
The Government meddles in the internal affairs of other countries, and recently used surrogates and secret prisons to do things that legally can’t be done here. History shows that this hypocritical behavior only creates problems. A good reputation and friendship are just as important as security and freedom.

The Government is indefinitely holding people without charges and without trial, and has identified American citizens, who have not been charged or convicted of any crime, for assassination. The President has been given the power to declare Americans outlaws, depriving them of their rights.  These are the practices of dictators and kings, not a nation of laws.

The Government now fights undeclared wars. If we find it necessary to defend ourselves, then Congress should have the integrity and courage to declare war as required by the Constitution.

The Government has given itself the authority to wage war at any time and in any place. Unfettered authority appears to have resulted in unending war. This will enrich arms suppliers, but will surely lead to our nation’s downfall.

It took America three and a half years to defeat the Nazis and the Japanese empire. The Government has been at war now for the past ten years. All it has to show for it are the heads of a few ruffians on pikes, a mountain of debt, the wounded souls and maimed bodies of our countrymen, and everyone’s suspicion that AMERICA no longer exists.

The Government trumpets virtue and decency and sacrifice to the People while pursuing power and decadence and corruption for itself and its friends.

For many years, we have forewarned the Government of the problems associated with its growth, only to be told that we need still more Government. A government that continuously grabs power and begins to take on the characteristics that define a tyranny is not fit to be the government of a free people.

Nor have we ignored our fellow citizens. We have warned them of the dangers of this creeping intrusion into our lives and of the accumulation of power. We have reminded them why people came here and the circumstances under which this nation was created. We have appealed to their sense of fairness and open-mindedness, and have appealed to our common interest to reject these efforts which inevitably will undermine our connections and mutual trust. They have turned a deaf ear to the voice of reason and kinship, and our efforts have often been met with accusations of heartlessness and bigotry, or the insinuation that we should be silent because our words might incite violence. Freedom is a blessing, and thugs and lunatics don’t need provocation – only tyrants fear dissent. Despite all that, we consider all sincere Americans friends.

Therefore, the people of the United States of America, proclaiming our best intentions to the Supreme Judge of the world, do solemnly publish and declare, that we are disgusted with the federal Government’s illegal use of powers not given to it by the Constitution, by the States, or by the People. Five-hundred forty-five people in Washington cannot make 310 million people happy and secure; only vanity or hunger for power explain why you try. We want a government that honors the Republic, not power, privilege, and self-interest. We want a government that is financially responsible. We want sound money. We want the Government to stop redistributing our wealth under the pretext of trying to make life fair. We know you just like the power and the adulation that come from giving away what others have earned, but remember – “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” We want you to secure our borders and defend our nation. We want the Government to stop trying to solve all the world’s problems; we have enough here. We want you to stop building an empire; empires end in ruins. We want you to bring our men and women home – now! We want you to abide by the Constitution. It was designed to limit what you may do. Anything more is a violation of the Constitution and a threat to our Liberty. We expect you to return to their rightful owners – the PEOPLE – the freedoms you and your predecessors have stolen. If you don’t, then we will take them back.

Small Business Assault from Obamacare

Small Business Assault from Obamacare
July 4, 2012 | Sartre Batr

Hold on to your socks, the part time hiring of employees will become the new normal. The biggest prohibitive hit against job creation is in full motion. The consequences from Obamacare place a drag on the economy that is undeniable. This mugging of small business will guarantee that the primary engine of employment will sputter and knock, as the federal government forces higher and higher taxes on the last semblance of free enterprise.

Do not ignore the significance of this seminal moment. Forget about any economic recovery on Main Street. The unemployment stats will be stuck in a permanent loop, as the gross domestic product stagnates, at best. The more likelihood is that the characterized “double dip” recession will experience a full-blown depression. Government’s response will inflate prices in a feeble attempt to stave off deflation retractions.

Ponder the fallout of this escalated assault on the middle class. Larry Kudlow portrays in John Roberts Is a Super-Taxer the Supreme Court ruling as a dangerous precedent.

“The Roberts court has served up a “tax mandate” that is more powerful than the still-limited Commerce Clause regulatory mandate. Roberts has created a huge new loophole. Instead of new purchase mandates, we’ll have new purchase tax mandates.

Americans for Tax Reform estimates that Obamacare contains 20 new or higher taxes on American families and small businesses. Investor’s Business Daily says this comes to a $675 billion tax hike over the next decade.”

Watch the video of Stephen Moore, Senior Economics Writer with the Wall Street Journal, explaining that nearly 75% of Obamacare costs will fall on the backs of those Americans making less than $120,000 a year.
How Will The Supreme Court’s Decision To Uphold Obamacare Affect Small Businesses And Job Creation?, confronts the consequences of approving the tax mandate.

Beginning in 2014, the “Employer Responsibility” provision would require employers with 50 or more workers to provide health coverage.

Critics say it could hurt small businesses that have more than 50 workers and can’t afford to offer health care coverage. Moreover, it could curb hiring among companies that have fewer than 50 employees.

Also, “A lesser-known provision of Obamacare penalizes small businesses for hiring more than 25 employees, said Ben Piper, President of Ben Piper Consulting LLC. “Small businesses that have 25 or fewer employees and offer health care insurance will receive a 35 percent tax credit under the law.”

When the pro government mouthpiece CNBC reports of negative aftermaths, you know the prospects are awful. From Small Business on Obamacare: No Reason to Hire or Invest the warning follows:

Jim Amos, CEO and chairman of Tasti D-Lite, a frozen yogurt franchise that operates in 14 states as well as globally, is certain of one thing: The ruling will hinder growth in the franchise space. “It’s going to force franchisees to shift workers to part-time to avoid the 50-employee threshold,” he said. “It will keep new owners and new openings on the sideline.”

The Street exhibits an unsupported sentiment in, Small Business Reacts to Obamacare Ruling, “small businesses by and large are resigned to the law and preparing to move ahead with the required health care changes.” Maybe the more accurate assessment, in this same article is the operative response.

“Still, the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, a nonprofit advocacy and research organization dedicated to protecting small business and promoting entrepreneurship, says the ruling is a “major blow” to entrepreneurship overall.

The SBE Council has a broad-based membership of 100,000 members comprised of self-employed and small to mid-size businesses across industries.

“Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court undercuts freedom, which is essential to economic growth and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is on the decline in the U.S., and we need policies that will encourage risk-taking and start-up activity. Intrusive government policies and punishing taxes, like the Affordable Care Act with its individual mandate, work against a vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystem, ” SBE Council President and CEO Karen Kerrigan says in a statement.”

Add to the intentional and punitive burden that especially targets the independent business, the long list of corporate exemptions to the Obamacare requirements. These waivers are pure crony favoritism. Can anyone have confidence that the Obama administration will apply the law equally when their willingness to reward campaign supporters is so well established?

Over a year ago, Human Events listed HOW TO GET AN OBAMACARE WAIVER.

1. Join a labor union: The waiver list reads like a “who’s who” of Big Labor organizations.

2. Work for a huge corporation: Jack-in-the-Box, Cracker Barrel, Ruby Tuesday’s, Waffle House… these are among the most recognizable names of corporate waiver winners.

3. Work for a health care company: Quite a few of these exemptions go to the health care industry and pharmaceutical companies.

4. Work for the government: State and local governments get plenty of ObamaCare waivers.

5. Open a luxurious boutique in Nancy Pelosi’s district: Fully 20% of the latest ObamaCare waivers go to luxury businesses that happen to be located in the district represented by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

6. Live in Nevada, New Hampshire, or Maine: These three wonderful states have been granted special exemptions from many of ObamaCare’s provisions.

The law that “Big Phama” and the insurance carriers wrote has small business at such a disadvantage, that the actual survival of independent enterprises is at stake. When establishment business reporting sounds the danger siren, their corporate sponsors usually take note. The dancing in the corporate suites just goes to prove that the centralization of everyday commerce is behind the draconian burden placed on small business under Obamacare.

Most Americans know little of the risks and responsibilities of being in business. However, many more residents will experience the plight of unemployment and the curse of government dependence. The strength of economic viability must rest upon a sound foundation of small business. The bulk of jobs come from this sector. By inflicting financial costs, that bankrupt Main Street only leads to the destruction of prosperity.
James Hall – July 4, 2012

Read the entire article on the Negotium archive page
http://www.batr.org/negotium/070412.html

Discuss or comment about this essay on the BATR Forum
http://forum.batr.net/showthread.php?tid=2351

Comment: The chart at the top of this page is from a front group called Heritage Foundation. If Rommney were in office, this chart would not exist. With that said, the illusion that President Obama is the enemy and must be replaced by another imbecile such as Romney is part of your illusion.

The Big Bang versus the 'Big Bounce'

Credit: Thinkstock

The Big Bang versus the 'Big Bounce'
July 6, 2012 | Phys.org

Two fundamental concepts in physics, both of which explain the nature of the Universe in many ways, have been difficult to reconcile with each other. European researchers developed a mathematical approach to do so that has the potential to explain what came before the Big Bang.

According to Einstein’s (classical) theory of general relativity, space is a continuum. Regions of space can be subdivided into smaller and smaller volumes without end.

The fundamental idea of quantum mechanics is that physical quantities exist in discrete packets (quanta) rather than in a continuum. Further, these quanta and the physical phenomena related to them exist on an extremely small scale (Planck scale).

So far, the theories of quantum mechanics have failed to ‘quantise’ gravity. Loop quantum gravity (LQG) is an attempt to do so. It represents space as a net of quantised intersecting loops of excited gravitational fields called spin networks. This network viewed over time is called spin foam.

Not only does LQG provide a precise mathematical picture of space and time, it enables mathematical solutions to long-standing problems related to black holes and the Big Bang. Amazingly, LQG predicts that the Big Bang was actually a ‘Big Bounce’, not a singularity but a continuum, where the collapse of a previous universe spawned the creation of ours.

European researchers initiated the ‘Effective field theory for loop quantum gravity’ (EFTFORLQG) project to further develop this exciting candidate theory reconciling classical and quantum descriptions of the Universe.

Scientists focused on the background-independent structure of LQG which requires that the mathematics defining the system of spacetime be independent of any coordinate system or reference frame (background).
They applied both semi-classical approximations (Wentzel-Kramers-Brillouin approximations, WKBs) and effective field theory (sort of approximate gravitational field theory) techniques to analyze a classical geometry of space, study the dynamics of semi-classical states of spin foam and apply the mathematical formulations to astrophysical phenomena such as black holes.

Results produced by the EFTFORLQG project team exceeded expectations. Scientists truly contributed to establishing LQG as a major contender for describing the quantum picture of space and time compatible with general relativity with exciting implications for unravelling some of the major mysteries of the Universe.

Provided by CORDIS

UFOs sweep the skies: Orbs spotted worldwide (VIDEO)

Ad

UFOs sweep the skies: Orbs spotted worldwide (VIDEO)
July 6, 2012 | RT



Fast flying orbs of light have been spotted in the US and Europe almost simultaneously. While many suggest they were the same UFOs, the question remains: how they could travel so fast?

First the phenomenon was spotted over Salt Lake City, Utah, about a week ago. Then it was also seen in Poland, Greece and Slovakia, some 9,000 kilometers away.

Footage uploaded by many who witnessed the UFOs reveals that they appeared almost simultaneously.

The trajectory of the mysterious orbs was nothing like that of any man-made flying object. The orbs were of red and orange color and were moving very fast, witnesses say.

Many witnesses noted heavy rains in the regions where the orbs appeared.

Princess Diana documentary 'Unlawful Killing' is banned

Princess Diana documentary 'Unlawful Killing' is banned
July 6, 2012 | Ben Child

Controversial film about Princess Diana's death, directed by Keith Allen and funded by Mohamed Al Fayed, fails to secure insurance for US distributors

A controversial documentary questioning the circumstances of Princess Diana's death has been shelved after insurers refused to indemnify the makers against potential libel lawsuits, reports the Sun.

Unlawful Killing, directed by Keith Allen and funded by Diana's partner Dodi Fayed's father, Mohamed Al Fayed, was screened at Cannes last year, though it was not part of the official festival. It alleges that "dark forces" within the British establishment worked to cover up the true details of Diana's death in 1997.

Producers admitted last year that lawyers had warned them to make 87 cuts if they wanted to show the film in Britain, but the makers had hoped to show the film in the US and other territories to coincide with the 15th anniversary of the deaths of Diana and Dodi in a Parisian tunnel. Unfortunately, insurers have baulked at the prospect because US distributors might have faced litigation through their UK offices.

"Unlawful Killing has been sold all around the world," a spokesperson for the film told the Sun. "But there was a specific form of insurance needed by the US distributors to cover them for their French and UK offices. This proved impossible to secure. The film has been withdrawn in perpetuity."

The move will presumably disappoint Al Fayed, who has long argued that the circumstances surrounding the death of his son and Diana were suspicious. He is reported to have put up the film's entire £2.5m budget and was said to be "delighted" at the results, though Allen argued in a Guardian article last year that the documentary was independently conceived and had not been altered to fit the worldview of its benefactor.

As one Diana movie fades into the dust, so another raises its head above the parapet. The first pictures of Naomi Watts as the princess in the upcoming biopic Diana have hit the internet. The Australian actor plays Diana in her later years in the film, previously known as Caught in Flight, which is being directed by Downfall's Oliver Hirschbiegel, best known for his acclaimed drama about the last days of Hitler in his Berlin bunker. The film centres on the princess's relationships with heart surgeon Dr Hasnat Khan (played by Naveen Andrews) and Dodi Fayed. It is scheduled for release next year.

From Sott.net: Trailer of 'Unlawful Killing' the documentary by Keith Allen on the death of Diana, Princess of Wales:



Director Keith Allen defends his film of Princess Diana's death:

WikiLeaks “Syrian Files” Obtained by Flame to Set Up Assad

WikiLeaks “Syrian Files” Obtained by Flame to Set Up Assad
July 6, 2012 | Susanne Posel


WikiLeaks has released damning emails embarrassing Syria and exposing “Syria’s opponents”, says Julian Assange. There were more than 2.4 million emails that show correspondence between “Syrian political figures, ministries and associated companies” between August 2006 and March 2012.

The Associated Press reports, “WikiLeaks’ Sarah Harrison told journalists at London’s Frontline Club that the emails reveal interactions between the Syrian government and Western companies, although she declined to go into much further detail. … WikiLeaks posted only a handful of the documents to its website Thursday, but the disclosure — whose source WikiLeaks has not made clear — wouldn’t be the first major leak of Syrian emails.”

Harrison said that the “material is embarrassing to Syria” but claims that Syria’s opponents will equally be ashamed. “It helps us not merely to criticize one group or another, but to understand their interests, actions and thoughts. It is only through understanding this conflict that we can hope to resolve it.”



Called “The Syrian Files” numerous diplomatic correspondences are more of an exposure to insider information than WikiLeaks disclosure concerning the US government’s role and responsibility in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The hacked emails include:

• Correspondence from the Baath party
• Contains information on foreign affairs, finance and Assad’s presidential business
• Records of financial transfers from Syrian ministries to nations
• Over 68,000 are in Russian

Russia is in arms trade with Syria even though the UN with pressure from the US has imposed sanctions against Assad’s government because of the fake revolution called the Arab Spring that was inspired and controlled by Soros infiltrators and the CIA.

WikiLeaks and Assange have not “verified all the emails” because of the sheer volume, however they claim that they are “statistically confident” that the files they have obtained are genuine.

Questions concern Assange’s connections to the CIA and his ability to expose “leaked” information. As a psy-op, the manifestation of Assange and WikiLeaks has effectively used engineered operations of secret document exposure to give the appearance of forced political responsibility for intelligence and policy failures. This is detailed in the CIA document entitled, The Secret Team .

The CIA connection to Assange creates an avenue where fake leaks of documents can be made to give the illusion to the public that they are privy to secret information.

Meanwhile, the CIA “people-power coup” has been integral in many fake revolutions both in the streets of foreign nations and on the internet.

WikiLeaks assisted the US government’s overthrow of the Tunisian government. Assange’s portrayal as a lone wolf just trying to expose corruption has aided the US government as the perfect psy-op cover that convinces individuals to rally in favor of their hero, Julian Assange, and keep his crusade alive.



These emails come just prior to the meeting in Paris where the Friends of Syria group, which supports Assad’s removal. Russia, who is not attending the meeting, says that this is a ruse to combine efforts against Assad and create more international support for a force regime change and pending military strike.

Haaretz reported back in February that Anonymous hacked into Syrian servers and extracted emails. These emails supposedly exposed, among other things, Assad’s wife’s “shopping sprees”; however the obviousness of this claim is simply propaganda intended to defame the Assad government while the Obama administration, Israel and the UN “peacemakers” publicly decry for either war or Assad’s “voluntary stepping down”.

While the arrest of Ryan Cleary, member of LuzSec, was first announced, it became apparent that the LuzSec – Anonymous link was concrete . The origination of Anonymous is traceable to the CIA as an attempt of the US government to create a false flag threat that justifies the Obama administration’s restriction of information flow and freedom on the internet.

The hacktivist movement has spawned new off-shoots of the main groups Anonymous and LuzSec, named “LuzSec Reborn”, “MalSec”, and “SpexSec”. These groups are using the same techniques as Anonymous, with new names. The nature of these groups is to wreak havoc, break apart, and come together under a different name to begin the process over again.

During on the of the CIA directed “hacks”, Anonymous gained information from foreign servers in Syria. This was achieved with the use of Flame, the descendent of Stuxnet. These US government agents posing as hacktivists are pretending to be independent persons in a nameless, faceless hacking group hell-bent on cyber-attacking government agencies.

Flame, analyzed by Eugene Kaspersky, of the Russian Kaspersky Lab, was found to be capable of:

• Stealing data via USB memory stick
• Steal information whether or not the computer is connected to the internet
• Have the exact same programing properties as Stuxnet
• Linked usage to the US government and Israel

The leaks Assange has revealed directly benefit the US, Israeli and UN campaign to remove Assad from his governmental seat and implant a stooge, just as was done with the “ election ” of Muslim Brotherhood member Muhammad Morsi.

In Egypt, the move of Morsi to presidential power benefits the US government as Morsi has already destroyed the Egyptian constitution, disbanded their parliament, and made clear assertions of compliance with Israeli agendas to remove Assad from power in Syria.

The case against Assad is mounting, although it is mostly propaganda taken as fact and spun in the mainstream media worldwide. This “revelation” from WikiLeaks assists the desire of Obama, Netanyahu and the UN to control the Syrian government.

This is all very easy to understand: a CIA operation where information stolen from Syrian computer servers by Flame (which is the cyber-weapon of the US government) was given to Anonymous (who are CIA agents) and “leaked” by WikiLeaks (the fake whistleblower website).

Was there Advanced Knowledge of the 7/7 London Bomb Attacks?

Source

Was there Advanced Knowledge of the 7/7 London Bomb Attacks?
July 5, 2012 | Michel Chossudovsky

7 Years Ago, 7/7 2005

The London 7/7 Bombings
 
Seven Years Ago, The London July 7, 2005 Bombings

Global Research Analysis and Selected Articles

Michel Chossudovsky (Editor)

On the 7th anniversary of the London Bombings (July 7, 2005), we bring 
the following collection of articles to the attention of our readers.

INTRODUCTION

Coincidence? Unanswered Questions?

Was there Advanced Knowledge of the 7/7 London Bomb Attacks?

A fictional "scenario" of multiple bomb attacks on London's underground took place at exactly the same time as the bomb attack on July 7, 2005.

Peter Power, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, a private firm on contract to the London Metropolitan Police, described in a BBC interview how he had organized and conducted the anti-terror drill, on behalf of an unnamed business client.

The fictional scenario was based on simultaneous bombs going off at exactly the same time at the underground stations where the real attacks were occurring:

"POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.

HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise?

POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don't want to reveal their name but they're listening and they'll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they'd met and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on."

(BBC Radio Interview, 7 July 2005)

In response to the flood of incoming email messages, Peter Power --who is a former senior Scotland Yard official specializing in counterterrorism-- responded in the form of the following "automatic reply":

"Thank you for your message. Given the volume of emails about events on 7 July and a commonly expressed misguided belief that our exercise revealed prescient behaviour, or was somehow a conspiracy (noting that several websites interpreted our work that day in an inaccurate / naive / ignorant / hostile manner) it has been decided to issue a single email response as follows:

It is confirmed that a short number of 'walk through' scenarios planed [sic] well in advance had commenced that morning for a private company in London (as part of a wider project that remains confidential) and that two scenarios related directly to terrorist bombs at the same time as the ones that actually detonated with such tragic results. One scenario in particular, was very similar to real time events.

However, anyone with knowledge about such ongoing threats to our capital city will be aware that (a) the emergency services have already practiced several of their own exercises based on bombs in the underground system (also reported by the main news channels) and (b) a few months ago the BBC broadcast a similar documentary on the same theme, although with much worse consequences [??]. It is hardly surprising therefore, that we chose a feasible scenario - but the timing and script was nonetheless, a little disconcerting.

In short, our exercise (which involved just a few people as crisis managers actually responding to a simulated series of activities involving, on paper, 1000 staff) quickly became the real thing and the players that morning responded very well indeed to the sudden reality of events.

Beyond this no further comment will be made and based on the extraordinary number of messages from ill informed people, no replies will henceforth be given to anyone unable to demonstrate a bona fide reason for asking (e.g. accredited journalist / academic).

[ signed ] Peter Power"

Coincidence? Was there Advanced knowledge of the Bomb Attacks?  

Another Coincidence? Several important people were in London at the time of the bomb attacks including Benjamin Netanyahu and former Mayor of New York City Rudi Giuliani.

According to a report of the Associated Press correspondent in Jerusalem, the Israeli embassy in London had been advised by Scotland Yard of an impending terror event, suggesting that there was advanced knowledge of the planning of the 7/7 bomb attack by the British Home Office. (AP, July 7, 2005) 

Benjamin Netanyahu, who at the time was Israel's Finance Minister, had been warned by his embassy not to attend an economic conference organized by the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (TASE) in collaboration with the Israeli embassy and Deutsche Bank.

Netanyahu was staying at the Aldridge Hotel in Mayfair. The conference venue was a few miles away at the Great Eastern Hotel close to the Liverpool subway station, where one of the bomb blasts occurred.

Rudolph Giuliani, who was mayor of New York City at the time of the 9/11 attacks, was staying at the Great Eastern hotel on the 7^th of July, where TASE was hosting its economic conference, with Israel's Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as keynote speaker.

Giuliani was having a business breakfast meeting in his room at the Great Eastern Hotel, close to Liverpool Street station when the bombs went off. 

Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Rudolph Giuliani knew each other. Giuliani had officially welcomed Netanyahu when he visited New York City as Prime Minister of Israel in 1996. There was no indication, however, from news reports that the two men met in London at the Great Eastern. On the day prior to the London attacks, July 6, Giuliani was in North Yorkshire at a meeting.

After completing his term as mayor of New York City, Rudi Giuliani established a security outfit: Giuliani Security and Safety. The latter is a subsidary of Giuliani Partners LLC. headed by former New York head of the FBI, Pasquale D'Amuro.

It is worth noting that Peter Power's Visor Consultants and Giuliani Security and Safety LLC specialize in similar "mock terror drills" and "emergency preparedness" procedures. Both Giuliani and Power were in London at the same time within a short distance of one of the bombing sites. While there is no evidence that Giuliani and Power met in London, the two companies have had prior business contacts in the area of emergency preparedness. Peter Power served on the Advisory Board to the Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness (CCEP), together with Richard Sheirer, Senior Vice President of Giuliani and Partners. who was previously Commissioner at the NYC Office of Emergency Management, and Director of New York City Homeland Security.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, July 7, 2012

This introduction is based on an earlier article entitled 7/7 Mock Terror Drill: What Relationship to the Real Time Terror Attacks?  August 8, 2007

Articles/Videos..

 

Code Pink - Occupy The Military Industrial Complex

Code Pink - Occupy The Military Industrial Complex
July 6, 2012 | OccupyLAMedia

Court in OWS Twitter Case Gets it Wrong Again

Court in OWS Twitter Case Gets it Wrong Again
July 5, 2012 | Hanni Fakhoury

Despite Twitter's (and our) best efforts, it has been ordered to disclose to the government all of the information it has on an Occupy Wall Street protester.

We've been following the case of Malcolm Harris'  -- arrested in connection with the OWS Brooklyn Bridge protest in October 2011 -- very closely. Charged with disorderly conduct, New York City prosecutors sent a broad subpoena to Twitter, seeking to obtain any and all information it had on Harris -- tweets, subscriber information, email addresses. From the very beginning, we suspected that the government was really after location information. And sure enough, after Harris challenged the subpoena, the NYC prosecutors admitted they wanted the information to show he was on the bridge at the time of his arrest.

In April, the court denied Harris' motion to quash, writing an opinion filled with troubling legal conclusions, finding Harris had no legal standing to challenge the subpoena since he didn't own his tweets, and allowing the government to access content and location data without a search warrant. Thankfully, Twitter stepped up to challenge the subpoena since the court ruled Harris couldn't do it himself, and together with the ACLU and Public Knowledge, we filed an amicus brief in support of Twitter's motion to quash.

Unfortunately, last week the court issued another decision, this time denying Twitter's motion to quash for much the same reason that it denied Harris' motion to quash: the belief that there is no expectation of privacy -- and thus no 4th Amendment privacy interest -- in information turned over to companies or broadcast over the Internet. While we're not surprised the judge didn't change his mind, we're still disappointed to see the court failing to appreciate the privacy concerns at stake. We think the court is behind the times on this important issue.

We've repeatedly (and are continuing to) challenge this idea and have seen some courts slowly begin to recognize that the 4th Amendment's right to privacy applies to information, like emails and cell site location information, turned over to third parties. Earlier this year, Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor noted in her concurring opinion in United States v. Jones that the elimination of privacy rights in information turned over to third parties is "ill-suited" for the digital age we live in today.

While we may have lost this round of the fight, we're positive that this will not be the end of this issue both in Harris' case, and in similar cases throughout the country. As this case and issue work their way up through the appellate courts, EFF will be continuing the fight to keep this sensitive personal information out of the prying hands of the government unless they obtain a search warrant.

XMM-Newton Captures The Beating Heart Of A Newborn Star

XMM-Newton Captures The Beating Heart Of A Newborn Star (via redOrbit)

[ Watch the Video ] redOrbit Staff & Wire Reports – Your Universe Online ESA’s XMM-Newton has helped to reveal the violent behavior of a young Sun-like star spinning at high speed and spewing out super-hot plasma. Along with information from NASA’s Chandra and Japan’s Suzaku, the findings shed…

Unprecedented: Class Action Lawsuit against Church, State and Big Pharma given Green Light

Bowman holding papers July 4

Unprecedented: Class Action Lawsuit against Church, State and Big Pharma given Green Light
July 5, 2012 | Activist Post

Toronto, Canada – History was made yesterday when a legal team headed by Jason Bowman of the ACP was granted the right to proceed with its filing of a criminal conspiracy lawsuit against the Vatican, Crown of England and other parties.

A Federal Court judge in Toronto examined the material and granted leave for the full application to be filed and presented in court next Monday, July 9.

According to Bowman, who acted on behalf of both the ACP and ITCCS,

We expected to simply file a motion … Instead, the Court directed that we file not only the ex-parte motion materials, but also our entire Application a full week earlier than we were expecting. Naturally, I was elated.

A crowd of supporters accompanied Bowman to the Federal Court where he secured a preliminary hearing and approval to proceed from the on duty judge.

Afterwards, the group held a press conference nearby and was harassed by security guards and at least one agent provocateur named Greg Renouf who tried to incite violence and discredit both Bowman and ITCCS founder and co-applicant Kevin Annett. Renouf has since then posted a derogatory and untruthful YouTube posting about the event.

An attempted livestream broadcast of the event was inexplicably disrupted, although blog media activists who were present reported the news extensively on the Internet.



None of the “mainstream” media in Toronto attended the press conference.

The ACP-ITCCS lawsuit is the first of its kind: a class action aimed at so-called heads of state, including the Pope and the Queen of England, on behalf of victims of alleged crimes against humanity committed by churches, governments and corporations.

Also named in this suit as defendants are the government of Canada, the United Church of Canada, the Church of England, and pharmaceutical companies, all of which are charged with crimes against humanity and criminally conspiring to obstruct justice.

Kevin Annett, who is named in the court application as a plaintiff against the Crown, Pope and other defendants, commented,

As usual, the corporate media ignored us and paid operatives tried to discredit and stop us, but this time, we got our foot in the door of the court system. Wherever that leads us, we’ve taken another step towards forcing criminals in power to do time for their crimes. Whether it’s in this court or in a common law de jure one, the tables will be turned. Stay tuned for you tube postings, and more updates after the July 9 court appearance, at www.itccs.org and http://federalclassactions.wordpress.com

For videos and other footage see:

http://federalclassactions.wordpress.com/2012/07/04/update-historical-application-to-be-filed-and-served-upon-the-vatican-the-queen-others-court-directs-applicants-in-chambers-today-re-mondays-ex-parte-motion/

See the evidence of Genocide in Canada and other crimes against the innocent at www.hiddennolonger.com and at the website of The International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State at www.itccs.org.

Messages for Kevin Annett can be left at 250-591-4573 (Canada).

Watch Kevin's award-winning documentary film Unrepentant on his website www.hiddenfromhistory.org

You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE

Chris Hedges at National Gathering Occupy Philadelphia Forever

chris hedges at NatGat Philadelphia 
July 1, 2012 |  mscotko



Chris Hedges speaking at Occupy National Gathering in Philadelphia, streamed live by Jesse Hadden - http://www.ustream.tv/channel/jessehadden July1, 2012.

The Biggest Financial Scam In World History

The Biggest Financial Scam In World History
July 5, 2012 | Washington Blog

Why Is the Libor Scandal So Important to You?

There have been numerous big banking scandals recently.

But the Libor scandal is the biggest financial scam in world history.  See this and this.

The former CEO of Barclays said today that banks across the world were fixing interest rates in the run-up to the financial crisis .

Professor of economics and law Bill Black notes:

It is the largest rigging of prices in the history of the world by many orders of magnitude.

Indeed, the scandal effects an $800 trillion dollar market – 10 times the size of the real world economy.

Matt Taibbi explains that this is the “mega scandal of all mega scandals”, because Libor is the “sun at the center of the financial universe”, and manipulating Libor means that “the whole Earth is built on quicksand.”

Local governments, credit card holders, students, small businesses, small investors, homeowners and virtually everyone else in the entire world has been impacted by the manipulation.

As just one example, let’s look at mortgages.  The Washington Post notes today:

60 percent of prime adjustable rate mortgages, and nearly 100 percent of subprime ones, were indexed to LIBOR.
***

That means that when LIBOR rises, so do the prices ordinary consumers pay to, say, get a mortgage.
***

So how did the manipulations by Barclay’s affect this rate? First, from 2005 and 2007, the bank allegedly varied the rates it reported to the BBA and Thomson Reuters so as to improve its margins on internal trades. For example, it could have placed bets that the LIBOR rate would increase, and then reported artificially high rates which in turn artificially increased the LIBOR averages, so that the bets were likelier to pay off. This … bumped up mortgage rates – however infinitesimally – for consumers even when the risk of the loans hadn’t changed at all.

That is dramatic enough.  But the entire U.S. mortgage market is around $10 trillion dollars.   Many hundreds of trillions of dollars worth of assets are effected by Libor.

Indeed, the scandal is so big that it will further destroy trust in our financial system and drive many people from investing in the capital markets altogether.

I Want The Earth, Plus Five Percent: The Origin of a Debt Based Economy

I Want The Earth, Plus Five Percent: The Origin of a Debt Based Economy
Feb. 2, 2012 | TheResistanceUprise

How Satan Gets in Your Mind

How Satan Gets in Your Mind
July 5, 2012 | R. Mark Sink

Satan Abstract: The following is a short abstract of letter P which explains the truer navigation which has not been revealed until now. I wrote about the letter P in a recent article, however, I did not mention these initial roots which tell a story. I wrote this out after watching a film (at bottom of linked page) produced by Sott.net on the Miviludes in France and their association to Scientology which is a CIA Satan cult intended to thwart awareness.

Scientology seems to take on the direct role of Satan as this is part of our life experience dealing with temptation which is strongly tied to our desires for food and all that life has to offer. In essence, Scientology is Satan in all its forms, however, the building of the companion which is not recognized as is, defiles it allowing Satan to reign over Earth. A Satanist may not actually be evil, just thoroughly obedient. The abstraction of Satan begins with the first version of letter P, and as I had wrote in the article, this was the combination of power and temptation working hand in hand. You can easily compare these to the actual roots and verify these definitions. Satan is also association with other letters which will need discernment.

1. Food of life; satrap enters, also Satan, temptation (pastor always possesses companion)
2. A form of appeasement or formation of a stake in the ground, propaganda follows (those who see life processing as peaceful are used as fabric)
3. Essence of these foods becomes "battle-flag"
4. Inserted version of pan (collection of funds) also Satan; SIFTING, GOOD RETURNS
5. Pope, father element
6. Food controlled by breaking abstinence between father figures and food; breakfast
7. Father/woman relationship defined as poverty, encyclopedia
8. Pessimism impairs empathy for life; pedophilia
9. Compassion becomes fiend deadens cloth
10. Celtic Macedonia; pineal
11. Consciousness by some thought to be bitter if too defined; paint
12. Wealth, riches in the cattle; pecuniary
13. Formation of cult; concoct

The last root listed above also contains the word "cook," which validates these notions. The reader should be able to sense some of what has happened in these relationships. The fourteenth root is the beginning of  a complex mind/body set. If I have left anything out, please comment below.

Here are some questions you may want to ask yourself?

1. Is the pastor food or is this a man?
2. Are you part of the fabric of the false-flag, or do you sense the pang?
3. Do you not know when it is going to rain?
4. Or must you depend on your false-flag?
5. Does your father really love you as a form of empathy or are you forced to provide cover?
6. Do you eat just because food is in front of you?
7. Those subject to Satan's influence are categorized by men who worship Satan. Do you agree?
8. Weakened by propaganda, do you succumb to temptation?
9. If so, then the passive state has you, did you know it is defined as the devil?
10. Did you know that a tree has resin?
11. Did you know this resin is also hated?
12. No resin seems allowed, why is that?
13. Roland Orzabald once said, "He had seen the kitchen," in the lyrics of one of his songs. What did he mean?

EU Defeats ACTA

photo: © European Union 2012 - European Parliament

EU Defeats ACTA
July 4, 2012 | CommonDreams.org

ACTA, the controversial online piracy treaty, was dealt a blow on Wednesday when the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly to reject it.

The European Parliament voted 478 to 39 against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which was drawn up in secret and had been protested by hundreds of thousands across the EU who saw the treaty as an infringement on internet freedom.

President of the European Parliament Martin Schulz welcomed the decision and stated that "ACTA is the wrong solution to fight online piracy." He said that the treaty negotiations had lacked transparency and acknowledged the massive public mobilizations against the treaty.

"The majority of the parliament is of the opinion that ACTA is too vague - leaving room for abuses and raising concerns about its impact on privacy and civil liberties, on innovation, creativity and the free flow of information," wrote Schulz.

"We have to take all possible measures to fight piracy, but this should never be done at the cost of what has made the internet one of the most revolutionary technologies in history: the EP wants the web to remain free and open," he added.

Civil liberties advocates including Pirate Party leader Loz Kaye also welcomed the decision. "The European Parliament vote is a triumph of democracy over special interests and shady back-room deals. This is a significant victory for digital rights, and it's thanks to the tireless work of activists and grass roots organizations, including the Pirate Party world wide. Without this opposition, our representatives would have waved this agreement through. It is now clear that it is becoming increasingly politically poisonous to be 'anti-internet'," Kaye said.

With this vote, there is no possibility of EU ratification, leaving the future of the treaty uncertain.

The Founders’ True Spirit

James Madison

The Founders’ True Spirit by E.J. Dionne, Jr.

It’s entirely appropriate that the week of our July Fourth celebrations should coincide with a moment when the Supreme Court’s health care decision has prompted intense debate over the purpose of our government and what the Constitution allows it to do.

We are a more philosophical people than we give ourselves credit for. Constitutional questions enter the political conversation in the United States more than in most countries because our diverse nation is bound by our founding principles, not by blood, race or ethnicity.

This has advantages and disadvantages. The biggest advantages are our openness and the fact that we tend to argue on the basis of high principles. The biggest disadvantage is that differences over policy are often disguised as differences over whether a preferred choice is constitutional or not. When we should be addressing pragmatic questions—Will this approach work? Will it solve the problem it’s designed to solve? Is this a problem government should do something about?—we instead fall back on rather abstract discussions of whether a given idea violates the Constitution.

It’s not a recent habit. When Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton proposed that the federal government establish a Bank of the United States in 1790, his idea was strongly opposed by James Madison, his partner in writing both the Constitution and the Federalist Papers that defended it.

Madison wasn’t just against the bank. Setting a pattern for the future, he insisted that its creation would be unconstitutional. Those who claim we can be so certain of the “original” intentions of the Founders should take note: If two of the original authors of the Constitution came to such a stark point of disagreement so quickly, what exactly does “originalism” mean?

 Moreover, it is dangerous to turn the Founders into quasi-religious prophets who produced a text more like the Bible or the Talmud. It’s neither. It is a governing document that was the product of compromises and arguments. “Historians today can recognize the extraordinary character of the Founding Fathers,” wrote Gordon Wood, one of the premier contemporary scholars of the founding era, while also acknowledging that they had “no special divine insight into politics” and that they were “as enmeshed in historical circumstances as we are.”

We do a disservice to ourselves and the Founders alike if we take them out of history and demand that they settle arguments that we ought to settle on our own.

The Founders, after all, were not timid men bound by the past. They did something bold and adventurous. In creating a novel form of government, they were thinking and acting anew.

Recently, University of Texas law professor Sanford Levinson pointed me to Madison’s lovely words in Federalist No. 14. “Is it not the glory of the people of America,” Madison asked, “that, whilst they have paid a decent regard to the opinions of former times and other nations, they have not suffered a blind veneration for antiquity, for custom, or for names, to overrule the suggestions of their own good sense, the knowledge of their own situation, and the lessons of their own experience?”

The Founders would no doubt be gratified that we still care so passionately about their work. But they might be quite surprised to learn how much of our health care debate focused on a careful parsing of what the Constitution’s clauses on regulating commerce and levying taxes allowed us to do to solve a problem that would have been unknown to them. We would be truer to the Founders’ intentions and spirit if we followed Madison in having more confidence in our own good sense and our knowledge of our own situation.

The genius of the Founders is that they created a government designed to act, and so I’d propose a new patriotic ritual involving an annual reading of the preamble to our Constitution:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Yes, the first word of the Constitution is “we,” and its purposes include establishing justice and promoting the general welfare. Before we expend enormous energy deciding how many angels can dance on the head of the Commerce Clause, we would usefully keep in mind the broader objectives of our great experiment.

E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com.
   
© 2012, Washington Post Writers Group