The politics of greed is what keeps this world wrapped in corruption. If you want to stick around for a while longer, I suggest you educate yourself and try to do something constructive to help save what little good, honesty, and trust we have left.

A motto for us old vets: Take one with you!

Use your Go Back and Go Forward commands to get to where you were in a previous file.

Go to Home

Highest Go To numbers are the latest Links of all coruption pages.


Go to 13075
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=8328
Silver, Gold & the Last American Hero JFK
By Darryl Robert Schoon - drschoon.com March 31, 2008

hero, def. a man distinguished by exceptional courage and nobility and strength
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Like everything in our past, the late American president, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, exists as a memory. Struck down by an assassin in a decade where bullets - democracy’s deadly equalizer - quieted those brave enough to champion change, e.g. JFK, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was a true American hero; and heroes, while a champion to many are, by definition, a threat to some.

In How To Survive The Crisis And Prosper In The Process, I detailed how America’s problems after 1950 mirrored England’s descent from power one century before. America’s problems did not go unnoticed by those who then led the US, Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and his successor, John F. Kennedy. The reaction of each, however, is a chilling reminder of the dangers facing those who rule.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower was Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces that defeated the fascist powers in World War II; and, as a war hero, he was believed to be an ideal candidate for the Republican Party in the 1952 presidential elections.

Eisenhower was elected but while serving as president, Eisenhower clearly saw the forces that would someday be responsible for America’s loss of power; for it was during Eisenhower’s presidency that the erosion of America’s economic wealth began.

Prior to Eisenhower’s presidency in 1952, the US was the wealthiest nation in the world. As the largest industrial power, the US enjoyed a positive balance of trade with its partners. Before Eisenhower assumed office, the US had gold reserves totaling almost 22,000 tons, the most gold any nation had ever possessed.

When Eisenhower left office, however, it is uncertain how much gold remained; because after 1954, the US never allowed a public audit of its gold reserves. As the US then sold more goods abroad than it bought, US gold reserves should have increased. Instead, they declined. In one year alone, 1958, US gold reserves were reduced by 10 %.

The powerful forces that controlled America were spending so much of America’s wealth on overseas military and corporate expansion that gold was flowing out faster than trade could bring it in. Indeed, the profligate spending responsible for America’s loss of gold and consequent debt began during Eisenhower’s presidency.

I place economy among the first and most important republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.

President Thomas Jefferson 1743-1826

Only days before leaving office, in his Farewell Speech Eisenhower named those he believed responsible for the policies that would someday endanger America’s liberties and render this once wealthy nation financially insolvent.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

…We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

Less than fifty years after Eisenhower uttered those prophetic words, America’s patrimony is gone and its future mortgaged beyond its ability to repay. His words were heard but not heeded - not then or since. It cannot be said that America wasn’t warned. It can and will be said that America didn’t listen.


WHO RULES AMERICA

It is no coincidence that Eisenhower waited until three days before leaving office to warn America about the US military-industrial complex. A military man himself, Eisenhower felt it necessary to warn the country of the unwarranted influence and intrusion of military and industrial [sic business] interests that were then colluding to hijack the future liberties and prosperity of America.

Eisenhower’s warnings were not conclusions he had reached just before his presidency ended. They were conclusions Eisenhower had reached during his eight years as president, years spent observing how the business of government was conducted and who profited by its activities.

Eisenhower knew that even as President of the US, he did not possess the requisite power to openly oppose the powerful interests that were even then spending the US into insolvency. So President Eisenhower waited until the very end of his last term to warn America of the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.

Eisenhower was right not to openly challenge the military-industrial complex. The man who succeeded Eisenhower as president, John F. Kennedy, did. But those who wield the real power behind the government’s facade of democratic fair and equal rule were not to be trifled with then. They are not to be trifled with now.


REAL RULERS REAL POLOTIK

The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes.

US Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter

US President Woodrow Wilson also spoke of the real rulers in Washington DC decades before Eisenhower and Kennedy were to encounter them. In his preface to The New Freedom: A Call For The Emancipation Of The Generous Energies Of A People, Wilson wrote:

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

These are not words of an imprudent man. They are the words of a US President who cared enough about his country to warn of the dangers lurking behind its illusory façade of law, liberty, justice and equality for all. Dangers of which Americans were unaware of then—and of which the vast majority are still unaware of now.


EXECUTIVE ORDER 1110 AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK

Change is no more welcome in Washington DC than it was in Galilee

John F. Kennedy was not to live out his first term as President. Three years into his presidency, JFK was felled by an assassin’s bullet in Dallas, Texas. While there is much controversy surrounding his death, it is clear that whatever the theory, it was no accident.

The assassination of a standing president is not undertaken lightly. The public killing of a highly popular political figure such as JFK is decided upon and agreed to only when sufficient amounts of money or power are at stake.

Previous theories have revolved around issues of power. Dissident and/or dissatisfied rogue CIA agents and/or right-wing Washington DC power brokers and/or the mafia conspiring separately or together in a mutual hatred for the upstart Kennedy have been the favored theories. Another, simpler theory, however, should also be considered - money.

On June 4, 1963, Executive Order 1110 was signed by President Kennedy directing the US Treasury to issue a new US currency. This new US currency was to be backed by a precious metal - silver, unlike the credit-backed money issued by the Federal Reserve since 1913.


EXECUTIVE ORDER 1110 AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO, 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY.

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows: (Y)

SECTIOIN 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended is hereby further amended- (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 therefore the following subparagraph (j): n" (j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933 as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b), to issue silver certificates against silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption (X) of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars (Z) and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption, and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suite or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.

John F. Kennedy, The White House. June 4, 1963

By the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy’s signing of Executive Order 1110 returned the power to issue currency back to the US Treasury thereby ending the fifty year monopoly of private bankers and the Federal Reserve Bank over US currency. Six months later, President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed.

In 1913, as a result of intense lobbying by business and banking interests, the US government had turned over the power to issue US currency to a group of private bankers - the Federal Reserve Bank. Many believe this transfer was unconstitutional. US presidential candidate and Congressman Ron Paul (ranking member of the House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy) has stated:

The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.

The power to coin money and regulate the value of the currency is among the most important responsibilities and functions of government. That the US government in 1913 turned over this public function to a group of private bankers is astounding.

As a consequence, almost one hundred later, the US and its citizens are now on the edge of bankruptcy, indebted up to their eyeballs to the very bankers they gave the power to coin their money and regulate their currency, private bankers who are even now being bailed out by America taxpayers with money made available to them by their fellow-bankers at the Federal Reserve. HELLO AMERICA, ARE YOU THERE? CAN YOU HEAR? ARE YOU EVEN LISTENING?


THE PUBLIC PURSE THE GREATEST PRIZE OF PRIVATE BANKING

For almost one hundred years in America, private bankers through the Federal Reserve Bank have had a monopoly on the printing and issuance of US currency. In that time they have inflated the US money supply to such a degree the US dollar has lost 95 % of its purchasing power and again brought the nation to the edge of economic ruin.

In 1963, fifty years after the Fed acquired the right to print, issue and inflate the money supply of the US, President John F. Kennedy quietly transferred that power back to the US Treasury, the only institution which the constitution had granted the power to coin and regulate currency. Rest assured that transference did not go unnoticed by the private bankers and the Fed.

US Presidential candidate Ron Paul has introduced legislation during each Congress to abolish the Fed (H.R. 2755 - 110th Congress, H.R. 2778 - 108th Congress, H.R. 5356 - 107th Congress, H.R. 1148 - 106th Congress). His inability to attract congressional support, however, is in all likelihood his Washington DC life insurance policy. Morto uomini non causano problemi, [sic it. Dead men don’t cause problems].

…we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government board, has cheated the Government of the United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions...The people have a valid claim against the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks.

Congressman Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency from 1920–31


FED ASKS FOR OVERSIGHT OF ALL FINANCIAL MARKETS

oversight n 1: synonym, overlooking, as in government oversight

Plan would expand Fed's power to intervene in financial crisis March 29, 2008

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Federal Reserve would have the power to regulate virtually the entire financial industry under a Treasury Department proposal to be announced Monday.
The proposal is part of a sweeping overhaul of the government's regulatory structure that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson will propose in a speech Monday, said Treasury Department spokeswoman Michele Davis.

"I am not suggesting that more regulation is the answer, or even that more effective regulation can prevent the periods of financial market stress that seem to occur every five to 10 years," Paulson will say, according to a text of the speech obtained by The Associated Press.

According to Brookly McLaughlin, another department spokeswoman, Paulson will propose these changes:
· Give the Federal Reserve authority to look at the financial status of any institution that could affect market stability;
· Merge the Securities and Exchange Commission with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission;
· Give stock exchanges more room for self-regulation;
· Consolidate bank supervision into one regulator.
One of the most dramatic changes would extend the powers of the Federal Reserve -- designed to regulate the commercial banking industry -- to oversight of virtually the entire financial industry.


THE FOX IS IN THE HENHOUSE

After the recent collapse of Bear Stearns, the Fed announced that US funds will now be made available to international investment banks. Previous to this announcement, any loaning of US funds to investment banks was prohibited.

On March 28th, the first day the funds were available, the Fed loaned the banks $75 billion dollars. These investment banks, called primary-dealers, are the inner circle of the Fed’s funding mechanism.

That these primary-dealers are in need of US support is an indication of the rapidly disintegrating state of their balance sheets - and the lengths the Fed will go to protect their fellow bankers in the private sector with public money.


LIST OF BANKS ELIGIBLE FOR THE FED
"HEY BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS?"
LOAN PROGRAM FOR INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT BANKS

BNP Paribas Securities Corp.
Banc of America Securities LLC
Barclays Capital Inc.
Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc.
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co.
Citigroup Global Markets Inc.
Countrywide Securities Corporation[6]
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
Daiwa Securities America Inc.
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein Securities LLC.
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Greenwich Capital Markets, Inc.
HSBC Securities (USA) Inc.
J. P. Morgan Securities Inc.
Lehman Brothers Inc.
Merrill Lynch Government Securities Inc.
Mizuho Securities USA Inc.
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated
UBS Securities LLC.

The bailout of the richest investment banks in the world by US taxpayers is tantamount to a kidnap victim being forced to defray their kidnappers’ expenses. Someday, however, these bail-outs by the Fed will come to an end, but that end will not be pretty - for the end of central banking will be both unprecedented and brutal.

Central banks and investment banks are two sides of the same coin; and, now that the coin has been debased and recast with subprime securities and other suspect forms of debt; investment banks and their enablers, the central banks, are as vulnerable as those they once exploited.

Their increased vulnerability will soon be triggered by any number of events, e.g. bank insolvencies, collapsing currencies, slowing economies, money-market failures, counter-party derivative defaults etc., each one powerful enough to bring down a faltering house of cards built on a foundation of rapidly shifting sand.


PUBLIC PROBLEMS PRIVATE SOLUTIONS

It is the loss of our freedoms that has led us to understand them

It might be argued that the Federal Reserve is itself a private solution to a public problem. Indeed, such might be argued and in fact, it is true. The Federal Reserve Act is the most important act of privatization that happened in the US. It is also the worst.

This does not mean all private acts should be subsumed to public policy. Indeed, the opposite is true. Today, individual action is needed more than ever. Only by such action can the future be saved but it can be saved only after the present American economy collapses, a collapse set in motion by the military-industrial complex and private bankers, a collapse that can no longer be avoided.


WE HAVE GONE TOO FAR WE ARE TOO FAR GONE

The US military-industrial complex is still too powerful to confront and/or stop. With the bankers, they are responsible for America’s increasingly insolvable problems, their self-interests blinding them to what they have done to the nation.

Eisenhower couldn’t stop them, neither could Kennedy nor can Ron Paul. Only they can stop themselves and this they will soon do; albeit inadvertently as the foundation of their power, the US economy, succumbs to the damage they have inflicted upon it.


THE ARK OF GOLD & SILVER

If we invest in gold and silver - the anathema of private bankers, we can survive the crisis they caused. The economic carnage set in motion by government’s pact with private bankers will affect everyone - workers, savers, entrepreneurs, investors, pensioners, the helpless, as well the innocent and the guilty. Yes, bankers, too, will lose at least some of their wealth, if not all.

Everyone everywhere will be affected by the collapse of credit-based central banking. The economic landscape is already shifting as global credit markets implode. Bankers - the parasites of commerce and productivity - are now victims of their own excessive greed. Their demise will affect us all.

The torrent of collapsing debt accumulated and compounded since the beginning of central banking is about to be unleashed on an unsuspecting world. All beginnings have endings. So, too, does debt-based central banking.


THE FEDERAL RESERVE’S WAR ON GOLD

The Fed’s war on gold is not without reason - their reason, not ours. Ever since those in control of the US overspent America’s gold in the pursuit of military power and corporate expansion, the US paper dollar has been just that, a paper dollar exposed and vulnerable to the more obvious value of gold to which it was once convertible.

This is the reason the Fed and central banks have fought the rise of the price of gold since the US reneged on its gold obligations in the 1970s. The rising price of gold belies the Achilles heel of central banking, built on a foundation of debt-based paper money worth no more than the debts issued to produce it, debts that are no longer capable of being repaid.

The Swiss central bank sold 22 tons of its gold last fall as the price of gold raced towards the $1,000 per ounce mark. Without the intervention of the Swiss central bank, the price of gold would have passed $1,000 last year as easily as a Ferrari passes an elephant or an ass.

Buy as much gold as you can as long as central banks are selling it. It is our gold, after all, that they are selling. For when the flight from paper assets begins in earnest, there will be no gold for sale, at any price; and silver will do very well, as well.


BELIEF, HOPE, & REALITY

Elie Wiesel tells the story about the Jews who entered the boxcars going to the Nazi death camps told by their rabbis that God would never allow his chosen people to be destroyed.

Today, our governments and leaders are reassuring us that our pensions and investments are safe, that they have the tools and resources needed to protect us from the economic chaos threatening our financial futures, that there is no reason to panic.

My advice: Buy gold and silver. Don’t get in the boxcar.
www.kitco.com/ind/schoon/mar312008.html



Go to 13074
http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=58
THE EVILS OF ZIONISM
By Brother Nathanael Kapner - Copyright © 2008
THE UNDERLYING PREMISE OF ZIONISM is Anti-Christian. This is because Zionism affirms the incompatibility of Jew and Gentile.

This incompatibility is spelled out by the founder of Zionism, Theodore Hertzl:

— “I look upon the Zionist movement from the standpoint of Anti-Semitism which stems from economic envy, inherited prejudice, and religious intolerance. Anti-Semitism grows daily among the nations since its causes cannot be prevented.” — The Jewish State, 1896.

Here, the Arch Prophet of Zionism, Theodore Hertzl, presents the Gentiles as evil predators. But the Jews he presents as innocent victims. But we all know from our own personal experiences, that the Jews are anything but innocent little lambs! And our encounters with Jews prompt us to ask the question whether “Anti Semitism” is not for the most part wholly justified.

The Christian message which Zionism wars against, is completely different than the hate-affirming Zionist ideology:

— “Jesus Christ has broken down the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles. His purpose was that through His death and resurrection He might make the two into one new man so making peace.” — Epistle To The Ephesians, 61 AD, St Paul.


ZIONISTS STOLE THE LAND OF PALESTINE

ZIONISTS HAVE LONG MAINTAINED the myth that Palestine was uninhabited before their arrival. However, the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Curzon, writing on October 26, 1917, refutes this myth:

— “There are over a half a million Arabs in Palestine. They own the soil which belongs either to individual landowners or to village communities. They will not be content either to be expropriated for Jewish immigrants or to act merely as hewers of wood and drawers of water to the latter.” —

There were only 19 small Jewish settlements in Palestine by 1900, all of them established by Edmond de Rothschild. Some of the settlements were in the Jaffa citrus grove area whose owners were mostly Arabs.

Jaffa was the most advanced city in Palestine with its banking, fishing, manufacturing, and agriculture industries. It should be noted that the majority of all Arabic publications and newspapers in Palestine were published in Jaffa. Thus the Zionists targeted Jaffa in order to destroy the Palestinian “propaganda” arm.

On May 23 1948, the so-called Israeli War Of Independence broke out. Only ten days after the outbreak, the majority of Jaffa’s Arab population, numbering at least 50,000, were ethnically cleansed. Haifa’s Arab population, numbering at least 35,000, suffered the same fate.

— These included the groves owned by the renowned Palestinian, Hajj Khalil al-Banna Here & Here. Today, ironically, citrus fruits constitute two-thirds of all Israeli exports.

There was also desecration of Christian churches in Jaffa Here. Father Deleque, a Catholic priest, reported:

— “On May 13 1948, Jewish soldiers broke down the doors of my church and robbed many precious and sacred objects. Then they threw the statues of Christ down into a nearby garden.” —


CHRISTIAN-ZIONIST HAGEE
SPEAKS AT JEWISH TEMPLE


ON MARCH 11 2008, the Reverend John Hagee spoke at Rabbi Stephen S. Wise Temple in Los Angeles Here. Hagee was given several standing ovations by his Jewish audience especially when he avowed his support for the Zionist State of Israel. Hagee said:

— “I regard the founding of the State of Israel to be the most important event of the 20th Century. This ‘in-gathering’ is a necessary prelude to the rebuilding of the Temple.” —

And:

— “I do not believe that Israel ought to give up any territory it now controls.” —

The problem with Hagee and all of the Christian-Zionists is that they are making God an accomplice of Zionist racism, theft, and murder. In other words, “God is not the author of evil but of peace!”



Go to 13073
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/01/nalzheim101.xml
Drugs 'kill 23,000 Alzheimer's victims a year'
By Sarah Womack, Social Affairs Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:18am BST 02/04/2008

More than 23,000 elderly people with Alzheimer's could be dying prematurely in care homes each year after being given drugs to keep them quiet, a report claims today.

Your view: Why is Britain failing the elderly?
Read the full report
Anti-psychotic drugs, which are not licensed to treat dementia but are prescribed to control agitation, sleep disturbance and aggression, are being given to 100,000 elderly people to keep them "quiet and manageable", says a report by Paul Burstow, the Liberal Democrat MP and a campaigner for the rights of elderly people.

advertisementDespite studies that show the drugs can increase the risk of strokes and have other harmful side effects, the report claims the Government has failed to act to stem their use.

The report comes as research by three universities says long-term use of anti-psychotics offers "no long-term benefit for most patients".

The claims in the report will fuel the debate over the use of powerful drugs, dubbed "chemical coshes" because of their strong sedative effect, on care home residents.

Mr Burstow cited a yet-to-be published study by King's College London that gave a placebo to one group of Alzheimer's patients and anti-psychotics to another for 12 months.

The study, funded by the Alzheimer's Research Trust, found that after 24 months, the placebo group had a 78 per cent survival rate compared with 54.5 per cent for the rest; after 42 months the survival rates were 60 per cent versus 28 per cent.

Mr Burstow said: "There are around 244,000 people with dementia living in care homes, and the Alzheimer's Society estimates 100,000 are being given anti-psychotic drugs. Of those, I am saying that 23.5 per cent could be dying prematurely as a result of being prescribed anti-psychotic drugs - or 23,500 people a year."

Neil Hunt, of the Alzheimer's Society, said: "The over-prescription of anti-psychotic drugs to people with dementia is a serious abuse of human rights. Anti-psychotics should be used as a last resort."

Mr Burstow's report, which will be debated in the Commons today, calls for urgent police action and a ban on routine prescribing.

The drugs involved are thought to include Risperdal, Largactil, Serenace, and Stelazine, made by Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi-Aventis, IVAX and Goldshield respectively. None recommends the use of their drug in Alzheimer's patients.

Mr Burstow said: "Using drugs to restrain vulnerable older people with dementia is no different to strapping them to a chair. It is an abuse of their human rights. Ministers are guilty of being complacent. There should a ban on prescribing anti-psychotic drugs in all but the most severe cases of dementia."

A Department of Health spokesman said: "Guidance to health professionals and care staff is very clear: anti-psychotic drugs should only be used when they are appropriate as part of best clinical care practice."



Go to 13072
http://www.rense.com/general81/gmo.htm
Will Wheat-Killer Fungus
Be Use To Spread
GMO Wheat?
By F. William Engdahl
3-31-8

A deadly fungus, known as Ug99, which kills wheat, has likely spread to Pakistan from Africa according to reports in the British New Scientist magazine. If true, that threatens the vital Asian Bread Basket including the Punjab region. The spread of the deadly virus, stem rust, against which an effective fungicide does not exist, comes as world grain stocks reach the lowest in four decades and government subsidized bio-ethanol production, especially in the USA, Brazil and EU are taking land out of food production at alarming rates. The deadly fungus is being used by Monsanto and the US Government to spread patented GMO seeds.

Stem rust is the worst of three rusts that afflict wheat plants. The fungus grows primarily in the stems, plugging the vascular system so carbohydrates can't get from the leaves to the grain, which shrivels. In the 1950s, the last major outbreak destroyed 40% of the spring wheat crop in North America. At that time governments started a major effort to breed resistant wheat plants, led by Norman Borlaug of the Rockefeller Foundation. That was the misnamed Green Revolution. The result today is far fewer varieties of wheat that might resist such a new fungus outbreak.

The first strains of Ug99 were detected in 1999 in Uganda. It spread to Kenya by 2001, to Ethiopia by 2003 and to Yemen when the cyclone Gonu spread its spores in 2007. Now the deadly fungus has been found in Iran and according to British scientists may already be as far as Pakistan.

Pakistan and India account for 20 percent of the annual world wheat production. It is possible as the fungus spreads that large movements could take place almost overnight if certain wind conditions prevail at the right time. In 2007 a three-day wind event recorded by Mexico's CIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center), had strong wind currents moving from Yemen, where Ug99 is present, across Pakistan and India, going all the way to China. CIMMYT estimates that from two-thirds to three-quarters of the wheat now planted in India and Pakistan are highly susceptible to this new strain of stem rust. One billion people who live in this region and they are highly dependent on wheat for their food supply.

These are all areas where the agricultural infrastructure to contain such problems is either extremely weak or non-existent. It threatens to spread into other wheat producing regions of Asia and eventually the entire world if not checked.

FAO World Grain Forecast

The 2007 World Agriculture Forecast of the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in Rome, projects an alarming trend in world food supply in the absence of any devastation from Ug99. The report states, "countries in the non-OECD region are expected to continue to experience a much stronger increase in consumption of agricultural products than countries in the OECD area. This trend is driven by population and, above all, income growth ­ underpinned by rural migration to higher income urban areas...OECD countries as a group are projected to lose production and export shares in many commodities...Growth in the use of agricultural commodities as feedstock to a rapidly increasing biofuel industry is one of the main drivers in the outlook and one of the reasons for international commodity prices to attain a significantly higher plateau over the outlook period than has been reported in the previous reports." (my emphasis-w.e.).

The FAO warns that the explosive growth in acreage used to grow fuels and not food in the past three years is dramatically changing the outlook for food supply globally and forcing food prices sharply higher for all foods from cereals to sugar to meat and dairy products. The use of cereals, sugar, oilseeds and vegetable oils to satisfy the needs of a rapidly

increasing bio-fuel industry, is one of the main drivers, most especially the large volumes of maize in the US, wheat and rapeseed in the EU and sugar in Brazil for ethanol and bio-diesel production. This is already causing dramatically higher crop prices, higher feed costs and sharply higher prices for livestock products.

Ironically, the current bio-ethanol industry is being driven by US government subsidies and a scientifically false argument in the EU and USA that bio-ethanol is less harmful to the environment than petroleum fuels and can reduce CO2 emissions. The arguments have been demonstrated in every respect to be false. The huge expansion of global acreage now planted to produce bio-fuels is creating ecological problems and demanding use of far heavier pesticide spraying while use of bio-fuels in autos releases even deadlier emissions than imagined. The political effect, however, has been a catastrophic shift in world grain stocks at the same time the EU and USA have enacted policies which drastically cut traditional emergency grain reserves. In short, it is a scenario pre-programmed for catastrophe, one which has been clear to policymakers in the EU and USA for several years. That can only suggest that such a dramatic crisis in global food supply is intentional.

Ug99 is a race of stem rust that blocks the vascular tissues in cereal grains including wheat, oats and barley. Unlike other rusts that may reduce crop yields, Ug99-infected plants may suffer up to 100 percent loss.

A plan to spread GMO?

One of the consequences of the spread of Ug99 is a campaign by Monsanto Corporation and other major producers of genetically manipulated plant seeds to promote wholesale introduction of GMO wheat varieties said to be resistant to the Ug99 fungus. Biologists at Monsanto and at the various GMO laboratories around the world are working to patent such strains.

Norman Borlaug, the former Rockefeller Foundation head of the Green Revolution is active in funding the research to develop a fungus resistant variety against Ug99 working with his former center in Mexico, the CIMMYT and ICARDA in Kenya, where the pathogen is now endemic. So far, about 90% of the 12,000 lines tested are susceptible to Ug99. That includes all the major wheat cultivars of the Middle East and west Asia. At least 80% of the 200 varieties sent from the United States can't cope with infection. The situation is even more dire for Egypt, Iran, and other countries in immediate peril.

Even if a new resistant variety was ready to be released today it would take two or three years' seed increase in order to have just enough wheat seed for 20 percent of the acres planted to wheat in the world.

Work is also being done by the USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS), the same agency which co-developed Monsanto's Terminator seed technology. In my book, Seeds of Destruction I document the insidious role of Borlaug and the Rockefeller Foundation in promoting patents on food seeds to reduce global population. The spreading alarm over the Ug99 fungus is being used by Monsanto and other GMO agribusiness companies to demand that the current ban on GMO wheat be lifted to allow spread of GMO patented wheat seeds on the argument they are Ug99 stem rust resistant.

F. William Engdahl is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization and the author of http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=0011RTbzuzBrCjBVDSHcyzTJkBzSzKusA4xV12Hd22GFMblmhl59P
_M9soRGs-5YJRAE1VmD39Pb6-ftxC7QAzNhiB8xn7vkQouaBSnzAZLt-B_XWvPym
ZnN0znOOmSPkXFd1etsmamhXo=>Seeds of Destruction: the Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation published by Global Research and A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (Pluto Press). He may be contacted at
=http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=0011RTbzuzBrCi-m12fHoDf0xqPPp23XJM5KpHyItx0YeQ6Z039-JfhM
KJW_QeGuCcVncwdvJk-Ov4polxFyX_2CE9BVFk91AmIk2WHlufgYaWXErD0eLJYLpZL_SBSzm6Z
www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.



Go to 13071
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/banking-henhouse.php
APRIL FOOLS:
THE FOX TO GUARD THE BANKING HENHOUSE
Ellen Brown, March 30th, 2008
=http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/banking-henhouse.php

The Federal Reserve, which has been credited with creating the current housing bubble and bust just as it created the credit bubble of the Roaring Twenties and the bust of 1929, is now to be given vast new powers to oversee regulation of the banking industry and promote "financial market stability." At least, that is the gist of a Treasury Department proposal to be presented to Congress on Monday, March 31, 2008. Adrian Douglas wrote on LeMetropoleCafe.com, "I would like to think that this is some sort of sick April Fools joke, but, alas, they are serious! What happened to free markets?"1

In fact, what happened to regulating the banks? The Treasury's plan is not for the private Federal Reserve to increase regulation of the banking system it heads. Au contraire, regulation will actually be decreased. According to The Wall Street Journal:

"Many of the [Treasury's] proposals, like those that would consolidate regulatory agencies, have nothing to do with the turmoil in financial markets. And some of the proposals could actually reduce regulation. According to a summary provided by the administration, the plan would consolidate an alphabet soup of banking and securities regulators into a powerful trio of overseers responsible for everything from banks and brokerage firms to hedge funds and private equity firms. . . . Parts of the plan could reduce the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is charged with maintaining orderly stock and bond markets and protecting investors. . . . The blueprint also suggests several areas where the S.E.C. should take a lighter approach to its oversight. Among them are allowing stock exchanges greater leeway to regulate themselves and streamlining the approval of new products, even allowing automatic approval of securities products that are being traded in foreign markets."2
"securities products" include the mortgage-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations, credit default swaps, and other forms of the great Ponzi scheme known as "derivatives" that have been largely responsible for bringing the banking system to the brink of collapse. But these suspect products are not to be more heavily scrutinized; rather, their approval will actually be "streamlined" and may be automatic if they are being traded in "foreign markets." The Journal observes that the Treasury's proposal was initiated last year by Secretary Henry Paulson not to "regulate" the banks but "to make American financial markets more competitive against overseas markets by modernizing a creaky regulatory system. His goal was to streamline the different and sometimes clashing rules for commercial banks, savings and loans and nonbank mortgage lenders." "streamlining" the rules evidently meant eliminating any that "clashed" with the Fed's goal of allowing U.S. banks to be more "competitive" abroad. The Journal continues:

"While the plan could expose Wall Street investment banks and hedge funds to greater scrutiny, it carefully avoids a call for tighter regulation. The plan would not rein in practices that have been linked to the housing and mortgage crisis, like packaging risky subprime mortgages into securities carrying the highest ratings. . . . And the plan does not recommend tighter rules over the vast and largely unregulated markets for risk sharing and hedging, like credit default swaps, which are supposed to insure lenders against loss but became a speculative instrument themselves and gave many institutions a false sense of security."
Regulating fraudulent, predatory and overly-speculative banking practices has been left to the States, not necessarily by law but by default. According to then-Governor Eliot Spitzer, writing in January of 2008, state regulators tried to regulate these shady practices but were hamstrung by federal authorities. In a February 14 Washington Post article titled "Predatory Lenders; Partner in Crime: How the Bush Administration Stopped the States from Stepping in to Help Consumers," Spitzer complained:

"several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive 'teaser; rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.
"Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers. . . . [A]s New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices . . . .
"Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye. . . . The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). . . . In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules. But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation."
Less than a month after publishing this editorial, Spitzer was out of office, following a surprise exposé of his personal indiscretions by the Justice Department. Greg Palast observed that Spitzer was the single politician standing between a $200 billion windfall from the Federal Reserve guaranteeing the mortgage-backed junk bonds of the same banking predators that were responsible for the subprime debacle. While the Federal Reserve was trying to bail them out, Spitzer had been trying to regulate them, bringing suit on behalf of consumers.3 But Spitzer has now been silenced, and any other state attorneys general who might get similar ideas will be deterred by the federal oversight under which banking regulators are to be "consolidated."

The Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan deliberately enabled and permitted the derivatives debacle to take down the dollar and America's credibility. Greenspan is now lauded, feted and awarded at the White House and on network television, and takes a victory lap tour promoting and signing his book and celebrating his multimillion dollar book deal, enjoying his knighthood status in England and hero status on Wall Street. And as the falling debris of the American economy still piles up around us, the very agency that enabled disaster is now seeking to consolidate ultimate authority and accountability to itself, and through centralization and arrogation of power, eliminate all those pesky little Constitutional and State regulations and agencies, recalcitrant governors and the last few whistle blowers, so that the further abuse of power can be streamlined through one agency only. That agency is to consist of an alliance of the banking powers and the executive branch, a perfect formula for the institutionalization of continual abuse.

Perhaps Spitzer was lucky that he was the target only of a character assassination. When Louisiana Senator Huey Long challenged the Federal Reserve and fought for the State's right to oversee its own financial affairs in the 1930s, he was assassinated with bullets. Long's local assertion of decentralized State powers, as provided for in the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, enabled the State of Louisiana to loosen the grip of the corporations on the State's wealth and allowed the setting up of schools and public institutions that elevated the people of the State and placed its "common wealth" back into the hands of its citizens, while providing employment and education. The Constitution reserves to the States and the people all those powers not specifically delegated to the federal government, arguably including the creation of money itself, which is nowhere specifically mentioned in the Constitution beyond creating coins. (See E. Brown, "Another Way Around the Credit Crisis: Minnesota Bill Would Authorize State Banks to Monetize; Productivity," www.webofdebt.com/articles, March 23, 2008.) But in this latest attempt at expanding the Federal Reserve's already over-expansive powers, we see clear evidence that the Wall Street and global banking powers have no intention of allowing their plans to be reined in by the Constitutional powers of the States and the people. Instead, they intend to fill up the moat and pull up the draw bridge on their feudal powers, and let the serfs shiver outside the gates for as long as they will put up with it.


1 Adrian Douglas, "PPT to Come Out of the Closet," www.lemetropolecafe.com (March 29, 2008).

2 Edmund Andrews, "Treasury's Plan Would Give Fed Wide new Power," New York Times (March 29, 2008).

3 Greg Palast, "Eliot's Mess" www.gregpalast.com (March 14, 2008).


Ellen Brown, J.D., developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and "the money trust." She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her eleven books include the bestselling Nature's Pharmacy, co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker, which has sold 285,000 copies. Her websites are www.webofdebt.com and www.ellenbrown.com.



Go to 13070
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/03/31/cnfed131.xml
Fed eyes Nordic-style nationalisation of US banks
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, International Business Editor
Last Updated: 2:06am BST 01/04/2008

The US Federal Reserve is examining the Nordic bank nationalisations of the 1990s as a possible interim solution to the US financial crisis.

Hedge fund legends humbled by crisis
Read more of Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
The financial crisis in full

The Fed has been criticised for its rescue of Bear Stearns, which critics say has degenerated into a taxpayer gift to rich bankers


The Fed has been criticised for its rescue of Bear Stearns, which critics say has degenerated into a taxpayer gift to rich bankers.

A senior official at one of the Scandinavian central banks told The Daily Telegraph that Fed strategists had stepped up contacts to learn how Norway, Sweden and Finland managed their traumatic crisis from 1991 to 1993, which brought the region's economy to its knees.

It is understood that Fed vice-chairman Don Kohn remains very concerned by the depth of the US crisis and is eyeing the Nordic approach for contingency options.

Scandinavia's bank rescue proved successful and is now a model for central bankers, unlike Japan's drawn-out response, where ailing banks were propped up in a half-public limbo for years.

Bear market rallies delay day of reckoning
Stock market bulls should look away now
Capital flight from Russia increases
While the responses varied in each Nordic country, there a was major effort to avoid the sort of "moral hazard" that has bedevilled efforts by the Fed and the Bank of England in trying to stabilise their banking systems.

Norway ensured that shareholders of insolvent lenders received nothing and the senior management was entirely purged. Two of the country's top four banks - Christiania Bank and Fokus - were seized by force majeure.

"We were determined not to get caught in the game we've seen with Bear Stearns where shareholders make money out of the rescue," said one Norwegian adviser.

"The law was amended so that we could take 100pc control of any bank where its equity had fallen below zero. Shareholders were left with nothing. It was very controversial," he said.

Stefan Ingves, governor of Sweden's Riksbank, said his country passed an act so it could seize banks where the capital adequacy ratio had fallen below 2pc. Efforts were also made to protect against "blackmail" by shareholders.

Mr Ingves said there were parallels with the US crisis, citing the use of off-balance sheet vehicles to speculate on property. All the Nordic banks were nursed back to health and refloated or merged.

The tough policies contrast with the Fed's bail-out of Bear Stearns, where shareholders forced JP Morgan to increase its Fed-led rescue offer from $2 to $10 a share. Christopher Wood, chief strategist at brokers CLSA, says the Fed's piecemeal approach has led to "appalling moral hazard".

"Shareholders have been able to lobby for a higher share price only because the Fed took over the credit risk on $30bn of the investment bank's dubious paper. The whole affair also amounts to a colossal subsidy for JP Morgan," he said.



Go to 13069
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/frcourt.html
Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned
Case Reveals Fed's Status as a Private Institution

Below are excerpts from a court case proving the Federal Reserve system's status. As you will see, the court ruled that the Federal Reserve Banks are "independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations", and there is not sufficient "federal government control over 'detailed physical performance' and 'day to day operation'" of the Federal Reserve Bank for it to be considered a federal agency:

Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
John L. Lewis, Plaintiff/Appellant,
v.
United States of America, Defendant/Appellee.
No. 80-5905
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 2, 1982.
Decided April 19, 1982.
As Amended June 24, 1982.

Plaintiff, who was injured by vehicle owned and operated by a federal reserve bank, brought action alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The United States District Court for the Central District of California, David W. Williams, J., dismissed holding that federal reserve bank was not a federal agency within meaning of Act and that the court therefore lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, Poole, Circuit Judge, held that federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.

Affirmed.

1. United States

There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act, but critical factor is existence of federal government control over "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of an entity. . . .

2. United States

Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Tort Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations in light of fact that direct supervision and control of each bank is exercised by board of directors, federal reserve banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks, banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations nor as "mixed ownership" corporations; federal reserve banks receive no appropriated funds from Congress and the banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own names. . . .

3. United States

Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, federal liability is narrowly based on traditional agency principles and does not necessarily lie when a tortfeasor simply works for an entity, like the Reserve Bank, which performs important activities for the government. . . .

4. Taxation

The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation.

5. States Taxation

Tests for determining whether an entity is federal instrumentality for purposes of protection from state or local action or taxation, is very broad: whether entity performs important governmental function.


--------------
Lafayette L. Blair, Compton, Cal., for plaintiff/appellant.

James R. Sullivan, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., argued, for defendant/appellee; Andrea Sheridan Ordin, U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., on brief.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Before Poole and Boochever, Circuit Judges, and Soloman, District Judge. (The Honorable Gus J. Solomon, Senior District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation)

Poole, Circuit Judge:



Go to 13068
http://www.rense.com/general45/over43.htm
The Overthrow Of The
American Republic
Part 43
Daddy Bush and Teddy Kennedy-The Meeting

Sherman Skolnick
11-25-3

It was centuries in the making. The split between the Old World and the New World. Between East and the West. The Divide, the Vatican, the Reformation, the Protestant Church. The Capitalist World and their creation of their own "enemy", the Communist World.
It was the fall of 2003. In the view of some, there was a most unlikely meeting of two persons. At least as considered by some, each a spokesperson for a different faction. George Herbert Walker Bush. Promoted into the oil business by the British Royalty (actually German Royalty, the House of Hanover, masquerading as the House of Windsor). A functionary of the American CIA since 1959, using his front worldwide units of Zapata Petroleum Co., later Zapata Offshore. In 1961, supervisor of the disastrous aborted CIA invasion of Cuba at "The Bay of Pigs". 1976, Director of Central Intelligence, arranged the murder in Washington of a former top official of Chile. 1977-1981, Director of a pharmaceutical firm, complicit reportedly in the dope underground with cocaine, a by-product of the production of the secret base of Coca-Cola by Stepan Chemical Co., Northfield, Illinois.
October, 1980, French Intelligence videoed Daddy Bush arranging a traitorous deal with top officials of Iran near Paris. The Iranians were bribed to help the Reagan/Bush ticket win the Presidential/Vice President election by showing incumbent President Jimmy Carter as a wimp running for re-election. The bribery was to avoid the dreaded "October Surprise", if Carter got the release of the 52 U.S. hostages held by Iran. By the Bush treason, the hostages were held to exactly the moment in January, 1981, when Reagan/Bush were inaugurated. Bush was Vice President, 1981, and President, 1988.
Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat U.S. Senator from Massachusetts. Son of the Irish Patriarch, Joseph P. Kennedy. The Family having been from the 1920s, during Prohibition, making British royalty beholden to them. How? By Old Man Kennedy arranging to smuggle into the U.S. the booze products chartered by the British Royals. This was done with the aid of gangsters, Boston, Detroit, and Chicago. The criminals continued the distribution of the booze even after liquor was legal in the U.S. Teddy in 1964 survived an assassination plot in a sabotaged plane crash. His brothers, John F. and Robert F., did not survive murder plots, 1963 and 1968.
A transcript of the Fall of 2003 meeting, before the 40th Anniversary of the JFK murder.
Edward M. Kennedy: "George, I think by now, through your sources, you already know, the French CIA, for several decades now, has leaked out a few details as to Dallas. Although their people infiltrated the plot, their high-ups did not see fit to stop it, believing I suppose it could not be stopped or better to withhold details for blackmail. As you know, Oswald was a French intelligence agent, a hero, who fell between the cracks. His mother often said Oswald was under cover as with Naval Intelligence. Now my niece Caroline insists that I show you these films and documents."
[A projector is set up and the films shown. On one film, taken from the Overpass bridge, is shown the shots straight-on hitting Kennedy. Other parts of films, show one of the shooters using the storm sewer up on the railroad embankment, right near Dan Rather standing in the shadows nearby.]
George Herbert Walker Bush: "Teddy, you know the problem. Your brother Jack was soft on the Communists. Three weeks before Dallas, he ordered the coup against the Saigon regime of Premier Diem, a devout Catholic, and his two brothers, all anti-Communists---they were assassinated on your brother's orders. And your brother denied U.S. warplane cover at the Bay of Pigs, thus helping Fidel Castro, a Communist. Jack lost his nerve in 1962 in the Cuban Missile Crisis."
Teddy: "That Saigon matter is a frame-up, supposedly making the Vatican approve of what happened to Jack."
George: "Jack was allowing the country to be split on black-white racial lines by an agitator, Dr. King, a Communist."
Teddy: "I do not believe Dr. King was a Communist. I know Hoover hated us and said King was a Red."

-


"I suppose you know about the book written by a team of French Intelligence under a pen-name? 'Farewell America'."
George: "The main thing is your brother was dealt with like any Crowned Head of State. After the powers that be determined that your brother was a traitor, Lyndon [Baines Johnson, then Vice President] and I, and other noteworthy persons, including those in the Military and Intelligence, and others, arranged a public execution. On the facts, it was justified and proper."
Teddy: "George, it was not justified. Jack found terrible murder plots within the CIA, and was determined to scatter them to the wind and you know it. He would not instigate a nuclear strike against the Soviets. It is nonsense to claim Jack was a Communist, or soft on them. He wanted to take away the tax loophole favoring your oil pals."
George: "Your brother was a traitor. He had to be punished, as a symbol to all, that a traitor will have his head chopped off or his brains blown out, in public, for all to see."
Teddy: "My family has been in favor of silence on these subjects. They do not want to go public to rebut these outrageous accusations. Caroline, my niece, dissents. She demands the matters, the films, the documents, once and for all, be made public. Her husband, Schlossberg, a grain speculator, for business reasons, wants the silence to continue."
George: "Publicizing the details cannot be allowed."
Teddy: "Why?"
George: "Because the public is stupid. How can we explain high-level Affairs of State to dummies? The public execution was justified and necessary, and you know it. To reveal all the details now would tear the country apart."
So, on the 40th Anniversary of the assassination of John F.Kennedy, the media permitted, at least some did, the finger to be pointed at Lyndon Baines Johnson, now dead, once Vice President and then President. In espionage jargon, this is dealing with a sticky subject by a "limited hang-out", a throwaway detail.
Not accused, and they should be, are the British Royalty, the American CIA, Daddy Bush's Texas oil buddies, and Fascist killers high up in the U.S. Military and Intelligence agencies.
Considering that the French are holding all the cards---the films and proof as to Dallas---it was plain stupid for Bush, Jr., that is George W. Bush, to attack the Paris government regarding the plan to invade Iraq. Daddy Bush, maybe most have already forgotten, publicly opposed the pre-emptive attack on Iraq.
The oil-soaked, spy-riddled monopoly press would not dare report any details, which they already know, of the meeting between Daddy Bush and Teddy Kennedy.
For background, visit our website series Overthrow, Part 42 and other parts. Also, as to revealing details of the Kennedy Family, see our four-part series on the murder of JFK, Jr., "What Happened to America's Goldenboy". Somewhere on our website is the FBI document showing George Bush, of CIA, was involved with in some way covering up witnesses as to the Dallas murder. As to Daddy Bush, the Corrupt Federal Judges, underground dope and cocaine, and Stepan Chemical Co., see our extensive website series "Coca-Cola, CIA, and the Courts".



Go to 13067
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/30/fossilfuels.water
Those who control oil and water will control the world
New superpowers are competing for diminishing resources as Britain becomes a bit-player. The outcome could be deadly.

John Gray The Observer, Sunday March 30 2008 About this articleClose This article appeared in the Observer on Sunday March 30 2008 on p33 of the Comment section. It was last updated at 00:03 on March 30 2008. History may not repeat itself, but, as Mark Twain observed, it can sometimes rhyme. The crises and conflicts of the past recur, recognisably similar even when altered by new conditions. At present, a race for the world's resources is underway that resembles the Great Game that was played in the decades leading up to the First World War. Now, as then, the most coveted prize is oil and the risk is that as the contest heats up it will not always be peaceful. But this is no simple rerun of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Today, there are powerful new players and it is not only oil that is at stake.

It was Rudyard Kipling who brought the idea of the Great Game into the public mind in Kim, his cloak-and-dagger novel of espionage and imperial geopolitics in the time of the Raj. Then, the main players were Britain and Russia and the object of the game was control of central Asia's oil. Now, Britain hardly matters and India and China, which were subjugated countries during the last round of the game, have emerged as key players. The struggle is no longer focused mainly on central Asian oil. It stretches from the Persian Gulf to Africa, Latin America, even the polar caps, and it is also a struggle for water and depleting supplies of vital minerals. Above all, global warming is increasing the scarcity of natural resources. The Great Game that is afoot today is more intractable and more dangerous than the last.

The biggest new player in the game is China and it is there that the emerging pattern is clearest. China's rulers have staked everything on economic growth. Without improving living standards, there would be large-scale unrest, which could pose a threat to their power. Moreover, China is in the middle of the largest and fastest move from the countryside to the city in history, a process that cannot be stopped.

There is no alternative to continuing growth, but it comes with deadly side-effects. Overused in industry and agriculture, and under threat from the retreat of the Himalayan glaciers, water is becoming a non-renewable resource. Two-thirds of China's cities face shortages, while deserts are eating up arable land. Breakneck industrialisation is worsening this environmental breakdown, as many more power plants are being built and run on high-polluting coal that accelerates global warming. There is a vicious circle at work here and not only in China. Because ongoing growth requires massive inputs of energy and minerals, Chinese companies are scouring the world for supplies. The result is unstoppable rising demand for resources that are unalterably finite.

Although oil reserves may not have peaked in any literal sense, the days when conventional oil was cheap have gone forever. Countries are reacting by trying to secure the remaining reserves, not least those that are being opened up by climate change. Canada is building bases to counter Russian claims on the melting Arctic icecap, parts of which are also claimed by Norway, Denmark and the US. Britain is staking out claims on areas around the South Pole.

The scramble for energy is shaping many of the conflicts we can expect in the present century. The danger is not just another oil shock that impacts on industrial production, but a threat of famine. Without a drip feed of petroleum to highly mechanised farms, many of the food shelves in the supermarkets would be empty. Far from the world weaning itself off oil, it is more addicted to the stuff than ever. It is hardly surprising that powerful states are gearing up to seize their share.

This new round of the Great Game did not start yesterday. It began with the last big conflict of the 20th century, which was an oil war and nothing else. No one pretended the first Gulf War was fought to combat terrorism or spread democracy. As George Bush Snr and John Major admitted at the time, it was aimed at securing global oil supplies, pure and simple. Despite the denials of a less honest generation of politicians, there can be no doubt that controlling the country's oil was one of the objectives of the later invasion of Iraq.

Oil remains at the heart of the game and, if anything, it is even more important than before. With their complex logistics and heavy reliance on air power, high-tech armies are extremely energy-intensive. According to a Pentagon report, the amount of petroleum needed for each soldier each day increased four times between the Second World War and the Gulf War and quadrupled again when the US invaded Iraq. Recent estimates suggest the amount used per soldier has jumped again in the five years since the invasion.

Whereas Western countries dominated the last round of the Great Game, this time they rely on increasingly self-assertive producer countries. Mr Putin's well-honed contempt for world opinion might grate on European ears, but Europe is heavily dependent on his energy. Hugo Chávez might be an object of hate for George W Bush, but Venezuela still supplies around 10 per cent of America's imported oil. President Ahmadinejad is seen by some as the devil incarnate, but with oil at more than a $100 a barrel, any Western attempt to topple him would be horrendously risky.

While Western power declines, the rising powers are at odds with each other. China and India are rivals for oil and natural gas in central Asia. Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia have clashed over underwater oil reserves in the South China Sea. Saudi Arabia and Iran are rivals in the Gulf, while Iran and Turkey are eyeing Iraq. Greater international co-operation seems the obvious solution, but the reality is that as the resources crunch bites more deeply, the world is becoming steadily more fragmented and divided.

We are a long way from the fantasy world of only a decade ago, when fashionable gurus were talking sagely of the knowledge economy. Then, we were told material resources did not matter any more - it was ideas that drove economic development. The business cycle had been left behind and an era of endless growth had arrived. Actually, the knowledge economy was an illusion created by cheap oil and cheap money and everlasting booms always end in tears. This is not the end of the world or of global capitalism, just history as usual.

What is different this time is climate change. Rising sea levels reduce food and fresh-water supplies, which may trigger large-scale movements of refugees from Africa and Asia into Europe. Global warming threatens energy supplies. As the fossil fuels of the past become more expensive, others, such as tar sands, are becoming more economically viable, but these alternative fuels are also dirtier than conventional oil.

In this round of the Great Game, energy shortage and global warming are reinforcing each another. The result can only be a growing risk of conflict. There were around 1.65 billion people in the world when the last round was played out. At the start of the 21st century, there are four times as many, struggling to secure their future in a world being changed out of recognition by climate change. It would be wise to plan for some more of history's rhymes.

· John Gray is author of Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia, published by Allen Lane in paperback on 24 April



Go to 13066
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/aac6859e-fc35-11dc-9229-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Chinese exporters shun flagging dollar
By Robin Kwong in Hong Kong

Published: March 27 2008 22:02 | Last updated: March 27 2008 22:02

Rising numbers of Chinese exporters are shunning the US dollar or devising ways to offset the impact of the falling currency as they confront rising labour and raw material costs at home.

According to Alibaba.com, the online company that matches Chinese suppliers with international buyers, the vast majority of their almost 700,000 Chinese suppliers no longer use dollars to settle non-US transactions to minimise foreign exchange risk.



Go to 13065
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-norman/walmart-cancels-45-super_b_94112.html
Wal-Mart Cancels 45 Superstore Projects
Posted March 30, 2008
"Cannibalization Factor" Eating The Company's Future

By Al Norman

According to a list released this week, Wal-Mart Stores has abandoned a record-shattering 45 proposed projects over the past 10 months---often leaving local officials dejected and confused. Another 19 Wal-Mart projects have been killed by local citizen's groups. In total, the world's largest retailer has suffered an historic loss of 64 projects.

The list of store cancellations was compiled by Sprawl-Busters, which has maintained a database on Wal-Mart battles for more than a decade. Since June, 2007, the Arkansas-based retailer has delayed or killed its own stores in the following communities:

Aledo, IL; Arlington, WA; Belfast, ME; Bonita Springs, FL; Brooksville, FL; Chico, CA; Concord, CA; Crowley, TX; Derry, NH; Elyria, OH; Fircrest, WA; Garden Grove, CA; Gilbert, AZ; Glen Carbon, IL; Hadley, MA; Hemet, CA; Hilo, HI; Isle of Wight, VA; Knightdale, NC; Lake County, FL; Lakeland, FL; Lawrence, NJ; Lewiston, ME; Liberty, OH; Pennfield, MI; Hillsborough, NH; Kilbuck, PA; La Puenta, CA; Marietta, GA; Marysville, WA; Memphis, TN; Morganton, NC; Neptune Beach, FL; Oakley, CA; Oxford, NC; Portland, OR; Raleigh, NC; Ravalli County, MT; Rutland Charter, MI; Spooner, WI; St. Peters, MO; Sioux Falls, SD; Stoughton, WI; Sunrise, FL; Waukesha, WI;

These store withdrawals usually come with little advance notice, and even less explanation. In September, 2007, for example, when Wal-Mart suddenly folded its tent in Lancaster, Massachusetts---3 miles from the construction site of another Wal-Mart superstore---the company issued a terse, four paragraph press release which stated, "The decision is related to Wal-Mart's recently announced plans to moderate growth of U.S. supercenters as part of leveraging capital resources through a strategy designed to improve returns and sales within U.S. stores." Such dense statements left local officials scratching their heads in disbelief--sometimes following months, even years, of lobbying by the retailer to get a project approved.

Up until 10 months ago, Wal-Mart was planning to open a new store in America every 26.5 hours. But all of that changed on the morning of June 1, 2007. On that Friday morning, Wal-Mart stunned 18,000 stockholders assembled in the Bud Walton Arena on the campus of the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. The retailer announced its growth plan for 2008--in what the New York Times described the next day as a "turning point" for the company.

In their laps, stockholders held Wal-Mart's 2007 Annual report, which said, under the heading "Future Expansion," that the company's "planned expenditures will include the construction of...265 to 270 new supercenters..." But in the weeks between sending their Annual Report to the printer, and their stockholder's meeting---Wal-Mart popped its own growth bubble.

For several years, Wall Street's reaction to the retailer's overly-aggressive U.S. construction forecast had been less than encouraging. In 2005, for example, Bernstein Research Call issued a 13-page report warning stockholders of the downside of Wal-Mart's superstore plans. The analysts noted that Wal-Mart's growth "is under siege in several regions of the country from growing opposition by local communities...Local opposition has successfully squashed numerous plans among big box players in different parts of the country." Bernstein noted that "heightened resistance could negatively impact these retailers by slowing their square footage growth rates." Even modestly slower long-term square footage growth could have both an earnings per share and valuation impact, researchers said.

Because of grassroots anti-Wal-Mart groups, Bernstein warned, "it is clear that (discount retailers) will need to pursue a substantially larger number of permits going forward to hit their internal square footage targets given the likelihood of many opportunities failing."

Not only had Wal-Mart suddenly slammed on the brakes for 2008, but the company said it would open "only" 170 superstores per year for the next three years, and 80 supercenter would be deferred into 2009. In its 2007 Annual Report, the company explained, "We are focused on prioritizing capital spending to the projects that produce the highest returns. We want to improve our Company's return on investment, or ROI, improve our comparable store sales and improve our working capital productivity. The outcome is a focus on the most capital efficient opportunities."

In part due to the company's pale 1.9% growth in same store sales in 2007, John Menzer, Wal-Mart's Chief Administrative Officer, admitted, "We also have been focused this year on reducing cannibalization of existing stores via our more strategic selection of U.S. real estate projects." Same store sales indicates the performance of existing stores by measuring the growth in sales for such stores during a particular period, over the corresponding period in the prior year. Wal-Mart's same store sales have been dropping for 20 years, but this past year was the worst. The 1.9% growth rate in 2007 compares to 5% in 1997, and 13% in 1987.

Every store site that Wal-Mart proposes is reviewed by its executive-level Real Estate Committee, which looks at a number of benchmarks to see if each unit meets the retailer's Growth Model: the state of the economy, the local trade area, competition in the area, local demographics, real estate and construction costs, and: "potential impacts on neighboring Wal-Mart stores." This last metric---the cannibalization factor---has had a major impact on the deep-sixing of many superstore projects this year.

"As we continue to add new stores in the United States," the company told shareholders, "we do so with an understanding that additional stores may take sales away from existing units. We estimate that comparable store sales in fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005 were negatively impacted by the opening of new stores by approximately 1% in fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005. We expect that this effect of opening new stores on comparable store sales will continue during fiscal 2008 at a similar rate."

To measure Wal-Mart's retrenchment another way, the corporation added 42,000,000 square feet of store space in 2007, compared to 39,000,000 square feet in 2006. It's current growth plan cuts new square footage to 20,000,000 for 2008. As projects get cancelled, square footage growth drops, sales growth slows, all of which can impact earnings and company valuation. The last thing Wal-Mart wants is for investors to see the company for what it really is: a middle-aged corporation choking on its own domestic appetite for growth. If it weren't for China and India, Wal-Mart's growth prospects would be problematic. Yet Wal-Mart's future as a colonial retail empire is far from certain, if places like Indonesia, Germany and Japan are the yardstick.

Sam Walton explained that his growth strategy was "to saturate a market area by spreading out, then filling in...We became our own competition." He once boasted that Springfield, Missouri, for example, had 40 Wal-Marts within 100 miles. But Wal-Mart has paid a price for competing with itself. Today, the saturation card has been overplayed, and the retailer has been forced to go on a superstore crash diet. While hundreds of sling-shot coalitions have been hurling rocks at this retail Goliath for years, ironically, it is now the giant itself which is reeling from its own self-inflicted excesses.

This has created a wonderful 10 months for anti-Wal-Mart groups in 21 states, who have woken up in their small towns to read that another proposed Wal-Mart superstore has dissolved, as suddenly as the morning mist.

Al Norman is the founder of Sprawl-Busters. Forbes Magazine has called him "Wal-Mart's #1 Enemy."



Go to 13064
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8464
GMO and Morgellons Disease


by Barbara H. Peterson


Global Research, March 27, 2008


Email this article to a friend
Print this article


Since the Clinton administration made biotechnology “a strategic priority for U.S. government backing” (1), giant transnational agri-business concerns have aggressively taken over the global food chain by flooding it with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) without regard for the consequences to the earth or its inhabitants. This takeover not only has the potential for global economic devastation, but threatens the earth’s population with far-reaching health concerns as well. One health concern that seems to coincide with the GMO revolution is Morgellons disease. What if the advent of Morgellons disease has something to do with the ingestion of GMO foods?


Morgellons Disease – What is it?


Very little can be found regarding this disease. Originally, sufferers were told that their problem was imaginary. This was of little comfort to the people who were suffering.


Morgellons Disease sufferers report strange, fiber-like material sticking out of sores or wounds that erupt on the skin. This is accompanied by painful, intense itching, that has been described as “an ever present sensation as if something is crawling under the skin.” (2)


On May 18, 2006, KGW, a local news channel reporting out of the Oregon area published this story:


Strange sickness: Mystery disease horror story (excerpt)


[Dr. Drottar] The disabled family practice doctor felt like bugs were crawling under her skin.


"If I fully tell people what has gone on with me medically, they think they’re in the twilight zone,” said Drottar.


She woke up with the feeling that fluid was flowing just below her skin. Often black or blue hair like fibers protruded from her skin, she said.


“I thought I had been exposed to asbestos. I thought I was having asbestos fibers come out of my skin. I was pulling long, thin, small hair-like fibers that were extremely sharp that could literally pierce through my finger nails,” Drottar said.


In addition to the feeling of bugs and the fibers, Drottar also suffered from severe depression, chronic fatigue and a weakened immune system. As a result, she had to give up her family practice, Drottar said. (3)


Here are some pictures of Morgellons lesions included in the KGW report:


The Morgellons Research Foundation

Fibers embedded in skin removed from facial lesion of three year old boy, 60x.


morgellonsusa.com

Photo of the fibrous structures that were in the skin of a Morgellons sufferer.


Morgellons and GMO – the Link


Little information has been revealed concerning the long-term health effects of GMO crops on humans or animals, and even less information can be had regarding research correlating Morgellons with GMO foods. This is suspicious right off the bat, because it would seem that there would be a natural curiosity regarding a link between Genetically Modified Organisms that people ingest regularly and inorganic fibers that protrude from a person’s skin. This would be right up a geneticist’s alley, and quite worthy of intensive research. So, why aren’t there a ton of published studies? Why is it so difficult finding anything related to this? Could it be that companies such as Monsanto have enough clout to effectively squash these stories? If they have enough clout to ruin countries by deceiving impoverished farmers into purchasing patented GMO seeds, and then take it a step further and force these poor people to purchase seeds year after year instead of harvesting their own, then they have enough clout to ask our more than willing corporate government to manipulate the press...again.


According to Mike Stagman, PhD,


“Genetic Engineering is a nightmare technology that has already caused MANY disease epidemics -- documented but unpublicized.” (4)


Well Monsanto, you let at least one study slip through. With the help of a couple of search engines, the following article by Whitley Strieber published on October 12, 2007, titled “Skin Disease May Be Linked to GM Food” was found, which concludes that the fibers taken from a Morgellons sufferer contain the same substance that is "used commercially to produce genetically-modified plants." Here is the article:



Skin Disease May Be Linked to GM Food
12-Oct-2007


Many people—and most physicians—have written off Morgellons disease as either a hoax or hypochondria. But now there is evidence that this mysterious disease may be REAL and related to GENETICALLY MODIFIED food!

The skin of Morgellons victims oozes mysterious strands that have been identified as cellulose (which cannot be manufactured by the human body), and people have the sensation of things crawling beneath their skin. The first known case of Morgellons occurred in 2001, when Mary Leitao created a web site describing the disease, which had infected her young son. She named it Morgellons after a 17th century medical study in France that described the same symptoms.

In the Sept. 15-21 issue of New Scientist magazine, Daniel Elkan describes a patient he calls "Steve Jackson," who "for years" has "been finding tiny blue, red and black fibers growing in intensely itchy lesions on his skin." He quotes Jackson as saying, "The fibers are like pliable plastic and can be several millimeters long. Under the skin, some are folded in a zigzag pattern. These can be as fine as spider silk, yet strong enough to distend the skin when you pull them, as if you were pulling on a hair."

Doctors say that this type of disease could only be caused by a parasite, but anti-parasitic medications do not help. Psychologists insist that this is a new version of the well-known syndrome known as "delusional parasitosis." While this is a "real" disease, it is not a physically-caused one.

But now there is physical evidence that Morgellons is NOT just psychological. When pharmacologist Randy Wymore offered to study some of these fibers if people sent them to him, he discovered that "fibers from different people looked remarkably similar to each other and yet seem to match no common environmental fibers."

When they took them to a police forensic team, they said they were not from clothing, carpets or bedding. They have no idea what they are.

Researcher Ahmed Kilani says he was able to break down two fiber samples and extract their DNA. He found that they belonged to a fungus.

An even more provocative finding is that biochemist Vitaly Citovsky discovered that the fibers contain a substance called "Agrobacterium," which, according to New Scientist, is "used commercially to produce genetically-modified plants." Could GM plants be "causing a new human disease?" (5)

GMO – Not on My Watch!


The giant transnational corporations behind the GMO revolution are hitting us in our most vulnerable spot – our bellies. Most people have been brought up with an innate trust that what they purchase from the stores is safe to eat. This is no longer true, since most processed foods contain genetically engineered ingredients that can have disastrous effects on both animal and human health. What you purchase from the corner store might just change your DNA and create such frightening symptoms that the general public simply does not believe it. What is worse is that when you go to the doctor to get help, he/she tells you what you are experiencing is all in your head. This is rubbish! It is up to people who care to make the correlations between what we eat and what happens to our bodies. Remember the old saying – “you are what you eat?” Well, this author believes it is true.

Notes

1) Engdahl, F.W. (2007). Seeds of Destruction.

2) Stagman, M. Phd. (2006). GMO Disease Epidemics: Bt-cotton Fiber Disease. Retrieved from http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/08/344305.shtml

3) Porter, L. (2006). Strange sickness: Mystery disease horror story. Retrieved from http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_051806_news_sweeps_strange_sickness_morgellons.53b2569a.html

4) Stagman, M. Phd. (2006). GMO Disease Epidemics: Bt-cotton Fiber Disease. Retrieved from http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/08/344305.shtml

5) Strieber, W. (2007). Skin Disease Might be Linked to GM Food. Retrieved from
Go to 13063
http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=6486

Barbara H. Peterson is a Writer and Activist,
Go to 13062
http://spktruth2power.wordpress.com



Go to 13061
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/30/wuspols130.xml
Senior Democrats mull Al Gore's nomination
By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 2:02am BST 31/03/2008

Plans for Al Gore to take the Democratic presidential nomination as the saviour of a bitterly divided party are being actively discussed by senior figures and aides to the former vice-president.

The bloody civil war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has left many Democrats convinced that neither can deliver a knockout blow to the other and that both have been so damaged that they risk losing November's election to the Republican nominee, John McCain.


Former aides to Al Gore now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate


Former Gore aides now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate acceptable to both camps at the party's convention in Denver during the last week of August.

Two former Gore campaign officials have told The Sunday Telegraph that a scenario first mapped out by members of Mr Gore's inner circle last May now has a sporting chance of coming true.

Mr Gore, who was Bill Clinton's vice-president and has since won a Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar for his work on green issues, remains an influential figure eight years after he beat George W Bush in the popular vote but lost the White House after the Florida recount fiasco.

The opening has emerged because opinion polls show Mr McCain stretching his lead over both Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton, whose campaigns are engaged in a daily cycle of attacks, character assassination and mutual recriminations on religion, race and the economy.

advertisementBetween a quarter and a third of Obama and Clinton supporters say that they would not now vote for the other in November.

The prospect of a new Gore candidacy was raised last week in Time magazine by Joe Klein, the doyen of American political writers, and discussed on the main cable news networks, CNN, Fox and MSNBC.

If neither Mr Obama nor Mrs Clinton has the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination, and if both appear unable to beat Mr McCain, under one scenario a group of about 100 party elders - the "super-delegates" - could sit out the first ballot in Denver, preventing either candidate winning outright, and then offer Mr Gore the nomination for the good of the party.


Tim Mahoney, a Democrat congressman from Florida, said last week: "If it goes into the convention, don't be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket." This suggests the party would accept a Gore-Clinton or a Gore-Obama pairing.

Following a brief flurry of speculation that he might jump into the race last year, Mr Gore claimed he had "fallen out of love" with politics, but he has pointedly refused to rule out another tilt at the White House and said that the only job in public life that interests him is the presidency.



Use your Go Back and Go Forward commands to get to where you were in a previous file.