The plane carrying whistleblower
Edward Snowden has landed at Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport. The former
CIA contractor, who left Hong Kong in a bid to elude US extradition on
espionage charges, is on his way to a 'third country' via Russia. Former
MI5 agent Annie Machon says America's whistleblower hunt gives it the
image of a major global aggressor - READ MORE http://on.rt.com/jqm8cb
RT
(Russia Today) is a global news network broadcasting from Moscow and
Washington studios. RT is the first news channel to break the 1 billion
YouTube views benchmark.
In 1986 they promised that their pardon of 3.2 million illegals would be
the "last amnesty." They promised border security and workplace
enforcement and Fence's to span Mexico's boarder into the U.S,Millions have been sent but nothing never happened.. The only debate they should be
having is about implementing a nationwide and mandatory E-Verify program
and putting law agencies to the task of workplace enforcement. No need
to spend billions deporting 20+ million illegals. Simply dry up their
sources of employment and they will go back home the same way they came.
Thousands of British have reacted with outrage at the plans
to tax bank accounts which are in credit. The great EU bank robbery, as
it's been dubbed by some of the 60,000 or so ex pats living on the
island has forced many to start plans to withdraw their savings as Susan
Cairns who has lived and worked on the island since 2007 explained.
"On Tuesday I plan to go to the bank and withdraw all the money I have in there and have nothing left in there. You know, I can't trust them anymore. It's theft. They are stealing from me. That's how I see it,"
she said.
"I think it is particularly unfair for people that have saved and tried hard to keep some money in the bank, and it's just a blanket tax across everybody. I understand people with higher savings getting taxed more, but 6.75 percent seems an awful lot of money to me. I think it's a very clever way of making sure that Cyprus pays its fair share,"
opined another, Stuart Cowell.
British Chancellor George Osborne
said his government will reimburse military and government personnel
working on the island. But the UK tax payer will have to foot the bill.
Constantine
Georgiou, a British Cypriot believes the Cypriot politicians should
act.
"The government should investigate thoroughly and find the people responsible for this mess, prosecute them, put them in prison, even if he is the ex-president, whoever is responsible,"
he said.
While I was listening to a recent interview with Graham Hancock about his new novel and his TED lecture,
the startling claim was made that Russian President Vladimir Putin
commented that war might be a necessary result of the Monsanto
Protection Act. I was skeptical, but did a little digging around, and it
turns out the story checks out…
The shocking minutes relating to President Putin’s meeting last month
with US Secretary of State John Kerry reveal the Russian leaders
“extreme outrage” over the Obama regimes continued protection of global
seed and plant bio-genetic giants Syngenta and Monsanto in the face of a
growing “bee apocalypse” that the Kremlin warns “will most certainly”
lead to world war.
According to these minutes, released in the Kremlin today by the
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation (MNRE), Putin was so incensed over the Obama regimes refusal to discuss this grave matter that he refused for three hours to
even meet with Kerry, who had traveled to Moscow on a scheduled
diplomatic mission, but then relented so as to not cause an even greater
rift between these two nations.
At the center of this dispute between Russia and the US, this MNRE
report says, is the “undisputed evidence” that a class of neuro-active
insecticides chemically related to nicotine, known as neonicotinoids,
are destroying our planets bee population, and which if left unchecked
could destroy our world’s ability to grow enough food to feed its
population.
So grave has this situation become, the MNRE reports, the full
European Commission (EC) this past week instituted a two-year
precautionary ban (set to begin on 1 December 2013) on these “bee killing” pesticides following
the lead of Switzerland, France, Italy, Russia, Slovenia and Ukraine,
all of whom had previously banned these most dangerous of genetically
altered organisms from being used on the continent.
Two of the most feared neonicotinoids being banned are Actara and Cruiser made by the Swiss global bio-tech seed and pesticide giant Syngenta AG which
employs over 26,000 people in over 90 countries and ranks third in
total global sales in the commercial agricultural seeds market.
Important to note, this report says, is that Syngenta, along with bio-tech giants Monsanto, Bayer, Dow and DuPont, now control nearly 100% of the global market for genetically modified pesticides, plants and seeds.
Also to note about Syngenta, this report continues, is that in 2012 it was criminally charged in Germany for concealing the fact that its genetically modified corn killed cattle, and settled a class-action lawsuit in the US for $105 million after
it was discovered they had contaminated the drinking supply of some 52
million Americans in more than 2,000 water districts with its “gender-bending” herbicide Atrazine.
To how staggeringly frightful this situation is, the MNRE says, can
be seen in the report issued this past March by the American Bird
Conservancy (ABC) wherein they warned our whole planet is in danger, and as we can, in part, read:
“As part of a study on impacts from the world’s most widely used
class of insecticides, nicotine-like chemicals called neonicotinoids,
American Bird Conservancy (ABC) has called for a ban on their use as
seed treatments and for the suspension of all applications pending an
independent review of the products’ effects on birds, terrestrial and
aquatic invertebrates, and other wildlife.
“It is clear that these chemicals have the potential to affect entire
food chains. The environmental persistence of the neonicotinoids, their
propensity for runoff and for groundwater infiltration, and their
cumulative and largely irreversible mode of action in invertebrates
raise significant environmental concerns,” said Cynthia Palmer,
co-author of the report and Pesticides Program Manager for ABC, one of
the nation’s leading bird conservation organizations.
ABC commissioned world renowned environmental toxicologist Dr. Pierre
Mineau to conduct the research. The 100-page report, “The Impact of the
Nation’s Most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds,” reviews 200 studies
on neonicotinoids including industry research obtained through the US
Freedom of Information Act. The report evaluates the toxicological risk
to birds and aquatic systems and includes extensive comparisons with the
older pesticides that the neonicotinoids have replaced. The assessment
concludes that the neonicotinoids are lethal to birds and to the aquatic
systems on which they depend.
“A single corn kernel coated with a neonicotinoid can kill a
songbird,” Palmer said. “Even a tiny grain of wheat or canola treated
with the oldest neonicotinoid — called imidacloprid — can fatally poison
a bird. And as little as 1/10th of a neonicotinoid-coated corn seed per
day during egg-laying season is all that is needed to affect
reproduction.”
The new report concludes that neonicotinoid contamination levels in
both surface- and ground water in the United States and around the world
are already beyond the threshold found to kill many aquatic
invertebrates.”
Quickly following this damning report, the MRNE says, a large group
of group of American beekeepers and environmentalists sued the Obama
regime over the continued use of these neonicotinoids stating: “We
are taking the EPA to court for its failure to protect bees from
pesticides. Despite our best efforts to warn the agency about the
problems posed by neonicotinoids, the EPA continued to ignore the clear
warning signs of an agricultural system in trouble.”
And to how bad the world’s agricultural system has really become due
to these genetically modified plants, pesticides and seeds, this report
continues, can be seen by the EC’s proposal this past week, following
their ban on neonicotinoids, in which they plan to criminalize nearly
all seeds and plants not registered with the European Union, and as we can, in part, read:
“Europe is rushing towards the good ol days circa 1939,
40… A new law proposed by the European Commission would make it illegal
to “grow, reproduce or trade” any vegetable seeds that have not been
“tested, approved and accepted” by a new EU bureaucracy named the “EU
Plant Variety Agency.”
It’s called the Plant Reproductive Material Law, and it attempts to
put the government in charge of virtually all plants and seeds. Home
gardeners who grow their own plants from non-regulated seeds would be
considered criminals under this law.”
“After his victory in the 2008 election, Obama filled key
posts with Monsanto people, in federal agencies that wield tremendous
force in food issues, the USDA and the FDA: At the USDA, as the director
of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Roger Beachy, former
director of the Monsanto Danforth Center. As deputy commissioner of the
FDA, the new food-safety-issues czar, the infamous Michael Taylor,
former vice-president for public policy for Monsanto. Taylor had been
instrumental in getting approval for Monsanto’s genetically engineered
bovine growth hormone.”
“The US House of Representatives quietly passed a
last-minute addition to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill for 2013
last week – including a provision protecting genetically modified seeds
from litigation in the face of health risks.
The rider, which is officially known as the Farmer Assurance
Provision, has been derided by opponents of biotech lobbying as the
“Monsanto Protection Act,” as it would strip federal courts of the
authority to immediately halt the planting and sale of genetically
modified (GMO) seed crop regardless of any consumer health concerns.
The provision, also decried as a “biotech rider,” should have gone
through the Agricultural or Judiciary Committees for review. Instead, no
hearings were held, and the piece was evidently unknown to most
Democrats (who hold the majority in the Senate) prior to its approval as
part of HR 993, the short-term funding bill that was approved to avoid a
federal government shutdown.”
The leaders of Big Agriculture--Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta--are
determined that world's populations remain ignorant about the serious
health and environmental risks of genetically modified crops and
industrial agriculture. Deep layers of deception and corruption
underlie both the science favoring GMOs and the corporations and
governments supporting them.
This award-winning documentary,
Seeds of Death, exposes the lies about GMOs and pulls back the curtains
to witness our planet's future if Big Agriculture's new green revolution
becomes our dominant food supply.
A Question and Answer fact
sheet deconstructing Monsanto's GM claims and Big Agriculture's
propaganda to accompany the film is available online:
Question...Why are we Fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, but Arming Al Qaeda in Syria?
The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee has voted to send a bill to
the floor for a vote that authorizes “critical support to the Syrian
opposition through provision of military assistance, training, and
additional humanitarian support.”
The bill's official title is the Syria Transition Support Act,
and its two co-authors were Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Senator
Bob Corker (R-TN). Aside from providing weaponry and armamments, the
bill includes:
• “Creation of a $250 million transition fund each year through FY2015
drawn from funds otherwise appropriated for regional transition
support”;
• “Sanctions on arms and oil sales to Assad: Targeting any person that
the President of the United States determines has knowingly
participated in or facilitated a transaction related to the sale or
transfer of military equipment, arms, petroleum, or petroleum products
to the Assad regime.”; and
• “Amendment to the Syria Accountability Act: To allow for sanctions
removal once a transitional government is in place and certain terrorism
and WMD criteria have been met.”
That last one is important, and we'll return to it later.
The bill easily got through committee 15-3, and the only Senator to offer meaningful opposition was Senator Rand Paul ( R-KY).
“This is an important moment. You will be funding, today, the allies of al Qaeda,” Paul said.
The biggest and most prominent armed factions in the Syrian resistance
are outright al-Qaeda affiliates like Jabhat al-Nusra and the Syrian
Free Army, which is a mixture of Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda
dominated factions. Even the new 'official' Syrian resistance groups
President Obama formed as a figleaf, the Syrian Opposition
Coalition,(SOC)and the associated Joint Military Council are dominated
by the Muslim Brotherhood.The leader of the SOC is one Ahmed Mouaz al-Khatib,
former imam of the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, a religious cleric
closely allied to the Damascus branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and
fairly hardline and radical himself.
Senator Paul tried to tack two amendments on to the bill, one that would
have forbidden the transfer of weapons to the radical Islamists of the
rebel forces and another that would have prevented the use of U.S.
military armed forces in Syria.
Both were voted down.
There were the usual pro-forma remarks from Paul's colleagues about
'oversight' and transparency' but in the end, there's nothing to stop
the Syrian rebels from simply telling us what we want to hear to get
weapons and our money, and then turning those guns on whomever they
wish...including us. The Qu'ran tells Muslims explicitly that any
promise made to kuffars (non-Muslims), any treaty or agreement is null
and void whenever it's convenient.
Anyone taken a look at what's happening in Afghanistan lately?
Just for the record, (not that it matters), the original Authorization
for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) enacted after 9/11 specifically
called for finding and destroying al-Qaeda..and here we are a few years
later voting to supply arms to them!
What this is setting the stage for is a formalization of President's
Obama's desire to put Islamists in charge of yet another Muslim country.
What happened in Benghazi
was a failed Fast and Furious style covert attempt to purchase and
send weapons from Khaddaffi's arsenals to the Syrian rebels. That
failed, so now we're going to be doing it openly.
Americans traditionally rally behind a sitting president when there's a
foreign intervention or crisis, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if a
U.S. intervention in Syria wasn't timed to head off the fallout from the
massive scandals the Obama regime finds itself entangled in of late.
The similarities are terrifying, the conclusion inevitable. On March 23, 1933, the German
Parliment met to consider
passing a bill that Adolf Hitler had created called the Enabling Act. It
was officially called the 'Law for Removing the Distress of the People
and the Reich.' Why were the
German people in such
distress? Because their government was in utter chaos, and the German
leaders wanted to reassure
the people that everything would be ok. The only fly in the ointment
was that the Nazis had,
behind the scenes, caused the distress themselves by creating the
crisis, so that they could step in and solve it. Sound familiar?
Hitler promised the German
people that the government would "make use of these powers only insofar
as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures...The
number of cases in
which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one." So
the German congress voted on the bill, with the end result being the legal destruction of the
German Democratic Republic. The bill gave Hitler enormous, unprecedented powers to do as he
saw fit for the government of the German people. It was the act that offically created a legal
dictator who was answerable to no one. The people cheered, and National Socialism became the
law of the land from that day forward.
Obama=Hitler? A Notre Dame bishop
named Daniel Jenky said that Obama's policies regarding religious
liberty are comparable to Adolf Hitler, and now Notre Dame faculty are
calling for his removal from the university. Ana Kasparian of The Young
Turks and John Iadarola discuss this latest Obama related scandal.
Are
the faculty right to have reacted as they did? Bear in mind this is a
private university... but what should the response have been?
And if you liked this video, "Like" it as well! :)
the
following text was taken from a court transcript during the prosecution
of Hitlers Henchmen: Many included the Hitler Youth after they were
grown up. (had been indoctrinated by the Socialist)/
........
In order to accomplish their aims and purposes, the Nazi conspirators
prepared to seize totalitarian control over Germany to assure that no
effective resistance against them could arise within Germany itself.
After the failure of the Munich Putsch of 1923 aimed at the overthrow of
the Weimar Republic by direct action, the Nazi conspirators set out
through the Nazi Party to undermine and overthrow the German Government
by "legal" forms supported by terrorism. They created and utilized, as a
Party formation, Die Sturmabteilungen (SA), a semi-military, voluntary
organization of young men trained for; whose mission was to make the
Party the master of the streets.
(Notice the Hitler Youth started out Voluntary, in 3 years ended up compulsory.)
Section e .... (e)
In order to make the German people amenable to their will, and to
prepare them psychologically for war, the Nazi conspirators reshaped the
educational system and particularly the education and training of the
German youth. The Leadership Principle was introduced......
The
transition from democracy to socialism takes place over time. CHANGE.
I've always wondered how so many people could be duped. simple:
brainwashing. Hitler used movie houses, plays and everything else that
was available to him to brainwash the people. Today "they" use movie
theatres and plays also, but "they" also have the tv set. piped directly
into the home that becomes a "womb" for their socialist ideals and
principles.
Check out this link that displays the Nuremberg
trials of Hitlers Henchmen. Actual transcripts of trials.These documents
were declassified as top secret in 1969. Its history recorded.
Notice how the Hitler youth, once brainwashed, began to demonstrate
against those who opposed them. (ie. Following a Catholic church service
Hitler Youth accompanied by SA gathered outside shouting "Down with
Cardinal Innitzer. Our faith is in our country. Our faith is
Germany!!!") (ie. When Cardinal Innitzer tried to leave to go home
HItler Youth mobbed him and shouted outrages against him........)
The Hitler Youth were a determining factor in keeping their neighbors quite.
The media hailed Obama's Berlin speech in front of hundreds
of thousands yesterday as a call for a vision of America as part of a
"new world order". "Berlin's
city center took on the atmosphere of a rock concert as more than
200,000 people jammed the German capital's Tiergarten park to hear U.S.
presidential candidate Barack Obama," reports Bloomberg. news.
http://www.bloomberg.com
ABC News' Jonathan Karl and Dan Abrams discuss Edward Snowden.
Seems we live in a country where it is a crime to expose crime." ??
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable
cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the
place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized"
Violation of the 4th amendment. Snowden is upholding a law HIGHER
than the presidency or NSA. Its the NSA and Obama that are traitors and
should be tried for treason
I don’t remember saying that everybody in the country would have a lower premium, because everybody in the country doesn’t have health insurance, so how could it be lower.
Tens of millions will still not have coverage even once Obamacare is in
full swing, which is strange since the purported goal of the law was to
cover the those very people. There is also an “out” built into the
Affordable Care Act in the event they find it unaffordable:
This analysis suggests that the uninsured under Obamacare
will be heavily low-income, even though many of those people will have
access to subsidized health insurance. Still, some might not find it
affordable, and the health care law does allow for an exemption from the
individual mandate for those who cannot find affordable coverage
(defined as insurance that costs less than 9.5 percent of an
individual’s income).
Possibly the biggest failure of Obamacare is that it doesn’t provide
those who can’t afford the Affordable Care with a cheap mini-plan that
would at least cover their treatment for an accidental irony overdose.
Hard Questions for the Zeitgeist Movement - Live Discussion
StormCloudsGathering· OK its very long, and they covered a lot of topics, but one area that i
that i've been looking for answers for was covered and that is; Who is
in control (eg ensures all wants/needs are being met, is it a computer,
government, everyone or locals) and how are these decisions enforced
(does everyone just need to accept the decisions of the "system" if what
they are looking for is not available/recommended, will there be police
or enforcers) and also whats available to people if they feel the
system is not looking after them because they are in the minority or not
in line with the rest of society.
The standard generic answers of "science" or "society" were initially
put forward as the solutions, but then some specifics came up, which
didn't really answer the question to a level that most (or at least me)
people want.
But basically what i took the the answer to be : if someone has an idea
for an improvement the idea is proposed (to who and how?) and then put
through the system using scientific methods to come up with a
recommendation which is basically what will happen.
So the question i now have is, in the decision making process, are
options going to be produced (in situations where no perfect solution is
available, multiple options with differeent benefits/negatives will
need to be weighed up, taking into account if the are multiple
categories of entities that will affected differently depending on what
decision is ultimately made), or is only "the best" (the goals are
defined by who?) answer going to be put forward.
If the answer is various options, then who makes the final choice, if
it's only one, what happens if some people dont agree with it, will this
decision be enforced and if so by who?
It was stated that that experts should/can be challenged, but its
difficult to convience an expert (or the decision makers) they are wrong
when you are not and expert and unable to use their methods to prove
your point (as thats the method being used to determine the outcome), or
even if its a moral reason and not a difference in their interpretation
of the data. Also if two sets of scientists disagree using the
scientific method what happens then? Some decisions will need to be made
quickly due to need and maybe the decision making process will take
longer than the time available.....can decsions be made without this
process and if so under what conditions. Can morality ever overide the
outcome of a decision resulting from the science method?
Even in an RBE, people will still have different opinions/preferences
even if the they all support the basic premise of an RBE and have been
educated in it. I agree with the point raised in the discussion that we
are talking about an RBE with todays values and expectations of how
things work, which may not be helping things when thinking of an RBE,
since there are many issues today which wont be issues then like greed
or the quest for profit, but since we know that fact, answers should be
able to be formulated in todays "talk" so the people of today can
understand it, instead of "in and RBE that won't be a problem...society
will be different...trust me".
I think some rules or principles in this area need to be documented
(even if it changes over time) so people can make a decsion to get on
board. People want details, and i don't think there are details provided
to the level they want them or using a frame of reference they are used
to.
I agree with an RBE in principle, and so i'm also looking for an
understanding of the details of how it will operate, or the next level
down. The reason we can say the current system is bad is because we know
how these things work in it, and its hard to convience others that an
RBE is better if these questions can't be detailed for comparrison of
the two, ie not why an RBE is the best idea, but at least how it is
better than what we have now.
Another topic i feel worth detailing that was raised in the discussion
is that the purpose of an RBE is not to restrict what people can/cant do
but how to do the things that need doing. So its not saying you cant
have potato chips, but rather how to manage the creation of them in the
most effective manner.
Are there quick answers to the following questions?
a) In an RBE do we need a government, if so what will their role be
b) In an RBE do we need a justice system, if so what will their role be
c) In an RBE do we need police, if so what will their role be
d) In an RBE do we need an army, if so what will their role be
and if so how are they selected or what privileges will they have over
others if any? Will an RBE require enforcement of some of its principles
for the proctection of its people?
I came across these videos by the same person in the original video,
which explores these ideas not just for an RBE (i think he doesn't like
an RBE actually) but for any social system or civilization thats in
place, that in my opinion need to be throught about for an RBE.
Now we all know these bad things occured in todays society or the ones
that have precededed it, so how do we think an RBE will stop these
things from happening under it? The removal of greed is probably an
obvious one, but if something else becomes "powerful" underan RBE, what
mechanisim will be in place to stop things like we know have happened
from happening again?
I think we will need someone/something to perform the role of
government/police/army/legal systems in one form or another(at least
intially since we are used to them now), although they will most likely
do less than they do now and be on much reduced scales, but from my
experience of discussing these topics, these are the things people i
talk to want to know about in an RBE.
Also, its most likely that the whole world will not come on board to an
RBE at the same time, however the person in the video has presented some
ideas (in other videos) on what could happen if everyone is not on
board :
The summary of which is most likely there will not be one system that
everyone agrees on at the point in time when a choice is needed to be
made, so a constitution should be written now (which may be quicker than
a test city) by each of the organized groups now for what ever systems
they want to happen after the current system ceases to exist, and ask
for people to get on board in principle, as well as getting involved in
the process, and that each different group should agree to allow other
groups to exist with a non aggression agreement, and to work out how to
get on with other groups before hand. Even if an RBE has a principle to
reduce the need for written laws, one would still be useful at the start
of the process where this situation will most likely be the state of
play when this happens. Sure this can split people into groups, reduce
numbers etc, but even in the zeitgeist movement there are diefferent
opinions on how to do things, but I still think this gives an RBE the
best chance to come into place and evolve over time.
With all of the attention drawn to
the Tsarnaev brothers and therefore Chechnya it's a good time to look at
the history of the conflict in that region.
Violation of the 4th amendment. Snowden is upholding a law HIGHER than the presidency or NSA. Its the NSA and Obama that are traitors and should be tried for treason