Activism

Smoke and the Moon

moon

© infrakshun

“The Truth, when you finally chase it down, is almost always far worse than your darkest visions and fears.”

– Hunter S. Thompson


 Some recent news articles and reports which were gathered at random:

The secret epidemic of Police domestic violence: Cops up to 15x more likely than general public to be domestic abusers

Japan: Fingerprints to Be Tested as ‘currency’

Federal Business Opportunities: 994 Tons of Weapons Shipped to al-Qaeda in Syria

4-Year-Old Alameda County Boy On Terrorist Watchlist

Drone kill list: UK Parliament deceived on ‘medieval assassination’ program

Hillary Clinton Fundraiser Hosted by All-Star Cast of Financial Regulators Who Joined Wall Street

Mind Control Microscope Changes Behavior of Mice: Scientists Say They Will Soon “treat the brain as the keyboard of a piano”

US-NATO Plans for a New War in Libya

Wi-Fi exposure is more dangerous to kids than previously thought

Greenpeace Helps Corporations Destroy the Planet

***

The Apex

The above articles offer a glimpse into a rising tide of pathology scorching the global consciousness. There is a veritable storm of complex forces presently battling, appeasing, joining, consuming, subsuming or resisting.  The friction is electric out there. No doubt you feel it impinging on awareness in a variety ways.  It feels like an apex of change is in sight.

We have US police brutality and abuse which almost defies description, symptomatic of a nation engineered for decline; various countries (in this case, Japan) pushing state surveillance and SMART society programming;  clear evidence of US-NATO, Turkey, Israel, Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia working on behalf of their Western masters to supply weapon shipments to Daesh / ISIS and Al-Qaeda affiliated mercenary  groups – all handsomely paid for their trouble; more evidence of the United States extrajudicial assassination program mirrored in the UK assisted by the growing obsession with drone technology; yet another ridiculous case of a “terrorist” appears on the ever-burgeoning Terror Watch List, this time in the guise of a 4-year old; US-NATO Establishment cartels busy expanding their wars for corporate profits and psychopathic ideology of total control, while the health effects of Wi-Fi continue to raise alarm bells just as they did with mobile phone use and a growing realisation that genuine environmental activism is being ponerised toward corporate interests and the Establishment agenda of UN Agenda 21 and their “one world” SMART society.

(more…)

Reality Change II: “Hope for the best, Prepare for the Worst.”

“Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.”

– ‘Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies’

***

“Don’t trust the banks. Most are bankrupt. Don’t put your gold and silver coins in the safe deposit box. Keep them at home and keep them secret. Don’t keep more cash in the bank than is necessary to cover about a month’s worth of bills. This is a flashing red alert. Many tens of thousands of people who have their trust in the government system (U.S. currency) are headed dead ahead into impoverishment.”

– Bob Livingston, Personal Liberty Digest


Not a pretty picture.

The above nebulous language introduced in recently amended regulations in the US code of military operations on domestic soil conveniently skipped over what these “activities” would be in order to quell civil disturbances. What it does do is give the US military carte blanche to do as they please in such a scenario which won’t exactly reassure American citizens that they are safe. Indeed, it suggests that the only “unexpected” thing here is just what the US military has planned in the face of the inevitable break down in social “order.” And when we factor in all kinds of natural disasters on the horizon you can understand why so many folks are leaving cities with high density populations and even leaving the country completely.

Not all of the disaster events in the last post will occur but since the main points on this list was first compiled in 2011, we are already seeing some of these scenarios playing out. And who knows? They may all arrive within a year… It really is a case of “Hope for the best and prepare for the worst,” as some bright spark once said …

Returning to our Machiavellian friend and insider Zbigniew Brzezinski, this man has had his finger on the pulse between pathocrat and the global public for several decades. Driven by an irrational and all-consuming hatred of Russia, Brzezinski is a master tactician and highly astute at deciphering the many possible futures currently jostling for supremacy.  If he is worried about the scope and depth of changes taking place, then you can be fairly certain he’ll telegraph his concerns to the pathocratic faithful so that contingencies can be updated.

(more…)

Reality Change I: 16 ignition points

 By M.K. Styllinski

 “Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced.”

– James Baldwin


Unless you have been living in a small cave in the mountains for the last few decades (and that may still be an option) you have probably noticed that we are moving through extremely tumultuous times. Having successfully traversed the Grand Hype and misinterpretations of the 2012 Mayan Prophecy which did not say the world would end but indicate massive change – humanity is still here. Nonetheless, it seems we are in for some truly momentous events. In fact, there is a host of global indicators which, in isolation, or as a non-linear combination, could signal an epic meltdown in the fortunes of humanity whilst offering the possibility of a completely new world.

Do not take the following synopsis as inevitable and that we should all order a bulk supply of dehydrated chicken noodles and chlorinated water tablets, pack our bug bags and find our respective caves … Only that one, or several of these events have an extremely high probability of occurring over the next 2 -10 years. Our history appears to be one long bid to cover up the reality that this planet goes through cycles of catastrophic upheaval – a “reset” if you will. Those that learned to read the signs and took sensible measures to avoid unnecessary future hardship in the face of these dramatic environmental and infrastructure changes were the ones that survived. That means psychological as well as practical awareness.

In lieu of what has gone before in this series, I hope this list helps to place the events in context, whilst offering an easy summary of what we are all facing. A selection of links is included under each heading which are not definitive, merely relevant sources for further reading.

(more…)

Police State Amerika I: Facebook Thought Police and CPS Blues

By M.K. Styllinski

“The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth becomes the greatest enemy of the State.”

– Dr. Joseph M. Goebbels


As a direct result of the Global War on Terror we are seeing the militarisation of law enforcement, the shocking rise of police brutality and an out of control US Army. The inevitable result is not merely the erosion of civil liberties but the very real danger of no civil liberties at all. America is at a crossroads with numerous symptoms of soft totalitarianism converging to meet its overt, classical form.  In other words, A Brave New World of social engineering and transhumanist-led SMART society converging with an Orwellian rule of martial law. This is getting more likely by the day and in Europe life is changing in more gradualist terms, but changing nonetheless.

Perhaps one of the clearest signs of psycho-pathogenic infection of the US government can be seen in who is deemed terrorist material. If entrapment doesn’t get you then considering yourself a “normal” citizen seems to be no protection either. The definition of the word “terrorist” has been stretched so far that anyone who doesn’t conform to the Establishment perception of reality is effectively a potential threat. As we know, Pre-Crime and mass surveillance is a much loved principle. The events of 9/11 seemed to open a a door to psychopathy and authoritarianism in a way that harks back to the both the building and collapse phases of historical Empires with each transition exhibiting a huge increase in pathology. It is my contention that we are transforming to toward a global consolidation arising from manipulated chaos, or we are going to see this attempt swing to the other polarity where the Pathocrats will lose control of their Grand Project and fall into their own entropic footprint.

Either way, Big Change is ‘a comin.

Since America is the primary source of Pathocracy at this time, the disintegration of which is required for the Establishment to extend its reach globally, it is little wonder that clear signs of a police state are not being reported in the MSM and if they are, it is with a broad strokes that exclude any historical perspective and analyses that could counter the official line. Only the most outrageous events are reported to give the impression that they are the exception to the rule when the opposite is the case. To that end, let’s explore thematically some of the police crimes taken at random from a variety of newspapers and online journals to illustrate the audacity of this emerging war against the people.

USApolicestate1© infrakshun

In early 2014, Pentagon directives advanced greater contingency powers for the war on terror on domestic soil. A particular focus of these new powers is the targeting of the civilian population and the enforcement of martial law through convenient loop-holes through the updating of the Insurrection Act of 1807 and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. In the new DoD Directive 3025.18: Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) the ill-defined, nebulous language allows “federal military commanders” these new powers, namely, anyone who happens to be in command can enforce military law against civilians according to their say so and without presidential authorisation. One section reads: “In these circumstances, those Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.”  Naturally, the severity of that scenario is not discussed nor why it is that presidential authority is suddenly “impossible.” Vague wording without legal meaning is a back door for emergency powers to arrive in favour of the military to do as they please, when and where they like.

Oddly enough, while the American public’s trust in the government and media is at record lows, the military fairs better. [1] This maybe due to the lack of psychological and financial support given to Iraq and Afghanistan veterans upon returning home and the sense of nationalistic pride that tends to surround them in the community. What this means when the military is not only employed on the streets but when they are an everyday presence, may change this perception.

Meanwhile, not content with performing invasive criminal background checks on passengers exercising their right to travel, the Transport and Security Administration (TSA) has expanded its duties beyond airports and is now armed and allowed to roam in public to conduct “suspicionless searches” on demand. They even carry out searches of cars at airport car-parks – without a warrant. (Oh, and make sure you have your papers i.e your biometric identity card otherwise you won’t be travelling anyway). Parallel with these inspection powers checkpoints have been popping up in various states used to “Dominate, Intimidate, & Control”. ‘Sneak & peek’ warrants allow police and FBI to secretly enter homes without notice; the IRS can seize entire bank accounts of unsuspecting citizens if there is sufficient reason for suspicion. There is no sign that these patterns of surveillance and intimidation have any intention of slowing. Indeed, it is getting worse very quickly. [2] [3] [4]

shocked emoji

Internet emoji used in social network messaging. Even this harmless symbol may get you into trouble with the thought police.

As we know, this trend has been allowed to target the internet, with federal and intelligence agencies monitoring and commandeering the freedom of expression on social networks in order to fine those – mostly young people – critical of the government. 

A 19 year old was jailed for leaving a sarcastic comment on Facebook regarding “shooting up a kindergarten”. He did so after being embroiled in a spat between other gamers who questioned his mental state. He responded: “I think Ima shoot up a kindergarten / And watch the blood of the innocent rain down/ And eat the beating heart of one of them.” He received 9 months in prison for the trouble. [5]

The ability to understand irony appears to be missing in the minds of police and judiciary.

Even posting rap lyrics on Facebook can get you branded as a “terrorist threat” it seems. When high school student Cameron D’Ambrosio, 18, posted this little missive on his account: “F— a boston bombinb [sic] wait til u see the sh– I do, I’ma be famous for rapping, and beat every murder charge that comes across me…” It was enough to land him front of a grand jury, though he was thankfully acquitted after members had the wit to reflect on the First amendment. [6]

Over in the United Kingdom the same level of insanity has also gripped the authorities. 19 year-old Matt Woods was sentenced to three months in jail for making sick jokes about missing children on Facebook. His comments focused on missing children April Jones and Madeline McCann including the following: “I woke up this morning in the back of a transit van with two beautiful little girls, I found April in a hopeless place.” and “Who in their right mind would abduct a ginger kid?” [7] He was apparently inspired to do so by a website called Sickipedia, where tasteless jokes are the norm. It seems his comments were enough to have a lynch mob at his door baying for blood which ultimately led to his arrest after the comments received a wider circulation. The judge called it: “ a disgusting and despicable crime,” sentencing him to 3 months in jail. [8]

Tasteless and silly, but a “despicable crime”? Hardly. What are becoming when we begin to send young people to jail for doing nothing more than exercising their right to free speech?

Then we mustn’t forget one of the most ridiculous attempts to drum up more cash for the Terror Industry when even using words – sick or otherwise – isn’t necessary for you to be handcuffed and led away.

After NYPD police were conducting a “routine Facebook monitoring” – and oxymoron in itself – Osiris Aristy, 17, was arrested at his home and charged: “with making ‘terrorist threats’ due to his use of emojis, posting photos of himself with a gun and therefore a criminal possession of a weapon, criminal use of drugs and criminal possession of marijuana” – all from the catalyst of using … emojis. The criminal complaint stated: “As a result of this conduct, the defendant has caused informant and other New York City police officers to fear for their safety, for public safety, and to suffer alarm and annoyance…” [9]

Aristy1

The FBI also likes to flex their muscles by tracking down Facebook users.  Within 24 hours of posting a comment about the “American Police State” Blaine Cooper, 33, was interviewed for 45 minutes by Prescott Valley Police Department based in Arizona with the FBI sitting in. Satisfied that he wasn’t a threat Cooper was Released. after Cooper contacted the website policestateusa.com and revealed further details:

“They had every Facebook post I had ever made in a huge file, along with all my wife’s information, and parent’s information…” Cooper said that he was told that without “defusing the situation” by complying with the interview, his house might have been raided. “The FBI made mention they came to question me so they didn’t have to kick in my door,” [10]

As legalisation of marijuana laws gains momentum, this hasn’t slowed down the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in matching the FBI’s penchant for snooping, this time to support the tangential nonsense of the “War on Drugs.” Setting up fake Facebook accounts to impersonate and spy ona victim’s friends was a normal part of DEA work load it seems.

It was back in 2010, when Sondra Arquiett was arrested by the DEA and along with her boyfriend, charged for distributing drugs. Special Agent DEA Special Agent Timothy Sinnigen took it upon himself to purloin her cell phone (apparently with consent) in order to access the wealth of personal information. The phone was returned only after all her private photos, addresses, emails and records had been copied, a fact about which Arquiett was entirely unaware. The agent then created the online Facebook account and pretended to be Arquiett by contacting her friends, posting photos, sending messages and making friend requests. A high level of personal information was used to create the illusion that this was Sondra Arquiett – AKA Sondra Prince.

Arquiett only became aware of the false account when one of her friends alerted her to the fact. Since she had not even registered for a Facebook account this was doubly shocking. After the drug case had been concluded and she had served weekend jail terms for several months, she filed a lawsuit at a New York, Syracuse District Court in June 2013. Arquiett, now 28, cited emotional distress and the perceived cooperation with the DEA that might endanger her life and that of her child. 

What is perhaps more troubling is the clear breech of ethical guidelines where law enforcement not only mimics crime but once again sees no problem in actively creating it. The government, using the same para-logistical arguments to which we should now be well accustomed, defended the DEA and their methods by claiming that Arquiett “implicitly consented” by allowing agents and police access to her phone reinforcing their belief that these actions were carried out “for a legitimate law enforcement purpose.”  If such implicit consent and standardised legitimacy is now seen as normal, then American law has set the bar extremely low indeed. Many privacy experts agree.  Anita L. Allen, a professor at University of Pennsylvania Law School commenting on the case said: “It reeks of misrepresentation, fraud, and invasion of privacy.”  [11]

Sondra-Prince-Arquiett

The Facebook page set up by the DEA impersonating Sondra Arquiett AKA Sondra Prince. (Source: Associated Press)

Despite the obvious trashing of the principle of free speech anyone with a normal ability to discriminate between a terrorist threat, taking advantage of potential petty criminals and the ever-present noise of teenagers and their hormonal spats would have swiftly moved on, bored out of their minds. Such is the extreme paranoia coupled with profit margins the government prefers to waste billions of tax dollars on creating a climate of fear in the younger members of society. When the right to be silly and say inane and even controversial comments on the “privacy” of one’s social networking page is restricted and monitored then it is no distance at all to censorship, control of information and using the internet as a cynical opportunity to blur the lines between crime and prevention. Free speech then becomes a quaint afterthought.

Compliance becomes the norm.

CPS and DHS

The corruption of Law and the family Courts is now common place. It seems the Child Protection Services (CPS) and the Department of Human Services (DHS) appear to be working in tandem to make the lives of ordinary children, new born babies and their families an utter misery. That is not to say that these services do not offer protection and care for the young in many, perhaps still the majority of cases. However, there is a large body of evidence to suggest that this is changing – and changing fast. This is unsurprising given the fact that the CPS and DHS are tied to the hip with Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment which routinely enforce mandatory vaccination, orthodox medical procedures  and the growing seizure of children, despite and often due to the fact that parents have the temerity to call them out on their failures. The CPS in particular, shows itself to be a cartel with profits as the primary mover. It has come under the intense scrutiny of concerned citizens across America who have suffered a severe abuse of their human and civil rights. The reports are so alarming that it you’d be forgiven for harbouring doubts. Unless that is, you talk to those who have been on the sharp end of totalitarianism camouflaging itself as social care.  A few examples follow.

eroicamaycarey

Erica May Carey “escorted” away from her child by police

“The police literally ripped 14 month old Levi from his mother’s breast, reports Erica May Carey, as she was nursing him in the car at a California gas station. Her baby was screaming, and she says her breast was exposed as the officers dragged her from the car. As she recounted the events of last Thursday, Erica began weeping, saying that she was “hogtied like an animal, when moments before I was nursing my infant.” She was arrested and jailed for fighting to keep her children with her.

Erica and Cleave Rengo were the subject of national interest as reports of them fleeing Washington CPS [Child Protection Services] made the headlines. Last November, the holistic, devoutly Christian couple’s three breastfed babies were taken amidst accusations of neglect for choosing alternative remedies such as calendula and coconut oil for their older baby’s eczema and preferring not to take their newborn twins to the hospital after an unassisted homebirth, even though they were reportedly healthy.” (Source: Epic Times)


You might think you would have the freedom of choice to forgo vaccines for your new born baby but this wasn’t the case for Aliea Bidwell and Ben Gray, who became parents on March 14th, 2014. Unfortunately, the parents had the bad luck to come up against a doctor who took exception to the fact that they did not wish to inject drugs into their son. Despite this vaccine not even required by law in Alabama state, Dr. Terry M. Bierd, MD, staff pediatrician at St. Vincent’s Hospital in Birmingham, gave them an ultimatum: take the Hepatitis B vaccine or lose your baby to the Child Protection Services (CPS). The family is filing suit against the doctor and also set up a Web site to raise awareness of this medical blackmail and aggression. Donations are accepted to assist with legal costs.  [12] (A detailed account of their experience can be found at The INQUISITR).

It is completely understandable that parents do occasionally opt to refuse the Hepatitis B injection for their sons and daughters given the evidence of its toxicity and record of related deaths.  In June 2014, Lorie Blalock’s baby suffered an adverse reaction after being vaccinated with the drug against the mother’s wishes whereupon the infant was abruptly taken into medical foster care. They are still waiting to have their baby back. [13] [14] [15]

Then we must also mention Rebekah McClain was made a victim of the medical establishment after having her baby removed by the CPS despite demonstrable evidence that vaccinations were having adverse reactions. McClain was later accused of abuse. Her tale is an horrific one, detailing medical malpractice and vindictive behaviour that you would expect to find in a bizarre horror film. [16]

In a similar case which beggars belief, the Washington Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) subjected a Tacoma foster mother and her baby to a bureaucratic attack on her civil rights to refuse influenza vaccinations. They gave her the same ultimatum so common in these cases by insisting that the entire family have the shots and if they refused, the baby would be seized by the state. In the end, Jamie Smith the boy’s foster mother, reluctantly complied stating: “I’ve done a lot of research on it and I don’t like some of the side effects that it has,” …. “I’ve thought about that a lot. Unfortunately, I have to think about our kids who are in the house first and to me they’re more important, their safety, than trying to fight to keep this little guy.”  [17]

She is not the first mother to be threatened with kidnap if the vaccinations are not accepted nor will she be the last. Not only babies are being snatched from their mothers to cover up malpractice and to fall in line with mandatory vaccinations, refusal to have chemotherapy treatment can also be considered abnormal, where the strong arm of the law must force you to comply.

An Amish family and their daughter suffering from leukaemia were initially forced to flee the United States, despite the ruling from an Ohio Judge supporting their right to halt all chemotherapy treatment. The parents of Sarah Hershberger believed that drug treatment would have produced more suffering and likely killed her rather than cure the disease.

According to one report:

“An appeals court issued a ruling granting an attorney for Akron Children’s Hospital, Maria Schimer, temporary guardianship over 11-year-old Sarah Hershberger after she begged her parents to discontinue the toxic drugs being administered to fight cancer. ‘Parental rights, even if based upon firm belief and honest convictions can be limited in order to protect the ‘best interests’ of the child,’ the court ruled.”  [18]

When sheriffs and CPS representatives came to take the child, the family had already left the country. Maurice Thompson the Hershberger’s attorney claimed: “It’s the constitutional right, but [there’s a] moral right to refuse conventional medical treatment,”. Thankfully, the family was able to return to the United States after grassroots protests and a successful legal battle. Sarah is now cancer-free. However, many are still not able to express their right to have a say in what happens to their own bodies in the event of a serious illness. Especially, it seems, where money is to be made.

Another instance of State coercion was visited upon 17 year old Cassandra from Connecticut State who was taken away from her mother and forced to receive chemotherapy that she vehemently opposed.

Diagnosed with Stage 3/4 Hodgkin’s lymphoma by Connecticut Children’s Medical Centre (CCMC)  doctors opted to remove some of Cassandra’s lymph node. This is where the chemotherapy drugs came in. Cassandra was opposed to this form of treatment, viewing the side effects as too dangerous, an opinion she had had for several years, according to her mother. As pressure from doctors mounted the family decided to seek a second opinion elsewhere. Meanwhile, the CCMC contacted Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) alleging “parental medical neglect.” A Superior Court ruling swiftly followed, forcing Cassandra’s mother to return her daughter for chemotherapy treatment she had no wish to have.

After two chemotherapy treatments at the end of 2014, Cassandra was desperate and ran away from home to avoid any more interference. Upon her return she still refused treatment. Yet, at the conclusion of a CPS session and the CCMC doctors testimonies, the trial court subsequently ordered her “removed from her home and that she remain in DCF’s care and custody.” Which meant that Cassandra was hospitalised as a ward of the state with “all medical decisions made on her behalf.” She was then forced to endure further unwanted surgery and chemotherapy treatment.  [19]

To any normal person, having the choice as to whether or not you wish your kids to be vaccinated with toxic drugs, the chance to exercise your right to take care of your own children when it is self-evident that you are a responsible parent, or if your right to reject potentially dangerous treatment, is of supreme ethical and moral importance. Apparently, the CPS and similar social services and members of the medical Establishment disagree. What is more, should you have the audacity to question their Orwellian procedures you better make sure you have a lot of money and a suitable support system.

Cassandra and her mother committed the cardinal sin of seeking a second opinion which meant that the CPS/medical cartel went into overdrive. Since they have unlimited resources the sheer tripartite power of medical, judicial and law enforcement tag team is frightening to the ordinary family who ends up the object of their ire. For all the high profile cases that gain momentum on the internet or in local newspapers there are thousands of other cases that do not receive the headlines they sorely need. 

The Connecticut Children’s Medical Centre was in the news again in March 2015, this time for separating a 3 year-old cancer patient from his mother and accusing her of child abuse when it was nothing more than a diaper rash. Known to be a dedicated and loving mother by her friends and family, no charges were filed but Wendy Lamarre is still fighting to get her child back.  [20]

Here is a very brief round up of just some of the cases where people exercised their rights and dared to take a second opinion:

Teenager Isaiah Rider Speaks Out After Being Taken From His Mom In Medical Kidnapping Case

“Dissatisfied with her 16-year-old son’s medical care, Michelle Rider was preparing to transfer him from Lurie Children’s Hospital when a doctor delivered staggering news: The teen had been placed in temporary protective custody.

“They accused me of medical (child) abuse,” Rider said of that morning last month. “I said, ‘What is that?’ They told me to Google it. I was not allowed to have contact with my

Eight year old Jaxon Taken By Hospital When Parents Ask For Second Opinion

A Missouri doctor recently told a little boy that, if she had it her way, he would never see his mommy and daddy again. This was after 8 year old Jaxon was seized from his parents’ custody based solely on a statement from this single doctor. His parents, Tiffany and Jason Adams, are desperately trying to bring him home after what appears to be his doctor’s retaliation because they “dared to seek a second opinion.”

Teen indefinitely detained in psych ward after parents seek 2nd medical opinion

A judge has ruled that a Boston teen may continue to be held captive in a hospital and forcibly drugged… indefinitely.  The tragic series of events began when a doctor discarded an earlier medical diagnosis and declared another, prompting objections from her parents and threats to discharge her from Boston Children’s Hospital to take her to get a second opinion.  An epic battle of egos ensued, and the hospital decided that the parents’ insolence in challenging the doctor was tantamount to child abuse.  Without a trial or having broken a specific law, the girl was stripped from her parents’ custody and the state of Massachusetts has kept her indefinitely detained in a hospital since February 2013.  Based on the latest ruling, the girl may very well be locked in a psychiatric ward until she turns 18 years old.

The above  case of 15 year-old Justin Pelletier is a tragic summary of the authoritarian crimes of the CPS and Medical Establishment. Please visit the website http://justiceforjustina.com/ and donate to their cause.

Not only do we have these cartels gnashing their teeth at families who seek a second opinion in the face of their extreme behaviour but it seems smoking pot, drinking raw milk, perceived mental disability, hanging around with black kids, swearing on camera and even giving birth at home can land you in jail or facing the seizure of your children:

CPS snatched infant because of legal medical marijuana prescription

A man was placed into handcuffs, a woman sobbed uncontrollably, and their 11-month-old boy was seized by social workers and put into foster care — all because of legally prescribed medical marijuana.  It didn’t matter that no law had been broken; Child Protective Services has the power to split apart families in an instant without a trial, and regularly does across the country.

This heartbreaking situation happened to California couple Shawnee Anderson, 27, and Aaron Hillyer, 34.  After a nosy neighbor called the police because of a loud argument, cops arrived and found doctor-prescribed cannabis — legal for medicinal use in a total of 20 states. […]

The commonly-used cannabis plant is an easy target for child-snatching agencies — even if it is legal.  The agency can deem virtually anything “abusive” or “neglectful” at their discretion.  The targets of CPS are punished first, then attempt to prove their innocence later.  The American tradition of treating people as if they are “innocent until proven guilty” is lost on CPS.

“There are families out there … destroyed over a medicinal plant,” said Hillyer to CNN. “It’s baffling.”

Mom gets investigated by social workers after advocating marijuana reform and for in-depth: Fighting FIRES: Branden the Brave’s Battle for Medical Cannabis Access

“I feel like our family was targeted, just because I’m doing what our beautiful country is built on: Freedom of Speech.” […]

A child-abuse investigation has been launched on a Florida mom after she made some public statements in support of medical freedom. Social workers intruded into her life in order to look for excuses to seize her children.

This is the situation that Renee Petro is facing.  She is the mother of a boy with a terrible illness.  Branden, age 12, has been diagnosed with a rare form of epilepsy which results in uncontrolled seizures and can be fatal.  Her desperate quest to save him is also what has drawn the scornful eye of the state.

Healthy girl confiscated from parents who smoked pot, given to murderous foster mother

A little girl was confiscated from her loving parents because they smoked marijuana, and given away to a foster mother who put her into a coma and killed her. Alexandria “Alex” Hill, age 2, succumbed to her injuries after being “thrown to the ground.”

“We never hurt our daughter. She was never sick, she was never in the hospital, and she never had any issues until she went into state care,” said the girl’s father, Joshua Hill, to KVUE.

Alex was seized by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Service (TDFPS) after her parents were accused of smoking marijuana while the girl slept. She was taken into state custody in November 2012.

Mr. Hill said that she was put into more than one dangerous foster home.

Breastfeeding 2-day Old Newborn Seized From Parents Because Mother Has Disability :

“A Florida couple is devastated. Child Protective Services just took their breastfeeding newborn from her mother’s arms at the hospital. She was is not even two days old, but parents Tracey and Freddie Verzosa of Kissimmee, Florida will now only be able to visit their baby for feedings, under supervision. The accusations against them, according to the parents’ story, boil down to the facts that Tracey is a slow learner, they are poor, and the baby was born too quickly for them to make it to the hospital.”

DHHS accused of abusing authority with Brooklin teen who feeds baby goat milk formula

A young Brooklin mother who feeds her baby a goat milk-based formula, missed doctor appointments and refuses to have her child vaccinated is accusing the Maine Department of Health and Human Services of overreaching its authority by investigating her son’s well-being.

Family and supporters of Alorah Gellerson, 17, and her 4-month-old son, Carson, held a rally Thursday at Cascade Park in Bangor to make a statement against DHHS, which the young mother says has completed its investigation and given the baby a clean bill of health.

“We must send Maine DHHS a message that this overreach of authority is not acceptable,” the family wrote of the event on their farm’s Facebook page.

Many in the group who gathered at the park wore pins that read, “Goat milk formula is not a crime.”

CPS seizes toddler for saying naughty words on video

“A 2-year-old toddler has been seized by Child Protective Services when a clip surfaced of him using “inappropriate” language in a video posted on the internet.  The standard for breaking apart families has become so broad that it now covers politically incorrect speech.

The events began when the Omaha Police Department discovered a YouTube video of a diaper-wearing child using profanity at the encouragement of two adults.  OPD posted the video to its website, saying it was an example of the “cycle of violence and thuggery” in the community.”

CPS nabs teenager because she was hanging out with black people

A teenage dance student took a trip out of state with two fellow dancers to spend a weekend taking classes with some of the top professionals in the industry.  The weekend came to an abrupt end when she was seized by police and put into the hands of Child Protective Services because of the way her companions looked.

Young dancer Landry Thompson, 13, and her two companions departed from Tulsa, OK, and headed down to Houston for a weekend of professional dance instruction.  Her mother trusted Emmanuel Hurd, 29, and Josiah Kelly, 22, and had given her full consent to the trip.

The group spent all day Saturday in dance class.  Exhausted, they departed for their hotel.   But they struggled to find their destination. “We were on the GPS trying to figure out where the hotel was.  And we sat there and we dozed off,” said Hurd, her instructor.

The next thing the group knew, there were police surrounding the vehicle.  They apparently didn’t think Thompson had any business in a car with her companions, based on nothing but the way they looked.

[…] “‘Are you aware your daughter is with two Black men?’ When I said, Yes, I’m aware of that, he called into questioning [my] parenting,” the mother said. […]

A woman who wished to remain anonymous recounted her story of authoritarian abuse on a blog (now defunct) subsequently reported by Police State USA. After delivering her baby naturally at home she and her partner were surprised to find themselves putting up with a flood of visits from social workers checking to see that the baby was “healthy and “under government-approved medical supervision.” The mother was happy with the birth and both she and her husband were keen to avoid “unnecessary medical interventions”, hence the reason for a natural home birth. They had the baby checked out on the 6th day. It was then that things began to get disturbing:

Police State USA takes up the story:

The hospital experience, according to the mother, was infuriating. When doctors found out they had performed a home-birth, she and her husband were allegedly treated as if they were “crazy” and “incompetent fools.”

While at St. Joseph’s Hospital ER in Philadelphia, after some brief checks, the mother said that doctors rudely told her that her baby would be transferred — without permission — to another hospital. The supposed reasoning was that St. Joseph’s did not have a dedicated pediatric center. The mom says the decision was made behind their backs and an ambulance was already dispatched by the time she was informed.

Even though nothing was found wrong with her baby, the mother said that rejecting the transfer was not an option. A staff member named Dr. Elisa Evans allegedly “came in the room with a stern look and said, ‘If you refuse to transfer her, we WILL CONTACT DHS AND THE POLICE,’” she recalled.

The mom says that cops appeared and blocked the exit. “The officers stood in front of the emergency room doors — arms crossed and said you cannot leave with your child”.

The baby was involuntarily transported by ambulance to Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (costing the parents $3,320.00). The mother said that doctors performed “test after test, hoping to find something.” For four hours this process went on, without the parents’ consent and under the threat of government compulsion. The parents had walked into St. Joseph’s at 10:00 a.m. and were not allowed to leave Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia until 9:30 p.m.

This is the same political correctness and paranoia gone mad that we explored in The Rule of Law , Sex, Lies and Society and The Politics of Entrapment. The confusion and mixed messages within such state departments and institutions is breath-taking. Real child abuse is covered up while the innocent are persecuted through a convergence of ineptitude, ignorance, bureaucracy and deception. They may even use these labels to cover their own tracks and maintain authority. Higher up the chain of command there are no doubt reasons to suspect elements of social engineering and ideology steering the DHS and CPS ships.

Now keep in mind Surveillance Society and All the Way Down to our DNA... and you may now have a better idea as to how ordinary people are being made to conform to Official Culture. Can you see how this plays an important part in a new form of technocratic centralisation? The Medical Establishment is no exception to this ideology.

Which brings us to this little item:

Secret list: Having your name on this secret Michigan list of 275,000 people could cost you your job (video included at source)

It’s a secret list that can cost you your family or your job.  Once you’re on it, it can be very hard to get off.   While some changes are being made to the law, many experts say it doesn’t go far enough.

The state maintains something called the Michigan Child Abuse and Neglect Central Registry and the sole power to label you an abuser lies not with a judge or a jury, but with child protective services workers.

And you may be surprised at how the state can define “abuse.”

Anita Belle says she’s never been convicted of a crime.  But Belle’s name has been put on the Central Registry as a child abuser.

“Where is the due process,” asked Belle.

The Central Registry is maintained by Child Protective Services workers inside Michigan’s Department of Human Services, or DHS.

Something to remember next time you consider placing efficiency before freedom – such as it is. Making false diagnoses, suppressing evidence, refusing to hear medical testimony and harassing families and their children appears to be business as usual for many members of the CPS and DHS departments fully mandated by the government. Independence and self-sufficiency covers all avenues. The more outside society you can be whilst cultivating a large network of like-minded friends, the better the potential for your future. 

In the next post we’ll look further at the rise of the police state after 9/11, with stories from those who have come under the baton and jackboot of the police and SWAT teams.

 

See also: Public School System Exposed for Reporting Parents to CPS for Homeschooling


Notes

[1] ‘I Can’t Breathe’: Eric Garner’s Last Words Symbolize Our Predicament’ By Rev. Jesse Jackson and Grace Ji-Sun Kim, Huffington Post,  12/18/2014| Updated: 02/17/2015.
[2] ‘Security Check Now Starts Long Before You Fly’ By SUSAN STELLIN, New York Times, OCT. 21, 2013.
[3] ‘T.S.A. Expands Duties Beyond Airport Security’ By RON NIXON, New York Times,  AUG. 5, 2013.
[4] ‘Sneak & peek’ warrants allow police to secretly enter homes without notice -Covert tactics have become legally accepted and increasingly popular. Police State USA, June 27, 2014.
[5] ’When A Teen’s ‘Sarcastic’ Facebook Message Goes Terribly Wrong’ Daily Mail, Jul. 8, 2013.
[6] ‘Grand Jury Rejects Indictment of Teen Arrested for Rap Lyrics’ Massachusetts student’s arrest for alleged ‘terroristic threats’ raised First Amendment concerns, By John Knefel, Rolling Stone, June 6, 2013.
[7] ‘Teenager jailed over offensive April Jones Facebook posts’ By Kim Pilling, The Independent,  08 October 2012.
[8 ]‘Unemployed teenager sent to prison for three months for vile Facebook posts about missing children April Jones and Maddie Mccann’ Daily Mail, By Emily Allen, 8 October 2012.
[9] ‘Teen Arrested for His Choice of Emojis in a Facebook Post, By Cassandra Rules, January 23, 2015. The Free Thought Project at www.freethoughtproject.com.
[10] ‘FBI interrogated man after comment about American ‘Police State’ on Facebook’ -Man’s fears are confirmed when the FBI wanted to interrogate him within hours of making an impassioned comment, www.policestateusa.com August 27, 2013.
[11] ‘Government Set Up A Fake Facebook Page In This Woman’s Name’ By Chris Hamby, http://www.buzzfeed.com/ October 7, 2014.
[12] ‘Parents Blackmailed By Doctor: Consent To Vaccine Or We Take Your Newborn’ The Inquistr, May 23 2014.
[13] ‘Grassroots Effort To Fight Medical Kidnapping Of Baby Kathryn By UMC Children’s Hospital And CPS In Texas’ The Inquitr, October 26, 2014.
[14] ‘Social Services To Family: ‘Get Flu Shots Or We’re Taking Your Baby’ By Mac Slavo, January 18th, 2015 | SHTFplan.com.
[15] ‘Vaccine-Injured Child Kidnapped from Family by Child Protective Services’ by Augustina Ursino,www.vactruth.com,  November 15 2014.
[16] ‘4 Month Old Texas Baby Seized from Parents in Medical Dispute’ By Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News, December 2014.
[17] ‘Amish family forced into hiding to avoid court-ordered chemotherapy treatment’  December 1, 2013. www.policestateusa.com
[18] ‘Connecticut Supreme Court Upholds Ruling That State Can Force Chemotherapy On Teen’ By Josh Kovner, www.courant.com/
[19] ‘No Charges Filed, But 3-year Old Cancer Child Taken from Mother over “Diaper Rash”  by Terri LaPoint, March 14, 2015, healthimpactnews.com/
[20] ‘Medical Kidnap: CPS Worker Makes False Medical Diagnosis to Seize 4 Year-old Child from Family’  Terri LaPoint, March 14, 2015.

Save

Save

The Terror Industry (2)

“The FBI isn’t nabbing would-be terrorists so much as setting up mentally ill or economically desperate people to commit crimes they could never have accomplished on their own”

– Trevor Aaronson: The Sting: How the FBI Created a Terrorist


US-FBI-ShadedSeal.svg

The Seal of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation

The Politics of Entrapment explored US, British and European sting operations against sex offenders and would-be terrorists. We re-visit the subject from the standpoint of  global terrorism in order to take a more detailed look at the FBI’s role and the historical basis of a strategy of tension, a formula which has been a standard tactic for as long as the State has existed. Indeed, one cannot exist without the other it seems. The American public remains ill-informed about the billions of dollars taken from tax payers to keep the treadmill of the perpetual war on terror and security framework operational. Perhaps this is no surprise, since the censorship in the mainstream media reached No.4 on Project Censored’s most under-reported stories of 2012.

The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) is sitting astride a network of 15,000 spies, most of whom are criminals who have infiltrated a cross-section of ethnic communities in an attempt to uncover terrorist plots. Rather than foiling potential terrorism  – most of which would have been as a direct result of American foreign policy in the first place i.e. “blowback” – these agents provocateurs are responsible for encouraging crimes against civilians and government with a substantial cash reward should they deliver. Since 9/11, over 150 men have been caught in FBI terrorism entrapment operations receiving a sentence of 25 years or more in prison. These unhappy young men had their lives ruined whilst providing essential PR for the FBI and substantial profits for security firms, law enforcement, weapons manufacturers and the US military, justifying the flow of tax dollars, funnelled from a treasury that continues to print money out of thin air.

Although there are many books that cover the complex history of state-sponsored terrorism today, award-winning journalist Trevor Aaronson was one of the first to fully document the FBI’s endeavours in fake terror plots in his 2013 book The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism. [1] Interviewing case officers and FBI Task Force leaders as well as informants themselves, he documents case after case of undercover agents groomed for entrapment operations. One of these was Quazi Nafis who received 30 years for planning to bomb the New York Stock Exchange in 2012. A fake Al-Qaeda operative and informant known as “Kareem,” was instrumental in his grooming and subsequent capture.

Nafis didn’t have any explosives nor the finances or contacts to acquire it, he was merely a disaffected youth of meagre intelligence, burning with understandable hatred for Western imperialism. Through Kareem, the FBI would provide him with all he needed to carry out the attack which included: “… not only the storage facility and supposed explosives, but also the detonator and the van that Nafis believed would deliver the bomb. …” But it was not to be: “On the morning of October 17, Nafis and Kareem drove the van to Lower Manhattan and parked it in front of the Federal Reserve Bank on Liberty Street. Then they walked to a nearby hotel room, where Nafis dialed on his cellphone the number he believed would trigger the bomb, but nothing happened. He dialed again, and again. The only result was Nafis’ apprehension by federal agents.” [2]

dreamstime_s_17720730

© Davidalary | Dreamstime.com – Fingerprint Photo

Some of the more high profile cases include the conviction of a group of young black men known as the Newburgh Four who were jailed in June of 2011 for an alleged 2009 terrorist plot to fire a Stinger missile at US military planes. Career FBI informant and petty criminal Shahed Hussain was responsible for putting them there, offering enormous financial inducements to carry out the plot. The sum of money amounted to $250,000 for one man, free holidays and top of the range cars. He cruised the mosques looking for likely men with radical chips on their shoulders and who could be groomed accordingly. Yet, the men that he managed to find were not radical Islamists bent on terrorist atrocities but, as Paul Harris described, writing for The Guardian, on December 12, 2011, these were: “… impoverished individuals struggling with Newburgh’s grim epidemic of crack, drug crime and poverty. One had mental issues so severe his apartment contained bottles of his own urine. He also believed Florida was a foreign country.” The report stated further: “As defence lawyers poured through the evidence, the Newburgh Four came to represent the most extreme form of a controversial FBI policy to use invented terrorist plots to lure targets.” Professor Karen Greenberg, a terrorism expert at Fordham University observed: ‘There has been no case as egregious as this. It is unique in the incentive the government provided…” [3]

Now, “unique” has become pedestrian.

The case of the Fort Dix Five also deserves a mention. Arrested in May of 2007, on charges of plotting to kill US soldiers at Fort Dix, New Jersey, a DOJ press report from June 5 read: “The five defendants are charged with conspiracy and other charges related to their plans to kill as many soldiers at the Army base as possible. A sixth man was indicted for aiding and abetting the illegal possession of firearms by three members of the group.” Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer (an ethnic Jordanian) and Albanians Dritan Duka, and Eljvir Duka, Serdar Tatar (a Turk) and were charged with: “conspiracy to murder members of the uniformed services” along with the “unlawful possession of machine guns” and “illegal alien” status. The fifth member, Agron Abdullahu an ethnic Kosovar was charged with “aiding and abetting the Duka brothers’ illegal possession of weapons.”

The Jewish Anti Deformation League (ADL), the right-wing evangelist Pat Robertson and a coterie of authoritarian organisations displayed a vengeful glee at what were clearly trumped up charges. Referring to the ADL’s gloating of the defendants sentences of life imprisonment in 2008, geopolitical analyst Stephen Lendmen commented: “Imagine their comments if five Israeli Jews had been convicted on the same charges instead of Muslims: “No plot, No crime, so the FBI invents guilt with an entrapment sting operation – its usual modus operandi to ensnare the innocent.”

In his 2008 article on the Fort Dix Five he describes the entrapment narrative which trapped the men:

At a Cherry Hill, NJ Circuit City store in January 2006, Mohamad Shnewer innocently wanted a home video transfered to DVD. It showed men shooting weapons at a Pocono Mountains firing range, playing paintball (an innocent game in which opposing teams try to eliminate opponents by marking them with water-soluble dye shot in capsules from air guns), and repeating Arabic phrases like Allah Akbar (meaning God is Greatest). The store clerk called the police. They notified the FBI. They began investigating and recruited two dubious informants to help.

Each knew nothing about the other. One was Besnik Bakalli, an ethnic Albanian, who falsely told defendants he was a Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) veteran – the US/Germany supported terrorist group recruited to destabilize Kosovo/Serbia in the 1990s. At trial, however, he testified that he fought for no group and knew nothing about Islam or extremists calling for jihad.

Mahmoud Omar was the other informant, an Egyptian-born used car salesman/mechanic on probation for bank fraud. He and Bakalli entered the US illegally and faced likely deportation or worse. They were easily recruited, so cooperated, and were well compensated for their efforts – thousands of dollars a month, and according to defense lawyers, Omar (from when recruited in March 2006) will have earned $238,000 for his efforts. NewJersey.com believes more – over $240,000 plus rent and other expenses, and, of course, leniency in handling their charges. Bakalli was used for a shorter period and reportedly was paid about $150,000. The FBI also relocated his parents to America as an added incentive to cooperate. [4]

Perusing the trial evidence it was clear that there was no plot except what the FBI could dig out of their bag of tricks to justify their entrapment program and the subsequent arrests. Though hostile to America’s wars against Iraq and Afghanistan and an obvious faith in the religion of Islam, all five maintained their innocence, a certainty that remained throughout their arrest and trial.

fbi-entrapment

It seems the FBI can disrupt service utilities to a house and pretend to be helpful technicians in order to gain entry and covertly search the premises in order to “find” evidence that might later justify a search warrant. [5]

Five black US citizens and two Haitian nationals from Liberty City one of the poorest sections of Miami were arrested in 2006 and accused by the FBI of attempting to blow up the Sears Tower and several federal buildings. Known as the Liberty City Seven, two mistrials from 2007 – 2008 was followed by a third trial which ended on May 12, 2009. Naudimar Herrera was acquitted but the five remaining defendants Narseal Batiste, Patrick Abraham, Stanley Grant Phanor, Burson, Augustin and Rothschild Augustine all received prison sentences between from 6-14 years and lengthy supervised release orders. Yet, it was perhaps one of the most blatant cases of corrupt entrapment practices yet seen.

Announced with the usual triumphant propaganda from government sponsored media lackeys and commentators, the foiled plot was hailed as a triumph against an attack which could have been “bigger than September 11th.” As the prime mover in the alleged cell was an FBI informant posing as an Al-Qaeda go-between, the “evidence” was likely concocted by FBI informants rather than the existence of any tangible threat.

According to the press release ‘Transcript of Press Conference Announcing Florida Terrorism Indictments’ from the Department of Justice on 23 June 2006, payments for services rendered by four informants amounted to over $160,000. Deputy Director John Pistole even admitted that the so-called plot was: “… more aspirational than operational.” The accused did not have any genuine contact with Al-Qaeda, nor did they have explosives or weapons since the only source would have been through the FBI’s informant. The director assured the press that the individuals posed no danger. After the indictments two local community activists were interviewed by Democracy Now! Online news and summarised the ludicrous nature of the charges:

“a lot of show has been made about the militaristic boots that they had… [I]t turns out… the FBI bought them the boots. If you look at the indictment, the biggest piece of evidence… is that the group ,may have taken pictures of a bunch of targets in South Florida. But the guys couldn’t afford their own cameras, so the federal government bought them the cameras… The federal government rented them the cars that they needed to get downtown in order to take the pictures. In addition… the men provided the FBI informant with a list of things they needed in order to blow up these buildings, but in the list they didn’t include any explosives or any materials which could be used to make explosives. So now everyone in Liberty City is joking that the guys were going to kick down the FBI building with their new boots, because they didn’t have any devices which could have been used to explode…” [6]

As many of the informants are illegal immigrants waiting on their entry status or criminals given immunity in return for working for the FBI, there is a ready and willing supply for identifying potential terrorists and as Trevor Aaronson explains: “… in some cases even planting specific ideas for attacks.” He also poses questions that politicians, many academics and the majority of mainstream journalists have not seen fit to ask, namely: “How many of these would-be terrorists would have acted were it not for an FBI agent provocateur helping them? Is it possible that the FBI is creating the very enemy we fear?” And most importantly: “Federal officials say they are protecting Americans with these operations—but from whom? Real terrorists, or dupes like Nafis, who appear unlikely to have the capacity for terrorism were it not for FBI agents providing the opportunity and means?” [7]

Occupy Wall Street© unknown

Even the Occupy Wall Street Movement has been embroiled in the same entrapment procedures. The FBI has blew its own its own trumpet all over the media and claimed it had once again foiled a terrorist plot, this time, to blow up a Cleveland bridge. Five members of Occupy Cleveland: Douglas Wright, 26, Brandon Baxter, 20, Connor Stevens, 20, Anthony Hayne, 35, and Joshua Skelly 24, were each sentenced to between 6-11 years charged with conspiracy and the use of explosive materials. Despite cooperating with plea deals given by three of the men, so-called “terrorism enhancements” were used by the presiding judge to increase sentences. Douglas, Brandon and Connor’s appeals were denied. Skelly rejected a plea bargain and chose to take it to trail. Consequently, he was found guilty on all counts and received a ten year sentence. As of early 2015, he is still waiting for his appeal.

As with so many similar “plots” the usual paid FBI informant featured heavily.  Shaquille Azir had a criminal history (leverage for bargaining) and was placed undercover within the Occupy Movement for several months. He eventually delivered the defendants to the FBI as ready-made “terrorists” all of whom had at one time been homeless or without work. Not only had the FBI provided alcohol, drugs and accommodation for the young men, through Azir, but they told the informant to create a sense of dependency within the group with various promises of assistance tailored to their individual needs. It seems Azir had his job cut out to get them interested.  According to the website:  www.cleveland4solidarity.org set up as a campaign to free the men: “They all continue to fight against the government’s attempt to brand them as terrorists and to expose the techniques of entrapment employed by the FBI and their informants.”  The case of one of many, all of which follow the same patterns. [8]

occupycleveland5L-R: Connor Stevens, Brandon Baxter, Douglas Wright, Anthony Hayne (now released) and Joshua Stafford

There are many other cases popping up in America and Europe. One of the most important was the April 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings which saw the entrapment and framing of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev – a classic false flag operation designed to dupe the public and engender maximum reaction for domestic and geopolitical ends. [9]

So, how did it come to this? Like most ponerological symptoms they infect the body politik very quickly.

Stemming from the 1970’s and 80’s sting operations of the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) the FBI gradually came under its jurisdiction in the face of increasing trade in illicit drugs. The terrorist sting is based on these drug raids with certain differences that make the practice highly controversial. Briefcases full of cocaine or heroin were substituted with empty ones in front of hidden surveillance cameras after which the agents would pounce on their unsuspecting criminals. This defined raids for decades and which were faithfully reproduced in Hollywood cinemas. Now, the terrorist sting generally involves faulty guns and dud bombs. Aaronson points out the fundamental flaw in terrorist stings compared to drugs raids and that which leads to a progressive corruption of the already faulty principles on which they are based:

“In drug stings, federal law enforcement officials assume that any buyer caught in a sting would have been able to buy or sell drugs elsewhere had they not fallen into the FBI trap. The numbers support this assumption. In 2010, the most recent year for which data is available, the DEA seized 29,179 kilograms, or 64,328 pounds, of cocaine in the United States.

In terrorism stings, however, federal law enforcement officials assume that any would-be terrorists caught would have been able to acquire the means elsewhere to carry out their violent plans had they not been ensnared by the FBI. The problem with this assumption is that no data exists to support it—and in fact what data is available often suggests the opposite.

Few of the more than 150 defendants indicted and convicted this way since 9/11 had any connection to terrorists, evidence showed, and those that did have connections, however tangential, lacked the capacity to launch attacks on their own. Of the more that 150 defendants, an FBI informant not only led one of every three terrorist plots, but also provided all the necessary weapons, money, and transportation.

The informant goaded them on the whole time, encouraging the pair with lines like: ‘We will teach these bastards a good lesson.” For his work on the case, he received $100,000 from the FBI.’ ” [10]

Indeed, with an annual budget of $3 billion the FBI has both an ideological and financial incentive for keeping the war on terror mythology entrenched in the American public’s psyche. In order to find out how many of these “terrorists” would have acted without the entrapment ruse, Aaronson, with the help of a research assistant: “… built a database of more than 500 terrorism prosecutions since 9/11, looking closely and critically at every terrorism case brought into federal courts during the past decade.” Thousands of pages of court records were carefully analysed until a coherent pattern emerged. They found that: “… nearly half of all terrorism cases since 9/11 involved informants, many of them paid as much as $100,000 per assignment by the FBI.” The research team also found that: “… 49 defendants had participated in plots led by an FBI agent provocateur, and that number has continued to rise since.” What is more, as Muslim targets held particular personality types so too the informants. A typical pattern and profile of each were matched together.

The following typifies the patterns and personality profiles involved:

The Gold digger: Pattern: Target is broke and thinks he can make big money by catering to informant’s suggestions.

The Convert: Pattern: Target is a newcomer to Islam with only a rudimentary understanding of the religion; often also broke and/or homeless.

The Oath Taker: Pattern: Target swears a fictitious Al Qaeda oath made up by informant; is charged and convicted based on that oath

The Car Bomber: Pattern: Target and informant hatch plot together; FBI supplies vehicle, “explosives,” and phone to trigger the supposed bomb.

The Trainee: Pattern: FBI agent or informant offers to train target as a jihadist, most often via weapons instruction and bodybuilding.

The Subway Bomber: Pattern: With the exception of one attempt to bomb the New York City subway, all the headline-grabbing subway “plots” you’ve heard of were FBI-led nonstarters. [11]

The New York Times in 2012 reiterated the suspicion that it is highly unlikely that these young men would have had the means to execute terrorist plots “… without substantial assistance from the government.” [12] 

Just like the sexual predators in society, from occult ritual abuse to inter-generational abuse the idea promoted is that the lone paedophile and child rapist generally act alone. So too with the “lone wolf” terrorist as a useful asset to keep the cogs turning. Dupes or patsies need to found and groomed which is why the FBI uses its vast network of spies and the NSA’s surveillance to identify locate and monitor tomorrow’s disenfranchised Muslims with chips on their shoulders. Spies are embedded in every Mosque in the US are paid to profile those young men with anti-American views and ripe for radicalisation, thus suitable for sting operations. This is also occurring online across the breadth of social networks (See: Police State Amerika I: Facebook Thought Police…)

Under President Barack Obama’s National Security and Surveillance State, entrapment continues to grow, with a very wide definition as to who exactly is a terrorist. During the tail-end of the George W. Bush’s tenure the number of operations markedly decreased but since Obama’s presidency in January 2009, sting operations have not only resumed but increased in frequency. During Obama’s first term in office, the Justice Department prosecuted more than 75 targets of terrorism stings. Trevor Aaronson discovered that as an adjunct to Obama’s extrajudicial assassination teams, arrests from terrorism stings occur: “… at a rate of about one every 60 days, suggesting either that there are a lot of ineffective terrorists in the United States, or that the FBI has become effective at creating the very enemy it is hunting.”

worldmap1

Global Terrorism 2013. Red hotspots are combinations of incidents, fatalities and injuries. Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan are the primary countries exhibiting terrorism hotspots. | Source: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START). (2013). Global Terrorism Database [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd

Even if we were to believe that somehow the history of terrorism is defined purely in terms of religious extremism seeking to enforce its will, we’d be barking up the wrong tree on this one too. Religious fundamentalism does not spontaneously arrive. In the vast majority of historical cases a vacuum emerges out of the chaos of economic depression, famine and most frequently from the influence of invading forces. In the last forty years British and American invasions have increased the likelihood of religious fundamentalism and the rise of terrorist groups simply through their neo-colonial ambitions. Consequently. these terrorist groups have been indirectly or directly created and further encouraged by Western powers.

It is foreign occupation which fuels terrorism not the perceived spectre of Islamism or any other extremist grouping; they are secondary results of policies which destabilise, balkanise and create collective trauma. These conclusions have been stated by researchers across the political divide for some years but only recently has it been shown beyond any doubt, that engaging in drone strikes and so-called interventionist polices in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism, without exception. At higher levels of Pathocracy this is fully understood and required while at the lower levels of their followers’ greed and ignorance is enough to maintain these destructive dynamics. Factor in geopolitical plans stretching back many decades to claim the Middle East for ideological aims, to exploit resources such as natural gas, oil and minerals and you have all the reasons you need for the continuance of civilian atrocities, year after year.

Taking into account the presence of intelligence operatives and informants responsible for encouraging suicide attacks and those which occur “spontaneously”, extensive research published by the University of Chicago prove that over 95 percent of all attacks are in response to foreign occupation. [13]  The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) the Global Terrorism Database hosted at the University of Maryland has precise statistical data which supports the University of Chicago’s own findings. It is the most comprehensive open source terrorism database available to journalists and civilians alike. The results are a clear indictment of US and NATO foreign policy, all of which show a massive increase in terrorism since the Global War on Terror began 14 years ago. These charts below show the number of terrorist attacks recorded in the following countries:

alqaedaincidentsovertime_iraqIraq

terrorism_in_Afghanistan_since_2004Afghanistan

terrorism_in_the_Middle-EastMiddle East

terrorism_in_SouthAsiaAsia

su_saharanAfrica_terrorismovertimeAfrica

terrorism_worldwideSharp rise in Global terrorism since 2004

Notice the sharp peak in each region. For the Middle East and predominantly Iraq, so-called terrorism shot up during 2002-2003, the year of the Invasion by US and coalition forces. Afghanistan saw a sharp ascent from 2001 and another rapid incline in 2010 following the large-scale increases in military operations against the Taliban by the Afghan and US coalition forces. Obama sent a further 30,000 troops in that year. Asia and Africa in 2004 both saw massive geo-strategic grab for resources by US-NATO under cover of humanitarian pretexts and false flag events. United States Africa Command, (U.S. AFRICOM) was operational by 2007 and established as cover for strategic control of the Continent. It is in this year we see a huge spike lasting until 2013. This has obviously excluded the horror of ISIL – the latest creation of Western Intelligence black operations. Judging by the events of 2014 we can only summise that we will see a huge corresponding spike when the new data is in.

All the charts show a parallel increase in terrorism and / or insurgency. Have a look at the following chart which illustrates just how false flag terrorism and grassroots insurgency follows the US and NATO forces around and directly related to power plays for their resources. Cause and effect?

terrorism_iraq_afgh_1974_2013

Source: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START). (2013). Global Terrorism Database [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd

alqaeda_incidentsovertimeGlobal Al-Qaeda attacks since 1990s – 2012

isis attacks2007_2013ISIS/ISIL attacks in Iraq 2006 -2012

alqaedaincidentsovertime_iraqAl-Qaeda attacks in Iraq from September 2001-2013

privatecitizensAttacks on Private Citizens & Property  (Most attacks in Pakistan and Iraq)

In these set of charts we can see a similar trajectory. As Al-Qaeda has outlived its usefulness in the region, covert funding by Western governments’ military intelligence and private outsourcing were stepped up for Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS/ISIL) taking over the mantle of the Global Terror demon. Just as Al-Qaeda begins to wane, ISIL begins its rapid ascent with billions of dollars seemingly arriving from nowhere in 2006, to reach a peak in 2009 with the subsequent tales of horror and atrocity, all of which is entirely authentic, though not the methods of media propagation. This is designed to ramp up the emotional response which military powers can use to ride their imperial desires. The sharp dip in incidents was merely a re-fuelling prior to another sharp increase in terror across the Middle East and Africa in 2014-2015. Through all this, carefully designed civilian attacks and the loss of property has suffered an exponential rise for several decades. Once again, this took off in 2004 as the West and its banks launched their quest for perpetual war.The Global population bears the brunt of these crimes. | Source: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START). (2013). Global Terrorism Database [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd


Now that Al-Qaeda, as America’s primary outsourced terror collective has been transferred to ISIL it seems the war hawks at the Council on Foreign Relations want to let bygones be bygones and make the terrorist organisation a firm friend so that things aren’t too complicated for us all. Barek Mendelsohn writing in CFR’s journal Foreign Affairs that due understanding should be exercised since Al-Qaeda is after all the “enemy of our enemy” and that:

“… the instability in the Middle East following the Arab revolutions and the meteoric rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) require that Washington rethink its policy toward al Qaeda, particularly its targeting of Zawahiri. Destabilizing al Qaeda at this time may in fact work against U.S. efforts to defeat ISIS … [America’s] interests would be better served by keeping the terrorist organization afloat and Zawahiri alive.” [14]

The irony is so pathological you just couldn’t make it up.

Foreign occupation is the main cause of terrorism. It is expedient for invading powers to keep populations back home locked in fear and seeking revenge while the youth of both domestic and foreign populations become open to radicalisation, similarly encouraged by entrapment plots by the FBI and world intelligence agencies. Regimes with suitably strategic dividends are destabilised and plunged into civil war so that resources can be extracted. Selling these invasions under humanitarian interventions or seeking retribution for a perceived atrocity against “democracy” are the usual pretexts.

This is the state of the world we live in. It is a direct result of the Grand-Daddy of false-flag attacks which took place on September 11th, 2001 and which re-ordered the world according to pathocratic principles of paranoia, greed, separation and asymmetric warfare. Thanks to the Israel and its Bush-Cheney and Obama-Biden administrations, the constitution and Bill of Rights have been shredded, where inverted totalitarianism is becoming normalised.

The next post will see, in graphic detail, how the United States of America is sliding into a full-blown police state.

 


Notes

[1]Terror Factory, The: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism By Trevor Aaronson, IG Publishing (2015 edition)| ISBN-10: 1935439960.
[2] ‘Inside the Terror Factory’ By Trevor Aaronson, January 11, 2013, Mother Jones| http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/terror-factory-fbi-trevor-aaronson-book
[3] ‘Newburgh Four: poor, black, and jailed under FBI ‘entrapment’ tactics’ By Paul Harris, The Guardian, December 12, 20013. | http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/dec/12/newburgh-four-fbi-entrapment-terror
[4] ‘It’s the Wrong Time to be a Muslim in America – The Troubling Case of the Fort Dix Five’ by Stephen Lendman, Counterpunch, December 31 2008.
[5]’Can Authorities Cut Off Utilities And Pose As Repairmen To Search A Home?’ October 29, 2014. NPR News. http://www.npr.org/
[6]‘Aspirational Rather than Operational’ – 7 Arrested in Miami Terror Plot. Democracy Now! 2007.
[7]op.cit. Aaronson.
[8]’Did the FBI Use Occupy Cleveland Case to Equate Activism with Terrorism?’ By Kris Hermes, Alternet, September 12, 2012.]
[9]The event demands a book in itself and due to brevity, it will not be covered in this present series. Suffice to say, if you wish follow up and research this subject yourself the following books and articles are recommended: Manufactured Terror: The Boston Marathon Bombings, Sandy Hook, Aurora Shooting and Other False Flag Terror Attacks by Joe Quinn and Niall Bradley; ‘False flag theater: Boston bombing involves clearly staged carnage’ By Shelia Casey, May 8, 2013| ‘Boston Bombings ‘set-up’: Mother of patsies says sons groomed by FBI ‘Russia Today, 20 Apr 2013. | “False-flag” meme goes mainstream with Boston Marathon bombing, Kevin Barrett, Veteran’s Today/Press TV, 17 Apr 2013 | ‘Boston Bombings: The most obvious staged event since 9/11’, The Caterpillar Flys, 29 Apr 2013. | ‘Were The Boston Marathon Bombers ‘Mind Controlled’?’ By Joe Quinn, Sott.net, 11 Jan 2014.
[10] p.32; Aaronson; The Terror Factory.
[11] ‘The Best Terrorists Money Can Buy’ – Broke-ass losers. Big talkers. Ninja wannabes. How dangerous are the FBI’s sting targets?’ By Trevor Aaronson, Mother Jones, September/October 2011 Issue.
[12] ‘Man Is Charged With Plotting to Bomb Federal Reserve Bank in Manhattan’ By MOSI SECRET and WILLIAM K. RASHBAUMOCT.The New York Times 2012. October 17, 2012.
[13]Cutting the Fuse: The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It (2010) by Robert A. Pape and James K. Feldman, Chicago University press.
[14] ‘Accepting Al Qaeda’ The Enemy of the United States’ Enemy’ By Barak Mendelsohn, Foreign Affairs, March 9, 2015.

The Terror Industry (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

 If you’re submitting budget proposals for a law enforcement agency, for an intelligence agency, you’re not going to submit the proposal that ‘We won the war on terror and everything’s great,’ cuz the first thing that’s gonna happen is your budget’s gonna be cut in half. You know, it’s my opposite of Jesse Jackson’s ‘Keep Hope Alive’—it’s ‘Keep Fear Alive.’ Keep it alive.”

former FBI assistant director Thomas Fuentes


twin-towersIt took over 35 years for the majority of Americans to realise that factions within their own government assassinated John F. Kennedy. Not exactly a hopeful premise from which to start. It was at this juncture that the ground was laid for a more serious threat to the freedoms of not just the American Republic but to the stability of the whole world. More than 14 years have passed since the September 11 attacks and more people than ever are studying the official story and coming away with many more questions than answers.

Opinion polls on 911 vary greatly, both in terms of the questions asked and the size of the number of respondents. Back in 2006 more than a third of the American public suspected that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East. [1] One in seven people in the UK believe the US government staged 9/11 and a recent poll sponsored by the German magazine Welt der Wunder resulted in 89 percent of the respondents saying they don’t believe the US government has told the whole truth about 9/11. [2] Interestingly, for the purveyors of State protection, a 2012 online poll by The Franklin Centre Library revealed that 77 percent thought 11 years after 9/11 that we were all less safe than before. [3]

With 75 top professors and leading scientists claiming  9/11 was ‘inside job’ in 2014, it appears academia is catching up with the public, though at a snails space. A more respectable 2,322 architects and structural engineers have also expressed their disbelief in all or some of the aspects of the official story over at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 truth (ae911truth.org/). There are hundreds of other 9/11 website organisations and non-profit educational charities who take issue with the governments version ranging from grassroots to academic.

The online encyclopedia of Wikipedia, (censored and guarded by suitable official story gatekeepers) provides the best summary of the US government and media-led “conspiracy theory” which has lodged itself in the public mind. The following represents the standard synopsis which is constantly wheeled out from media outlets and taken as the consensus.

Once upon a time…

“The September 11 attacks (also referred to as September 11, September 11th, or 9/11) were a series of four coordinated suicide attacks upon the United States in New York City and the Washington, D.C. areas on September 11, 2001. On that Tuesday morning, 19 terrorists from the Islamist militant group Al-Qaeda hijacked four passenger jets. The hijackers intentionally flew two of those planes, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, into the North and South towers of the World Trade Center complex in New York City; both towers collapsed within two hours. The hijackers also intentionally crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, and intended to pilot the fourth hijacked jet, United Airlines Flight 93, into the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.; however, the plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after its passengers attempted to take control of the jet from the hijackers. Nearly 3,000 people died in the attacks, including all 227 civilians and 19 hijackers aboard the four planes. At the time of the attacks, media reports suggested that perhaps tens of thousands might have been killed, and the total number of casualties remained unclear for several days.

Suspicion quickly fell on Al-Qaeda, and in 2004, the group’s leader, Osama bin Laden, who had initially denied involvement, claimed responsibility for the attacks. Al-Qaeda and bin Laden cited U.S. support of Israel, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, and sanctions against Iraq as motives for the attacks. The United States responded to the attacks by launching the War on Terror and invading Afghanistan to depose the Taliban, which had harbored Al-Qaeda. Many countries strengthened their anti-terrorism legislation and expanded law enforcement powers. In May 2011, after years at large, bin Laden was located and killed.” [4]

So, let’s get this straight…

… What we are being told is that a handful of mostly Saudi Arabians without military or intelligence training, acting independently of government or Intel agencies, managed to outsmart the whole Anglo-American Intelligence network, Israel’s MOSSAD and NATO; as well as the National Security Agency with its massive surveillance of connected networks spanning the globe. Let’s add to this the so-called “failures” from the National Security Council; US Airport security; NORAD, Air Traffic Control and the US Air Force. Let’s not forget the world’s most powerful defence system overseen by the world’s greatest superpower which just happened to allow a handful of Arabs with minimal pilot’s training, armed with box-cutters fly two jumbo jet airliners into the financial heart of downtown New York exploding into the most famous icons of world trade, whilst another employed an impossible flight manoeuvre in order to crash into the military defence centre of the most powerful nation on earth. Then, just before Obama’s election time, Osama Bin Laden, a known CIA asset and a former close business associate of the Bush family is conveniently found after over a decade of being “on the run”. Despite being the most wanted terrorist on earth, he is not questioned – like so many in Guantanamo Bay who appear to be mostly innocent yet tortured nonetheless – he is assassinated and promptly dumped at sea. Mission accomplished.

dreamstime_s_21682504

© Rkaphotography | Dreamstime.com – US Wars Are State Sponsored Terrorism Photo

That has to be the worst conspiracy theory ever to insult the intelligence of a sixth grader.

Yet, that is the official story we are expected to accept – without question. Most shocking of all, that’s exactly what so many people do: accept a story that simply cannot be true. Moreover, to add insult to injury and the memory of the dead, no proposal for an independent investigation into why the most monumental “failure” in National Security could have happened has arisen from the President, Congress, the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the MSM; nor has anyone been reprimanded, let alone prosecuted. The reality has been constant resistance, stone-walling, disinformation, propaganda, threats, suicides, and murders. Add to the mix are the corrupted commissions and inquiries whose only remit is to push the official story that must be made to fit into official culture. Of course, such a coup d’état could never have been accomplished if societies hadn’t been suitably tenderized by decades of social engineering. Part of that success has been due to the global War on Terror, or “overseas contingency operations” as Obama likes to call it.

Al-Qaeda and the global war on terror is the continuance of a “Strategy of Tension,” which refers to a period in Italy from 1969 to 1974, which suffered a series of terrorist attacks with heavy civilian casualties. It was an offshoot of what has been called Operation Gladio and their state-sponsored terror teams in Europe. [5] The strategy had its roots in fascist beliefs of Synarchism within government, military and intelligence networks. Their objective was to ruthlessly exploit underlying fears and grievances in European nations so that people would believe that the attacks were carried out by a communist insurgency within Europe. Many of these terrorist organisations went underground and resurfaced to be periodically stimulated by their masters for bespoke objectives. They do not just arise out of the blue. Much like the ebb and flow of paedophile and sex abuse networks, terrorist atrocities are given the required camouflage so that the perpetrators and their handlers remain in the shadows.

There are many populist and academic sources that will prove the phoney nature of Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. Of particular note is the acclaimed UK documentary The Power of Nightmares by Adam Curtis Top where CIA officials openly admit that the creation and history of Al-Qaeda as a terrorist network is a fabrication. [6] As former French intelligence officer Major Pierre-Henry Bunel confirms:

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money.” [7]

The CIA has used this ghost to buttress the fantasy that is Al-Qaeda (and the new proxy private army called ISIL), employing fake media reports and video appearances clearly from persons other than bin Laden himself which have fed into the aftermath of the new pearl harbour that was 9/11. [8] Even the name of “Al-Qaeda/Al-Qaida” has produced confusion, even dark amusement in Arab circles as one commentator wryly observed: “You have heard before that ‘Al-Qaeda’ roughly translates into ‘the base,’ but were you aware that ‘Ana raicha Al Qaeda’ is Arabic colloquial for ‘I’m going to the toilet’? Would hardened terrorists hell bent on the destruction of the west name their organization after a euphemism for taking a shit?” [9]

A fair point.

The common tactic that has been referred to before is known as the Hegelian Dialectic, though in truth Hegel described social changes rather than pointed manipulation in this context. However, it serves a suitable framework for the thinking behind state-sponsored terrorism which goes something like this:

1. The government creates or exploits a problem then attributes blame to others.

2. The populace react by asking the government for protection and help.

3. The government offers the solution that was planned long before the crisis.

4. Outcome: Rights and liberties are exchanged for the illusion of protection and help.

This is the geopolitical paradigm of our times largely unknown by the public, though thanks to the internet this is gradually changing. Government and military agencies at the mid to lower levels are equally unaware of this old formula which writer G. Edward Griffin described as: “… not a war on terrorism to defend freedom, but a war on freedom that requires the defense of terrorism.” [10] Meantime, the PR from the MSM and academia is still pushing the idea that America and Europe are overrun with teeth-gnashing terrorists hell-bent in renting asunder the fabric of our Western way of life. Since what is left of any civil rights in Europe and the US constitution has been eviscerated by the very same authorities who peddle these myths then might there be some mileage in the idea that they have something to gain from it all? For anyone who has taken the time to research the genesis of terrorism and the present-day nonsense passing for terrorist laws in the United States it is beyond doubt that the only thing American and European people need to fear is their governments.

According to a basic statistical analysis from 2013 the actual percentage of the US population who may be classified as a terrorist is around 0.00016%, or about 1 in 624,297 people. In this context, the writer Marc Salvo makes a pertinent observation about this topsy-turvy terror game when he said just a few months ago: “We’re not suggesting that terrorism doesn’t exist, but considering that 1 in 1000 Americans in 2010 were the subject of police misconduct ranging from excessive force beatings and murder to sexual assault and false arrest, perhaps the government should turn its surveillance on itself, rather than the 99.9% of Americans who want nothing more than to be left alone.” [11]

That is not to say there are not genuine terrorist plots, but the key issue here is what prevents terrorism from occurring and what actively encourages it? We know that invading Syria or Iraq has provided a massive surge of terrorist cells in those countries as a result and a bleed-through must have occurred in America and Europe. However, like some police trawling and entrapment operations in the UK, the lines between what is a genuine terrorist plot and creating home grown fanatics is more than blurred, it continues to stoke the needed fear and high profits necessary to sustain a terror industry.

As Al-Qaeda is wound down, ISIS takes over, funded with billions of dollars: a new brand with new bloody atrocities to market …

 


Notes

[1] ‘New National Poll: 36percent of Americans Believe 9/11 Was an Inside Job’ By Thomas Hargrove, Scripps Howard News Service Seattle. August 2, 2006.
[2] ‘One in seven believe U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks in conspiracy’- The belief is more common among younger people, with a quarter of 16 to 24-year-olds subscribing to the theory By Alanah Eriksen, Daily Mail, 29 August 2011 | ‘German Poll: 89percent Question 9/11’ Welt-der-Wunder, January 24, 2011, 9/11 Truth News.
[3] ‘9/11 Online Poll’ The Franklin Center, September 11, 2012. http://www.franklincenterblog.wordpress.com
[4] ‘September 11th Attacks’www.wikipedia.com ( A far better starting point for an alternative “wikipedia” version of 9/11 can be found at wikispooks.)
[5] “Operation Gladio is undisputed historical fact. Gladio was part of a post-World War II program set up by the CIA and NATO supposedly to thwart future Soviet/communist invasions or influence in Italy and Western Europe. In fact, it became a state-sponsored right-wing terrorist network, involved in false flag operations and the subversion of democracy.
The existence of Gladio was confirmed and admitted by the Italian government in 1990, after a judge, Felice Casson, discovered the network in the course of his investigations into right-wing terrorism. Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti admitted Gladio’s existence but tried to minimize its significance.
The main function of the Gladio-style groups, in the absence of Soviet invasion, seems to have been to discredit left-wing groups and politicians through the use of “the strategy of tension,” including false-flag terrorism. … The aim was to instill fear into the populace while framing communist and left-wing political opponents for terrorist atrocities.” – Operation GladioNATO/CIA “Stay-Behind” Secret Armies/ Truth Move / International Truth Movement, http://www.truthmove.org/content/operation-gladio/
[6] A partial listing for your own research follows: The Power of Nightmares BBC documentary by Adam Curtis. This is freely available to watch from various sources on the internet. ‘Al Qaeda and the ‘War on Terrorism’’ By Michel Chossudovsky, January 20, 2008. The Centre for Global Research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7718 and read the updated version of his 2005 book: America’s War on Terrorism by Michel Chossudovsky,| ISBN 0-9737147-1-9 2005. wwwglobalresearch.ca.: “…new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy. According to Chossudovsky, the ‘war on terrorism’ is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex. September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington’s agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.” | See also: ‘Divide and Conquer: The Anglo-American Imperial Project’ by Andrew G. Marshall, Global Research, July 10, 2008 and ‘The Myth Of The Palestinian Suicide Bomber’ By Joe Quinn, Sott.net, 29 Jan 2007.
[7] ‘Al Qaeda: The Database’ by Pierre-Henry Bunel, Wayne Masden report November 18 2005. “In yet another example of what happens to those who challenge the system, in December 2001, Maj. Pierre-Henri Bunel was convicted by a secret French military court of passing classified documents that identified potential NATO bombing targets in Serbia to a Serbian agent during the Kosovo war in 1998. Bunel’s case was transferred from a civilian court to keep the details of the case classified. Bunel’s character witnesses and psychologists notwithstanding, the system “got him” for telling the truth about Al Qaeda and who has actually been behind the terrorist attacks commonly blamed on that group. It is noteworthy that that Yugoslav government, the government with whom Bunel was asserted by the French government to have shared information, claimed that Albanian and Bosnian guerrillas in the Balkans were being backed by elements of “Al Qaeda.” We now know that these guerrillas were being backed by money provided by the Bosnian Defense Fund, an entity established as a special fund at Bush-influenced Riggs Bank and directed by Richard Perle and Douglas Feith.”
[8] ‘Researcher: Bin Laden’s beard is real, video is not’ – Digital evidence supports the theory that Al-Qaida is recycling old footage to create new messages. Cnet.com September 12, 2007.
[9] ‘Existence of ‘Al-Qaeda’ Is Crap; Quite Literally’ – Did Osama really choose to name his terror network after potty humor or was it a computer database he used to chat with his CIA handlers? By Paul Joseph Watson, PrisonPlanet.com| October 6 2006: “The origins of the name “Al-Qaeda,” and its real arabic connotations prove that every time the Bush administration, Fox News, or any individual who cites the threat of ‘Al-Qaeda,’ as a mandate for war and domestic authoritarianism, they are propagating the myth that such a group ever existed.
An organization by the name of “Al-Qaeda” does not exist and has never existed outside a falsely coined collective term for offshoot loose knit terror cells, the majority of which are guided by the Pakistani ISI, Mossad, the Saudis, MI6 and the CIA, that were created in response to America’s actions after 9/11 – as the recent NIE report shows. According to the BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares, the infamous footage of Bin Laden marching around with armed soldiers was a ruse on the part of Osama himself, graciously propagated by the lapdog press, in which actors were hired off the streets, given uniforms and guns and told to look aggressive.” […]
[10] ‘The Chasm: The Future Is Calling’ (Part One) by G. Edward Griffin 2003, Revised March 17, 2011.
[11] ‘Odds That You Are a Terrorist: 1 in 624,297’ By Mac Slavo, SHTFplan.com, October 18th, 2013.

Save

9/11: The Point of No Return?

By M.K. Styllinski

 “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty.”

 – President G.W. Bush, at the United Nations, November 10, 2001


9-11_Truth_2Note: Let it be said right at the start: I am no 9/11 scholar. This is merely an attempt to refresh our minds about the nature of the September 11th attacks in the context of an emerging Pathocracy and the subjects previously discussed. Therefore, what follows in this series is in no way a comprehensive analysis of what is, after all a vast topic. That said, as part of an exploration of why humanity stands at the threshold of massive change, it would be foolish not to include a summary of the key elements involved in such a global marker. I hope the following posts help to at least clarify the subject for those beginning to take a serious look at the nature of our reality in this context.


September 11th 2001 and the World Trade Centre attacks are a signpost in the fortunes of social control. It was the day – perhaps more than any other in the last two hundred years – that saw geo-strategy and our societies change for the worse. With any major act of synthetic terror there is a window of opportunity to perceive the objective reality behind the noise and smoke before Official Culture brings the shutters down once more. Since 2001, anyone who has taken the time to carefully sift through the discrepancies, distortions and obvious lies of the official conspiracy theory will have to navigate through the minefield of individual and collective belief as to how the world works. We bridle at accusations that our thinking is often just second or third hand opinion lifted from mainstream radio, T.V., newspapers or blogs. Seldom do we truly question what we are being force-fed through the constant osmosis of “news”. What the mainstream media (MSM) and most of current academia believe doesn’t just impinge on our own evaluations but very often exclusively determines the quality and direction of our opinions. This is why the media has such a crucial role to play in the correct presentation and dissemination of information.

Unfortunately, we cannot trust the MSM to provide unbiased and objective analysis due to a variety of conflicting interests from corporate, government and Psychological Operations teams (PSYOPS) embedded in media institutions for decades and the internet since its inception. Our news is layered over with self-censorship and journalistic pride that will not touch subjects deemed taboo for fear of losing their job or even worse, losing respect and prestige so coveted in their respective fields. As a result, there are well-known journalists and academics for which the subject of 9/11 is off-limits because it is has evolved into such a “hot potato” of controversy that to address it would mean the end of their social standing.

It is also true that certain persons still operate from a hopelessly juvenile dictionary which they still prefer to use when appraising personal and external realities. They derive comfort in overly simplistic versions of national and international events, despite the apparent expertise and erudition in their chosen field. Their beliefs come first and reality is tailored towards it. They cannot and will not sanction the idea that a coup d’état could have taken place on September 11th and no amount of reasoning will alter such a position. The often smug, post-modern denials and ad hominem attacks are used as a battering ram against those wishing to find the truth and if you start to make some headway in connecting the dots you will likely be on the end of carefully targeted character assassination by the fearful and ill-informed.

Official Culture determines what is or isn’t possible regarding the nature of governments and the military-intelligence apparatus, which means an almost impenetrable wall preventing critical analysis and reasoned discourse. What is now labelled the 9/11 Truth Movement is no exception, having been thoroughly infiltrated by paid CoIntelpro agents tasked with sowing the seeds of in-fighting and disinformation.

Talk show host and “king of conspiracy theory”, Alex Jones is a prime example. Famous for his cringe-making rants and bombastic behaviour and extremely commercial internet websites, he manages to switch off anyone interested in discovering the objective truth about our world, though he naturally appeals to those of high school age just waking up to the world.  Jones exists to hoover up any and all information pertaining to conspiracy-related topics and thus helps to tarnish these subjects by association. If he happens to get invited on mainstream television he is so over the top and reactionary that any rational conversation is impossible. This is how CoIntelpro works: whether a conscious or unconscious agent, both will assist to deflect, distort and disinform.

alex_jones

Alex Jones Talk show host and “conspiracy king”.

Similarly, Go to the internet pages of the very popular encyclopaedia Wikipedia and search for the pages on 9/11 and you will come away thinking that the 9/11 Truth Movement is inhabited only by delusional nerds, that the official story is beyond repute and supported by cast-iron facts. Wikipedia is visited by millions of people every day who might be persuaded by the obviously skewed presentation; where voluminous pages expound on the official story, affording little time for critical appraisal and alternative arguments.

In reality, there are many well qualified, experienced, rational and sincere persons for whom the official story of 9/11 does not and cannot possibly be anything but a fictional account. Anyone who approaches the subject with an open but skeptical mind and are able to think critically about this issue will inevitably come away with the disturbing conclusion that something is very wrong with the narrative we have been sold. Yet, there is a constant maintenance of the official story by the MSM and governments world-wide.

Once you start digging, the propaganda, blatant lies, fallacies and distortions are so painfully obvious to those who take the time, that it becomes truly shocking how deeply managed our culture truly is. And be assured, you don’t have to go very far before the central premise of the official story shows itself to be no more than a house of cards waiting to tumble. But fear is the cement upon which the bricks of belief can be constructed. And it is sometimes terrifying to have all that one thought good and true scattered to the wind. But it must be done if we are to have any hope at all going beyond an illusion of democracy.


“I Believe…”

Two words which have determined the course of history.

We humans have a curious predisposition to seek belief instead of facts. All actions or non-actions are based around either direct verification by experience and attention to supporting evidence or a preference for belief which includes neither. Belief systems set a demarcation line that cannot be crossed. One is happy in one’s belief and reality defines it.  Our wishful thinking tends to offer temporary comfort from the demons in our subconscious shadows. The wish to believe provides it with a formal structure which we can re-affirm in the outer world, surrounding ourselves with others who have chosen the same “consensus” through which to live their lives. Threats to those constructs are often resisted with logical fallacies and emotional reactions:

“Because the Bible says so and the Bible is the word of God.”

“I believe in Science. If there is no empirical proof then as far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t exist.”

“You don’t believe in all that 911 conspiracy theory nonsense do you?”

Peer groups and tribal memberships provide a rich reservoir of socio-cultural knowledge offering a ready template for custom-made ideologies. This is gradually adapted to one’s own personality and conditioned by long-term memory. If it fits with our need to survive in society, perhaps buffering us from pain, fear and uncertainty, then our social position, values, and objectives will conform to it. Conformity – at whatever degree or level – is a defining factor accompanied by a dictionary of interpretation which must exclude other forms of knowledge. When such a dictionary becomes out-dated and in conflict with the facts – even though new knowledge lies alongside it – that interpretation becomes a juvenile one, locked into the past and resistant to change.

Change, as we all know, can be very painful.

dreamstime_m_20965675© Krutoeva | Dreamstime.com – Through Rose Colored Glasses Photo

When assumption and ignorance are chosen as a way to protect ourselves from uncertainty, responsibility and unpleasant memories then abstract ideas provide the tool for social engineering and the seeds for ponerological influences. It logically follows that one’s beliefs can facilitate directions which – though founded on good intentions and “Christian principles” – may not be in the individual’s, groups’ or societies’ best interests. Any belief tends to reduce the potential for creative choices by limiting the field of awareness and therefore the quality of consciousness.

Psychopaths, social dominators and authoritarian personalities cling to their beliefs as a confirmation of their chosen, highly subjective reality. They serve any figure of authority be it a new age guru, academic lecturer or any type of leader that confers rewards for obedience. They prefer fantasy rather than what is, especially if, in the authoritarian’s case, it provides certainty against the unknown, however simplistic.

The psychopath will create reality according to his instinctive, primal desires which exclude all else. He will bend and force life into his twisted conceptions, whatever the cost and whatever the stakes. He turns the world into a poker game with guns and aces up his sleeve. Our wish to believe lends him momentum to achieve his goals; the projection of his self-belief is willingly received by those whose inner nature is vulnerable and without foundation. Belief restricts an open system of learning, which often includes suffering. Suffering accompanies self-growth as we discover what is, rather than what we would like it to be.

The world is conspiratorial by nature though this fact has been successfully glossed over by a combination of wishful thinking and perception management. After all, if you want to suggest that the government and its agencies have our best interests at heart then the denigration of those who offer an unprejudiced search for truth outside of traditional corporate controlled media is a standard tactic. It is also pertinent to mention recent university studies which reveal that the 9/11 official story “gatekeepers” fit the profile of irrational and emotionally unstable individuals when exposed to an alternative view of reality, no matter how sensible or logical that reality may be.  In June 17, 2013 online journal 21st Century Wire included a post entitled: ‘New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane, while government dupes are crazy and hostile’. Psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent found that:

“The research … showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.” […] “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

In other words, the stereotype of the conspiracy theorist as lunatic, fringe-fanatic, in fact generally described those who defend the official conspiracy theory provided by the governments and their media outlets.

Political scientist Professor Lance deHaven-Smith’s book Conspiracy Theory in America (2013) published by University of Texas Press provides further insights into the term “conspiracy theory.”

It is a matter of historical record, albeit widely unknown, that the CIA embarked on an illegal propaganda campaign to circulate the phrase so that it became a pejorative term. (See: “In 1967, the CIA Created the Label ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ … to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the ‘Official’ Narrative). So, when people began to question the 1963 assassination of J.F. Kennedy they would be ridiculed and defamed thus providing a psycho-social protection for the subject. As we know, there is nothing more powerful than the herd instinct for self-preservation. In the Professor’s own words: “The CIA’s campaign to popularize the term ‘conspiracy theory’ and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time.”

WTC_smoking_on_9-11

September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers, 2001.

Studies have also shown cognitive dissonance and “confirmation bias” dominates the perceptions of those who prefer to believe in the 9/11 official story and many other official versions of historical conspiracies, despite many of those “theories” since proven to have been conspiracy fact. While hard-core skeptics and self-avowed debunkers tend to exhibit an absolutist  persona backed up by a militant belief in materialist science, what may be at the root of this apparent quest to find the truth is nothing more than an abnormal emphasis on the left brain, a neurological deficiency which limits the ability to see beyond their own authoritarian beliefs. This was revealed in spectacular fashion by Professor Bob Altemeyer’s studies on authoritarian followers.

There remains today a wealth of information on the internet and in published books regarding the events of September 11th 2001. You may be one of those people who consider themselves open-minded and well-read, willing to take on new sources of information in order to learn about our world in order to expand your awareness. Although there has been a sea-change in collective awareness you would still be in the minority. When we approach the subject with an open but skeptical mind, and sift through the media and US government’s official story of September 11th, then we will come up against a “conspiracy theory” that is logically inconsistent, defies the laws of physics, flies in the face of rational, deductive observations and fails to explain the reasons and causes of these events on so many different levels that we will likely suffer a change in our world-view. Depending how inured one is in Official Culture this will result in two emotional responses and the choices which must follow:

1) Shock and cognitive dissonance as a result of one’s cherished beliefs about the world coming under attack and the fear and stress induced. A shoring up of those beliefs may occur, calling a halt to any further research and a determined crystallisation of the official story. Depending on how deep the threat to one’s beliefs the information presents, the seeking out of groups and persons who can bolster and buffer those beliefs will take place where ridicule, disinformation and authoritarian precepts rule the day. No matter how illogical or irrational the stance, nothing must be allowed to penetrate these beliefs since they are bound up with identity.

2) A period of disbelief and sadness, perhaps even an initial rejection, followed by an interlude of reflection and soul-searching. This might lead to a re-visiting of the subject and the determination to find answers. The choice is made to seek a better understanding of the issues involved and arrive at more objective appraisal. The only way to do this properly is to network with others who have also recognised that something is seriously amiss.

That does not imply that all the answers are immediately forthcoming or even correct, only that the government story cannot be true and therefore a new, independent investigation must take place, however improbable such a possibility may be.

This brings us back to the idea that there are two types of people who will gravitate to either an a priori belief and the comfort it offers at the expense of truth, or the ability to think critically while maintaining an open mind – a healthy skepticism if you will. Authoritarians, drawn from both conservative and the liberal, function largely on emotions which are used to defend their worldview. The intent behind any assessment of new information is based not on the search for truth but the need to maintain that belief and thus to “feel good”. Unexamined assumptions inform the reality of fundamentalists or absolutists who prefer order and error to complex truth. Since irrational criteria is used for assessing facts which are filtered through the controlling belief, they cannot be aware of their own indoctrination and dogma.

9-11-2011A

Freedom lights anniversary (wikipedia)

Ideally, true critical thinkers, with a broad knowledge of many fields test the certitude of their conclusions. Experiential knowledge and networking without prejudice acts as the litmus test for evaluations. Lying to themselves does not feature and nor do manipulative appeals to the emotions. Impartiality and objective observation of each opposing camp is analysed while using their heads and their hearts to position themselves fairly, even if it leads to the break-down of a hidden bias or the discovery of a set of assumptions. They are aware of how easily it is to deceive themselves. This latter grouping is lacking in relation to the 9/11 inquiries and related fields – most especially ponerology.

This is what makes the events of 9/11 a highly controversial issue because it is not simply a matter of addressing the gargantuan holes in the government story; it is akin to peeling away the outer layers of an onion which can stimulate a parallel process to occur within ourselves. It is here that we find the crux of the challenge: this process of discovery is potentially more painful than simply pointing out errors in logical reasoning and scientific principles; far more sensitive than addressing social, cultural and geo-political justifications for why the official story doesn’t make sense. As you dig deeper you realise that what we considered to be truth and reality is turned upside down and that is akin to experiencing a form of withdrawal from our addictive, Official Culture. Our faith and trust in our valued institutions and the beliefs – so often based on a false interpretation of history – can be shaken to the core. So much so, that our world-view begins to unravel and thus our sense of self.

If you are one of those who consider themselves outside such cultural shocks then perhaps your particular belief hasn’t been discovered yet. The deceptions inherent in the 9/11 attacks may be easy for you to take on board but there are sure to be other “sacred cows” lying buried …We all have them. When we have not been suitably prepared and these revelations happen too quickly we can fall into loneliness, sadness and even depression as a result of knowing what we would rather not know, perhaps having shielded ourselves from what we knew to be true deep down. Or, we can go to the other extreme and become drunk on the new information, our intellect inflating to the extent it squeezes out emotional nuance and thus proper communication. We become trapped in that particular mirror and over identify with the subject in question, becoming fundamentalist in our quest. 

This is the greatest challenge to the uncovering of information and knowledge regarding 9/11 and other crimes, as it demands that we shine the light on the darkness in the outer world thereby highlighting our own inner complacency. Those factions within the Establishment who may have sanctioned and perpetrated the events of 9/11 rely on the fact that many will not go against a complex and tightly-woven set of beliefs and their societal constructs. This programming instinctively resists any attempts at disclosure and investigation in favour of the status quo. 

dreamstime_m_34143077

© Alphaspirit | Dreamstime.com – Businessman Like An Ostrich Photo

The events of 9/11 are unquestionably a rich field of discourse not just because the world changed into a more paranoid and dangerous place since that tragic event, but because the answers to so many questions about the role and function of government, the media and commerce lie within it. It is the central core from which various paths of deleterious influence fan out, and which can be traced back to providing tangible benefits to a select few. Machiavellian strategies are always in the shadows stimulating these collective traumas in the mass mind and suitably conditioned to accept the solutions proffered, however ridiculous. Qui bono always applies.

After the whitewash of the 9/11 commission, the still deafening silence of much of the MSM and infiltration of the 9/11 Truth Movement by CoIntelpro, it may be that researchers and investigative journalists have lost the initiative they might have had. Every year which goes by gives an advantage to those who perpetrated this ambitious crime. The dire consequences for the American people and for the world in general cannot be overstated. The present police state in the USA and geopolitical events in the Middle East and the Ukraine are testament to this fact.

Despite this, there is hope. More and more people are deciding to think critically about the events of that day and the surrounding geo-political narratives. It will be an arduous task to produce a consensus where it counts regarding the events of that day, let alone push for an independent investigation. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that our social systems have largely evolved to keep us compliant and docile and/or pathological and disturbed. The tranquility of mind and openness necessary to make informed choices on this subject must be hard won, especially when Establishment dynamics largely operate in secrecy along with policies in plain sight which require an understanding of their vocabulary and insider language. Thanks to independent internet journalism the blindfold might be slipping … slowly but surely.

As noted in previous posts, secrecy and conspiracy are the standard pillars holding up our Official Culture. A reminder from historian and researcher Richard M. Dolan will underscore the fact:

“Nearly everything of significance undertaken by the military and intelligence community in the past half-century has occurred in secrecy. The undertaking to build an atomic weapon, better known as the Manhattan Project, remains the great model for all subsequent activities. For more than two years not a single member of Congress knew about it, although its final cost exceeded the then incredible total of $2 billion. During and after the Second World war, other important projects, such as the development of biological weapons, the importation of Nazi scientists, terminal mind control experiments, nationwide interception of mail and cable transmissions of an unwitting populace, infiltration of the media and universities, secret coups, secret wars and assassinations all took place far removed not only from the American public, but from most members of Congress and a few presidents. Indeed, several of the most powerful intelligence agencies were themselves established in secrecy, unknown by the public or Congress for many years.” [1]

Undue secrecy and manipulation on the part of Empire always fails in the end, albeit going underground. The trick will be to predict how and when those roots may rise again. Hindsight is after all, a wonderful thing. But thanks to pioneers in the fields of psychopathy and ponerology we are now seeing a return to ancient wisdom, which, down through the ages may have been alerting us to the evil in our midst. That’s where a finely-tuned psycho-social conscience is crucial in preventing the ascendance of psychopaths in power, and when it becomes a matter of soul survival for the individual and his culture.

So, with this in mind, how did it get to a state of affairs where the American public (and much of the world) could so easily accept the Hollywood version of 9/11?

To answer this question, we must take a brief detour back to Mr. Edward Bernays who contributed to a very modern psychological coup against the US population and the consequent systematic dumbing down of its education.

 


Notes

[1] p.23; introduction; UFOs and the National Security State Chronology of a Cover-up – 1941-1973 (2002) By Richard M. Dolan. Published by Hampton Roads Publishing Co.

Dark Green XVIII: The IPCC’s All-Seeing-Eye (2)

All_seeing_eye2 © infrakshun


To reiterate, tearing strips off the IPCC is not some exercise in criticising for its own sake but to highlight where science has been politicised and corrupted. Similarly, there is obviously a huge need to care for our environment and everything else in this precious biosphere. We cannot do this until we have climate science firmly outside activism and where ecological conservation has been innoculated against corporatism and Establishment influence.

If we go back to the Climategate 2.0 scandal, we can see that some of the emails relating to the IPCC are quite illuminating on these points. For example, Professor Jonathan Overpeck of the University of Arizona’s Department of Geosciences deciding what shouldn’t go into the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4):

“The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guide what’s included and what is left out. For the IPCC, we need to know what is relevant and useful for assessing recent and future climate change.”

Commenting on another section of an IPCC report he states:

“Need to convince readers that there really has been an increase in knowledge – more evidence. What is it?” [1]

Or Professor Phil Jones of East Anglia University searching for a suitable hurricane paper that dovetails into his beliefs and thus the IPCC AR4 report:

“Seems that this potential Nature paper may be worth citing, if it does say that GW is having an effect on TC [Tropical Cyclone] activity.” [2]

Each of the climate reports (CRs) are weighty, no more so than the 2007 report at 3,000 pages. No one is going to wade through all of that, least of all the sound-bite media. What is more concerning and goes straight to the heart of why science plays so little part in climate change policy, is the IPCC executive summaries which it prepares for the smaller reports that make up the CRs as a whole. Not more than 35 pages in length, this is called “Summary for Policymakers” which gives you an idea how the IPCC wants these summaries to be used, even though the depth of understanding and contextual analysis may be missing.

Scientists are tasked with drafting these documents which are then passed on to those who meticulously pore over each line so that a cleansed and white-washed copy can be presented for inspection by a clueless media and public. So, these will not be scientific documents at all. These “cleansing” meetings are not open to anyone but IPCC staff and suitably vetted observers from environmental groups or organisations. The media are not permitted entry. A core group of IPCC bureaucrats decide what goes into the reports.

A Climategate 2.0 email by Tim Carter of the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) and Climate Change Programme, writing to IPCC authors seems to confirm this fact even within the AGW brethren:

“Regarding the phrase ‘IPCC position’? Would it be wise to check that McCarthy /Watson have the same understanding as we do.”

And the reply:

[TC] You could try, but it has been tricky getting anyone to make statements about anything. It seems that a few people have a very strong say, and no matter how much talking goes on beforehand, the big decisions are made at the eleventh hour by a select core group.” [3]

Governments and organisations like the IPCC are complicit in the cover up and manipulation of scientific facts. Scientists who contribute to the CRs are being played and used for a political agenda and the short-term greed and the MSM has cheer-led this subterfuge from the beginning. A summary document given out as a press release to the world’s media and public has been put through the politician, bureaucrat and diplomat’s PR machine, vetted to make sure that it conforms to the AGW paradigm in secret and without oversight.

Devoid of facts but replete with conjecture, the media simply parrots the information and goes back to sleep. Indeed, regarding the draft reports the IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri openly stated that they are altered, stating: “we necessarily have to ensure that the underlying report conforms to the refinements.” [4]This means regardless of the validity (or not) of expert science, the authors are side-lined and what they have written is tweaked to give unanimous support to the political agenda, an agenda that has been crystallized within the IPCC for more than twenty years.

vendetta3IPCC as authoritarian climate science?

Scientists within the IPCC also have misgivings, such as Mike Hulme Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia. Commenting in a Climategate 2.0 email, he states: “I am increasingly unconvinced by the majority of climate impact studies – including some of those I am involved in – and feel we are not really giving the right message to our audiences.” [5]

There’s an understatement to beat them all.

One of the holy grails of climate change science is computer modelling which has been responsible for much of the perceived advances in recent years. As we saw with the Club of Rome, the nature of computer modelling is fraught with assumption yet fully embraced as if the world operated on perfectly plotted principles. Evolution of any system is defined by its creative unpredictability a mathematical complexity of non-linear and often chaotic events far from equilibrium. In climate modelling a virtual world is set up that seems to be insulated from the “flies-in-the ointment” that may appear in long-term predicative analysis. The opinions of modellers then become a new science divorced from the observational inquiry. As LaFramboise asserts, the climate modelling science of opinion: “… is a recipe for tunnel-vision. It is group think waiting to happen,” and yet another example of the “group mind” steamrolling the creative sparks of objective thought which are not only needed in science but are essential to its healthy functioning so that it remains free from a political and belief-driven consensus.

No rigorous evaluation of climate modelling by independent parties has taken place. (This is presumably due to the love affair our culture is undergoing in relation to technology in general). Instead, the IPCC asks the same modellers to evaluate their own work. This is hardly scientific. Lead author roles for modellers is not the way forward, as there is little chance of them coming to the conclusion that climate modelling may be barking up the wrong tree. Since no true cold-blooded analysis of these models has taken place there is no way to know if they are even useful.

LaFramboise has also discovered that sections in the attribution chapter of the IPCC CRs are also written by climate modellers, the most crucial part of the report which decides the direction of global warming and if it is a man-made or natural cycle. Christopher Monckton and Garth W. Paltridge discovered that is wasn’t just the unreliability of climate modelling that is cause for concern but a strange coded bureaucracy that goes with it. The authors point out:

The big danger is that, with the increasing model complexity and cost, the number of truly independent climate models around the world is decreasing. This is because great slabs of the computer code of a model are often exchanged between research groups so as to avoid writing the stuff from scratch. This sort of exchange satisfies a general bureaucratic tendency to abhor what seems to be a duplication of effort. The net result must surely be a natural decrease in the spread of total feedback over the various remaining models and a consequent joy at the apparent tightening of the range of forecast temperature rise – a tightening that may have nothing at all to do with an improvement in the representation of the physics. [6]

Climate modelling does not ensure the validity of human-influenced global warming claims but rather fits neatly into circumscribed beliefs waiting in the wings. That does not mean to say that global warming is not a reality in some form, but to leave it to climate modelling to define all the parameters by which we can make informed decisions is dangerous because the solutions will lean hugely towards the overarching agenda explored previously. After all, even a minor tweak in feedback representations covering temperature rises can drastically alter a given a picture which can stretch from 1 degree celsius to infinity and beyond. That means that only thing we can be sure of is the fact that the much trumpeted “consensus” on global warming remains a myth.

Global_Climate_Model

“Climate models are systems of differential equations based on the basic laws of physics, fluid motion, and chemistry. To ‘run’ a model, scientists divide the planet into a 3-dimensional grid, apply the basic equations, and evaluate the results. Atmospheric models calculate winds, heat transfer, radiation, relative humidity, and surface hydrology within each grid and evaluate interactions with neighboring points.” (wikipedia)

Climate modelling also fails an important test when it comes to CO2 and temperature increase. In the 2007 IPCC report it even admits that the models do not seem to show the extra heat that should be there if we are to believe the theory. But they believe that the models are still correct and somehow the data out there in the real world is at fault. [7]

And here we come to a few important points relating to climate modelling and the temperature rise hysteria that the media and most academic establishments take for granted. Firstly, and very simply: Positive feedback = the reinforcement or magnification of disturbance. Secondly, Negative feedback = disturb the balance – a counteraction occurs. Thirdly, we have the greenhouse gas theory and the doubling of CO2 which might cause some warming of one degree celsius over a century. But there is the assumption that the climate responds to minute changes resulting in amplification of these changes by hundreds of percent. Positive feedback. But negative feedback is the dominant factor in almost every process in nature yet in climate science positive feedback is assumed to the culprit. Law professor Jason Johnston found in his study that: “climate catastrophe is not an “output of climate analysis but an input.” [8] In other words, the science is based on an assumption with no mention of the positive-negative feedback dichotomy anywhere in the reports.

LaFramboise points out the inevitable conclusion that:

“… the only reason climate models tell us we are at risk of eco apocalypse is because the climate modellers believe our climate system behaves in a manner that is opposite to the way most natural systems behave. If the modellers had split themselves into two groups, half programming-in negative feedback and half programming-in positive feedback, the first group of models would predict nothing alarming.” [9]

Yet, when we add this to protective bureaucracy, conflict of interest in both journals, media and activist-scientists in educational institutions and further include those IPCC personnel who “systematically conceal or minimize what appear to be fundamental scientific uncertainties,” in IPCC reports, it is a clarion call for major change. [10]

And major change is the selling point at UN conferences. But rather than practical and preventative solutions emerging from such meetings, there is a lot of talk and a lot of political posturing with non-elected representatives of civil society pushing a consensus that doesn’t exist, except for those with a political agenda. What does happen is the organisation and allocation of mountains of CASH. The UN conferences in this respect are like a vast auction of clamouring NGOs and eco-activist groups seeking a top-up or first time injection for the cause, but it is the green of the dollar bill that informs the climate industry more than anything else.

dollarbillClimate Change is a multi-billion dollar industry

As we have seen, the United Nations and the UNEP are green-dipped in the New Age tank so that the various beliefs stick like parasites to the decision-making process. Not to mention the corruption and sexual abuse scandals which have dogged the UN for years. When you have a vast bureaucracy and a constant stream of money flowing into and out of the body sitting on top a system which has virtually no accountability any issue – no matter how noble – is going to be contaminated by politics, power and greed. It is about as basic a human fable as it gets. Add ponerology to the mix and you have a UN with its charters and declarations which work on paper only.

Like the perpetual rubber-stamping of the IPCC and other agencies, it is a symbiotic relationship of collusion rather than transparency. If you are not the most morally responsible individual and the rules do not apply to you by virtue of your status and you know you can get away with all kinds of back-handers and bribes, the system actively encourages you to maintain that trajectory. This is so often the nexus point for international decisions that determine the fate of nations. If there is no accountability, why should it be any different for UN bureaucrats who juggle the money flow?

***

We have barely touched the surface regarding the problems within the IPCC. What should be clear by now is that it is not a scientific body but a political one fused with the beliefs of scientist-activists. This was illustrated by a Climategate 2.0 email from Professor Heinz Wanner of the University of Bern. On reporting his National Academy of Sciences panel critique of Michael Mann to the media: “I just refused to give an exclusive interview to SPIEGEL because I will not cause damage for climate science.” [11]
In the same way, politicians and environmental activists determine the form, content and outcome of IPCC reports that have been seen as the gospel truth for decades. Political discourse from more than 100 countries determines the direction. After all, it is worth potentially billions with a lot of academic posts, consultancies and companies riding on the AGW slipstream. Sounding the global warming bells in a variety of alarmist ways feeds into multiple agendas which have nothing to do with the truth. Consequently, to speak ill of AGW is to commit the outrageous sin of attacking the religious zeal of green militancy that has had a long and dark history.

wfarmsbirdsBirds flying into a wind turbines. Symbolic of IPCC climate science?

Is there any possibility that the IPCC can promote the same “radical shift” and “New value system” within its own ranks and which it insists society should adopt? Can it clean its own house to become the body of open-minded science that is so desperately needed?

Climate scientist Dr. Roy Spencer believes thinks the organisation can never be fixed for the simple reason:

“… that its formation over 20 years ago was to support political and energy policy goals, not to search for scientific truth. I know this not only because one of the first IPCC directors told me so, but also because it is the way the IPCC leadership behaves. If you disagree with their interpretation of climate change, you are left out of the IPCC process. They ignore or fight against any evidence which does not support their policy-driven mission, even to the point of pressuring scientific journals not to publish papers which might hurt the IPCC’s efforts.” [12]

The organisation has embraced the same constructs that every co-opted movement has done in the past, whilst avoiding the opportunity to lead by example and follow the principles it continually demands from society. [13]The inherent danger of science and political ecology is what historian Anna Bramwell calls “a value-saturated creed” which acts like an open door for the movement to become fully ponerised. [14] Science is infused not with objectivity and a quest for truth but with subjective desires peculiar to a historical mind-set of authoritarianism, regardless of the root values present at its inception. This is the story of ponerology.

The legion of World State rulers in waiting would be very happy that a scientific elite is redefining human values for us. The myth that governments respond to the will of the people has never been clearer. The real choices and thus the potential solutions have been denied to us all.  As the Under-Secretary to one time UN Chief Kurt Waldheim, Brian Urquhart declared: “The worst way to make an argument is by reason and good information. You must appeal to emotions and to their fears of being made to appear ridiculous.” [15]Irony aside, so it is with the IPCC and so many other connected bodies inhabited by the same men and women willing to stoop to the lowest common denominator.

The IPCC plays an extremely important role in the disseminating information on the science of climate change. If we cannot place our trust and faith in institutions who set themselves up to discover new solutions to some of the most pressing problems of our time then it means precious resources of creative energy is being wasted and re-directed into collective gutters of non-action and short-term gain. It becomes yet another example of pathological infection striking at the heart of what we consider to be our mentors, protectors and pioneers; expert minds dedicated to improving humanities lot. That means acknowledging the danger that ecology, environmental activism and any scientific discipline exposed to ponerological influences, must come under the same scrutiny.

If a deep love of Nature and the environment can historically sit side by side with the most virulent form of fascism then it behooves us all to guard against its all too easy re-appearance.

Pol Pot, the Cambodian dictator was responsible for the deaths of 21% of his country’s people.  He was also a former geography teacher.


Notes

[1] Email #4755 and email #1922 Jonathan Overpeck http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[2] Email #0170 Phil Jones http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[3] email #3066 Tim Carter. http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[4] ‘Food, Water Security threatened by Warming UN Panel says’ by Alex Morales,Bloomberg, February 16, 2011.
[5] email #0419 Mike Hulme. http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[6] p.28; The Climate Caper: Facts and Fallacies of Global Warming by Garth W. Paltridge. Published by Taylor Trade Publishing, 2010. ISBN-10: 1589795482
[7] op. cit. LaFramboise (p.69)
[8] ‘Global Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination’ by Jason S. Johnston, Law University of Pennsylvania Law School | “Legal scholarship has come to accept as true the various pronouncements of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other scientists who have been active in the movement for greenhouse gas (ghg) emission reductions to combat global warming. The only criticism that legal scholars have had of the story told by this group of activist scientists – what may be called the climate establishment – is that it is too conservative in not paying enough attention to possible catastrophic harm from potentially very high temperature increases.”
“This paper departs from such faith in the climate establishment by comparing the picture of climate science presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other global warming scientist advocates with the peer-edited scientific literature on climate change. A review of the peer-edited literature reveals a systematic tendency of the climate establishment to engage in a variety of stylized rhetorical techniques that seem to oversell what is actually known about climate change while concealing fundamental uncertainties and open questions regarding many of the key processes involved in climate change. Fundamental open questions include not only the size but the direction of feedback effects that are responsible for the bulk of the temperature increase predicted to result from atmospheric greenhouse gas increases: while climate models all presume that such feedback effects are on balance strongly positive, more and more peer-edited scientific papers seem to suggest that feedback effects may be small or even negative. The cross-examination conducted in this paper reveals many additional areas where the peer-edited literature seems to conflict with the picture painted by establishment climate science, ranging from the magnitude of 20th century surface temperature increases and their relation to past temperatures; the possibility that inherent variability in the earth’s non-linear climate system, and not increases in CO2, may explain observed late 20th century warming; the ability of climate models to actually explain past temperatures; and, finally, substantial doubt about the methodological validity of models used to make highly publicized predictions of global warming impacts such as species loss.
Insofar as establishment climate science has glossed over and minimized such fundamental questions and uncertainties in climate science, it has created widespread misimpressions that have serious consequences for optimal policy design. Such misimpressions uniformly tend to support the case for rapid and costly decarbonization of the American economy, yet they characterize the work of even the most rigorous legal scholars. A more balanced and nuanced view of the existing state of climate science supports much more gradual and easily reversible policies regarding greenhouse gas emission reduction, and also urges a redirection in public funding of climate science away from the continued subsidization of refinements of computer models and toward increased spending on the development of standardized observational datasets against which existing climate models can be tested.”
[9] op.cit La Framboise (p.70)
[10] op. cit. Johnston.
[11] Email #1104 Heinz Wanner http://www.di2.nu/foia/
[12] ‘Climategate 2.0: Bias in Scientific Research’ November 23rd, 2011 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph.D.
[13] ‘Western Lifestyle unsustainable says climate expert Rajendra Pachauri’ The Guardian, June 20, 2011.
[14] The Fading of the Greens, by Anna Bramwell, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1994.(p.28)
[15] ‘The UN and Its Discontents’: An Exchange April 26, 1990 Shirley Hazzard, reply by Brian Urquhart The New Yorker March 15, 1990 issue.

Dark Green XVII: The IPCC’s All-Seeing-Eye (1)

All_seeing_eye© infrakshun


The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) gave its full blessing to the Al Gore power-point revival as he made his merry way to a carbon trading pot of gold. However, before kneeling down at the altar of the IPCC we must have a peek behind the doors of an institution that has presided over a fiefdom of green belief.

The IPCC has been lauded for over twenty years as the guardian and protector of the planet, a scientific beacon in a dark age of industry and corporate irresponsibility. It has served as the primary reference for ecologists and environmentalists buttressing the religion of anthropocentric climate change. But does this organisation truly merit the global mantle of scientific authority it now enjoys? Or is it a pretender to the throne of open-minded science? A closer examination of the facts shows that the latter is closer to the truth, with serious consequences for climate science and environmental studies worldwide.

Maurice Strong’s United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization(WMO) set up the IPCC in 1988 with a later endorsement from the United Nations General Assemblythrough Resolution 43/53. With 195 members worldwide, the intergovernmental body is currently chaired by Rajendra K. Pachauriwho steers the mission: “… to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts.” The IPCC describes itself as a scientific body which “… reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change.” [1] Scientists voluntarily contribute to the work of the body where an “objective” and “complete assessment of current information” takes place. In the IPCC’s view, due to its scientific and intergovernmental status, it embodies: “… a unique opportunity to provide rigorous and balanced scientific information to decision makers. By endorsing the IPCC reports, governments acknowledge the authority of their scientific content. The work of the organization is therefore policy-relevant and yet policy-neutral, never policy-prescriptive.” [2]

As a consequence of this so called objectivity and impartial information presented to policy makers, an international acceptance of its claims is now in place and supported by an overall “consensus” (there’s that word again…) from leading climates scientists and participating governments. Further, in recognition of its work, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was shared between the IPCC and Al Gorethe IPCC acting as the source for most of the information found in An Inconvenient Truth. This fact is enough to plant a question in any informed person’s mind about the nature of the science the IPCC advocates. So, let’s see if the self-penned, glowing descriptions of the organisation stand up to scrutiny.

The IPCC reports also known as “The Climate Bible” – which we will call the “CRs” – are produced every year and represent an unassailable doctrine of climate science which cannot be challenged and to do so amounts to a form of heresy. The CRs have had an enormous effect on government policy around the world and are routinely cited as the most authoritative source on Climate change. CO2 emissions as the greatest evil known to man and the reason carbon taxes exist are all down to these reports. It is a climate science lovingly fawned over by the world’s media, much of university and think-tank academia, the same people who believe unquestioningly in Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth. The problem is, they believe that all those reports have been toiled over by thousands of experts who are holding hands in a sacred communion of consensus across the world; they believe that the science is water-tight and anyone but a fool would think otherwise.

Rajendra Pachauri has chaired the IPCC since 2002 and in one sense, is the personification of the IPCC in much the same way that Prince Philip was for the WWF. He has fuelled the belief that the IPCC and their CRs are full to the brim with thousands of the best scientists, the finest quality expertise at the cutting edge of climate science which is all parroted ad nauseum by the world’s media. [3] Unfortunately, many scientists and their papers have been ignored. Whether it is hurricane research, tropical diseases or oceanography, unless the scientists tow the official party line of anthropocentric global warming (AGW) then they can expect a cold response indeed to submitted papers.

Pachauri has since been accused of “inappropriate” sexual behaviour by several women who worked at the IPCC and TERI a non-profit, scientific and policy research organisation which Pachauri is Director-General. According to one alleged victim as part of her testimony from 2005: “A sexual harasser 10 years back, a sexual harasser today. He did it to me and others then. He has done it to her and possibly others now … His physical advances and sexual innuendos and acts, often reduced to as ‘inappropriate behaviour’, have been common knowledge and corridor gossip.” [4]

As a result, Pachuari finally stepped down in March 2015.

This appears appropriately symbolic of the IPCC’s place in climate science.

Rajendra-Pachauri_ipccstructureRajendra Pachauri, still going strong as Chairman of the IPCC

With 40 years of experience in tropical diseases Paul Reiter thinks the papers on his specialist subject found in the CRs are full of inaccuracies and incorrect conclusions, made worse by the fact that none of the lead authors had actually penned a research paper. Much of the information in the CRs are not written by experts at all and gave testimony to that fact to the UK House of Lords. [5]

One would think that the IPCC would have been keen to recruit the best experts they could find but it appears they prefer students and the inexperienced rather than the world class scientists spoken of in the mainstream media. The UN seems quite happy that its organisation continues to promulgate lies on this point while peddling unsubstantiated and very biased beliefs instead.

Journalist Donna LaFramboise’s searing indictment of the IPCC highlighted the fact that “the world’s finest scientific minds” have been culled from a reservoir of young and inexperienced students and activists such as 25 year-old Richard Klein, a Master Degree student and Greenpeace campaigner drafted in to serve as IPCC lead author on what was eventually to be six reports, six years prior to the completion of his PhD. [6] Laurens Bouwer served as an IPCC lead author before he had completed his Masters in 2001. To compound the confusion still further, the chapter to which he was given responsibility dealt with financial services whilst his “expertise” was in climate change and water resources. [7] In 2008, Lisa Alexander was a research assistant at Monesh University, Australia and went on to earn her PhD in 2009. Yet from 2001 and 2007 she had been plucked from obscurity by the IPCC to author two reports, one as lead author and the other in a contributory role – all ten years before she had claimed her doctorate. [8] Sari Kovats hadn’t earned her PhD until 2010 yet 16 years previously before any academics papers had been written: “Kovats was one of only 21 people in the entire world selected to work on the first IPCC chapter that examined how climate change might affect human health.” Lead author twice and contributing author once, all before the completion of her PhD. [9]Nor are these exceptions to the rule. This has been normal practice for the body since the early 1990s.

So, what’s going on?

LaFramboise describes how the analyses of IPCC policies and procedures were to come under the microscope, but perhaps not in the way it would have liked. In 2010, an international science body called The Inter-Academy Council took the bold step in establishing the first committee to investigate the quality and structure of IPCC research which resulted in an extensive questionnaire on its website to which people were encouraged to respond. Over the last few years a wealth of interesting data totalling over 678 pages has accumulated for the dogged researcher to peruse.

Many recurrent gripes which surfaced amongst respondents’ answers was the lack of qualifications from lead authors; decisions being political rather than scientific and undue political correctness regarding gender and multiculturalism at the expense of science. Among these problems follows the deeper more intransigent factor of activism married with science. The IPCC tells the world it is a scientific body tasked with sifting conjecture and assumption to produce as much as is possible, scientific fact. Yet, the institution is infested with activists from top to bottom. How can this be an impartial and politically neutral body offering reputable science when beliefs are colouring the overall picture?

Environmental activist organisations cross-fertilise IPCC conclusions in the CRs and other publications citing each others papers to bolster predetermined results. Rajendra Pachauri routinely writes forewords and editorials for activist groups such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth. As LaFramboise observes: “The IPCC’s role is similar to that of a trial judge. It examines the scientific evidence and decides whether or not human-produced carbon dioxide is guilty of triggering climate change. How much faith would you have in the impartiality of a murder trial if the judge was hearing evidence during the day and partying with the prosecution team during the evening?” [10]

A new breed of “activist scientist” is happiest hanging out in activist groups, universities and agenda-ridden institutions like the IPCC. Objectivity regarding scientific results is the first casualty. Scientific judgement is wide open to abuse from emotionally-driven views which consciously or unconsciously select the data that reinforces their beliefs. They often have access to a wide cross-section of interested parties from government to an annual influx of university students. Scientific credentials merely serve to reinforce beliefs and fit the data with a mind already made up. If it doesn’t fit, then it is made to fit through mental gymnastics and cherry-picking the data. Of course, this can work both ways. However, whereas many groups who do not follow the AGW line and do not have links to the fossil fuel agenda state their case with proven scientific data and expertise, the same cannot be said for the IPCC which sets itself up as an impartial arbiter when it is nothing of the kind. It is clearly AGW-biased, hiding behind the bogus claims of rigorous and objective research supported by “world class scientists.”

Michael Oppenheimer is one such example. A Director of Science, Tech. Environmental Policy, at Princeton University; Professor of Atmospheric Sciences Prior to the above posts and 20 years as Chief Scientist to Environmental Defence Fund (EDF). He is a lead author IPCC report 2007 and a Senior Author of the IPCC report in  2011. Remember his words when speaking on behalf of the EDF? “The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.” Regardless whether one agrees or disagrees with this statement it is hardly the position required of a scientist let alone one who contributes regularly to the IPCC. He is an activist-scientist and thus seriously biased.

A sample of other activists working for the IPCC include:

  • Bill Hare – Greenpeace spokesperson 1992; Chief climate negotiator 2007 / Key member of Greenpeace International Climate team; Lead author IPCC reports 2007 Expert reviewer 2007.
  • Malte Meinhausen – Key member of Greenpeace International Climate team; Greenpeace spokesman 2002-2003; Co-author Kyoto Protocol Analysis; contributing author of IPCC reports 2007.
  • Ove Hoegh-Guldberg – Marine Biologis, Reef expert Greenpeace funded reports on coral reefs and climate change 1994-2000 WWF funded reports; Contributing author 2007; Coordinating author 2011.
  • Richard Moss – One time WWF vice-president; IPCC senior personnel.
  • Jennifer Morgan – WWF chief spokesperson; WWF Kyoto Protocol Delegation; WWF Global Climate Change Program; Climate Action Network; Director of Climate program World Resources Institute. IPCC report 2010.

The process by which CR authors are selected – for an organisation who claims to be transparent and open – is highly secretive. No one seems to know how top decisions are actually made. The Inter-Academy Council questionnaire makes interesting reading in this respect, with some of the respondents giving answers such as: “Selection of lead authors in my view is the most important decision in the IPCC process, and it is not transparent,” or: “After being [a lead author or contributing author] several times, I still have no idea how I was selected. This is unacceptable.” Another participant states: “It has always been unclear how this has been undertaken.” [11]Not a huge crime for any other low-level institution but the IPCC isn’t just anybody. It has told us that it is open, transparent and scientifically credible and wields enormous influence because of it.

ippc-un

The United Nations, UNEP, WHO and the IPPC are all closely related, as are their worldviews.

The IPCC receives nominations from governments but does not make it public the names of the nominees; it does not explain the selection criteria and when successful nominees are announced only the country of origin is mentioned, qualifications and credentials are nowhere to be seen. Based on past evidence one can see why they would want the secrecy to remain in place. Apparently, we are meant to guess that the candidates are experts and trust the IPCC’s word.

What makes matters worse is the organisation’s history of refusing to help journalists, researchers and academics in their quests to scrutinize sources, reports and data. Moreover, when problems have been raised with the report content, such as out-of-date source papers, incorrect citations or quoting from papers yet to be published, the shutters came down with a the rigidity of a spoilt child folding its arms and pouting. If you begin to rock the boat too much then you are stone-walled or threatened with expulsion. [12]

Yet, according to John Holdren, President Barack Obama’s science advisor the IPCC is: “… an immense edifice of painstaking studies published in the world’s leading peer-reviewed scientific journals. They have been vetted and documented in excruciating detail by the largest, longest, costliest, most international, most interdisciplinary, and most thorough formal review of a scientific topic ever conducted.” [13]Holdren has been told some porkies. In reality, the IPCC does none of the above and has no quality control procedures at all. Or, as one IPCC respondent states on page 384 of the public questionnaire: “Quality assurance and error identification is non-existent…” [14]  Which means when the body claims it uses peer-reviewed literature we find this is also incorrect. [15]The amount of peer-reviewed sources to support the findings in the IPCC reports is very low indeed; yet, people continue to believe it is true because it operates on the same belief as Al Gore. [16]IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri: “… has a history of systematically misrepresenting the process by which his organization produces reports. His declaration that the IPCC does not settle for anything less than peer-reviewed sources is wrong. Nor is it wrong by a trivial amount. When 21 out of 44 chapters have so few peer-reviewed references they score an F, a serious disjuncture exists between the facts and the IPCC’s fiction.” [17]

Nor is peer-review a fail-safe mechanism for detecting research misconduct and malpractice. The only way to safe-guard such problems is fully independent, scientific review where an assumption of the reliability of research papers before they have even appeared in print is not seen as the norm. Peer-reviewed science is only as good as the structure upon which it sits. If that is rotten then you have nothing. If Al Gore published papers for peer-review it would matter little that his credibility is zero because his talents lie in the performance designed to create maximum emotional response. Facts are secondary.

When trusts, foundations and institutions presenting themselves as scientific bodies dedicated to objective scientific analysis merge with the beliefs of green activism, however laudable, it produces a dangerous politicisation. Organising communication between professions and the media then becomes an exercise in maintaining the demands of lobbying. When substantial amounts of money are involved then science is just another tool for exploitation. Just as high quality journalism should inform activism so too science must act as the primary foundation to issues with science at their core. Without objective knowledge of the highest quality charges of passion without reason and the effects they induce cannot be countered.

LaFramboise, with an enormous network of voluntary assistance, found that 30 percent of the IPCC 2007 report was non-peer-reviewed. The sources which were included comprised of “… newspaper and magazine articles, unpublished masters and doctoral theses, Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund documents and yes, press releases.” The journalist highlights several points that should make us all think twice about the proclamations of unimpeachable sources and credentials when the media, UN and governments wax lyrical about the IPCC’s standing.

LaFramboise further observes:

Climate sceptics are frequently asked why they imagine their own judgment to be more reliable than the judgment of such esteemed bodies. The answer to that question is this: No science academy noticed that one in three references in the 2007 Climate Bible is actually to grey literature. [unpublished papers] If these academies are so well-informed why did it take a group of Internet-linked volunteers to bring this to the world’s attention? Why didn’t even one of these science academies subject chairman Pachauri’s rhetoric to rudimentary fact-checking? [18]

Could it be that IPCC personnel simply don’t care enough to have a hand in changing the direction of this behemoth and are quite comfortable with the way things are?

Not content with preaching to the rest of us on impeccable standards in climate research to which we must all adhere, the IPCC’s treatment of its voluntary army of expert reviewers falls very short of fair. The 2007 report invited reviewers to offer comments which were responded to by IPCC authors. Yet, unsurprisingly, they are at liberty to ignore most, if not all of the comments that don’t fit with their “group-think.” The body freely inserts new material in reports, rejects reviewer opinions and essentially undermines the whole review process which was designed to prove the rigorous and objective nature of the CR science.

Group think rises up through the ranks of academic journals which instead of being independent and thus offering valuable critiques, appear to be chosen for reviews, citations and source material because an IPCC insider is Editor-in-Chief. As LaFramboise comments on the late founding editor of Climatic Change Stephen Schneider and Club of Rome member: “The fact that Schneider, a senior figure at the IPCC, was routinely deciding what would – and would not – make it into the same scientific literature the IPCC would later cite as evidence doesn’t appear to have caused anyone concern.” [19]

Nor is this an isolated incident. In the next post, we’ll see why.

 


Notes

[1] http://www.ipcc.ch/
[2] Ibid.(organisation)
[3] ‘The Science is absolutely first rate’ June 5 2007, The Rediff Interview with Rajendra K. Pachauri http://www.rediff.com | ‘The Rajendra Pachauri Interview’ by Amitabh Pal, The Progressive, May 2009 issue.
[4] ‘Harasser’ who lifts staff like little girls’ The Telegraph, Calcutta, India, Ananya Sengupta and G.S. Mudur, February 22 , 2015.
[5] Select Committee on Economic Affairs Written Evidence – Memorandum by Professor Paul Reiter, Institut Pasteur; Paris THE IPCC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION. EXAMPLE: IMPACTS ON HUMAN HEALTH
[6] p.8; The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert by Donna Laframboise. Published by Createspace, 2011.
[7] Ibid. (p.9)
[8] Ibid. (p.10)
[9] Ibid. (p.11)
[10] Ibid. (p.18)
[11] Ibid. (pp. 185, 180 and p.28) | Review of the IPCC InterAcademy Council http://www.reviewippc.interacademycouncil.net
[12] Ibid Chapter 8: “Clear as mud” See example 1: Steve McIntyre of ClimateAudit.org p.30-35 correspondance between Susan Solomon.
[13] Ibid. (p.34)
[14] http://www.reviewippc.interacademycouncil.net
[15] Ibid. (p.43) – Richard Tol found that in the Climate Bible (CRs) 2007 “IPCC authors had ignored the findings of peer-reviewed studies and had instead cited non-peer-reviewed material to make the opposite case.”
[16] Ibid. (pp.43 -50: “The Peer Review Fairy-Tale”)
[17] Ibid. (p.48)
[18] ‘Book excerpt: Conspiracy of silence Special to Financial Post, By Donna La Framboise, Oct 22, 2011.| http://www.opinion.financialpost.com/2011/10/21/book-excerpt-conspiracy-of-silence/
[19] Ibid. (p.62)

Dark Green XVI: I’ve been Gored!

“… the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it but every penny that I have made I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge.”

– Al Gore


Climate_Reality_Logo-Globe

Logo of The Climate Reality Project founded by Al Gore | Source (WP:NFCC#4) (wikipedia)

With hedge funds popping up like bad sores in readiness for the carbon credit bubble it is these financial marauders who will benefit most rather than the environment or third world nations’ climate change projects. What we can be sure of is a substantial hike in the cost of living generally with special attention to electricity and manufacturing. All the while the imposition of caps is guaranteed to contribute precious little to limit carbon emissions, should the science on CO2 even be true.

The Nobel prize-winning Al Gore has been very busy playing at eco-activism and evangelising the message of AGW for many years. He has become smoothly effective as the political vanguard of environmentalism. Gore’s legendary capitalism masquerading as left-leaning liberalism is never more clearly seen when it comes to green corporatism, his favourite plaything. Gore was one of the first to implement the corporate structure of “public-private partnerships,” where the decision-making process was quietly shifted away from the people and transferred to unelected international corporations. And what we are seeing now is how effective such structural conversions can be when married to distorted environmental fears. Al Gore has excelled at being the guru of green-back sensationalism. He is a master of the slight-of-hand. However, it is difficult to say whether he is a “useful idiot,” desperately naïve (doubtful) or an opportunist of the very worst kind. Perhaps it is a mix of all three.

The Climate Reality Project founded by Gore in 2011 is another attempt to launch a frontal attack against so-called climate deniers (when all it does is cover up good science). “Join reality” “effect change”. You can also sign on to become a “Climate Reality Leader” within the Climate Reality Leadership Corp. and bludgeon everyone into becoming like Al Gore. Gore is creating an army of the faithful to do what? To reach net zero carbon emissions” which is apparently “… the key to our collective prosperity and well-being for all.”

Unfortunately, that probably isn’t the key. Not even close.

This is all about objective reality it seems…  Yet, the “The facts” page reads like a catalogue of supposition assumption where blaming nasty old fossil fuel folks for it all appears to mask barely concealed zealotry. That’s not to say that corporatism isn’t having a ripe old time stirring the propaganda pot with equal vigour. And that is also not to say greenhouse gases aren’t causing havoc and yes, we must try to reduce our pollution. But the overall campaign and impetus is that human beings are responsible for the overall climate change which are very probably the result of complex natural cycles and even vast cosmic processes. As my hamster Ernie belts around his plastic wheel the sheer power of his little cardiac footprint is not liable to produce massive climatic weather patterns.  (I don’t have a hamster but you get the analogy).

The whole idea that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused Earth’s temperatures over the past 50 years appears erroneous. BUT that doesn’t mean greenhouse gases are benign. It doesn’t mean they do not pose a problem such as ozone depletion. The real problem is how AGW science has obfuscated the subtle connections going on between a whole host of complex factors which have been reduced down to the level of Al Gore and his slide show hotly followed by the IPCC. And that does not provide a good basis upon which to inform the public.

You CANNOT change a natural cycle. And no amount of hectoring, deception and phoney science it going to alter that fact.  It amounts to an enormous hijacking of energy that could be better used in prevention against cataclysmic change that will come regardless of whether we have paid our carbon-free credits.  But by now, if you have been reading the previous posts on this blog you either think I am a deluded devil incarnate or one of the many who are seeing behind all the noise. Perhaps I am teetering between the two.

That said, let’s continue and find out a bit more about our Al and whether he’s one arctic roll short of an ice-cap.

gorepromoAl Gore (left) and promotional material for the DVD launch for An Inconvenient Truth: “the most terrifying film you will ever see.”

Gore has written over a dozen books on society, politics and environmentalism, most notably Earth in the Balance: Forging a New Common Purpose. (1992) The Assault on Reason. (2007) and An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It. (2006) which accompanied a film of the same name which won an Academy Award for Best Documentary. The film was directed by Davis Guggenheim, who stated that after the release of the film, “Everywhere I go with him, they treat him like a rock star.” It couldn’t have been more apropos for the likes of the Club of Rome who saw in Gore the popular appeal of their designs made manifest. The message is fear, catastrophe and guilt wrapped up in emergency environmental “education.” The science didn’t matter the message was all that counted.

Having already achieved humble martyrdom in running against the villainous Bush, he was as well placed to transfer this new found sainthood into the cause of climate change and make considerable amounts of money in the process. An Inconvenient Truth was designed to educate millions of citizens about the perils of global warming using Gore as messenger who would give an in-depth slide show presentation to a rapt audience interspersed with relevant footage. It premiered at the 2006 Sundance Film Festival and opened in New York City and Los Angeles on May 24, of the same year. It became a critical and box-office success, garnering two Academy Awards for Best Documentary Feature and Best Original Song. It was also commercially successful earning $49 million internationally and becoming one of the highest grossing US documentary films of all time. [1]

Let’s turn our attention to two aspects of Gore’s journey, that of the science in the film and the financial aspects of Gore’s AGW platform. Firstly, the science.

In May 2007, a lawsuit was launched by a group of global warming sceptics over the UK government’s distribution of the film in UK schools. Dimmock v Secretary of State for Education and Skills heard the bid for an injunction preventing the screening of the film in English schools, on the premise that the film was imbalanced, impartial and political.

On 10 October 2007, High Court Judge Mr Justice Burton did not ban the film finding that it was largely drawn from scientific fact and research even though it was also politically motivated. He ruled that An Inconvenient Truth contained “nine key scientific errors” and could only be shown in British schools with explanatory notes on the errors “to prevent political indoctrination.” The judge said that showing the film without the explanations of error would be a violation of education laws. Judge Burton also stated that errors had arisen “in the context of alarmism and exaggeration” driven by Gore’s belief in AGW. [2]

In the synopsis of the film given by Paramount studios, the distributor gives a flavour of the content of the film which the judge ruled amounted to an “apocalyptic vision.” In a breathless example of sensationalism it implored: “If the vast majority of the world’s scientists are right, we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tail-spin of epic destruction involving extreme weather, floods, droughts, epidemics and killer heat waves beyond anything we have ever experienced.” [3] The judge ruled that An Inconvenient Truth was “politically partisan and thus not an impartial scientific analysis of climate change.” It was, he ruled: “a political film.” [4]

Marketed as “… the most terrifying film you will ever see,” by online trailers, with commentary claiming audiences have been “shocked everywhere,” the dramatic images of global environmental destruction bombard the viewer with terrifying storms and even a nuclear explosion. This sets the tone for a mass-dumping of fear and danger in the younger generations and creates the antithesis of reason and constructive dialogue. Politics, alarmism and “apocalyptic visions” do little to educate children, especially when Agenda 21 is overshadowing the proceedings. While they may compel a sense of urgency and activism in the cause of “saving the planet,” if it is sourced from bad science and emotional reflex then this will play straight into the politics and the social frameworks recently discussed. It will have very little effect on the real, preventative climate change issues which could be addressed given the correct guidance. Exaggeration and alarmism merely helps to create fear and insecurity in the minds of children who are already having great difficulty processing the future. Neuroses in the young anxious about climate change, is becoming increasingly common.

Climate science journalist Björn Lomborg reviewed some startling results on this issue where “… a new survey of 500 American pre-teens, … found that one in three children, aged between six and 11, feared that the earth would not exist when they reach adulthood because of global warming and other environmental threats. An unbelievable one-third of our children believe that they don’t have a future because of scary global warming stories.” The same pattern exists in the UK with “half of young children aged between seven and 11 [whom] are anxious about the effects of global warming, often losing sleep because of their concern.” [5]

To draw out those fears and increase the likelihood of cash injection into the climate change industry we have Gore’s slick Hollywood production which uses emotive photos of cutsie animals and advanced animations taken out of context alongside endless replays of environmental destruction to illicit guilt and alarm. For example, smoke pouring forth from chimneys and cooling towers implying extreme CO2 production when in reality CO2 is invisible and benign. The message here is not scientific solutions but emotional manipulation.

Gore has yet to modify any of his statements made in film and print, the most obvious examples being the internationally discredited hockey stick temperature graph and his clinging to CO2 global temperature increases, despite the data that showed temperatures rose 400-800 years before CO2 and drove higher CO2 levels, a fact which had been confirmed for at least two years prior to Gore’s film. [6]But this was only the beginning. The following nine errors as outlined by Judge Burton include:

ERROR 1: Sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland “in the near future”. [Judge] agreed that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water – ‘but only after, and over, millennia’. The Armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus.”

ERROR 2: The film claims that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls ‘are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming’ but the judge ruled there was no evidence of any evacuation having yet happened.

ERROR 3: The documentary speaks of global warming ‘shutting down the Ocean Conveyor’ – the process by which the Gulf Stream is carried over the North Atlantic to western Europe. Citing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the judge said that it was ‘very unlikely’ that the Ocean Conveyor, also known as the Meridional Overturning Circulation, would shut down in the future, though it might slow down.

ERROR 4: Mr Gore claims that two graphs, one plotting a rise in CO2 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed ‘an exact fit’. The judge said that, although there was general scientific agreement that there was a connection, ‘the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts’.

ERROR 5: Mr Gore says the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was directly attributable to global warming, but the judge ruled that it scientists have not established that the recession of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro is primarily attributable to human-induced climate change.

ERROR 6: The film contends that the drying up of Lake Chad is a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming but the judge said there was insufficient evidence, and that ‘it is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability.’

ERROR 7: Mr Gore blames Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans on global warming, but the judge ruled there was “insufficient evidence to show that”.

ERROR 8: Mr Gore cites a scientific study that shows, for the first time, that polar bears were being found after drowning from ‘swimming long distances – up to 60 miles – to find the ice’ The judge said: ‘The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm.’ That was not to say there might not in future be drowning-related deaths of bears if the trend of regression of pack ice continued – ‘but it plainly does not support Mr Gore’s description’.

ERROR 9: Mr Gore said that coral reefs all over the world were being bleached because of global warming and other factors. Again citing the IPCC, the judge agreed that, if temperatures were to rise by 1-3 degrees centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and mortality, unless the coral could adapt. However, he ruled that separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution was difficult. [7]

Rather than just nine errors the Judge mentioned, there are so many serious errors in AIT that becomes much more of a concern about the film-makers understanding of the issues involved and certainly where Al Gore’s true perceptions lie. Former British MP Christopher Monckton and founding member of the Science and Public Policy Institute based in the UK found plenty more. All of the following have proven to be grossly exaggerated or simply false:

  • Thermohaline circulation “stopping”
  • 100 ppmv of CO2 “melting mile-thick ice”
  • Hurricane Caterina “manmade”
  • Japanese typhoons “a new record”
  • Hurricanes “getting stronger”
  • Big storm insurances losses “increasing”
  • Mumbai “flooding”
  • Severe tornadoes “more frequent”
  • The sun “heats the Arctic ocean”
  • Arctic “warming fastest”
  • Greenland ice sheet “unstable”
  • Himalayan glacial melt waters “failing”
  • Peruvian glaciers “disappearing”
  • Mountain glaciers worldwide “disappearing”
  • Sahara desert “drying”
  • West Antarctic ice sheet “unstable”
  • Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves “breaking up”
  • Larsen B Ice Shelf “broke up because of ‘global warming’”
  • Mosquitoes “climbing to higher altitudes”
  • Many tropical diseases “spread through ‘global warming’”
  • West Nile virus in the US “spread through ‘global warming’”
  • Carbon dioxide is “pollution”
  • The European heat wave of 2003 “killed 35,000”
  • Gore’s bogus pictures and film footage
  • The Thames Barrier “closing more frequently”
  • “No fact…in dispute by anybody.” [8]

In A Sceptic’s Guide to Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ (2007) senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) Marlo Lewis PhD, provides a meticulous analysis of the Al Gore’s book version of the film. Lewis’ Congressional Working Paper contains 324 references with extensive links to web sites for fact checking, a practice Gore would do well to emulate. Lewis’ conclusions on the book revealed:

  • Wrong statements, false statements—19;
  • Misleading statements—17;
  • Exaggerated statements—10;
  • One sided statements—25; and
  • Speculative statements—28. [9]

Environmentalists have drawn our attention to the fact that Marlo Lewis is a friend of the fossil fuel lobby and is a corporate lackey with a clear agenda. Be that as it may, the facts he provides are correct. It is unfortunate that facts have to surface from two extremes rather than a simple quest for truth.

polarbearsonice

This photo was widely used to promote the idea that polar bears were stranded due to global warming induced ice melt. In actual fact, it was faked. See HERE for more details.

As an ex-senator, businessman, journalist, lawyer and highly articulate orator and raconteur it seems bizarre that Gore has not only chosen to ignore his “errors” but continue to perpetuate them. Even worse, he has also repeatedly refused to debate publicly on the issue and will not participate in conferences, interviews or public forums with those who take the opposing view on AGW. This is bad for science and bad for open, rational discourse which is so desperately needed.[10] Not least, it is bad for Gore’s credibility as he clearly prefers hyperbole and rhetoric rather than scientific rigour. If he is correct and he has spent most of his life genuinely seeking to redress the balance for the Earth’s ecology then one would think he would have at least a basic understanding of the principals involved, given his position and responsibility. Yet, while he may have a nose for communication he doesn’t seem to have the first clue about truth – inconvenient or otherwise. Gore’s research has been drawn primarily from the IPCC, which offers even more cause for concern, as we shall see presently.

What of Gore’s financial interests in climate change and carbon credits? He is a partner in two hedge funds, Generation Investment Management (GIM) and Capricorn Investment Group LLC, set up to trade carbon credits. Remember the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) in the U.S. and the Carbon Neutral Company (CNC) in Great Britain? GIM exerts substantial influence over these firms in the following way: Having expended considerable amounts of cash to test the viability of carbon credits back in 2000, CCX has some of our well known players secreted within its membership. One begins to wonder if he has cloned himself to appear in all places and in all times but sure enough, Maurice Strong sits on the board of directors and has long since been considered as an Elder-guru to Gore. Other members who had undertaken to reduce their emissions by 2010 (some did some didn’t) are Amtrak, Ford Motor Company, Dow Corning, International Paper, Motorola, DuPont, American Electric Power and an assortment of other corporations and universities. Carbon-offset projects are also underway via “participant members.” ECX also has around 80 member companies, including Shell, Barclays, BP, Fortis, Calyon, Endesa, Morgan Stanley and … Goldman Sachs.

And here’s where come full circle back to the Goldman cartel once more.

GIM was founded by both Al Gore and Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs and financial criminal CEO, Hank Paulson. We already know that Goldman Sachs virtually owns the carbon credit markets including 10 percent of CCX shares and a stake in ECX. This is due, in part, to the fact that GIM is riddled with Goldmanites: Mark Ferguson, former co-head of GSAM pan-European research; David Blood, former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management (GSAM) and Peter Harris, who headed GSAM international operations. Peter S. Knight, who is the designated president of GIM with strong ties to Al Gore and Bill Clinton serving under them respectively.

World Economic Forum in Davos

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore speaks next to rapper Pharrell Williams during a panel session on the first day of the 45th Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum, in Davos, Jan. 21, 2015. | TIME magazine. |The World Economic Forum? Really? This is straight out of the Live Aid programming manual (It’s all right, just be happy…)

In 2008, Gore’s venture capital firm loaned $75m to Silver Spring Networks, a small Californian firm wishing to develop energy-saving technology. The company’s main production efforts go into hardware and software to make the electricity grid more efficient. And in 2009, the US Energy Department announced a $3.4 billion boost in SMART grid grants more than $560 million going to utilities under contract to Silver Spring. [11]

To say that this would provide Gore with substantial profits would be an understatement. With an estimated $70 million he received for a 20 percent stake in the 2013 sale of the Current TV network, a slice of a $500 million pie paid out by Qatari-owned al-Jazeera Satellite Network, and a steady $1.2 million a year in salary and bonuses, he stands to make millions more in the long-term. Hence the media cry: “Will Gore be our first carbon billionaire?” Gore disputes this and is happy to be “putting his money where his mouth is.” A “one off investment” and “transformation of our energy infrastructure” towards energy that is free forever” is what’s needed according to Gore. He sees no hypocrisy radiating from his  green-messiah activism and Goldman Sachs plundering.

He goes on to say somewhat defensively: “Do you think there is something wrong with being active in business in this country?” … “I am proud of it. I am proud of it.” [12]

Goldman Sachs would certainly agree.

 


Notes

[1] “Documentary 1982–present (film rankings by lifetime gross)”. Box Office Mojo.
[2] Stuart Dimmock v Secretary of State for Education & Skills”. England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions. 2007-10-10.
[3] ‘Al Gore’s ‘nine Inconvenient Untruths’ By Sally Peck, Telegraph, 11 Oct 2007.
[4] Ibid.
[5] ‘Scared silly over climate change’ by Bjorn Lomborg, The Guardian, 15 June 2009.
[6] ‘Climate myths: Ice cores show CO2 increases lag behind temperature rises, disproving the link to global warming’ by Catherine Brahic and Michael Le Page. New Scientist, 16 May, 2007.
[7] op. cit. Peck.
[8] ‘35 Inconvenient Truths – The errors in Al Gore’s movie’ By Christopher Monckton, http://www.scienceandpublic policy.org PDF version: http://www.scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/press_releases/monckton-response-to-gore-errors.pdf
[9] ‘Al Gore’s Science Fiction: A Sceptic’s Guide to An Inconvenient Truth’ Congressional Working Paper By Marlo Lewis. 01/22/07 — Competitive Enterprise Institute || http://www.cei.org.
[10] ‘Al Gore Refuses To Dignify Debate: “It’s Not A Matter Of Theory”’ Huffington Post, April 5 2009.
[11] ‘Al Gore could become world’s first carbon billionaire’ Telegraph, November 3, 2009.
[12] Ibid.

Dark Green IX: UN Agenda 21 and US Land Grab

“One of the big lies about UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is that it ‘builds strong communities’. It does. But not in the way you would expect. It is managed democracy and manufactured consensus.”

– Rosa Koire, Executive Director, Post-Sustainability Institute


If we are to live our lives supporting and deriving benefit from Nature’s bounty, sustainable development must be an essential part of human destiny. However, in the hands of our leaders the concept of sustainability in its present incarnation may be very far from what many environmental activists believe it to be.

One of the many initiatives to come out of the Rio conference in 1992 was a 300 page document called Agenda 21 which the UN defines as: “… a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and major groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.” Out of the summit came a National Strategy for a Sustainable America which led to the announcement in July 1993 by US President Bill Clinton of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) to implement a “national Strategy” for sustainable development. By 2010, this had advanced to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s mission of advancing the principles and goals of sustainable development through partnerships, collaboration, and outreach. [1]

The 1992 Earth summit’s Rio Declaration on Environment and Development set out 27 principles intended to guide future sustainable development around the world. The PCSD also had a set of “We Believe Statements” outlining 16 principles which paraphrase the Rio Declaration. Both these sets of principles are incorporated into Agenda 21 (“21” refers to the 21st Century).

The Agenda 21 document comprises of 40 chapters grouped into 4 sections:

  • Section I: Social and Economic Dimensions
  • Combating poverty in developing countries, changing consumption patterns, promoting health, achieving a more sustainable population, and sustainable settlement in decision making.
  • Section II: Conservation and Management of Resources for Development
  • Includes atmospheric protection, combating deforestation, protecting fragile environments, conservation of biological diversity (biodiversity), control of pollution and the management of biotechnology, and radioactive wastes.
  • Section III: Strengthening the Role of Major Groups
  • The roles of children and youth, women, NGOs, local authorities, business and workers and strengthening the role of indigenous peoples, their communities, and farmers.
  • Section IV: Means of Implementation Science, technology transfer, education, international institutions and financial mechanisms. [2]

In the above, we find the complement to the Earth Charter, where the opposite poles of political beliefs come together to create maximum noise ratios and thus obscure any rational discourse on the issue. A “divide and rule” friction is set up between so called “lefties” and “right-wing whackos” for which Agenda 21 is the devil incarnate or a practical framework for a sustainable future. Is Agenda 21 an innocent “soft law” platform for change? Or are the “radical right, conspiracy theorists” correct and this is an an attempt to impose a vast template for technocratic global governance via Agenda 21?

treeeee © infrakshun

The UN Commission on Global Governance established in 1992 with full support from then Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali published a report in 1995 called “Our Global Neighbourhood.” Sustainable development (SD) and environmental protection are seen as integral step to the long-term security of that vision. As the report confirms: “The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.” And further: “Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through to the United Nations itself.” [3]

The problem that many have with this process as it is being developed in both EU and the United States is that it removes the public from the decision-making process, by default. If elected officials are by-passed by non-elected officials who have been tasked with an agenda, however well-intentioned, it means that democracy and civil liberty is side-lined in favour of a consensus that may have no relation at all to the values, culture and self-determination of the country involved. Regionalism and the communitarianism are fine ideas – even welcome theories for socio-economic development. However, the devil is in the details. The overriding importance for members of the UN and Establishment circles is the dismantling of national sovereignty and the absolute control of the domestic population with the means to see that come about. When you get these people whole-heartedly supporting such potentially massive changes you can be absolutely sure it has nothing whatsoever to do with the greater good but the interests of the “lesser evil.”

Areas which are prompting most concern involve policy making procedures defined by collaborative consensus building a conflict resolution label appropriated by SD and SMART redevelopment and is inaugurating drastic changes in the way public policy is created in the United States. This consensus process as defined in Agenda 21 and the “We Believe” Statements of the PCSD serves to circumnavigate elected officials and place power in the hands of unelected officials who then determine Agenda 21 policy. This gives a free reign to a multitude of SMART redevelopment programs, where government and the corporate sector merge in ethically compromised, ideologically questionable ways.

With the United States having already had much of its constitution eviscerated by both the Bush-Cheney and Obama-Biden Administrations, the legitimate concern here for this one-time Republic and for the nations of Europe is that governments are exercising entirely undemocratic powers through seemingly benign programs. They do this because such passion can be usefully diverted to agendas which piggy-back the initial intent from public and officials, which is sincere. The Agenda 21 platform certainly has collectivist principles to its policy changes which immediately causes the political right to raise its hackles at the merest hint of such a thing. Since the US has an appalling record on global resource use and environmental safeguards in general, the kinds of changes which are being demanded under Agenda 21 will mean that there will be a forced redistribution of wealth and the confiscation of private property under the guise of “protecting the environment.” Therefore, the “social equity” in such a context, is a collectivist dream.

The concept of sustainable development does require a system of governance that is even more centralised under an integrated package of social equity, environmental protection and economic activity. (And we haven’t even looked at carbon tax yet). The PCSD brought the concept of Sustainable Development (SD) into the policy process of every agency in the US federal government. In partnership with the same environmental organisations who drafted Agenda 21, federal government agency grants are allowing SD programs to be seeded into the infrastructure of American life. So, while the UN cannot impel communities to adopt Agenda 21 policies its influence and beliefs are outsourced to hundreds of environmental groups and NGOs – the latter often paid quangos for government meddling – who carry out its operations so that Agenda 21 dove-tails seamlessly into future SMART growth infrastructure.

As a prelude to the Agenda 21 framework and The Convention on Bio-Diversity which has yet to be ratified, the Ecosystem Management Policy spear-headed by the UNEP is up and running in many US states. This means that where federal management of ecosystems exists it would inevitably expand federal control of the use of privately owned land and increased restrictions on the use of public lands for economic purposes. Since ecosystems do not have a defining boundary, private lands would be included in an expanded regulatory framework with the imposition of restrictions and guidelines mandated by law. The scope for the abuse of power would be limitless.

In Agenda 21’s vision for America, the protection of the ecosystem and sustainable development would take precedence over economic activity and private property rights. If the authority for implementing ecosystem management eventually meshed with Agenda 21 and continues to lie with the federal government, the vested interests of stakeholder input and authoritarian environmental activists, a massive transfer of power from the individual to the state is the only possible outcome.

The political and social equality pushed in Agenda 21 does not necessarily equate with a free society.

The repeated statement that a “transformation of society” is required includes an irreversible change in the process through which decisions affecting citizens are made. Extensive land use planning delivering SD to local communities dispenses with these democratic processes, or as commentator Henry Lamb correctly observes: “The fundamental principle that government is empowered by the consent of the governed is completely by-passed in the process … the natural next step is for government to dictate the behavior of the people who own the land that the government controls.” [4]

The lure of partnership-privatisation, be it water or forestry management and the wider issues involved, are often eclipsed by the approach of financial dividends. Everyone is always keen to make a buck and nothing is more seductive when one’s conscience is perceived to be clean while doing it. Bailing out bankers is a euphemism for maintaining an exploitative system. Such bailouts can operate under corporate lawyers and foundation executives offering financial assistance while making sure that they can gain much more for their money in return. Local officials and rural communities are seldom aware of what they are being “sold” and wouldn’t know a biodiversity clause or an Agenda 21 stipulation if it was deftly flashed in front of them on an i-pad screen. But it would sure look benevolently green.

One of the most surprising and little known facts related to SD and the present land grabs which are now taking place in the USA are the Executive Orders No.11490 and No.11647 enacted by President Richard Nixon on February, 10, 1972. The United States was divided into 10 Regional Councils, each federally controlled by bureaucrats for the improvement of coordination of activities between different levels of government. These 10 federal regions were to be given powers over everything pertaining to regionalism. Within those regional divisions, this included conservation, land use, water and all other natural resources within the United States. Fairly momentous and dramatic contributions to the US yet very few people know about it thanks to a compliant media and a corrupt Congress.

fedregional Standard Federal Regions

A bureaucratic binding has now arrived in the form of four federally chartered regional commissions: the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), signed into effect by President Kennedy in 1963 and amended numerous times up until the present; The Delta Regional Authority (DRA) signed into effect by President Ronald Reagan (1988) and the Northern Great Plains Regional Authority (NGPRA) signed into effect in 1994 and the Denali Commission (DC) signed into effect in 1998 – both by President Clinton, the latter being the only commission targeting a single state (Alaska).

Each commission is responsible for a variety of legislative operations and procedures implementing a long term economic plan:

  • ARC: On top of a mandate to improve “regional infrastructure, reducing regional isolation; water and wastewater management resources; natural resources development; and human resources development, including housing, education, job skills, and health care” the Truman Administration expanded this to “… promot[e] economic development in the region; and establishing a framework for joint federal and state efforts in developing basic facilities essential to promoting coordinated regional responses to the region’s problems.”
  • DRA: “The Rural Development, Agriculture, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for FY1989.9 Title II of that act, known as the Lower Mississippi Delta Development Act, authorized the creation of the Lower Mississippi Delta Development Commission (LMDDC […] the Commission’s legislative mandate was to identify the economic needs and priorities of the Lower Mississippi Delta region, and to develop a 10-year economic development plan for the region.
  • NGPRA: “… directed it to study and make recommendations for improving the economic development prospects of residents of rural Northern Great Plains communities. The Commission was charged with developing a 10-year rural economic development plan for Northern Great Plains (NGP) with the assistance of interested citizens, public officials, groups, agencies, businesses, and other entities. […] “The act charged the NGPRDC with developing a 10-year plan that would address economic development, technology, transportation, telecommunications, employment, education, health care, housing, and other needs and priorities of the five-state region. The act encouraged the NGPRDC to develop the plan in collaboration with Native American tribes, federal agencies, non-profit and specific issue areas: value-added agriculture, international trade, business development, telecommunications, transportation infrastructure, health care, and civic and social capacity.”
  • DC: “… the Commission’s mission included providing job training and other economic development assistance to distressed rural areas in the state. The act also charged the Commission with providing for rural power generation and transmission facilities, modern communication systems, water and sewer systems, and other infrastructure needs of remote areas in the state.” [5]

All these Commissions are in turn, focused on a highly complicated jumble of state and local county development programs many of which are integrated or in the process of being integrated into the Agenda 21 blueprint. What Nixon and the Clinton-Gore administration did was to create a new government eco-bureaucracy or “regional” government placing the states into the aforementioned Ten Regions and their requisite federal funding. However, as regional government was the assigned vehicle for federal fund distribution it meant that local government officials were unaware that they were effectively reducing their power by being answerable to administrators of regions. Local authorities would be bypassed in favour of regionalism which isn’t just a system of grant distribution but an extension of State power.

The justification for all these eco-imperatives comes from the United Nations which – in much the same way as the Eurocrats in Brussels – overrides democratically elected decision-makers in favour of SD and SMART associated stake-holder legislations. Fusing management and administration systems based on new technology, redevelopment and eco-imperatives are making regionalism very far from democracy and constitutional accountability. We are faced with a situation where decisions are rubber-stamped by international regional government administrators and their connected councils serving a desperately hierarchical world management system which has nothing whatsoever to do with serving Mother Earth or its people.

The concept of Sustainable Development as it was sold to the public was never a grassroots ignition. It is a top-down product of a world management system dressed up in green language which will allow yet another vast channel of technocratic control to merge with fake land ethics, laws, and regulations. Environmental protection of fauna and flora will certainly take place but society will be in no position or have the legal right to enjoy it! Nature’s new found liberalisation, sagely bestowed by global stewards will always know best it seems.

The UN works through the emerging civil society which is actually made up of thousands of NGOs with largely the same beliefs as UN personnel. They are not necessarily representative of society as a whole. Via summits, national and international conferences, seminars and local outreach groups policy documents are formulated drawn from the gospel of Agenda 21, they are all overseen by Maurice Strong’s UNEP. Under the ever-present influence of NGOs and environmental pressure groups, local governments become un-elected members of “stakeholder councils” managing “empowerment zones”, or “enterprise committees” and “visioning councils” determined to adhere to the concepts of SMART growth. *

Despite many recommendations still to be implemented, the UN has spent – and continues to spend – millions of dollars whilst holding various international meetings which are attended by hundreds of political leaders, corporate CEOs and thousands of other non-governmental organizations who expend equal amounts of time drafting massive policy documents. Clearly, this is much more than a whimsical green distraction. They mean business. Although Agenda 21 is entirely “voluntary” and “non-binding” that is not how it’s playing out on the ground. Using an array of Delphi-based psychological techniques a veritable army of “facilitators” are descending on American cities and part of the neighbourhood councils and planning associations. Often, eco-SMART NGOs are nothing more than pincer movements into communities in order to extract support for redveelopment proposals under Agenda 21/SMART auspices.  Most importantly, they represent a fusion of corporate and government sponsorship which stands to make a lot of money for both parties at great expense to specific communities, most notably in suburbia.  As these new vested interests are drawn from Rockefeller-type Foundations and corporate CEOs it does not bode well for the future that will be defined by the disempowerment of civil society and the dilution, if not disappearance of truly representative local government and community.

The ubiquity of SD activists and advocates becomes especially problematic when so many of these people are tuning in to what is after all, a genuine wish to protect the environment and improve the quality of societies for future generations. Yet there is a refusal and a lack of knowledge as to how an ideology and system can be co-opted and used for something quite different. The young’s natural passion to protect the Earth is strong, so too are the dangers of the dogma and fascism that are intimately connected to the history of the environmental movement. With the present global economic system in terminal decline and media propaganda as potent that it has ever been, we are reminded of Peter Staudenmaier’s observation in the context of rising fascism: “The attraction such perspectives exercised on idealistic youth is clear: the enormity of the crisis seemed to enjoin a total rejection of its apparent causes. It is in the specific form of this rejection that the danger lies.” [6]

So Agenda 21 network continues to infiltrate every aspect of society and local development plans from biosphere reserves, wetlands, greenways, railways, carbon footprints, partnerships, conservation /environmental protection, land use, environmental protection, heritage areas and planning to name but a few. While securing more legislation and government control it reduces the rights of the individual and usurps power from local, democratically elected councils. Perhaps most importantly, after our exploration of eco-fascism and depopulation we should be extremely concerned when a vast blueprint for ecological management and sustainable development is sourced from those who cheerily support perpetual war, state-sponsored terror, cartel capitalism, eugenics, forced sterilisation; a global tax, (usually on those who will be least able to pay) and massive reduction of the human population by any and all means to reach that objective.

So, the perceived belligerent fears from the right-wing resistance to Agenda 21 stems from a much more complex dynamics playing out in plain sight. Therefore, there needs to be much more bipartisan support for rooting out what really gives on this issues both politically and within the public. The refusal to address legitimate fears from liberal and left-wing groups displays the same tunnel vision.

UN-Logo© infrakshun

Building on the advances made from the 1992 Rio summit, the Rio+20 Summit on Environmental Sustainability took place in late June of 2012. Though no real breakthroughs or commitments were forthcoming, the “larger achievement [may have been] making global sustainable development goals a priority on the international agenda” according to a recent Council on Foreign Relations report. The summit produced Rio+20’s outcome document, The Future We Want the greatest contribution of which “… catalyses a global call to make sustainable development priorities central to global thinking and action.” [7]

Whether this is a turn for the better for humanity is entirely dependent on whom we choose to preside over this transformation. Some of the perceived enemies of environmental activism such as large polluting corporations and bureaucratic government departments also play a part as effective double agents on the panoramic stage of social engineering. Presenting and even encouraging the rifts between the two serves to prop up the illusion that the overall conflict is real when it is all part of the programming. That is not to say that is ALL a conscious ruse. Clearly not. But we can hopefully begin to see how these ambitious macro-social projects connect like a vast net across the globe. And a big part of this eco-Intelpro involves the confiscation of land.

The rush to grab land and resources across the world has defined a new form of colonialism in the 21st century. China, America, Britain and other European countries are leading the way in carving up African land under the pretext of offering environmental or humanitarian assistance. [8]But how many of us know about the vast tracts of land which are being bought up by federal government programs in partnership with Establishment families, and hundreds of conservation trusts and environmental groups a bit closer to home?  In the US these “buffer zones” and “rural corridors”; heritage sites and designated conservation areas of “re-wilding” which are falling under the protection of SD and biological diversity legislation sometimes run into anything from 100,000 to 25 million acres where human presence is seen as “interference.” [9]

The re-introduction of species which have died out in specific regions, the management of forests and lakes, reservoirs and various types of land reclamation rides on the powerful and deep-seated wish for people to care for their environment. Difficult as it may be to accept – especially for ecologists and environmentalists who are traditionally some of the most passionate in their beliefs – the US is experiencing a gradual but inexorable large-scale theft of US land by those with money and power in order to turn almost 50 percent of America into protected habitats and reserves for the good of biological diversity. It is a theft because the vast majority of the public has neither access to, nor the necessary information to make an informed decision as to where they stand on the issue. Thanks to the usual lack of proper investigative reporting by the US media and the constant noise and distraction of Republican and Democrat knockabouts, the required public awareness on this agenda is non-existent and thus proceeds with ease, with locals and their councils oblivious to the larger implications, all too often embroiled in the impenetrable bureaucracy that SD has spawned.

The Wildlands Network (formerly the Wildlands Project) is more radical than the vision of SD though it is sitting alongside its ideological platform quite comfortably. The United Nations gave its seal of approval in its “Global Biodiversity Assessment” when it mentioned The Wildlands Project as a possible approach to preserving biological diversity. [10]  It is vast in scope, extending from one end of the continent to the other. Equally impressive is the enormous list of Wildlands Network affiliated organisations and groups, councils and foundations which in turn have sub-categories of affiliates which are thousands in number. And what do you know? The Rockefeller Foundation is there among the donators as is The Turner Foundation, from media mogul and depopulation advocate Ted Turner, the largest sponsor of environmental causes in the country. The Environmental Grantmakers Association makes sure a steady stream of cash keeps this long-term project afloat and on course.

The network was created from the concept of “re-wilding” a term first coined by conservationist and activist Dave Forman, one of the founders of the group Earth First! The term described the creation of “reserve networks” across the United States which would provide vast areas of wildlife habitat, the goal being to maximize biological diversity across the land. Humans, however, do not feature in this grand plan. Having laid the blueprint for the Wildlands Network in the 1980’s with colleagues Howie Wolke, and Bart Koehler, conservation biologists Michael Soulé and Reed Noss continued to build on the ideas, most notably in an influential paper published in 1998. [11]While Forman’s involvement has faded somewhat, Reed Noss, has become the leading spokesman for the Plan, expanding the possibilities with federal government support.

The philosophy which suffuses the Wildlands Network is Deep Ecology. In the words of Forman, from his popular 1991 book Confessions of an Eco-Warrior: “The only hope of the Earth is to withdraw huge areas as inviolate natural sanctuaries from the depredations of modern industry and technology. Move out the people and cars. Reclaim the roads and the plowed lands.” Deep Ecology is essentially a mix of the rich tradition of Pantheistic nature worship with streams of Taoism, Buddhism and American and German eco-revivalism thrown in. It is in fact, a beautiful philosophy. However, in radical hands it becomes something quite different.

Norway’s premier Philosopher Arne Naess and recognised pioneer of the Deep Ecology movement drew up eight basic principles that describe the philosophy:

  • The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves. These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.
  • Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realisation of these values and are also values in themselves.
  • Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.
  • The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life demands such a decrease.
  • Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.
  • Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.
  • The ideological change is mainly in appreciating life quality rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.
  • Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary change. [Emphasis mine]

Eminently sensible. Except that this same philosophy is also embraced by eco-fascists who define our “obligations”, in slightly more authoritarian ways thereby hoping to change political policies to a situation “deeply different from the present.” We might hazard a guess what they might be prepared to do to get that ideal differential.

Deep Ecology has many positive connections to past traditions which involve co-creating with Nature rather than exploiting it, thus exhibiting a much needed humility. Nonetheless, since it appeals to those harbouring eco-fascistic views and authoritarian designs it is easily absorbed into the Agenda 21 framework.  Despite the central premise of Deep Ecology as philosophical (which often means impractical) and a guide to a deeper awareness of nature and our relationship to it, in the context of Pathocracy it becomes another nail in the coffin of true awareness; the case of the horse bolting before the cart. When Deep Ecology becomes grafted on to the State – much like anything other truth – it cannot become anything else but subverted.  The radicalism of the Wildlands Network in combination with Agenda 21 and Deep ecology advocates has the potential to become something quite different to the romance of us all returning to a more harmonious connection to the Earth. Such radicalism invites it as John Davis, editor of Wild Earth magazine exemplifies: “Does all the foregoing mean that Wild Earth and The Wildlands Project advocate the end of industrialized civilization? Most assuredly. Everything civilized must go …”

So, to what does the Wildlands Network comprise? Reed Noss defines it in the following terms: “A wilderness recovery network is an inter-connected system of strictly protected areas (core reserves), surrounded by lands used for human activities compatible with conservation that put biodiversity first (buffer zones), and linked together in some way that provides for functional connectivity of populations across the landscape.” [12]

 agenda21wildlandssustainabilitydiagramThe 4C’s meets the 3E’s 

The characteristics of these core areas include the expansion of parks and “wilderness areas to include adjacent old growth, roadless areas, and ecological areas,” where size means “bigger is better.” (So much for E.F. Schumacher’s Small is Beautiful) Existing roads would be closed and “Human access greatly reduced or eliminated altogether.” Noss interjects that: “Many ecologists (myself included) would just as soon see huge areas of land kept off limits to human activities of any kind.” [13] “Buffer zones” allow for some human activity, while “corridors” permit wildlife to travel freely from one core area to another, extend reserve habitats; allow seasonal migration genetic interchange between core reserves; “provide for long distance migration in response to climate change” with the average width of corridor one mile wide where little or no human use is encouraged. All of which seems to confirm the idea of that humans are to be controlled and managed in order to preserve Nature. The Integration and marriage of the natural world of which we are a part seems an unworkable hypothesis, but such segregation would certainly appeal to a super-rich Elite who have made it their long-term purpose to live in these reserve habitats while the rest of us get used to living in Mega-cities.

SD principles and the parallel visions of conservation biology share a special place in collectivist minds. The three pillars of SD which can be found in almost every article or paper related to Agenda 21, ecology and environmental ethics are: “Equity”, “Economy” and “Environment” or “The three E’s of Sustainability.” (See above). Each sector requires a total transformation towards global government. The “transformation of society” under the auspices of the UN and its agencies, the Club of Rome and many other think tanks and non-elected institutions and NGOs is not about a paradigm shift to more freedom and ecological emancipation but to accept a carefully engineered set of beliefs in order to welcome its exact opposite. Equity, Economy and Environment are embedded in the collectivist-corporatist ethos of the 4Cs of: commercialisation, consolidation, centralisation and control. Equity is about social justice that will put nature before humans and thus create the conditions by which private ownership is diluted and eventually seen as “eco-unfriendly” and against the “greater good”. Integrated into a SMART infrastructure a police state will be relatively “soft” due to the pervasive sanitising of consciousness drawn from socio-eco-engineering principles. In this way, Fabian economics has always been behind much of the new ecological visions currently capturing the minds of the Western young bureaucrats and technocrats. It is the core force behind the 4Cs, the 3Es and the 3EM.

Ecologists, environmental activists, politicians and bureaucrats are so bound up in green visions or the cash incentives for green technology that they cannot seem to entertain the possibility that such huge projects may serve a totalitarian game-plan. As discussed the shadow of right-wing paranoia and conspiracy theory lunacy, rather than a cold-bloodied appraisal of some obvious sign-posts holds sway.  One wonders if the Rockefeller, Oppenheimer, Windsor, and Rothschild dynasties and the protégés of One World, eco-fascists are going to be inhabiting the carefully regulated, SD-designed SMART cities of the future where everything conforms to a bland monotony of ecological and technocratic “efficiency”. I doubt it. The poor of course will remain where they always have – in centralised systems, on the margins of society scratching a living without access to nature (or nurture) while the middle class will be suffocated under more and more eco-SMART technocracy with very little ability to free themselves from  biometric “convenience.” The Elite will be residing in “secure zones” with grand ranches, mansions and resorts set deep in the wilderness away from the human species that does not respect her; like demi-Gods on earth whose stewardship and spiritual status demand their presence as custodians of the New World Religion. The World State writ large. Meantime, the rest of humanity will be corralled into cities known as “safe zones” and far away from “sacred” wild lands. These mega-cities will house what’s left of the human populations, after wars, disease and manufactured crises have done their work…

Dystopian fantasy? Hysterical hyperbole?  Or perhaps we really believe that all of this is really for us, and everyone will be happily paragliding, hiking and rafting the rapids at their leisure from core wilderness centres to the grand corridors of their choosing?

In the next post we will look deeper into the Sustainable Development, UN Agenda 21 and how it is currently affecting cities in America.

 


* In the unlikely event that you still unclear as to what SMART growth actually means, wikipedia provides as good a summary as I can come up with describing it as:

“… an urban planning and transportation theory that concentrates growth in compact walkable urban centers to avoid sprawl. It also advocates compact, transit-oriented, walkable, bicycle-friendly land use, including neighborhood schools, complete streets, and mixed-use development with a range of housing choices. The term ‘smart growth’ is particularly used in North America. In Europe and particularly the UK, the terms ‘Compact City’ or ‘urban intensification’ have often been used to describe similar concepts, which have influenced government planning policies in the UK, the Netherlands and several other European countries.”

As we get to the section on Technocracy you’ll see how snugly all this “exciting” and “liberating” SMART technology fits into Sustainable Development and Agenda 21.


Notes

[1] ‘Sustainable development,’ U.S. Department of Agriculture.
[2] http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/
[3] The Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
[4] ‘Is your private property in jeopardy?’ By Henry Lamb, October 31, 2005 | http://www.sovereigntinternational.com
[5] CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web, Federal Regional Authorities and Commissions: Their Function and Design Updated September 21, 2006, By Eugene Boyd, Analyst, Government and Finance Division. http://www.hsdl.org
[6] op. cit. Staudenmaier.
[7] ‘Examining Rio+20’s Outcome’ Authors: Suan Ee Ong, Senior Research Analyst, Multilateralism Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University Rômulo S. R. Sampaio, Professor of Environmental Law, Getulio Vargas Foundation Andrei Marcu, Senior Advisor and Head of Carbon Market Forum, Centre for European Policy Studies Agathe Maupin and Elizabeth Sidiropoulos, Research Fellow and National Director, South African Institute of International Affairs. http://www.cfr.org/ July 5, 2012.
[8] The Land Grabbers: The New Fight Over Who Owns The Earth by Fred Pearce. Published by Eden Project Books. 2012.
[9] The Wildlands Project: Summary: http://www.wildlandsprojectrevealed.org
[10] Section 13.4.2.2.3, page 993, ‘Global Biodiversity Assessment’ Cambridge University Press, 1995.
[11] Michael Soulé and Reed Noss, “Rewilding and Biodiversity: Complementary Goals for Continental Conservation,” Wild Earth 8 (Fall 1998) 19-28.
[12] “The Wildlands Project: Land Conservation Strategy, ”by Ross F. Need, Wild Earth Journal, .January 1992.
[13] Maintaining Ecological Integrity in Representative Reserve Networks by R. Noss, World Wildlife Fund Canada Discussion Paper, 1995. p.12.

Dark Green VIII: Waldheim’s UN, Lebensräum and Sustainable Development

The-United-Nations“Governments must take action to support institutions and mechanisms that will improve coherence, as well as bring about integrated policy and action across the social, economic and environmental pillars.

Current understanding supports the creation of a Sustainable Development Council within the UN system to integrate social, economic and environmental policy at the global level.

There is also strong support for strengthening global governance by including civil society, business and industry in decision-making at all levels.”

State of the Planet Declaration


Strains of eco-fascism have been worming their way through the insides of the United Nations and genuine initiatives since it first arrived on the scene, care of Rockefeller funding. The Malthusian influence didn’t fully get underway until 1967 with the Trust Fund for Population Activities, a result of the 2nd World Population Conference in Belgrade, two years earlier. After this, a steady outflow of population bomb hysteria linked with environmentalism, education, international aid and health began to emerge. Ever looking for a way to push through its “scientific technique” of humanism, UNESCO held their conference on the Scientific Basis for the Rational Use and Conservation of the Resources of the Biosphere in 1968, complementing the publication of Paul Erhlich’s book The Population Bomb in the same year. The World Population Conference in Bucharest followed in 1974. [1]

Pertinent to our exploration of Elite-induced eco-fascism, Austrian-Czech Kurt Waldheim seems to have played an important part in its genesis when he became General Secretary of the United Nations from 1972 – 1981. When we look at his background it is not hard to understand why.

After the German annexation of Austria in 1938 Waldheim was attending the Boltzmangasse Consular Academy and the University of Vienna’s Law Faculty which had built a tradition of Nazi recruitment and indoctrination. [2]In the same year, 20-year old Waldheim became a member in the National Socialist German Students’ League (NSDStB), a division of the Nazi Party. Not long after, he applied to become a member of the mounted corps of the SA but it is not clear if he actually became a member. [3]In early 1941, he then served as a squad leader in the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front and soon discharged from further service after being wounded, spending the rest of the war studying for a law degree at the University of Vienna. He also married Elizabeth Ritschel in 1944 who was uncompromising in her belief in Nazism. [4]

It seems Waldheim did rather well as an intelligence officer of the Wehrmacht obtaining the rank of Oberleutnant. According to The International Commission of Historians Waldheim’s functions in the German Army Group E from 1942 – 1945 were as: “… an Interpreter and liaison officer with the 5th Alpine Division (Italy) in April/May 1942, O2 officer (communications) with Kampfgruppe West in Bosnia in June/August 1942, Interpreter with the liaison staff attached to the Italian 9th Army in Tirana in early summer 1942, O1 officer in the German liaison staff with the Italian 11th Army and in the staff of the Army Group South in Greece in July/October 1943 and O3 officer on the staff of Army Group E in Arksali, Kosovska Mitrovica and Sarajevo from October 1943 to January/February 1945.” [5]

Kurt Waldheim

Kurt Waldheim

By 1943 he was in Yugoslavia and embroiled in the massacres carried out by the German and Croatian military. Waldheim claimed no direct knowledge of these atrocities but had heard such things took place. He stated he had been “horrified” but believed he was powerless to prevent such things from happening, which was probably true. [6]However, as author William Walter Kay mentions, this was standard protocol in German Army units in which Waldheim served. He tells us: “In 1942 the multi-national Axis army enacted a system of reprisals for acts of resistance including punitive executions of suspects. SS units randomly lynched Serbs from Belgrade street-posts to meet quota. Worse atrocities were committed by the Axis puppet state of Croatia – a front for the genocidal Ustasha movement …”

Walter Kay also notes: On March 19, 1942, after a spike in resistance, the German 12th Army decreed: ‘The most minor case of rebellion, resistance or concealment of arms must be treated immediately by the strongest deterrent methods… It is better to liquidate 50 suspects than have one soldier killed’ ” These standards were mild. In Bosnia, where Waldheim was, ratios were: ‘100 Serbs to be executed for every German killed, 50 Serbs for every German wounded.’ ” [7]

What came under the spotlight more than any other period of Waldheim’s history is his role in Operation Kozara in 1942. Also known as Operation West-Bosnian by the Axis, fierce fighting took place around the mountain of Kozara in North-Western Bosnia involving Yugoslav Partisan resistance against the Germans, Croatians and Chetniks. Over 25,000 Serbs were sent to concentration camps and many civilian atrocities carried out by the invading forces [8]

One of the biggest and most notorious camps was Jasenovac based in Ustaše (Croatia).

In 1942, when victory over the Bosnian Resistance had been declared, Waldheim was cited for valour before joining General von Stahl’s 72,000-troop Battle Group in West Bosnia in order to rout the partisans once and for all. The General went to work in no uncertain fashion, ringing the surrounding area with barbed wire before advancing. The aftermath saw: “4,735 insurgents/suspects were executed and 70,000 civilians were shipped to camps. Rape and robbery were rampant.” Indeed, Waldheim’s role as an intelligence officer was to keep casualty statistics and to organise transportation for detainees. His name appears on a fine paper commemorative ‘list of honour’ a Wehrmacht document for distinguished service in Kozara. The Croatians awarded him a silver Crown of King Zvonimir medal “for courage in the battle against the rebels in West Bosnia.” [9]

Not exactly standing on the side-lines.

Yet, once again, Waldheim claimed ignorance even though he was in the thick of atrocities and as an intelligence officer it was his job to collate statistics and be acutely aware of the numbers game relating to all aspects of operations. One such operation took place in the Greek city port of Salonika on July 11, 1942 where: “… several thousand Jewish men were corralled into the city square and forced to perform difficult yoga positions under the hot sun while German soldiers hooted, clapped and took photographs. Elderly Jews died on the spot. The photos circulated widely in the Axis press including in a Croatian newspaper popular where Waldheim was then stationed.” [10]

If not directly involved, Waldheim was part of the enabling intelligence apparatus which had detailed knowledge of atrocities. As Walter Kay highlights: “Deporting Jews was a labour intensive operation, much discussed by the soldiers, and unavoidable to an intelligence officer like Waldheim who later pled ignorance.” [11]

Without such enthusiastic support for Croatian fascism Waldheim’s name would scarcely have appeared on the Wehrmacht’s “honor list” of those responsible. In the same year and probably as a reward for a job well done, Kurt Waldheim was allowed time off to complete his PhD thesis ‘The Concept of Reich according to Konstantin Frantz.’” In it he argued that “… the Germanic Reich was the new ‘body of Christ’ inspired by the theory of Prussian statesman Konstantin Frantz (1817-1891) who was part of the Lebensräum ethic of a Greater Germany extending to across Western and central Europe. Poland, Belgium, Switzerland, the Balkans, and the Netherlands were all to be absorbed into the Reich according to Waldheim’s thesis.[12]

Part of the problem with Waldheim’s denial of his own history is the access he had to military information, special briefings, reconnaissance reports, logistics and statistics. As an intelligence officer he was at the sharp end of covert operations. This was best represented by his position as an “O3” officer which: “… were the army’s best informed men.” Walter Kay’s research reveals that Yugoslavian authorities accused Waldheim of involvement in the destruction of villages and massacring civilians, stating: “Orders were planned in detail with the cooperation of the [intelligence] unit at the army corps headquarters, and in particular with the collaboration of Lieutenant Waldheim.” They relied on numerous direct witnesses including three officers from General Loehr’s staff who confirmed Waldheim’s job was “to offer suggestions for reprisals, the fate of prisoners of war and imprisoned civilians.” [13]

After the war in 1947 Waldheim’s record was formally presented to UN War Crimes Commission by the Yugoslav delegation. 75 percent of Yugoslav prosecution requests were rejected by the British-chaired UN Commission. Yet the following year prosecution was recommended in part from British and US veterans’ eyewitness reports and persistent allegations of “putting hostages to death and murder.” [14]And here’s where Waldheim managed to get away with the biggest conjuring trick of his life, which would eventually result in the helmsman ship of the United Nations.

After the summer of 1945 where he had spent most of it in a POW camp he cut a deal with Anglo-American Intel and offered all he knew. In return, Waldheim gained safe passage back to Austria and a new life knowing that various intelligence agents had powerful bargaining chips over his destiny. With the War Crimes Commission concluded by the end of the 1940s with over 36,000 accused Nazi criminals dismissed without trial communism took over as the new bogeyman and Nazis disappeared into the system. His fate was very much in their hands. Like the Nazis of Operation Paperclip and those that fled to Brazil and Argentina it was life that could be both lucrative and powerful provided you would play ball. Waldheim was no different to many who had their war experiences washed cleaned in return for determining policy for vested interests. The next step was to get Waldheim into a position where he could be useful.

After Austria joined the UN in 1955, it was Waldheim who led Austria’s UN delegation until in 1965, whereupon he took up the post of Austrian diplomat in Czechoslovakia. With a failed bid for the Austrian Presidency with an ultra-right wing People’s Party in 1971, he was ushered into pole-position as an authentic candidate for UN Secretary-General.

Quite apart from the fact that Waldheim had a negative reputation within the UN itself (in one individual’s opinion: “a scheming, ambitious, duplicitous egomaniac ready to do anything for advantage or public acclaim.”) he presided over the greening of the institution in ways that established a cast iron, bureaucratic platform for the global warming industry and subsequent green washing in general. [15]In effect, Waldheim used the UN to usher in his global Lebensräum, a practical expression of Nazi land ethic and race theory. EU states supplied 40 percent of the UN’s budget and 50 percent for funding and programmes with most UN head offices located in Europe and two-thirds of environment offices and staff situated in Europe, prominence and complete bias of European Elite dominated the UN during his tenure. American and Russian influence was eroded by allowing mini-states to enter the consensus building process and creating complex and protracted meetings within the UN General Assembly (UNGA).

Meanwhile, Waldheim allowed a particular brand of European environmentalism to take precedence within the UN. Euro-Environmentalism and the UN are now one and the same with the UN’s Economic Commission of Europe (ECE) – which works closely with European Environment Agency (EEA) headquarters in Copenhagen – forging major treaties and subsidiaries for their implementation sourced from a £30 million annual budget. It is linked to the UN Millennium goals project by overseeing better coordination and continuing to usurp its otherwise economic mandate by making sure the “rational use of natural resources and sustainable development” continues apace. [16]

UN Agenda 21 and sustainable Development being the pinnacle of elite objectives. More on this in future posts.

In 1971, Maurice Strong had commissioned a report on the state of the planet, entitled “Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet” co-authored by Barbara Ward and Rene Dubos. 152 experts had given their analyses as to the “State of the Earth”, the first report of its kind. This was to act as a foundation report for the first major UN meeting on the environment in Stockholm the following year.

When Waldheim chaired the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972 it was attended by 113 states, setting for a global environmental textbook for a new industry of activism, operations, institutions and organisations. Twenty-six principles were listed which member states needed to focus their attention, with education, overpopulation, awareness of biodiversity and conversation as the key proponents of a green campaign. Science and society did not feature. The framework for change was predicated on maintaining a capitalist system but placing the ecological principles in the consciousness so that they may be later expanded. In other words, exploitation of resources was fine as long as reserves were not depleted or the environment polluted.

UNESCO’s roots in depopulation, eugenics and humanism was dipped in Waldheim-Green and found to fit remarkably well. Mass education on the perils of global warming and ecological disaster was implemented. The world was running out of oil and radical change was needed in societies. Climate change became an eco-cause.

1971-72 saw a veritable explosion of environmental awareness. Limits to Growth was published, and Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) headed by Maurice Strong all arrived just a few months apart. The UNEP covers a complex range of issues including: the atmosphere, marine and terrestrial ecosystems, environmental governance and green economy. Developing international environmental conventions, promoting environmental science, information and policy integration with national governments, regional institutions and in conjunction with environmental NGOs occupies the headquarters, six regional offices and various country offices around the world. Based in Nairobi, Kenya, with offices worldwide, UNEP’s task was to: “organize regulation of industrial agricultural products, gather data on the detriments of mining, and formulate a global energy balance sheet. UNEP’s inaugural budget financed 100 air pollution measuring stations and 10 stations to record environmental change.” [17]We will be coming back to the UNEP presently. For now, we must jump forward fifteen years.

dreamstime_l_33071801© Cienpiesnf | Dreamstime.com – Go Green Transparent Colorful City

Happy colours! Volunteering and a bright fresh, SMART future for all! I wish that was the reality. This isn’t about tearing down optimistic, and sincere concern for our environment. It’s about calling out elite pathology masquerading as constructive discourse and positive action – and it goes deep indeed. Stay with me here as it’s going to be a long haul.

The term “sustainable development” emerged from the 1987 report of the UN’s World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (otherwise known as the Brundtland Commission) chaired by CoR member Javier Perez de Cuellar, of which Maurice Strong was also a member. (Surprise!) The report was entitled: “Our Common Future” and placed sustainability and the focus on environmental resource management at the forefront of UN projects.

The report stated that the governments of the world have a responsibility to “… maintain eco-systems and ecological processes for the functioning of the biosphere, shall preserve biological diversity, and shall observe the principle of optimum sustainable yield in the use of living natural resources and eco-systems.” [18] Sounds logical and responsible, as all these initiatives do until you read the small print and place it in context. The report defined sustainable development (SD) to mean: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” This means that: “Sustainable global development requires that those who are more affluent adopt lifestyles within the planet’s ecological means.” Which is an admirable desire though contradicted when: “Sustainable development can only be pursued if population size and growth are in harmony with the changing productive potential of the ecosystem.” Hence, the targeting of the third world and very little targeting of those who create and keep the systems in place that defines such a world.  [19]

Due to the vague definition of what constitutes SD, there is still no consensus as to what fulfills the criteria for sustainable practice. Consequently, it has been used to denote and define a wide variety of different beliefs and eco-ideologies from eco-psychology to green capitalism and even domains which have nothing to do with environmental concerns but may feature in the grand scheme of what is perceived as “sustainable.” After all, the architecture of global economics and the dynamics of geo-political strategies connected to securing the world resources can in no way be said to be sustainable. They are based on a “grab and run” mentality. But they both derive their impetus from the environmental fruits of water, energy and food. The sustainable development issue can be used to justify a form of security on the part of the Establishment in order to secure future generations (i.e. their families) with sustainable supplies, despite those resources being finite. That is not to say that SD should not be a vital part of humanity’s endeavours at the local and global level. However, “sustainable” is not synonymous with “green” but it can be a darn good pitch for neo-imperialism.

The recycling and alternative-energy industries employ millions while The World Bank and the UNEP use SD to select which projects to finance. So, if the company walks the green talk and donates to saving a patch of rainforest in the South, he receives the World Bank stamp of approval whilst the company continues to “slash and burn” the Northern section of the forest. Know that your massive mining project will be viewed with disdain by the Structural Adjustment Team? Create a tree foundation and pay the fine. Business will continue as usual, provided you have a good PR dept. Thus a new “Green Capitalism” emerged at the end of the Wall St. eighties which promoted “pollution control pays” as a slogan and where big multi-nationals realised: “environmental management is a powerful corporate tool for improving efficiency” and improving public image even if there was no real change in corporate objectives, commonly known as “green washing”. Which meant the greater the benefits the more willing corporations would be to pay a fine and everyone would be happy. This hasn’t stopped some of the biggest environmental organisations from happily snuggling up to the corporate sponsors.

Mike Wright editor of Green Futures magazine recently commented: “… when it comes to working with business in general, one thing is certain. If our society is to make the decisive shift towards a sustainable future which is so urgently needed, then we need business – including the world’s major corporations – to play a key role in making that happen.” [20] Unfortunately, the nature of the corporation and the financial architecture from which they are birthed simply cannot entertain such a “key role” no matter how hard its employees, environmentalists and the public may want it to happen. Unless that is such dynamics can be turned on its head so that new industries can be borne, tied into the exact same market wheel. If psychopaths cannot be cured and nor can business models cast in their image.

While corporations were “greening” so too was their counterparts in crime.

The World Bank, IMF and UN were tinged with green as part of the international environmental movement’s on going penetration of ecological reform set in motion by the UN’s own Kurt Waldheim. The irony is that advocates of sustainability and self-sufficiency for the developed and underdeveloped world alike see no problem working away within the Structural Adjustment Team who despite every green initiative and conference declaration remain a part of the very economic architecture they wish to dismantle. While the Establishment and the wealthy stay the same, the working class and poor bear the brunt of new ecological systems designed to bring the world closer to a sustainable vision.

One example of the SD complexity inherent in non-linear eco-systems is the latest excitement that is producing ethanol from corn to make fuel. This product was once heralded as a saviour of environmentally sound agriculture in much the same cynical way as GMO foods were for feeding the world’s poor. Although corn is a renewable resource and replacing petrol with corn ethanol seems like a reason to be hopeful. But the cultivation, harvesting and conversion of corn is extremely energy intensive. Even if you succeed in making ethanol more sustainable than petrol you will leave a trail of environmental and social carnage behind you. When you divert corn to make ethanol it translates as less corn to feed your cattle, less corn to feed people which means the cost of corn goes up. That means more land is needed to turn into farmland and depending on the country and / or region that can mean more pressure on fallow or rainforest land which is razed to the ground once more. Open to alternatives sources of fuel and energy still inside the insatiable market maw cannot work unless the root perceptions and thus the economic frameworks upon which they are based has also changed. There lies the real “World Problematique.”

Sustainable Development is a buzzword with the best of intentions behind it. But it remains to be seen how much authentic sustainability can truly take hold in the present. The depletion of natural resources is a reality as is the scope for implementing solutions from permaculture to woodland management. The dark side sees SD fall into the hands of the World State advocates and their technocrats who see it as an opportunity not just to protect Nature over man, but as another avenue from which humanity can find themselves (literally) trapped.

In the next post we will briefly look at the UN’s Rio Earth Summit where many of these ideas were firmly planted in our consciousness care of Maurice Strong. We will then return to  Sustainable Development and how it seamlessly interlocks with another domain currently being contoured away from true creativity and emancipation: SMART growth.

 


Notes

[1] p. 637; Encyclopedia of the United Nations and International Agreements By Edmund Osmancyzk, Routledge, New York, 2003 | ISBN 0415939208.
[2] ‘Austrian university confronts Nazi past’ by Wolfgang Freidl, The Lancet, Volume 356, Issue 9246, Page 1994, 9 December 2000.
[3] Report of the International Historical Commission of 8 February 1988, section on “Membership in National Socialist Organizations”, as cited for example in http://www.nationalsozialismus.at/Themen/Umgang/waldheim.htm
[4] Quoted in William Walter Kay’s article: ‘Waldheim’s Monster: United Nations’ Ecofascist Programme’ 2009. This was in turn sourced from; Waldheim; Bernhard; Rosenzweig Luc, Adama Books, New York, 1987 (p. 18)
[5] The Waldheim Report. Submitted 8 February 1988 to Federal Chancellor Dr. Franz Vranitzky (p.39).
[6] ‘Kurt Waldheim: Austrian head of the UN who as president of his country was later tainted by charges of complicity in Nazi atrocities’. The Times 15 June 2007.
[7] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting: Herzstein, Robert; Waldheim, The Missing Years; Arbor House/William Morrow; New York; 1988 (p.60 and p. 67).
[8] Bosworth, R.J.B. (2009). The Oxford Handbook of Fascism. Oxford University Press. p. 431. ISBN 978-0-19-929131-1.
[9] op. cit. Walter Kay.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Cohen p.85-87)
[14] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Cohen p 79 – 80)
[15] Ibid. (Walter Kay quoting Hazzard, Shirley; Countenance of Truth: The United Nations and the Waldheim Case; Viking Penguin; New York; 1990( p. 91)
[16] op. cit Walter Kay
[17] Ibid.
[18] Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment. (1987) http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm
[19] http://www.earthcharter.org 2009.
[20] ‘Sponsorship: green wave or greenwash?’ by Martin Wright, Green Futures, 19th July, 2012.

Dark Green I

By M.K. Styllinski

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

– Maurice Strong, founder of UNEP


darkgreen1

You might be feeling the pressure in the outside world right now – I know I am, which is why I want to go through these next series of posts on a subject that is dear to my heart: environmentalism and its relationship to the Establishment.

The Earth and Nature have been vitally important to my sense of well-being since I was a small child, with environmental activism part of my early youth, through University years and beyond. Yet, I found that here too, the corruption of ancient wisdom principles and the politicisation of a very genuine intent to care for our Earth has been taking place for decades, indeed, a core of corruption may have been seeded in the very institutions and beliefs of people for whom nature is primary to increasing harmony in ourselves and societies at large. Blindness to how belief and ideology can be inverted is never more applicable to environmentalism, to the point that a form of “ecointelpro”  and greenwashing has become quite sophisticated.

Most people will agree that the planet is facing an ecological crisis. Loss of habitat, species extinction, the pollution of our land, sea and air has manifested as a result of embracing a very narrow interpretation of reality. By mid-2012, 3,190,185 hectares of forest had been destroyed; 4,294,877 hectares of land was lost through soil erosion and degradation; 7,361,316 hectare of land lost to desertification and 6,007,084 tons of toxic chemicals had been released into the environment. On top of all that, and intimately connected with the above – 6,860,322 people have died of hunger so far this year; with 908,808,765 undernourished people in the world; 1,104,707 deaths from water related diseases and 815,378,542 people with no safe drinking water source at all. [1]

And on it goes…

Yet, we are, in a very real sense an integral part of Nature right down to our DNA; a consciousness pulsating within this precious biosphere which expresses itself in one of two ways: 1) A dynamic that promotes a sustainable, nourishing symbiosis of creativity and which easily sits alongside a cornucopia of meaning and cultivated harmony in relationships. 2) a dynamic that seeks only to take and feed, destroy and separate. It is devoid of meaning and purpose, rattling around in a system predicated on entropy and artifice.

It’s no surprise to anyone that this latter perception of reality has continued to characterise humanity’s socio-economic and cultural “progress” for two hundred years. As a consequence we live in an “Official Culture” which has been forced into being by investing in lies, propaganda, social engineering and over reliance on government and institutions. By now, it must be obvious to most rational people that we are enmeshed in a destructive matrix of consumption which continually mirrors the spiritual loss within, which in turn, manifests in a variety of unconscious ways. This learned pathology has become normal and passed on from generation to generation.

Is it any wonder that the Earth and Nature simply mirror this chaos?

The cause and effects have largely stemmed from a scientific materialism and the political and economic principles it spawned, mostly laid down by the adoption of 19th Century industrialisation. This in turn, was a process of attrition which had accelerated after the Age of Reason and which saw humanity’s relationship to Nature and aligned spiritual traditions relegated to the background. The consequence of this was a mind-body split as Newtonian and Cartesian thought claimed the high-ground. Not that the dark world of superstition and ignorant belief didn’t need a candle lit at its centre – it most certainly did. But then the illumination turned into a raging inferno.  Our dog-eat-dog Earth has been subjugated, dominated and controlled so that it was inevitable that Capitalism would go beyond its initial remit – which was a short-term illusion in itself – and turn the world into a vast processing plant of consumption reaching deep into the soul of humanity and replacing it with a spiritual abyss.

The deep, multifaceted connection that humanity has with its environment and its present dormancy can be seen all too clearly in the lives of children being shaped by our SMART, technological society. An article from the UK’s Independent newspaper reported on BBC Wildlife magazine’s 2008 survey of British youth the results of which showed: “Children have lost touch with the natural world and are unable to identify common animals and plants … Half of youngsters aged nine to 11 were unable to identify a daddy-long-legs, oak tree, blue tit or bluebell … The study also found that playing in the countryside was children’s least popular way of spending their spare time, and that they would rather see friends or play on their computer than go for a walk or play outdoors.” [2]

Studies have also shown that children haven’t a clue about the origins of the food they eat, thinking that cheese comes from plants, and tomatoes grow underground. But this is just a symptom of a more troubling pattern of a growing separation from Nature. A ground-breaking study from October 2013 by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) found that 80 percent of UK children had no connection to the natural world. Higher rates of mental illness will continue to rise among our children as the connection between Nature and their consciousness is replaced by the lure of the digital screen. Inculcated narcissism from entertainment, glamour and the continuing revolution in technology has combined with the last few generations of parents who have grown up with an increasing dysfunctionality. This has had a profound influence on children’s ability to access and build a relationship with the natural world and by extension, their inner world.

2013-05-23 15.40.04

© infrakshun

One of the most complex and intractable problems facing humanity at the moment is not just the consequences of the ecological crisis but the beliefs embedded in banking, the economy, culture and the politicisation of science on which so many mere opinions and the actions in response to these crises are now based. If we have learned anything about these current crises and the true lessons of history it would be 1) that our actions are inseparable from our local and global environment 2) the latter has been founded on the power of the State as arbiter of values and the glue of social cohesion. If the whole concept of Statism is to rule from a hierarchical, centralised place of reductionist authority,  which effectively translates as a replacement to true self-sufficient clusters of community, then it is also inevitable that human beings would yearn for true conscience and freedom of mind, even if unconscious in that desire.

That every sentient life form is interconnected and interrelated in extraordinarily complex ways has surely never been a more pressing lesson to learn. We live in symbiotic relationships all the time and it is the denial of that fundamental truth that has left us prey to those who operate outside such laws and thrive on disconnection, separation and irresponsibility. Scientists are re-discovering that a small, “Butterfly effect”, whether seemingly positive or negative by intention, will have short-term and long-term consequences for the whole. Whether catastrophic or creative depends entirely on how well we understand a) the psychology operating in the human sphere which inevitably impinges on our environment in a multitude of ways and b) how well we comprehend the cycles, seasons and knowledge in Nature so that we can use practical, pragmatic and sustainable methods of survival that do not exceeds our means; working with Nature instead of exploiting her.

Yet, the authoritarian personalities played like puppets by the psychopath have tutored us from birth to adopt social dynamics which are diametrically opposed to any semblance of harmony, by default. It is little wonder that the world mirrors our own confused inner ecology where the sense of the sacred and ancient wisdom lies deeply buried in the shadows of our collective unconscious. If Planet Earth begins to reach a point of no return – which appears to be so at this period of history –  then rest assured, Mother Earth will hit the reset button, something which She and her human brood have been through many times before. In fact, cataclysms are a familiar part of our history. They may even be part of a cosmic cycle of change that visits planets periodically according to a precise set of criteria. Our Earth may simply wipe the slate clean and achieve her chaotic “balance” once more. We, on the other hand, might find ourselves on the receiving end of that planetary spring clean and revisiting the Ice age.

Nothing like a dose of global catastrophe to simplify your life.

Comet-hits-earth

© unknown

There is something more to the ecological awareness that is rapidly returning to humanity. Like all positive expansions in human consciousness which are founded on a practical methods to nourish, protect and embolden people’s lives, a new paradigm ends up being filtered through the still dominant and crystallized traditions , only to swiftly lose their dynamism and lustre. In other words, truth becomes distorted and turned upside down so that the movement, scientific discovery or humanitarian effort remains transitory. And so it is with our attempts to place biodiversity and the vital presence of our environment at the top of the agenda.

We are lacking knowledge as to just how easily this sincere love for the natural world can be hijacked and used against us.

For instance, that means the fossil fuel lobby, authoritarians on the religious right as well as politically correct left-liberals, human-influenced global warming advocates, are all equally culpable in creating the noise, though in entirely different ways. We must transcend the cultivated divisions completely and see it through the eyes of the Establishment and how they benefit from such conflict.

The above quote by green guru Maurice Strong may give you pause. What is the exact meaning behind his idea of “responsibility”. By what means are we encouraged to see the collapse of industrial civilisation?  This raises further questions:

1) What will be replacing this old order?

2) Who will be at the helm?

3) Can we truly trust those in power based on the lessons of the recent past?

4) Are they encouraging genuine, practical environmental solutions or are they merely change agents with another agenda entirely?

That agenda may be gleaned from the past posts in this blog and transposed onto the subject of environmentalism. I certainly won’t be able to answer all those questions; I may even end up going down the proverbial garden path, but perhaps from some of the information presented you can make up your own mind.

Similarly, it is not my intention to discredit the passion and relevance of environmentalism or ecological concerns. As stated, I have a deep connection to Nature and consider myself one of its many advocates. But we need new eyes to view this complex subject without recourse to a juvenile interpretation of reality. We must employ a cold-blooded evaluation of our cherished beliefs regarding environmental activism just as we would any politicised and abused arena of social discourse and action. We must do this so that the manipulation of our green emotions does not blind us to following the same pied pipers who have led us down so many dead-ends while reaping the socio-economic benefits. This is especially important, not just in relation to climate change and our disappearing biodiversity but how best we can prepare for what is to come, rather than try to prevent what may be unstoppable.

Ceasing all production and use of gases and chemicals which destroy the ozone layer is admirable and doable. Yet, can we for instance, halt climate change if it is actually a natural – albeit complex – cycle of global warming and cooling? And what if there is huge capital in promoting iffy science and divisions so that the bigger picture of cosmic influences and Earth changes are obscured?  Similarly, are there benefits to the elite in pushing through an environmental agenda on top of a SMART society for further control rather than a benevolent protection of all our futures? We’ll look at both those issues later on.

The history of ecology and the environmental movement has gone through considerable change in the last 100 years and it is only now that many are able to see how compromised it has become and how vital it is to wrest back some kind of sanity from those who want to exploit genuine concern for the Earth and to divert the altruism of many involved in environmental activism and animal welfare. Where there is unregulated emotion “to save” and “do good” along with a good dollop of dogma then you will find ample opportunities for ponerological influences to find their way in. Perhaps it is for this reason that the Irish politician and philosopher Edmund Burke warned: “It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for its welfare.”

greenpeacesmaller

getdegrees.com/ | Activism for the Earth is constructive in principles but what about the change agents? Do we really know what we are protesting for and against?

At no other time can we see how strongly these negative attributes are being displayed within the various environmental fields. The love of this Earth and the profundity of Nature means that passion to protect runs very deep indeed. Accordingly, the ideologies which have grown out of that devotion to save and nurture through various indigenous cultures and historical groupings of environmental activism has meant the seeds of inversion were always there, since the concept of protection, wildness and purity instantly aligns itself with so many authoritarian principles. As a result, we are now seeing a mixture of fascism, fanaticism, bad science, tribalism and tunnel-vision battling for supremacy in environmental science and activism. Its complete co-option is on a knife-edge, if it hasn’t happened already. That possibility may be a very hard pill to swallow for environmental activists but very important that such awareness is part of the movement as a whole.

The subject is huge and only the briefest look at some of the relevant themes and protagonists which have helped and hindered the cause will be possible. In terms of an emerging Pathocracy, ecological ideology has long played a part in neo-feudalist aspirations. Obviously, there are many of us who have a healthy relationship to the Earth and our place in its cycles. Our focus is on those who opened doors to its ponerisation as counterbalance to the positive work that is undoubtedly being carried out day after day around the world. It is imperative that we become aware of the spectre of eco-fascism in order to do justice to true environmentalism and the emergence of sound ecological principles.

Ironically, It is through the romantic desire to “save” or “heal the Earth,” force change and halt industrial “progress” at whatever the cost, which could enable the channels for inversion. That is not to say that the mindset which produced industrialisation wasn’t a disaster on many levels – it most certainly was (and is). The key issue remains the subversion of sound ideologies and intents and our willingness to look at our role in its genesis.

The next post will explore the relationship between fascism and ecology and how the Establishment psychopaths have gradually infected the movement as a whole.

 


Notes

[1] http://www.worldometers.info/
[2] ‘Children Have Lost Touch With Nature’ The Independent January 8, 2008.

Save

World State Policies X: MONSANTO and Seeding the Future

“The hope of the industry is that over time the market is so flooded [with GMOs] that there’s nothing you can do about it. You just sort of surrender”

– Don Westfall, biotech industry consultant and vice-president of Promar International, in the Toronto Star, January 9 2001.


monsanto11

                       VISTOENLAWEB.ORG

With its astonishingly aggressive lobbying and ruthless application of gene technology, the Monsanto Corporation lies at the top of the GMO pile. if ever there was a psychopath in corporate form, Monsanto fits the bill. As the largest producer of glyphosate herbicides, Monsanto’s most popular brand, “Roundup” has proved to be a health hazard for humans and animals and just about any sentient being unfortunate enough to come into contact with its mass spraying. The Environmental Protection Agency has officially stated that Monsanto is a “potentially responsible party” for 56 contaminated sites in the United States.

Not content with routinely damaging the health of its employees or residents living nearby, the company was involved in yet another controversy when introduced recombinant Bovine somatotropin (rBST), a synthetic hormone injected into cows to increase milk production. Unfortunately for Monsanto there were substantial side effects for humans, including the reduction of natural defences against cancer. [1]Cows became seriously ill with various diseases most notably mastitis, an infection of the udder which contaminates milk with pus. It was found that the unnatural increase in milk production at the expense of the cow’s health was ultimately passed on to the consumer along with the high level of antibiotics inflicted on the cows in order to combat the original side-effects. Before selling the operation, it did not stop the company from conducting a large-scale lobbying campaign to prevent labelling of rBST milk which was largely successful.

Phil Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications summed up the regulatory ethos in 1998: “Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is FDA’s job.” And when the Food and Drug Administration has been holding hands with Monsanto throughout its career of maximizing profits over people, this statement amounts to nothing more than callous irresponsibility. [2]

With its legendary history of environmental pollution and such heart-warming products as defoliate Agent Orange in the Vietnam War, the manufacturing of DDT and widespread innovation in plastics and subsequent spread of PCBs, Monsanto feels right at home when virgin forests need clearing and indigenous peoples require to be forcibly removed if the bribes prove ineffectual. The soya bean crops can and will be planted, come what may. The dominant types of GM foods as transgenic plant products include corn, canola, rice, and cotton seed oil, all of which Monsanto produces, distributes and directs according to a military-evangelical blend of national and international lobbying. Argentina was an early target of the GMO junta and represents a classic case-study of geo-political strategy working in unison with government and agribusiness’ interests. The soya bean has radically changed socio-economic and environment of the country. The displacement of other forms of often natural crop cultivation, pasture-based cattle ranching and the destruction of virgin forests and grasslands continues apace, with China and Europe benefitting from its substantial exports.

Economically, the divide between the rich and poor always becomes more pronounced when mass farming is introduced. Argentina has seen hundreds of thousands of workers forced off the land and a rise in poverty and malnutrition since the imposition and subsequent dependency on the soya bean. According to official statistics: “20.6 percent of Argentina’s 38 million people are poor. But in the North Eastern region, where soy is king, 37 percent are below the poverty line, and 13.6 percent live in absolute poverty, unable to feed themselves properly.” [3]

individual_monsanto_federal_position-largeThe revolving door of individuals working for Monsanto and Federal government (click on the image to enlarge) Source: http://occupy-monsanto.com/

Back in the mid-1970s Kissinger, as a Rockefeller provocateur, had considerable experience in fermenting dissent in other countries. Chile had been a textbook case of black operations let loose against a democratically elected leader and replaced with General Pinochet’s brand of fascism. According to declassified US State Department documents released years after the event, the same formula was envisaged for Argentina in a 1976 meeting between Argentine Foreign Minister, Admiral Cesar Guzzetti; Rockefeller’s political go-between vice-president Nelson Rockefeller and Kissinger as Secretary of State. Author F. William Engdahl notes: “Rockefeller even suggested specific key individuals in Argentina to be targeted for elimination. At least 15,000 intellectuals, labor leaders and opposition figures disappeared in the so-called ‘dirty war.’ ” [4]

Argentina began its trade in slavery and an increase in minority wealth and social divisions. With the help of foreign investment and support from Monsanto and the big six grain conglomerates such as Cargill, wealthy landowners worked to erode traditional workers’ rights and grab as much extra land as they could. Upwards of 200, 000 rural famers and their families have been displaced from generationally owned land, inevitably finding themselves destitute or living hand to mouth on the outskirts of cities or in slum areas. Prior to Wall St. and their banking families descending on Argentina, it enjoyed one of the highest living standards in Latin America. In fact, Soy is now the main export of the nation, amounting to one-third of the country’s total exports. [5]

Both in Latin America and the USA, Monsanto is now able to hold farmers to ransom by forcing them to sign binding contracts where they must agree not to re-use saved seeds. They must also pay new royalties to Monsanto every year. The fact that farmers have been working the land for thousands of years with their own seeds provided by Nature, free of charge is a minor quibble for the corporation and its shareholders. Despite most of the world’s farmers being too poor to afford the company’s GMO license and various other seed fees, most fall under Monsanto’s targeted multi-million marketing and live to bitterly regret it. Such a system is another manifestation of the neo-feudalism so favoured amongst the Establishment. Seeds have become an intellectual property and by extension, the genetic source of Nature as patent.

With the advent of soya bean monoculture and mass farming techniques comes the intensive use of agrichemical herbicides and pesticide, and preferably for Monsanto, their favourite and highly toxic “Round up.” Ironically, parallel to much lower yields with Roundup crops compared to traditionally grown soya, health issues for rural communities, farmers and animals soared as a result of constant exposure to the spraying crops increased. They found their own natural food cultivation destroyed by the chemicals not having the built-in gene resistance found in the large Monsanto designed soya bean crops.

In 2002, it was found by the UK’s Cropscience company that chicken fed glucosinate-tolerant GM maize Chardon LL were twice as likely to die prematurely than chickens in the control group. And from the same year up to 2005, four Italian universities published articles revealing adverse effects from GM soya which targeted pancreatic, hepatic (liver) and testicular cells in young mice. [6]

In 2005 and 2006, the Russian Academy of Sciences conducted an experiment on female rats fed with glyphosate-tolerant GM soya and reported that the female rats produced an excessive number of stunted pups, over 50 percent of them dying within three weeks and the other half, sterile. Accusations of faulty data could not be levelled at the experiment as it was repeated many times with the same result. [7]

Many more studies have not only shown the toxic effects on plants and animals but the economic and environmental unsustainability of herbicide and pesticide use. As the top-soil becomes essentially burned away, more and more agrichemicals are needed to maintain a false fertility derived from a dying soil and zombie crops saturated with chemicals. This inevitably leeches into the animal and human food chain adding to the concern of health issues and the already questionable nature of GMOs themselves. Meanwhile, great profits continue to accrue for the CEOs and their shareholders safely tucked away behind their boardroom desks, buffered from the carnage of the ecological and socio-economic disaster that claims the most vulnerable, a dynamic which has continued to characterise large-scale GMO cultivation.

As F. William Engdahl observes, the consequences for the environment and human health remain worrying:

“By 2006, together with the United States, where GMO Monsanto soybeans dominated, Argentina and Brazil accounted for more than 81 percent of world soybean production, thereby ensuring that practically every animal in the world fed soymeal was eating genetically engineered soybeans. Similarly, this would imply that every McDonald’s hamburger mixed with soymeal would be genetically engineered, and most processed foods, whether they realized or not.” [8]

With the help of WTO sanctions, strong-arm tactics of companies like Monsanto and the background support of a Washington Government firmly on board, the ambitious objective of controlling the world’s food supply by seeding every country with GM crops is well underway. In 2002, aid agencies were instructed by the US State Department to take their orders from the government agency USAID and to:

“… immediately report to them any opposition in a recipient country, to GMO food imports. They were told to collect documentation to determine if the anti-GMO attitude of the local government was ‘trade or politically motivated’ If they determined it was trade motivated, the US Government had recourse to the WTO or to the threat of WTO sanctions against the aid recipient country, usually an effective warning against poor countries.” Even emergency famine relief aid came in the form of: “… genetically modified US surplus commodities, a practice condemned by international aid organizations, as it destroyed a country’s local agricultural economy in the process of opening new markets for Monsanto and friends.”

In the same vein, the cosy relationship between agri-business, GMO firms and the US State Department and its agencies is obvious when food aid organisations ship only grain that has been provided by USAID – and that meant only genetically modified US grain. [9]

In the late 1980s and 1990s Monsanto’s gene technology produced a breakthrough which would enforce the rights of the company’s gene patents and fees. It was a chilling development in biotechnology fittingly named “Terminator” where the seeds would be genetically modified to “terminate” themselves after just one harvest season. A toxin was released before the seed ripened which caused the plant embryo to die. This meant that the thousand year old tradition of saving of seeds for the next harvest would become illegal under agribusiness.

The Terminator seeds or patented ‘suicide’ seeds, officially termed GURTs (Genetic Use Restriction Technologies) hark back to a project more than twenty years old as part of the early experiments in genetic engineering. By 1998 the US Patent Office had granted joint ownership to US Dept. of Agriculture and the Delta & Pine Land Company for ‘Control of Plant Gene Expression’ Patent No. 5,723,765. [10]

In the official D&PL SEC filing it states:

“The patent broadly covers all species of plant and seed, both transgenic (GMO-ed) and conventional, for a system designed to allow control of progeny seed viability without harming the crop’. […] ‘One application of the technology could be to control unauthorized planting of seed of proprietary varieties … by making such a practice non-economic since non-authorized saved seed will not germinate, and, therefore, would be useless for planting.” With almost salacious anticipation: “the prospect of opening significant worldwide seed markets to the sale of transgenic technology in varietal crops in which crop seed currently is saved and used in subsequent seasons as seed.” [11]

The company is clearly saying that dis-empowering farmers is economically viable by preventing any escape from the GM juggernaut once it has duped its passengers into hitching a ride. It is a disturbing declaration of intent and planning which has been pressing ahead since the first GM trials back in 1982.

fluorescentTobaccoA second generation of Terminator technology was developed at the end of the 1990s called T-GURT seeds, or Trait Genetic Use Restriction Technologies. Otherwise known as the ‘Traitor’ process the plant’s fertility and its genetic characteristics can be controlled by the introduction or restriction of a chemical inducer, rather like a light switch which could be turned on or off depending on what you wanted the plant to do. It was cheaper and less complicated to produce than Terminator seeds. Tied to the agrichemicals, it was potentially a big bonanza with total control over what the farmer could and couldn’t do, charging him every step of the way. Of course, the gene resistance to certain pests would be provided by Monsanto or Syngenta who held the patent rights. You wanted your GM crops to flourish then you had to pay. If farmers tried to buy “illegal seeds” from other sources then the chemical compound needed to turn on the resistance gene would be missing. As with any commercialisation and consolidation process, more farmers in the developing world needed to be “persuaded” to climb aboard and the big companies were not afraid of using the tactics of bribery, coercion, and illegal smuggling.

The health issues still loom large in Monsanto’s continuing fortunes. For instance, in 2003, the company’s Bt maize hybrid left five Pilipino villagers dead and many seriously ill. They tested positive for antibodies to the Bt protein. [12]  The Law of Unintended consequences frequently arrives in the absence of humility. As many experts have warned, the rise of superbugs and their ability to adapt in response to highly synthetic crops and their chemicals was inevitable. A research paper published in the latest issue of the journal GM Crops & Food [13]detailed the problems from the Western corn rootworms which have been busily munching their way through genetically modified maize. A 2010 sample of the rootworm population had “… an eleven-fold survival rate on the genetically modified corn compared to a control population.” Strong resistance to GM corn is becoming the norm. As farmers become dependent on GM crops the outlook is bleak for both agriculture and consumers. Adaptation, resistance and increasing recovery rates amongst the burgeoning population of super-bugs means ultimately the poor and vulnerable and the burgeoning global middle-class will foot the bill, not just for corn which has become a vitally important derivative product, but for a range of foodstuffs and consumables in general.

The drop in GM crop yields will continue just as many farmers continue to plant, while receiving very little in return and where rising costs outweigh the perceived benefits. As food prices steadily rise in response to yet another manipulated economic downturn, Elite families like the Rockefellers are not remotely concerned. After all, they sell organic food and non-GMO food in their various cafeterias and conference venues, [14]so why should they be concerned about their agri-engineering of the world’s populations if it gives them a good return on their money and reduces the population growth that much more?

This hypocrisy gives the global population two forced choices: eat poisoned GM foods or die of starvation.

The Obama Administration carried on the tradition of staying snug and warm in the corporate pocket as the above diagram illustrates. To that end, bought-and-paid-for Congress happily allowed their puppet president to sign into law the Agriculture Appropriations Bill 2013. This effectively gave immunity from prosecution for agri-business, which means MONSANTO has a free reign to do as it pleases.

Rows of a Carrot Field

As we have seen so far in this series,  the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Population Council, the World Bank and the UN Development Program and their close working relationship with the WHO banded together to introduce covert sterilisation programs using vaccinations. Lest we think that the merging of birth control and eugenics is just paranoid ramblings of researchers with too much time on their hands, keep in mind the sources behind the genetic engineering and biotechnology are not necessarily those who work within these fields. It then becomes easier to determine which direction humanity is being led.

Transgenic plants have already taken on frog and fish genes but in the context of birth control the Rockefeller passion for a depopulated world, the geneticists have been busy bees. Take Epicyte in San Diego for example, which held a press conference in 2001 to make an announcement about its work stating:

“Epicyte reported that they had successfully created the ultimate GMO crop-contraceptive corn. They had taken antibodies from women with a rare condition known as immune infertility, isolated the genes that regulated the manufacture of those infertility antibodies, and, using genetic engineering techniques, had inserted the genes into ordinary corn seeds used to produce corn plants.” [15]

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is another media darling that has rode the wave of philanthropy and praise while concealing its real agenda. While anthropogenic global warming (AGW) (rather than Climate change) is fast being seen for what it truly is: a politically driven power-grab, this apparently escaped the notice of the billionaire in his TED talk of 2010 where he followed the Al Gore (Goldman Sacs) propaganda of CO2 emissions as the global culprit for ensuing global catastrophe. Eager to show his depopulation credentials by highlighting dire projections of a global population at 9 billion by 2050, he made this curious comment early on in the talk: “… if we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps about 10 to 15 percent.” It is here we see that Bill has enthusiastically bought into the Elite nonsense and has put his money where his misinformed mouth is by pledging $10 billion for vaccines in order: “… to fight disease among the “world’s needy children.” [16] That is an extraordinarily large sum by anyone’s standards and truly admirable if it is founded on real science and long-term beneficial effects.

Unfortunately, neither of those possibilities is likely to be true.

billgates

Bill Gates

Bill Gates is famous for his relentless drive and constant activity. He is the CEO of the Microsoft Corporation representing one of the most all-encompassing monopolies on earth. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have used an almost inconceivable amount of dosh dispensed to needy causes around the world. It also helps that multibillionaire Warren Buffet added to the already blistering endowment total of $34.6 billion with a gift of a further $30 billion dollars’ worth of shares in one of his businesses which no doubt made Bill & Belinda supremely happy.

Apart from Gates’ chosen ignorance and/or indifference regarding the toxic health effects and long-time propaganda relating to GM foods and their use and distribution, vaccines are still Gate’s number one passion. His foundation decided to commission Japanese scientists to make another whacky vision a reality by engineering vaccines into mosquitoes that will deliver the inoculations through their bite. Bill & Melinda had stalwart support and involvement from the World Health Organisation, The PEW Charitable Trusts, and government agencies in the United States, England and Malaysia. They secured the development and promotion of the GM mosquitoes under the pretext of eradicating Dengue fever which was virtually non-existent until it suddenly popped up in Florida just after the genetically-modified vaccine carrying mosquitos was released. [17]In truth, GM mosquitos were released into the environment in the Cayman Islands in 2009 but the CIA sponsored experiments in bio warfare had been using mosquitoes in Florida for several decades so it was no surprise to find Dengue fever conveniently appearing to support Bill and Melinda’s quest for mass vaccination and the depopulation they so earnestly seek.[18]

Where Rockefeller’s and Gates’ visions really fuse is through the little known project that has been quietly carrying out its operations in the remote location of Svalbard, Spitsbergen, on the Barents Sea near the Arctic Ocean.

It was claimed by Norway without much fuss in 1925 because no one really wanted it. Nonetheless, on this barren outcrop of rock inside the mountain lies the “doomsday seed bank” or more officially known as the Svalbard Global Seed Vault where a motley crew of Monsanto, the Syngenta and Rockefeller foundations and Bill Gates have been investing millions; squirreling away different varieties of seeds from all over the world, ‘so that crop diversity can be conserved for the future,’ according to the Norwegian government. [19] They have the capacity to store more than 3 million seeds tucked safely away from whatever catastrophe they envisage befalling the Earth’s environment. As F. William Engdahl not unreasonably, asks: “What future do the seed bank’s sponsors foresee, that would threaten the global availability of current seeds, almost all of which are already well protected in designated seed banks around the world?” [20]

Up until 1998, Margaret Catley-Carlson was working for John D. Rockefeller’s Population Council (the eugenics inspired front for “family planning and sterilisation) and now chairs the Rome-based Global Crops Diversity Trust (GCDT) founded by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and Bioversity International (formerly the International Plant Genetic Research Institute), a branch of the CGIAR. Other GCDT members read like an Elite encyclopaedia of Establishment insiders from the weapons industry to Hollywood, biotech companies to bankers, all of whom share the same entropic perception of reality that hasn’t changed for two hundred years. With such rampant colonisation of the developing world; ecologically disastrous consequences from invasive technology like Terminator and Traitor; the death of traditional farming practices and the fake harvest gains they engender, the construction of the Doomsday Seed Vault surely raises urgent questions as to its true nature. It represents a significant biotechnology resource in combination with other seed banks around the world, all of which are owned and run by the same six agribusiness partnerships and their affiliated think-tanks and top-tier organisations. The Svalbard seed vault has the capacity to house over 4.5 million seeds, but to what end?

frohvelv_svalbard_Svalbard Global Seed Vault (left) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation HQ (right)

When you have the likes of Bill Gates, Dupont, Monsanto, Syngenta and the Rockefellers getting together for a joint venture you can be sure that it is most certainly not for altruistic reasons but to make a big, fat profit. However, they are not just in it for the money. On the one hand, the “Green Revolution” and the monoculture expansion continue to make inroads into Africa while on the other, they preserve seed diversity in a “doomsday vault.”

Is it not chilling that the guardians of this seed diversity are corporations and foundations pushing for a biotechnological free-for-all with a history of rapacious corporate predation and the funding of social control and eugenics?

***

The nature of psychopaths in power demands the introduction of long-term ideas that facilitate the reduction and dilution of the global population. Social dominators and authoritarian personalities are attracted to romantic notions of a World State and a neo-feudalism in order to maintain Elite bloodlines. Is it possible that eugenic beliefs of Anglo-Saxon superiority and various military-corporate-occult machinations are a cover for the mass culling and manipulation of “normal people” in favour of psychopathic dominance? This obsession with genetically altering nature has a variety of disturbing off-shoots in this context.

If we cast our eye back to the discussion of Israeli ethnic specific weaponry, the advances in genetic bio-warfare and interest in eugenics and place this in context of population reduction, is it really so far-fetched to expect that genetically modified crops may serve a more sinister purpose at the very top of this agricultural pyramid? A book called BattleField of the Future has a chapter written by Lt. Col. Robert P. Kadlec, USAF entitled: “Biological Weapons for Waging Economic Warfare.” Kadlec refers to cost effective and economically viable nature of biological weapons and warfare (BW) stating: “Not only is BW more affordable, but militarily significant quantities of BW agents (kilograms) in legitimate biological laboratories make BW production easy to accomplish and conceal. Any nation with a moderately sophisticated pharmaceutical industry can do so.” He then remarks on GMO-based biological weapons of mass destruction, the use of which: “… under the cover of an endemic or natural disease occurrence provides an attacker the potential for plausible denial. In this context, biological weapons offer greater possibilities for use than do nuclear weapons.” [21] Indeed, MIT biology professor Jonathan King says that the “… bio-terror programs represent a significant emerging danger to our own population,” adding: ‘while such programs are always called defensive, with biological weapons, defensive and offensive programs overlap almost completely.’ [22]

If we recall the Rockefeller history and Kissinger’s “Food as a weapon” politics and the US military fetish for bio-warfare then we must also entertain the probability that genetic engineering serves a variety of purposes all of which have nothing whatsoever to do with the betterment of humankind. If the spectre of bio-warfare and the weaponisation of food are part of the “invisible hand” of Pathocratic rule then we can expect a future planted with the same dark seeds.

There may be a further reason why the Elite are falling over themselves to eradicate a large quota of the population, build their bunkers and conserve various seed species. Do they have the inside knowledge that “something wicked this way comes”? The rise in cases of Ebola and various strains of Bubonic plague and the possibility of adaptive and muting strains may well indicate a strange confluence of natural occurrences and synthetic manipulation connected with the above bio-warfare. Further, if you are aware that the Earth endures terrain changes and cyclic catastrophes throughout its history with a similar cyclic manifestation of disease carried by cosmic harbingers such as comets and meteors, knowledge of such a confluence may be known by many at certain privileged levels. They may be at least partially aware of myth and science that tells us that we are way over due for another periodic of environmental and cosmological upheaval. Specific preparations would ensue, especially if you seek to retain control and protect your place at the top of the pyramid after the dust and ashes have settled.

Whatever the truth, it seems we won’t have too long to wait before we all find out.

In the next series of posts we will look into how the Establishment has co-opted environmentalism with special attention to the idea of eco-fascism and its traditional alignment to elite ideology.

——————

For news, resources and activism please visit:  monsantowatch.org

 


Notes

[1] Hankinson SE, Willett WC, Colditz GA, Hunter DJ, Michaud DS, Deroo B, Rosner B, Speizer FE, Pollak M (May 1998). “Circulating concentrations of insulin-like growth factor-I and risk of breast cancer”. Lancet 351 (9113): 1393–6. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)10384-1. PMID 9593409. / Pollak M (June 2000). “Insulin-like growth factor physiology and cancer risk”. Eur. J. Cancer 36 (10): 1224–8. DOI:10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00102-7. PMID 10882860. / Sandhu MS, Dunger DB, Giovannucci EL (July 2002). “Insulin, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), IGF binding proteins, their biologic interactions, and colorectal cancer”. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 94 (13): 972–80. DOI:10.1093/jnci/94.13.972. PMID 12096082.
[2] ‘Playing God in the Garden’. The New York Times by Michael Pollan October 25, 1998 The New York Times Magazine. p. Section 6; Page 44.
[3] ‘Soy – High Profits Now, Hell to Pay Later’ By Marcela Valente , Jul 29 , 2008 (IPS)
[4] op. cit. Engdahl (p.178)
[5] Javier Souza Casadinho, “Expansión de la soja en el Cono sur” (“Expansion of Soy in the Southern Cone”), Centro de estudios sobre tecnologías apropiadas de la Argentina Red de Acción en plaguicidas de América Latina (Center for the Study of Appropriate Technologies of Argentina, Pesticide Action Network Latin America) (Source Watch)
[6] GM Crops the Health Effects, The Soil Association 2007 | http://www.soilassociation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=SqDvBO1pyEUpercent3D&tabid=390
[7] ‘Weaponized Food and Medicine is Bad for Your Health’ by Paul Fassa, Natural News, August 25, 2009 | http://www.naturalnews.com/
[8] op. cit. Engdahl (p.190)
[9] op. cit. Engdahl (pp.267-268)
[10] United States Patent 5,723,765 Oliver, et al. March 3, 1998: Oliver; Melvin John (Lubbock, TX), Quisenberry; Jerry Edwin (Idalou, TX), Trolinder; Norma Lee Glover (Quanah, TX), Keim; Don Lee (Leland, MS) Assignee: Delta and Pine Land Co. (Scott, MS) The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of (Washington, DC) Appl. No.: 08/477,559. http://patft.uspto.gov/
[11] op. cit. Fassa.
[12] Ibid
[13] ‘Western corn rootworm and Bt maize: Challenges of pest resistance in the field’ Volume 3, Issue 3 July/August/September 2012. Authors: Aaron J. Gassmann, Jennifer L. Petzold-Maxwell, Ryan S. Keweshan and Mike W. Dunbar. http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/gmcr.20744
[14] ‘Gates and Rockefeller Cafeterias Reject Monsanto GE Foods 01 March 2012. | http://www.templestreamxangablog.com
[15] op. cit. Engdahal (p.270)
[16] ‘Gates’ Vaccine Boost’ UPI, Jan. 29, 2010.
[17] PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases – http://www.plosntds.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pntd.0001502
[18] ‘Viruses and the GM Insect “Flying Vaccine” Solution’ by Brandon Turbeville, Activist Post December 13, 2010
[19] ‘‘Doomsday Seed Vault’ in the Arctic – Bill Gates, Rockefeller and the GMO giants know something we don’t’ By F. William Engdahl Global Research, December 4, 2007.
[20] Ibid.
[21 Battlefield of the Future: 21st Century Warfare Issues Editors: Barry R. Schneider, Lawrence E. Grinter Revised Edition 1998. PDF http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/ Chapter 10 Biological Weapons for Waging Economic Warfare, Lt Col Robert P. Kadlec, MD, USAF (p.251).
[22] op. cit. Engdahl (Global Research)

Save

The Z Factor XV: Inglorious Human Rights

“Ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized,…”

– UNICEF, Children in Israeli Military Detention: Observations and Recommendations (2013).


  unicef

Israeli West Bank Barrier otherwise known as “The Wall”| Photo from the cover of UNICEF’s 2013 report Children in Israeli Military Detention: Observations and Recommendations (2013).


Jewish cultivation of victimhood and the mythologising of certain events in history have been used to affect a form of thought control that confers a mighty buffer to criticism. This serves to prop up a lasting deference and preferential treatment at both the socio-cultural and political level. But what of vengeance? Does the atrocious human rights record by Israelis have anything to do with Amalekian revenge and their association with Arabs as the New Nazis in waiting, should they be given power and equal rights?

Inglorius Barsterds, a 2009 film written and directed by Quentin Tarantino goes some way in explaining the perceptions of some of in the global Jewish community regarding the ideas of revenge and victimisation. Producer Lawrence Bender, after reading the first draft of the film script exclaimed: “… as a member of the Jewish tribe, I thank you, … because this movie is a fucking Jewish wet dream.” The film’s executive producers Harvey and Bob Weinstein, also reportedly “… enjoyed the film’s theme of Jewish revenge.” [1]

I  bet they did.

The film is set in Nazi-occupied France during World War II and follows the exploits of a group of Jewish-American soldiers known as ‘The Basterds’ as they go about inflicting various forms of Tarantino-esque revenge upon the Third Reich while going under cover to assassinate high-ranking Nazi officials. It is a nicely crafted film, musically rich, inventive, and visually powerful; chock full of comic-book humour and film culture references. As we’ve come to expect from Tarantino, it is also gratuitously violent and patently immoral.

Represented as cathartic “kosher porn” according to one of the Jewish actors who had a leading role, the film quite literally exorcised the Jewish archetypes of passivity and victimhood into an unbridled blood lust of revenge. While Tarantino revels in his own pornographic love of violence in a war-time setting, it perversely delves into some very dark arenas of Jewish lore with somewhat disturbing results. In attempting to come up triumphant by dramatically reversing Jewish guilt, passivity and victimhood, it merely creates their nemeses.  Nevertheless, Jewish influence in the entertainment industry and our Official Culture being as it is, we can’t be too surprise that it was deemed a resounding success by most critics and audiences.

However, a few were not convinced including author and critic Daniel Mendelsohn who found the portrayal of Jewish-American soldiers mimicking German atrocities done to European Jews disturbing and went to the heart of the matter  He when he stated: “ … Tarantino indulges this taste for vengeful violence by—well, by turning Jews into Nazis.” [2] The Jewish press, summed up Tarantino’s style of film making as lacking any kind of depth or subtle understanding and when faced with Nazis and Jewish retribution it was inevitable that audiences would be served with an: “… alternative to reality, a magical and Manichean world where we needn’t worry about the complexities of morality, where violence solves everything, and where the Third Reich is always just a film reel and a lit match away from cartoonish defeat.” [3] To which Tarantino would probably say, is exactly the point.

It’s only “entertainment” right?

inglourious_basterds_poster1-horz

Promotional Posters for Quentin Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds (2009)

The fact that the film not only went down a storm in Israel only serves to reinforce the idea that most Israelis and Jewish-Americans seem to be happy with the fact that Jews exacting revenge by using the same methods of destruction is without any moral ambiguity: “The ‘chapters’ of the movie showing Nazi-scalping, baseball bat-wielding Jews instilling fear into the hearts of the German army (and Hitler), as well as the bloodbath finale where Nazi elite are all burned alive, elicited cheers and hearty rounds of applause, while the man himself won a standing ovation as the end credits rolled.” [4]Such gleeful bloodletting and burning alive of Nazis is comfortably explained away by the right of victimhood while simultaneously fuelling Nazi-like behaviour that is not only deemed just and appropriate, but natural.  It was indeed a “wet dream” for Jewish movie moguls trumped only by Tarantino’s blatant and cynical pandering to the same, making sure he’ll always be welcome in Hollywood for a long time to come.

***

What makes this such an interesting mirror for the Israeli-Arab conflict is the current and appalling human rights abuse we see inflicted on Palestinians. It makes this “Jewish Fantasy” a far more disturbing and topical piece of propaganda than it first appears.

46811_157072180975064_155832537765695_550634_7658175_n

So, let’s have a look at some cold hard reality:

  • From September 29, 2000 to the present (March 2012) 125 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 1,471 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis [5]
  • 1,092 Israelis and at least 6,537 Palestinians have been killed; [6]
  • 9,226 Israelis and 45,041 Palestinians have been injured; [7]
  • 0 Israelis are being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 5,300 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel; [8]
  • no Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 24,813 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since 1967. [9]
  • The Israeli unemployment rate is 6.4 per cent, while the Palestinian unemployment in the West Bank is 16.5 per cent and 40 per cent in Gaza; [10]
  • Israel currently has 236 Jewish-only settlements and ‘outposts’ built on confiscated Palestinian land. [11]

Persistent violations of the Geneva Convention underlie these statistics with the Israeli military as the primary source for these atrocities. moreover, the brunt of these  attacks have been borne by Palestinian children. It is not hard to see that much of these human rights violations and deaths are sourced from beliefs that see Palestinians as not only unwelcome but less than human, a belief that has been instilled into socio-political consciousness of Israel for a very long time.

In 1973 Rabbi A. Avidan gave some religious “inspiration” for Israeli soldiers and subsequently published by the Central Regional Command of the Israeli Army. Although no other Rabbi or military personnel criticised the memo it was eventually taken out of circulation presumably due to conflict in the chains of command. It stated: “When our forces come across civilians during a war or in hot pursuit or in a raid, so long as there is no certainty that these civilians are incapable of harming our forces, then according to the Halakhah [Jewish religious law] they may and even should be killed … In a war, when our forces storm the enemy, they are allowed and even enjoined by the Halakhah to kill even good civilians, that is, civilians who are ostensibly good.” [12]

This “guidance” for the military feeds the parallels with Nazism and ethnic cleansing in general and brings the history of Biblical Jewish conquest into focus but also explains some of the brutality currently experienced by Palestinians, most notably children. A standard mantra for abrogating responsibility and to cover a probable shoot-to-kill policy is the following statement when the Israeli military killed yet another 3 year-old girl in her home: “A spokesman for the Israeli military justified the girl’s killing, saying that soldiers thought that Palestinian resistance fighters were somewhere in the neighborhood.” [13] This has remarkable mileage when you’d like to see the demise of a population. So, let’s review just a few of the many indiscriminate attacks against Palestinians under occupation.

In 2002, Palestinian Mohammad Abu Kweik, 8, his two sisters, Bara, 14, Aziza, 16, and their mother Bushra Kweik, 38, were killed when their Mitsubishi pick-up truck they were travelling in was bombed by Israeli forces in the West Bank Palestinian ghetto of Ramallah, she had picked them up from school. A car following the family was also hit killing two Palestinian children aged 4 and 16. Apparently, they were attempting to assassinate a man who was not in either vehicle. [14]

In July of the same year 11-year-old Khalil Ibrahim, was shot in the head in Rafah a part of the Gaza ghetto as he in a playground with his friends, two of whom were wounded. “The children were gunned down by Israeli soldiers from a Jewish guard tower as they were playing.” [15] In May 7, 2001 Israelis shelled homes in the Khan Yunis Refugee Camp and fired large-calibre machine guns which killed 4-month-old Iman Hijo, “shrapnel tearing a hole into the infant’s back.” The attack also wounded 24 civilians, he girl’s 19-year-old mother, as well as three brothers and sisters, were among the wounded, “including 18-month-old Mahmoud Hijo, [who] was in intensive care at Nasser Hospital with shrapnel wounds, doctors said.” … “Israeli troops also fired on the refugee camp’s Khaldieh School in the West Bank, killing a Palestinian school-teacher.” [16]

children-watchingIndiscriminate airstrikes (not Hezbollah’s or Hama’s shielding as claimed by Israeli officials) and violations of human rights were most evident in Gaza offensives by Israeli army between 2006 – 2009 causing a large spike in civilian casualties, the most brutal of which was the massacre of Palestinian women and children in Israel’s “Cloud of Autumn.” [17] When you grow up with state-mandated violence, hatred and poverty it is little wonder so-called resistance groups like Hamas and Hezbollah have formed. What needs to be borne in mind is that these are people who simply want to lead normal, ordinary lives with some dignity and respect for even the most basic human rights. According to American Educational Trust: “The majority of these [Palestinian] children were killed and injured while going about normal daily activities, such as going to school, playing, shopping, or simply being in their homes. Sixty-four per cent of children killed during the first six months of 2003 died as a result of Israeli air and ground attacks, or from indiscriminate fire from Israeli soldiers.” [18]

One report from Hebron describes the case of two year-old Burhan Sidir who was blown apart by Israeli mortar fire. His legs and head were found in the street and had to be retrieved by relatives. Can we even imagine the shock, grief and horror at having to pick up your son’s head from the street and carry on with your life?

Just think about that for moment when we become irritated that we’ve missed the last episode of Game of Thrones. Palestinians live with this kind oppression every day of their lives. everyone knows someone who has lost a son, daughter, mother, father, sister or brother.

Total disregard for Palestinian lives has given Israel numerous warnings for war crimes. [19]Palestinian inter-factional fighting between particularly between Hamas and Fatah on top of a fluctuating humanitarian crisis creates intolerable conditions for the young and old alike in the occupied territories. Worse still, is the spectre of targeted killings of children and teenagers by the Israeli military. Though it may not be official policy it appears to be a reality nonetheless, with higher level officers sometimes giving the order to shoot commensurate with reflexive actions of Israeli soldiers as whole which belie “a culture of impunity.” Many recent reports confirm what Palestinians have been living with for decades, namely that a Palestinian life – even a child – means nothing for many in the Israeli military and that an apparent unlawful death is like a fine for a parking ticket at around 100 or 200 shekel [$US22 or $US44]. Mandating a collective punishment on the Palestinian people is drawn from an ever-present emotion of revenge as Israeli soldiers explain:

In May 2004, Israeli forces launched an operation in southern Gaza that resulted in the expulsion of thousands of Palestinians from their homes, and the deaths of 50 Palestinians, up to half of whom were civilians Rafi, an officer in an elite unit connected to the air force, told how the entire mission was about revenge. “The commanders said kill as many people as possible,’ he said. Orders were also given to kill anyone seen on the rooftops of homes, irrespective of what they were doing or whether they were armed. Among the casualties were Asma Moghayyer, aged 16, and her brother Ahmed, 13, who were shot as they were collecting clothes from their rooftop washing line. Rafi described how his impression of the operation was ‘chaos’ and the ‘indiscriminate use of force’. ‘Gaza was considered a playground for sharpshooters,’ he said. [20]

The explanations that issue forth to justify attacks by Israeli Defence Forces hold less and less validity when such an unspoken policy exists as well as the numerous occasions of attacks in the refugee camps. When teenagers and children have been killed the Israeli military issues standard denials that anything untoward has taken place. How tragically ironic it surely is to see another kind holocaust going on in the occupied territories.


“(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers … heads smashed against the boulders and walls.”

— Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988


The baby in the photo (right) was killed by a bullet to the head during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. He is of one of thousands over the years, yet Israel is still considered a democracy.

What if it were your little niece or nephew?2308984369_6ef2825b9c_o

Your baby son or daughter?
Asma, 16, and her younger brother Ahmed, are typical examples of more “collateral.” They were both shot through the head by an Israeli soldier: “as they fed their pigeons and collected the laundry from the roof of their home in Rafah refugee camp.” Yet, just hours after the deaths Israeli officials were busy blaming Palestinians suggesting that the children had been planting bombs or killed accidentally by other external factors despite clear evidence to the contrary:

Dr Ahmed Abu Nkaria, who pronounced the Mughayar children dead, insists on proving the manner of their killing. He pulls Asma’s body from the mortuary’s refrigeration unit and fumbles through the teenager’s hair to reveal the hole where the bullet entered above one ear and ripped a much larger wound as it emerged above the other.

“The Israeli propaganda is that they were killed in a work accident. These are the kinds of lies they tell all the time,” he says. “They say all the dead are fighters. They say they do not deliberately kill children, but about a quarter of the dead from the first day of shooting are children. The evidence is here in the morgue. Does this girl look as if she was blown up by a bomb?” […]

Ahmed lies with 14 other bodies … He was a small boy who could not easily be mistaken for a man.

Dr Nkaria rolls the child over to show a tiny round hole in his forehead, just above his fringe. There is a much larger hole at the back of the head where the bullet came out. Neither Asma nor Ahmed show signs of any other injuries, particularly of the kind that might be expected from a blast, such as shrapnel spread across the body, burns, or mutilation.

“This is what the Israelis claim is a ‘work accident’,” Dr Nkaria says ….”This is Ibrahim Alqun. He is 14 years old. He was shot in the back of the head. The bullet came out of his right eye,” he says. The child’s face is badly mutilated by the wound. The bodies of the children continued to pile up in the mortuary yesterday.

Saber Abu Libda, 13, was shot dead by Israeli soldiers after he left his home in Tel al-Sultan in the morning to find water for his family. Dr Nkaria’s finger probes a tiny hole in the small child’s back which masks the devastation done to his heart as the bullet shot through it. “No one can say this child was a fighter. Look at the size of him and look where they shoot him – in the back, not coming to attack someone,” the doctor says. [21]

PALESTINIAN-ISRAEL-CONFLICT-GAZA

A Palestinian rescue worker carries the body of a child from the al-Dallu family into the hospital in Gaza City on November 18, 2012, after seven members of theal-Dallu family, including four children, were among nine people killed when an Israeli missile struck a family home in Gaza City, the health ministry said. AFP PHOTO/MOHAMMED ABED


The cases of children and teenagers being shot in cold-blood are numerous and amount to daily executions. A climate of fear is a constant part of Palestinian lives in the occupied territories and refugee camps.

Take the 2004 case of 13 year-old Iman walking to school and who accidentally found herself in Israeli army’s “forbidden zone” at the bottom of her street. It was broad daylight; she was carrying her satchel and wearing her school uniform. Only a few minutes later “the short, slight child was pumped with bullets. Doctors counted at least 17 wounds and said much of her head was destroyed.”

Standard denials followed from the military unit responsible for killing the school-girl. This was followed by an initial army investigation that cleared the commander of the unit of any wrong doing, despite his own soldiers accusing him of “… giving the order to shoot knowing the target was a young girl, and of then emptying the clip of his automatic rifle into her.”

Some Palestinian witnesses gave detailed descriptions as to what happened to Iman. Basim Breaka saw the killing from his living room: “Some soldiers were lying on the ground and shooting very heavily toward her,” …Then one of the soldiers walked to her and emptied his clip into her. For sure, she died on the second or third bullet. I could see her lying on the ground, not moving. I can’t imagine why that soldier wanted to shoot her after she was dead.” [22]

A prosecution case was brought by the family of Iman Darweesh al-Hams due to the lightness of the charges brought against the commander who was “reprimanded in custody.” Not one month later a tape surfaced showing exactly what happened to Iman and who was responsible. The whole Israeli unit continued firing at Iman well after she had been identified as a “frightened child,” and illustrated that both the unit and the commander were culpable. In the recorded exchanges someone in the operations room asks:

Iyman_Al_Hams1

Iman Al Hams was a 13-year-old Palestinian girl killed by Israel Defense Forces fire near a military observation post in a “no-man’s” zone near the Philadelphi Route on 5 October 2004, in Rafah in the Gaza Strip. (wikipedia)

“Are we talking about a girl under the age of 10?” The observation post, housed in a watchtower, replies: “It’s a little girl. She’s running defensively eastwards, a girl of about 10. She’s behind the embankment, scared to death.”

Not until four minutes later was it reported that the girl had been hit and had fallen. The observation post reports: “Receive, I think that one of the positions took her out.” … Operations room: “What, she fell?” Observation post: “She’s not moving right now.”

The tape records the commander as telling his men, after firing at the girl with an automatic weapon and declaring he has “confirmed” the killing: “Anyone who’s mobile, moving in the zone, even if it’s a three-year-old, needs to be killed.”

The soldiers said that the commander had fired two shots at the girl from close range as she lay on the ground before withdrawing, turning and “emptying his magazine” by firing some 10 bullets at her body. This account is broadly confirmed by the terms of the indictment issued this week. [23]

The Commander, “Captain R.” was subsequently acquitted and within a few months promoted to the rank of major. To further compound the misery of the al-Hams family the former Captain received “82,000 New Israel Shekels (roughly $17,000) to compensate him for his defense expenditures and time spent in jail.” [24] [25]

The family’s lawyer summed their feelings in a statement to the press believing that “… the commanders and the soldiers who fired should all have been charged with murder.”

Israel Gaza Conflict Enters Fourth Week

A homeless Palestinian girl stands in a burnt classroom at a United Nations school after it was hit by Israeli shelling on January 17, 2009 in Beit Lahia. | Photo: UNRWA photographer Iyad El-Baba/Electronic Intifada

In the summer of the same year Israeli soldiers killed a 13-year-old Palestinian girl as she was playing football near her home in southern Gaza. “Medics said teenager Sara Mahmud Zurub was shot in the chest in an outlying neighbourhood of the city of Khan Yunis on Monday and died on the way to the hospital.” The report also lists a separate incident where soldiers “soldiers shot dead a 50-year-old Palestinian woman in the south of the territory. The army claimed it had fired towards a site where mortars were allegedly fired from.” [26]

4 year-old Raghda al-Assar died in September 2004 of wounds she sustained two weeks before. She had been shot in the head by Israeli soldiers while sitting at her desk at elementary UNRWA school, in the southern Gaza Strip city of Khan Yunis: “The shooting began when Palestinian militants who oppose the Israeli occupation of Gaza launched a series of missiles at a nearby Jewish settlement. The UN says that the soldiers shot indiscriminately into the crowded refugee camp for more than half an hour.” “Headmistress Um Khalid says the incident has caused a lot of fear among her pupils, with some crying uncontrollably and others too afraid to come to school.” [27]

On the same day in Rafah, a 16-year-old Palestinian Mahmud Said Qishta, was playing outside his home in Rafah “when he inadvertently stepped on an explosive device left behind by the Israeli army.” He later died of his wounds. [28] Nor is this “careless” use of explosives exceptional. On Nov. 22, 2001, five Palestinian school boys ages 7 to 14 were on their way to classes in the Gaza strip when they were killed by a bomb planted by Israeli forces Palestinian children bid farewell to their deceased playmates, killed by a booby-trapped bomb planted on the path to their school by the child-killing Israeli army. [29]

While in March of 2008 in the Jabalya refugee camp 12 year-old Sami Abu Salem was killed by an Israeli sniper bullet. “An ambulance tried to reach her but Israeli soldiers opened fire at it, wounding a paramedic and causing the tires to lose air, and so she bled to death three hours after she was wounded.” [30]

Palestinian doctors and paramedics have been considered as targets by the Israeli military when attempting to rescue victims. In March 4, 2001 57-year-old Dr. Khalil Suleiman was killed while Israeli military opened fire on the ambulance attending to victims in the Jenin refugee camp. Three paramedics including a 9-year-old girl were wounded. [31] Tragedies and atrocities frequently occur at check-point crossing reminiscent of Nazi Germany: “An ill, one-year-old Palestinian baby died in his father’s arms on Sunday after the pair passed several hours under baking sun waiting to cross from the Gaza Strip into Israel, medics said. Ibrahim Abu Nahel and his father arrived at the Erez border crossing between Gaza and Israel at 8 a.m. on Sunday.” [32]

In 2008 Ramallah, an Israeli soldier received only 28 days confinement for causing the death of a Palestinian pre-term baby at a Hawara checkpoint near Nablus city. Israeli troops at the checkpoint “… prevented him and his pregnant wife from crossing the point in order to go to hospital despite the fact that his wife was bleeding. “… as they were waiting, his wife gave birth to their son Zaid who lived just for a few moments and after one hour and a half Palestinian paramedics arrived at the checkpoint and completed the birth process to save the life of his wife.” [33]

1_882127_1_341-horz

Palestinian girls traumatised at funerals of relatives and siblings | AFP

Harassment by Israeli border guards and airport security officials also takes place in the jolly land of Palestinian occupied rule. Israeli officials have been strip-searching girls as young as seven inflicting humiliation and indignity upon Muslims and Christians under the amused gaze of Israeli armed guards. Like so much Israeli unofficial policy it serves as another tool of psychological torture that pressures Palestinians not to return to Palestine.

One example comes from Oregon attorney Hala Gores from a Palestinian Christian family in Nazareth who had to leave due to Israeli discrimination and was strip-searched at just 10 years-old: “Gores has never returned to her family’s ancestral home in Nazareth, she says, in part because she does not want to repeat the experience of having no control over what is done to her. The Israeli policy appears to target only Christian and Muslim children, and is equally applied to those with Israeli citizenship and citizenship in other countries, including native-born Americans. There are no reports of Jewish children being strip-searched.” [34]

Perhaps one of the worst years for children murdered in the operations mounted by the Israeli military in Gaza was from June – September, 2006. Figures from the Palestinian Centre of Human Rights (PCHR) [35] put’s the whole tragic mess into perspective:

  • Bara Nasser Habib, 3 (hit by shrapnel to the head and body, Gaza City, 26 July)
  • Shahed Saleh Al-Sheikh Eid, 3 days old (bled to death after airstrike, Al-Shouka, 4 August)
  • Rajaa Salam Abu Shaban, 3 (died of fractured skull in air raid, Gaza City, 9 August) 
  • Jihad Selmi Abu Snaima, 14 (killed by a shell, Al-Shoukha, 10 september)
  • Khaled Nidal Wahba, 15 months (died of wounds from an airstrike, 10 July)
  • Rawan Farid Hajjaj, 6 (killed with his mother and sister in an airstrike, Gaza City, 8 July)
  • Anwar Ismail Abdul Ghani Atallah, 12 (shot in the head, Erez, 5 July) 
  • Shadi Yousef Omar 16 (shot in the chest by IDF, Beit Lahya, 7 July)
  • Mahfouth Farid Nuseir, 16 (killed by missile while playing football, Beit Hanoun, 11 July)
  • Ahmad Ghalib Abu Amsha, 16, (killed by missile while playing football, Beit Hanoun, 11 July)
  • Ahmad Fathi Shabat, 16 (killed by missile while playing football, Beit Hanoun, 11 July)
  • Walid Mahmoud El-Zeinati, 12 (died of shrapnel wounds, Gaza City, 11 July)
  • Basma Salmeya, 16 (killed in Israeli airstrike, 12 July, Jabalia)
  • Somaya Salmeya, 17 (killed in Israeli airstrike, 12 July, Jabalia)
  • Aya Salmeya, 9 (killed in Israeli airstrike, Jabalia, 12 July)
  • Yehya Salmeya, 10 (killed in Israeli airstrike, Jabalia, 12 July)
  • Nasr Salmeya, 7 (killed in Israeli airstrike, Jabalia, 12 July)
  • Huda Salmeya, 13 (killed in Israeli airstrike, Jabalia, 12 July)
  • Eman Salmeya, 12 (killed in Israeli airstrike, Jabalia, 12 July)
  • Raji Omar Jaber Daifallah, 16 (died of shrapnel wounds from missile, Gaza City, 13 July)
  • Ali Kamel Al-Najjar, 16 (killed by Israeli tank shell, Al-Maghazi refugee camp, 19 July)
  • Ahmed Ali Al-Na’ami, 16 (killed by Israeli tank shell, Al-Maghazi refugee camp, 19 July)
  • Ahmed Rawhi Abu Abdu, 14 (killed by drone missile, Al Nusairat refugee camp, 19 July)
  • Mohammed ‘awad Muhra, 14 (killed by Israeli bullet to the chest, Al-Maghazi refugee camp, 20 July)
  • Fadwa Faisal Al-‘arrouqi, 13 (died from shrapnel wounds, Gaza City, 20 July)
  • Saleh Ibrahim Nasser, 14 (killed by artillery fire, Beit Hanoun, 24 July)
  • Khitam Mohammed Rebhi Tayeh, 11 (killed by artillery fire, Beit Hanoun, 24 July)
  • Ashraf ‘abdullah ‘awad Abu Zaher, 14 (shot in the back, Khan Younis, 25 July)
  • Nahid Mohammed Fawzi Al-Shanbari, 16 (killed by artillery fire, Beit Hanoun, 31 July)
  • ‘aaref Ahmed Abu Qaida, 14 (killed by artillery fire, Beit Hanoun, 1 August)
  • Anis Salem Abu Awad, 12 (killed by airstike, Al-Shouka, 2 August)
  • Ammar Rajaa Al-Natour, 17 (killed by drone missile, Al Shouka, 5 August)
  • Kifah Rajaa Al-Natour, 15 (killed by drone missile, Al Shouka, 5 August)
  • Ibrahim Suleiman Al-Rumailat, 13 (killed by drone missile, Al Shouka, 5 August)
  • Ahmed Yousef ‘abed ‘Aashour, 13 (killed by missile fire, Beit Hanoun, 14 August)
  • Mohammed ‘Abdullah Al-Ziq, 14 (killed by drone missile, Gaza City, 29 August)
  • Nidal ‘abdul ‘aziz Al-Dahdouh, 14 (killed by rifle fire, Gaza City, 30 August)
  • Jihad Selmi Abu Snaima, 14 (killed by artillery fire, Rafah, 10 September

Not content in assassinating Palestinian youth the Zionist state imprisons children they do not kill. Human rights violations and forced labour form the basis of life inside prisons. From the authors of Stolen Youth: The Politics of Israel’s Detention of Palestinian Children prison is not only a central feature of Palestinian life, but part of Israel’s system of control “permeating every aspect of Palestinian life. It is a system backed by legal, political, economic, cultural and psychological structures, and designed to keep more than 3 million people under submission,” 600,000 Palestinians of whom have spent time in prison since 1967. [36]

The expertly researched book records the daily horrors of Palestinian children who are arrested: “… at checkpoints, on the street, or at their homes by heavily armed Israeli soldiers in the middle of the night. The soldiers take them to detention centres in Israeli settlements or military camps… the children are interrogated. This almost always involves some form of torture or abuse, including sleep and food deprivation, threatening language, beatings with heavy batons, being punched and kicked, as well as being tied in painful and contorted positions for long periods of time …” [37]

Astonishingly, a police state applies to Palestinians who are under military law whilst Israelis enjoy the privileges of their own civil law. Interrogation is then followed by a military court or virtual Star Chamber that decides the fate of children designed to try adults. This is due to “The [Israeli military] court’s definition of a child [being] a person who hasn’t yet reached the age of 14. A child between 14 and 16 ‘is a big child’ and if more than 16, an adult.” [38] Despite the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, defining a “child” as any individual under the age of eighteen years, for the Israeli military court system, this can be discarded according to their own whims and preferences. This means that a child of fourteen who has thrown stones at armoured tanks or soldiers equipped with riot gear and weapons with live rounds can be plucked from his bed at night, face a pseudo-military court, be tortured and abused and while absent for his or her trial, face many months in jail.

seamac-ad-childprisoner2-horz

Children a Rahfar border refugee camp – “the largest concentration camp”

Children often find themselves signing confession forms which are either entirely fictitious or distorted. In effect, these children are duped into signing false confessions along with a hefty fine rather than a release form. As all legal documents are in Hebrew as well as being terrified out of their wits it is little wonder that they end up part of the prison population rather than back with their families. Once the children are under prison control the absence of freedom exercised by Israeli military police even extends to bodily functions since “detainees are not allowed to use the toilet and are forced to relieve themselves while fully clothed in the presence of others.” [39]

Pretty much standard protocol in the use of torture.

Describing the pattern of invasive tactics that lead to detention, Murad Abu Judeh, a seventeen-year-old male resident of al-Arroub refugee camp in Hebron district, recalls:

We heard a very loud knock on the door … fifteen soldiers entered the house, three of them were masked and wearing civilian clothes. One of the masked soldiers asked me my name and for my ID card. I went to my room in order to bring the ID and one of the soldiers followed me. When I bent over to get the key for my drawer he kicked me on my back six times, pushing me to the ground. He searched my drawer, then grabbed me by my neck and took me back to the main room where I found the soldiers had upturned our furniture. The masked soldier whispered in my ear, “We’ll rape you one by one.” [40]

It is not just Palestinian children who have died in the continuing conflict that defines Arab-Israeli relations. Israeli children too have to shelter from the constant threat of Hamas fired missiles. Ambushes by Palestinian militants also occur though attacks on Israeli civilians are relatively uncommon by comparison. However, in one particularly brutal incident condemned by Amnesty international as a crime against humanity a pregnant mother of eight months and her four children were executed by a militant Palestinian group. [41]  Atrocities will happen when people have known nothing but violence and oppression since birth and when the total disregard for life is simply mirrored back to the perpetrators of the daily crimes from the Zionist state.

So, you see, maybe some Israelis and some Jews can celebrate in the confines of the cinema and enjoy the shedding of Nazi blood in cathartic kosher-porn of gore.  But when victims rule by perpetrating genocide upon their Arab neighbours who are in reality their brothers and sisters … Then it makes a mockery of remembrance; with Yahweh laughing down through the ages at the success of his child sacrifice. For some a promised land is worth thousands of children’s lives as long as they’re mostly Palestinian.

This post is dedicated to all those Israelis, Jews and Palestinians who join together to resist evil and work for peace.

1324612590_9a682f7acd

“Little Handala”


normanfinkelstein-reaction

Occupation1012Occupation 101

Occupation 101 – Official Movie (1 of 7) in High-Definition – New Digitally Remastered Version. Award-winning documentary film on the roots of the Palestine-Israel conflict and U.S. Government involvement.


The following graphs and many other details on the Israeli occupation can be found at www.ifamericansknew.org

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the world’s major sources of instability. Americans are directly connected to this conflict, and increasingly imperiled by its devastation. It is the goal of If Americans Knew to provide full and accurate information on this critical issue, and on our power – and duty – to bring a resolution.

Please click on any statistic for the source and more information.

Statistics Last Updated: March 5, 2014

Israeli and Palestinian Children Killed
September 29, 2000 – Present

129 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 1,523 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000. (View Sources & More Information)

Chart showing that approximately 12 times more Palestinian children have been killed than Israeli children

Israelis and Palestinians Killed
September 29, 2000 – Present

Chart showing that 6 times more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis.

1,109 Israelis and at least 6,862 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000. (View Sources & More Information)

Israelis and Palestinians Injured
September 29, 2000 – Present

8,550 Israelis and 54,761 Palestinians have been injured since September 29, 2000. (View Sources & More Information.)

Chart showing that Palestinians are injured at least six times more often than Israelis.

Daily U.S. Military Aid to Israel and the Palestinians
Fiscal Year 2013

Chart showing that the United States gives Israel $8.2 million per day in military aid and no military aid to the Palestinians.

During Fiscal Year 2013, the U.S. is providing Israel with at least $8.5 million per day in military aid and $0 in military aid to the Palestinians. (View Sources & More Information)

UN Resolutions Targeting Israel and the Palestinians
1955 – 1992

Israel has been targeted by at least 77 UN resolutions and the Palestinians have been targeted by 1. (View Sources & More Information)

Chart showing that Israel has been targeted by 77 UN resolutions, while the Palestinians have been targeted by 1.

Current Number of Political Prisoners and Detainees

Chart showing that Israel is holding 5,023 Palestinians prisoner.

0 Israelis are being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 5,023 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel. (View Sources & More Information)

Demolitions of Israeli and Palestinian Homes
1967 – Present

0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and at least 27,000 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since 1967. (View Sources & More Information)

Chart showing that 24,145 Palestinian homes have been demolished, compared to no Israeli homes.

Israeli and Palestinian Unemployment Rates

Chart depicting the fact that the Palestinian unemployment is around 4 times the Israeli unemployment rate.

The Israeli unemployment rate is 6.8%, while the Palestinian unemployment in the West Bank is 22.5% and 22.5% in Gaza. (View Sources & More Information)

Current Illegal Settlements on the Other’s Land

Israel currently has 262 Jewish-only settlements and ‘outposts’ built on confiscated Palestinian land. Palestinians do not have any settlements on Israeli land. (View Sources & More Information)

Chart showing that Israel has 227 Jewish-only settlements on Palestinian land.
Note:  All photos from the occupied territories courtesy of “Children of Palestine”  at Occupied Palestine. The photos are graphic and extremely disturbing. If you want to see the reality of Israeli occupation visited upon families in Palestine then look at these photos and channel this anger and outrage constructively – Seek to understand and raise awareness of these issues with others. Let’s end the dominance of psychopaths infiltrating our social systems and subverting them toward greed, poverty, war and ecological disaster.
 

Notes

[1] ‘Hollywood’s Jewish Avenger’ By Jeffery Steinberg, The Atlantic Magazine, September 2009. “Roth told me recently that Inglourious Basterds falls into a subgenre he calls “kosher porn.” “It’s almost a deep sexual satisfaction of wanting to beat Nazis to death, an orgasmic feeling,” Roth said. “My character gets to beat Nazis to death. That’s something I could watch all day. My parents are very strong about Holocaust education. My grandparents got out of Poland and Russia and Austria, but their relatives did not.”
[2] ‘Inglourious Basterds: When Jews Attack’ Daniel Mendelsohn, Newsweek. August 14, 2009.
[3] ‘Inglorious Indeed’. Tablet Magazine, by Liel Liebovitz, September 9, 2009.
[4] ‘Israelis go wild for Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds’ By Sara Miller, Haaretz, September 16 2009.
[5] ‘Remember these Children 2000’: a coalition of groups calling for an end to the killing of children and a fair resolution of the conflict. http://www.rememberthesechildren.org/
[6] B’Tselem, The Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. (Visit their statistics page, last updated September 30, 2011.)
[7] The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has collected data on both Israeli and Palestinian injuries since 2005. Their Protection of Civilians: Casualties Database provides careful and detailed documentation for each recorded injury, including location, gender, age, type of weapon used, context and incident type, and nationality of both the offender and the injured.
[8] International Middle East Media Center, “Gaza’s Ministry Of Detainees: ‘There Are 5,300 Detainees Still Imprisoned By Israel’” (October 21, 2011)
[9] The Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions estimates that 24,813 houses have been demolished in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza since 1967 (as of July 28, 2010).
[10] CIA World Factbook on Israel, the CIA World Factbook on the West Bank, and the CIA World Factbook on Gaza. All 3 are the estimates for 2010.
[11] Americans for Peace Now’s “Facts on the Ground” Map Project, (www.peacenow.org) there are 171 official Israeli settlements and 101 informal outposts on Palestinian land. APN’s interactive settlement map shows the name, location, and population for each settlement and outpost on Palestinian territory, all of which are considered illegal under international law.
[12] op. cit. Shahak (p.76)
[13] ‘Israeli army murders 3-year-old girl inside her house’ Al-Jazeera, January 26, 2005.
[14] ‘Israelis Murder Palestinian Family: Mother and three children’ Los Angeles Times, March 4, 2002.
[15] Ibid.
[16] ‘Israelis Kill Baby Girl and School-Teacher, Wound Ten other Children in Refugee Camp’ New York Times, March 16, 2001, (p. A-10)
[17] ‘Israel: Investigate ‘White Flag’ Shootings of Gaza Civilians’ Internal Israeli Military Investigations Inadequate Human Rights Watch, August 13, 2009. / ‘Israel: Gaza Ground Offensive Raises Laws of War Concerns’ Both Sides Must Take ‘All Feasible Precautions’ to Protect Civilians, Human Rights Watch, January 5, 2009 | Massacre of Palestinian Women and Children – Israel’s “Cloud of Autumn” Massacre in Gaza, Global Research, November 10, 2006.
[18] American Educational Trust, 2005. http://www.remberthesechildren.org,
[19] ‘Israel raid ‘could be war crime’’ BBC News, 15 September 2008. / ‘Criticism of Israeli War Crimes Mounts’ by Jonathan Cook, January 10, 2009.
[20] “Israeli soldiers reveal official ‘hoot to kill’policy towards Palestinian civilians” By Rick Kelly, World Socialist Website, wsws.org, 15 September 2005. “The soldier explained how there was a general culture of impunity within his unit, including with regard to the killing of Palestinian children. The attitude was, ‘so kids get killed,’ he said. “For a soldier it means nothing.”
[21] ‘Palestinian doctors despair at rising toll of children shot dead by army snipers’ by Chris McGreal in Rafah, The Guardian, May 20, 2004.
[22] ‘Israelis fired on girl ‘having identified her as a 10-year-old’, military tape shows’ By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem, The Independent, 24 November 2004.
[23] Ibid.
[24] ‘Inquiry faults probe of Gaza girl’s killing’ By Amos Harel, Haaretz February 18, 2006.
[25] ‘Court: Iman al-Hams death may have been prevented’ Ynet News, January 7, 2007.
[26] ‘Israeli soldiers kill teenage girl’ 26 Jul 2004, Al-Jazeera.
[27] ‘Gaza’s tragic classroom casualties’ BBC News, 27 Sep 2004.
[28] Ibid.
[29] ‘On The Way To School,’ Gideon Levy, Haaretz, Nov. 26, 2001: “…places explosive charges where children are likely to pass and then claims that only the other side practices terrorism?”
[30] ‘Israeli sniper bullet takes 12-year-old girl’s life’ Diaries: Live from Palestine, Electronic Intifada, 9 March 2008,
[31] op. cit. Los Angeles Times, March 5, 2002.
[32] ‘Gazan baby dies after 4-hour wait to cross border’ Agence France Presse, August 27, 2007.
[33] ‘Israeli officer who caused death of Palestinian baby sentenced to 28 days’ September 13, 2008.
[34] ‘Humiliation and Child Abuse at Israeli Checkpoints Strip-Searching Children’ by Alison Weir, CounterPunch, March 15, 2007.
[35] ‘Gaza: The children killed in a war the world doesn’t want to know about’ By Donald Macintyre, The Independent, 19 September 2006.
[36] p.7; Stolen Youth: The Politics of Israel’s Detention of Palestinian Children by Catherine Cook, Adam Hanieh, Adah Kay, London and Sterling, VA: Pluto Press, in association with Defence for Children International: Palestine Section, 2004. | ISBN-10: 0745321615 | The authors of Stolen Youth worked for Defense for Children International/Palestine Section (DCI/PS) between 1999-2003. Their work is based on the human rights reports of B’Tselem, The Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, Physicians for Human Rights, the Gaza Community Mental Health Program, on the DCI/PS case files, the Israeli press, and their own research, the interviews and testimonies of children, lawyers, advocates, and families.
[37] op. cit. Cook, Hanieh and Kay (p.5)
[38] Ibid.
[39] op. cit. Cook, Hanieh, and Kay (p. 81)
[40] op. cit. Cook,Hanieh, and Kay (p. 53) [DCI/PS case file, 17A/2001].
[41] ‘Pregnant mum and four children gunned down’ The Sydney Morning Herald. May 3, 2004.