Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
April 17, 2012

During a discussion at the 1980 Bilderberg conference in Aachen, West-Germany, one participant stood up to make his case for depopulation and the third world. In the Bilderberg notes we read:

CFR boss Richard Haass: “The common enemy of humanity is man.”

“The speaker (a German participant) went on to say that the leaders of the LDC’s understood that the oil price explosion had hurt the Third World much more than the industrialized countries. And they were beginning to see that they did not have at all the same interests as the oil-producing countries. What they did not perhaps fully understand was what a menace the population explosion was to their countries. It seemed that no one wanted to tell them that- neither the Catholic Church nor others. It would be nearly impossible to feed and employ the future world population at the rate it was growing. This had to be faced seriously; it could not be solved by talking about “gadgets and gimmicks.”, the German participant concluded.

The gadgets and gimmicks the Bilderberger referred to during the 1980 get-together were already in place during the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s en were to be expanded with painstaking accuracy by the global elite in the years and decades to come. To tackle the population problem and convincingly manufacture an ongoing crisis in order to justify their plans, they would have to find some pretext, any pretext, on the condition that it superseded nation-states for their own transnational designs.

CFR-head Richard N. Haass offers an insight into the true objective of the environmental argument in a 1991 Club of Rome document, ‘The First Global Revolution’:

“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a common enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.”

As we know, the globalists have decided long ago that the environmental debate is no longer a debate- it has been decreed that the “discussion is over” and everyone should better realize that man is the prime cause for global warming on the planet earth, or of any other natural calamity. As long as it serves the double purpose of the elite: to abolish nation-states in favor of a great global government, and reduce the world population in the same breath. The imagined threat of “international terrorism” being hardly sufficient to justify the drastic measures being implemented, another common enemy has presented itself, and that enemy is staring back at you in the mirror.

As numerous meteorologists and climatologists have testified to in recent years, their participation in the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been used to back a theory that they themselves did not support. And then there are the thousands of meteorologists of good name and standard, who out of scientific righteousness have stepped forward and presented their facts before the public and scientific community. But it is of no concern to the global elite. They have for a good long time, spanning the last couple of centuries at least, presided over the politics of eugenics and enforced its diabolical mechanisms with energy, cunning and precision. It is not an idle use of words, when we identify eugenicists as such, for however just and noble its cloaking makes them out to be, this supposed righteousness is merely a grotesque carnival-costume intended to shade its true countenance.

For an October 1975 ‘International Workshop on Environmental Education’, UN-representative Lars Emmelin writes: “The adult education effort seems to me most critical. First, because this element- now outside the formal channels of education- will continue to be the decision makers for the next 15 to 20 years, and it is within this period that the most critical and disruptive decisions will have to be made. We cannot afford to focus on youth and let the elders die off before changing our course, which, if time permitted, would be the most efficient way of institutions change.”

In choosing its course for mass-indoctrination, the 1975 workshop explores various ways in which the mass media can be used to “sensitize” the general public in accepting the UN’s long-term ambitions. Under the headline ‘The Media as Environmental Educators’ (page 4) several options are being presented by one of the participants in how the media can best be used:

“Discussing the role of media as motivators Sandman concludes that: “Four relatively effective kinds of environmental information are: basic ecological principles; prescriptions for environmental action; early warnings of anticipated problems; and assessments of blame for environmental degradation.”’, the report states.

During an ENESCO-conference in October 1977 held (bizarrely) in Soviet Russia, the Director-General of UNESCO, Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow, “paid tribute to the Soviet Union and to the spectacular results achieved since the October Revolution in all areas of economic, social and cultural life, particularly in education and science, and, more especially, in environmental education.”

You’re reading it right. Here the good Director-General is paying tribute to a then 60-year old regime responsible for murdering many millions of its own people in death camps and deliberate mass-scale starvation-operations. Yes, “environmental issues” were very high on the agenda of the USSR, very high indeed.

After having taken his hat off to his fellow-psychopath, the Director-General plunged into a long and melodious speech on the importance of the “environment-issue” in the decades to come:

“The objectives and strategies relating to the environment and to development had to be linked and coordinated. (…) It would be the task of education to make people aware of their responsibilities in this connection, but in order to do so it must first be reoriented and based on an ethos of the environment” And a little further on he states: “Environmental education should also promote attitudes which would encourage individuals to discipline themselves in order not to impair the quality of the environment and to play a positive role in improving it.”

It is true, under the intentionally vague ‘environment’-umbrella one can assemble all kinds of calamities and as many solutions to combat them.

“Work in this programme area”, the report continues, “will be intensified “in the line of the conference’s recommendations and move into a more operational fase. This means, among other activities, “making aid from UNESCO available to member states (of the UN) which would like to launch pilot projects”; considering a “bank” of experts on environmental education; augmenting “work in the exchange of experience, in training and in encouraging the production of teaching materials”; and strengthening the Secretariat and UNESCO’s infrastructure in general for the increased promotion of environmental education..”’

In the meeting, the chairman of the conference stressed that no means must or will be shunned in the coming propaganda war against the people:

“Some countries have also taken an interest, as part of in-service training activities, in the environmental education of various social and occupational categories of the population, such as factory workers, farmers, civil servants, etc. Marked progress has been made in the preparation of audio-visual and printed teaching materials concerning the environment, and the mass media are being increasingly used for sensitizing and informing broad sectors of the public about the environment.”

In a follow-up conference more than ten years later (this time in Moscow) the Secretary-General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, discusses “three levels of global education” in regards to the environment. The first, he states, is the “moral imperative” to reach as many people as humanly possible. The second level is “to harness school systems, non-formal learning and informal education to teach and learn about the global issues that shape and threaten the quality of our lives.” Arriving at the third and last level of global indoctrination, Mayor states: “The third level concerns the means at our disposal to project a global reach for education through both simple and highly advanced existing technologies. (…) the daily newspaper and radio have a crucial role to play in building bridges to the wider world. We must promote these media, defend and expand their freedom and appeal to their professionals at all levels to work with us for global education.”

We can hardly accuse the globalists of keeping their plans secret. At every possible UN event or brainstorm conference, they openly brag about their plans for the world in quite explicit ways. The Secretary-General continues about the steps that have to be taken in order to build a “new global perception”:

“Our first initiative would be to create a worldwide expert panel of scientists and educators to plan a global education curriculum of practical value and planetary scope.”

The Secretary-General forgets to mention here that just such a panel was created two years earlier by the very organization he presided over.

“Second, putting environmental education at the center of all curricula from kindergarten to higher studies and training the teachers and the administrators who can carry the massage into all schools.(..) Third, promoting a global civic education by devising teaching methods and materials that emphasize the ethics of worldwide community living.(…) Fourth, teaching the children of the wealthier countries about the conditions of their brothers and sisters in the developing world (…) Fifth, working with the mass media and telecommunication enterprises to produce and broadcast audio-visual packages that introduce audiences, particularly children and young people, to the great teachers of this world at al levels and in all cultures (…).”

“And finally”, the Secretary-General concludes, “let me make a very immediate and concrete proposal: building on the broadcast of this forum scheduled for tomorrow (…), to create global television learning networks on the issues of the human agenda for the next century. This would be an experiment in informal global education at its best.”

Under the term ‘Information Repackaging’, the UN has published several manuals on this subject, teaching their cronies how to most effectively influence public opinion. In a 1986 Manual for Repackaging of Information on Population Education, the UNESCO proposes “strategies for integrating population education into different subject areas”- one of these being playing into fears on the part of the population in regards to the subject of their home environment family:

“For instance, the effectiveness of fear appeals in changing attitudes and behaviour, such as the adverse effects of non- or limited access to education and housing facilities with more than two children, depends on the credibility of the source of information and the extent of general/public support to the message conveyed by a particular piece of information. Fear appeals directed to the welfare of people valued by the receiver of information (e.g. family members, close friends) are also effective.”

On page 37 of the manual, under the header “Selective Dissemination of Information (SDI)”, the strategy is further elaborated upon:

“One SDI package, for instance, focuses on the integration of population education into environmental education. The package contains materials which will help users understand the relationship between man and the environment, as well as provide insights and actual data on how to plan, teach and implement practical environment/population activities for everyday life.”

As we know, the above mentioned gadgets and gimmicks are being incrementally used in the mass media as the climate change propaganda machine is working overtime. Using the mass media to prepare the population for globalist supreme rule is not only an ambitious plan- it reveals the deceitful spirit behind the provided information, rivaling the work of Joseph Goebbels and his Department of Propaganda.

A March 2009 policy brief by the United Nations Population Division reveals that the long-term plan for worldwide population reduction is not going fast enough according to the social engineers, not by a long shot. Under the desperate headline “What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?” this particular policy brief gives an overview of the progress made by developing countries in regards to the globalists set goal of reducing population and proposes several ways of speeding up the death. Richly draped with graphic illustrations on the state of global population and the progress made by the UN to bring back fertility to “acceptable” levels, the policy brief advises an increased effort on the part of governments to commit to a strict family planning- policy and other measures designed to bring a halt to life.

“The reduction of fertility could be accelerated if effective measures were taken to satisfy the existing unmet need for family planning.”

After these recommendations, the authors plunge into a long, wailing lament about the slow progress of the desired culling of the population. They also blame a lack of commitment of the governments concerned and, as expected, they stress the need for a global intervention in order to avoid certain destruction.

This recent policy brief was just one out of many in regards to the long-term plan by the elite to significantly bring down the numbers of the existing earth population. From the moment the Rockefeller funded family planning-machine was widely kicked off in the 1960s and 70s, numerous meetings have been held in the last couple of decades where various strategies were discussed to implement population-reduction on as large a scale as possible. The strategies in question were especially directed towards the third world as the globalists had virtual carte blanche in the impoverished developing countries. The famous 1994 population conference in Cairo outlined some of the proposed strategies to be implemented. Then Secretary-General of the UN, Boutros Boutros-Ghali in his opening statement on the International Conference on Population and Development, stated that:

“I am not exaggerating when I say that not only does the future of the human society depend on this Conference but also the efficacy of the economic order of the planet on which we live.”

During a follow-up-meeting held in New York on December 1994, the United Nations’ participants came up with some practical solutions to the “population problem”– one of which is the integration of population issues with matters of “environment” and “human development”:

“Several priority areas were identified that needed immediate action by the participants. These included creation of awareness of the interrelationships between environment, population and development; advocacy; education; training; population management; gender concerns; monitoring and evaluation; and information dissemination and networking.”

Under the headline “Youth NGOs Agree to Integrate Environment and Population Issues in their Activities” were mentioned the following activities to “guide” the young into the right mindset by, again, mixing in environmental issues with population issues:

“Among the current issues identified by the Working Group as requiring priority attention were the problems dealing with population, environment and sustainable development. Hence, a Working Group Meeting of the Regional Consultation of Youth NGOs in Asia and the Pacific was held from 19-21 April 1995 at the UNESCO PROAP to discuss and shape a plan of action integrating issues on environment, population and development for consideration by the youth NGOs. (…) To help them develop a relevant plan of action, the participants were exposed and sensitized to the current policies and programmes adopted by FAO, UNEP, UNFPA, and UNESCO in the areas of population, environment and development.”

Further on the use of mass-media is being proposed as effective “carriers of population-information” to hammer dehumanization into the collective consciousness:

“With more than 2 billion radios in the world, roughly one for every three people, and growing number of televisions, the electronic media plays an increasingly important and influential role in building awareness of population and other development issues.”

The report continues with a prime example of predictive programming:

“Radio and television soap operas featuring family planning themes, popular songs on population-related issues, and phone-in question-and-answer sessions have all had an impact in different countries. The use of such media can be very important where literacy is low or where written information is not widely circulated. A TV soap opera series is credited with bringing thousands to family planning clinics in Mexico, and night-time drama series integrating family planning themes have proved successful in Egypt, Nigeria and Turkey.”

In a January 1994 preparation meeting for the Cairo conference called “Family Planning Communications Strategies Examined” it was discussed how best to use the media in order to create tolerance among the general public and “how attitudes and beliefs could be changed through the innovative use of traditional and mass media.”

“The meeting featured case studies and presentations by communication practitioners and covered a wide range of subjects, such as: the use of folk tradition and drama to organize community action in Egypt; the use of micro-communications to encourage acceptance of family planning in the Philippines; the use of traditional and modern media in Ghana; and the use of songs to propagate family planning messages in Latin America. The success in India and Mexico of radio and television soap operas and films on family planning subjects was also discussed.”

During the meeting the Executive Coordinator of the ICPD, Jyoti Shankar Singh, stressed the importance of using mass media to “convey family planning and reproductive health messages”:

“Electronic media, print media (and) interpersonal interventions were all part of the kind of comprehensive information, education and communication (IEC) strategies we need in pursuit of population goals.”

In another technical report Guidelines on Basic Education with special attention to Gender Disparities for the UN Resident Coordinator System the message is repeatedly conveyed that:

“It is important that information be disseminated through various channels including traditional means and packaged in various forms to allow both literate and illiterate persons to understand the key messages.”

In 1997 the UNFPA organized a Regional Media Seminar on Population and Development for the role of the mass media in (euphemistically called) ‘Information Repackaging’ for the Pacific islands. The UN officials boasted on the success of the seminar:

“The seminar brought together journalists in the print and radio media from 9 countries of the South Pacific to explore both the role and potential of mass media as a vehicle for population advocacy, information, education and communication. (…) The seminar explored the role of the media in developing and packaging population materials for identified target groups. The meeting also provided development partners with an opportunity to forge networks with media personnel and develop effective strategies to better address population and development goals and accelerate the implementation of the ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development) Programme of Action.”

In other words: every possible resource should be utilized for propagandizing different target audiences. But the people burdened with designing and implementing population education on a large scale emphasized the need for a common tongue and sequence of arguments with which the different UN-divisions sell the people on the idea of dehumanization.

“Mr. Michael Vlassoff, Senior Technical Officer, Technical and Evaluation Division, UNFPA, introduced the work of the Working Group on Policy-Related Issues. He explained that the Working Group had decided to address the “common advocacy” concern by drawing up a Statement of Commitment that would then be issued by all agencies and organizations involved in the IATF. The aim of such a statement would be to ensure that all UN agencies and organizations use the same language regarding population and development issues.”

The report goes on to list these arguments with which populations worldwide should be lured into embracing modern-day eugenics as a sensible policy:

“The “Statement of Commitment on Population and Development by the United Nations System”, drafted by the Working Group, is divided into three sections: a general introduction stressing the commitment by the UN agencies and organizations to implement ICPD (International Conference on Population and Development); a section on the linkages between population issues and other development issues; and a concluding section calling for global partnership in addressing these interrelated issues.”

In short- a great part of the 1990s was occupied with a coordinated mobilization of mass media for propaganda purposes by the global elite, a test case so to speak, before implementing the same strategies worldwide in the first decades of the 21st century. The great global warming swindle then was put into action, arriving just in time as the environmental issue to attach the basic message to: there are too many of us- and our numbers should be reduced before the planet is destroyed. Because the warming is global, the response should be so as well. However eloquently the message may be presented by hopelessly compliant media outlets, it is the tyrant’s voice we discern amidst the chatter- and all with ears to hear should educate their neighbor in this all-out information war. Let’s not forget what the elite who have funded the UN from the moment of its very conception have always aspired. In the words of the aristocratic fiend Prince Philip:

“If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

Similar/Related Articles

1. The UN, Eugenics and the Mass Media
2. Undermining Human Nature: Mass Media & Eugenics
3. Al Gore, Agenda 21 And Population Control
4. Environmental Toxins May be Causing Mass Cancer Wave
5. Eugenics Alert: UN’s Agenda of Population Control Accelerating
6. UK “Green Advsior” Says Population Must Fall to 30 Million
7. Top Professor at Globalist Population Control Summit: “No More Shrouding Our Statements in Code”
8. China says population control key to Copenhagen deal
9. From 7 Billion People To 500 Million People – The Sick Population Control Agenda Of The Global Elite
10. Former UNEP-Chieftain and Bilderberger Admitted to “International Consensus” on Population Policy
11. The Population Reduction Agenda For Dummies
12. UN’s World Population Day 2010: Beijing Announces Measures to Stop “Unauthorized Births”

Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
March 29, 2012

In a recent statement put out by “Planet Under Pressure” several scientists call for denser cities in order to mitigate worldwide population growth. When in doubt that UN’s Agenda 21 is not the Mein Kampf of our day, one should consider yet another in-your-face confession from yet another certified biocratic control freak

According to an MSNBC article one of the scientists while speaking about human populations worldwide, stated:

“We certainly don’t want them strolling about the entire countryside. We want them to save land for nature by living closely [together].”

Insisting the world’s population be locked up within the confounds of mega-cities, the elite realizes that if the herd is to be properly controlled walls are needed- thick walls, and by constructing these walls, making the masses go this or that way will be made easier..

Chief scientist Michail Fragkias involved with “Planet under Pressure” told MSNBC that “the answer (to population growth) is denser cities.”

The conference, co-sponsored by NASA and UNEP by the way, released its statement calling for denser cities to mitigate “worldwide population growth” ahead of the Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development taking place in June of this year.

“If cities can develop in height rather than in width that would be much more preferable and environmentally not as harmful”, Fragkias said.

People who know anything about history know that the creation of mega-cities in which the masses may be rounded up and enclosed, is identical to the Nazi principle of the “ghetto” as a means of managing the masses. Every student of history may also know what happens to those masses shortly after.

Some of the organizers of “Planet under Pressure” are founding their plea on the notion that we (as humanity) have entered the “Anthropocene”: a new geological era in which humans- not natural conditions- are the main drivers of geological and meteorological processes. Citing a website devoted to this concept, Martin Rees of the Royal Society stated at the conference:

“This century is special in the Earth’s history. It is the first when one species — ours — has the planet’s future in its hands,” reports the AFP news agency. “We’ve invented a new geological era: the Anthropocene.”, he stated.

This echoes yet another scientist, a professor at the University of Colorado, who in recent times also mentioned this new era in relation to a call for population control when he stated:

“Scientists now speak of humanity’s increased demands and impacts on the globe as ushering in a new geological epoch: the Anthropocene. Such selfish and destructive appropriation of the resources of the Earth can only be described as interspecies genocide.”

In addition the professor said: “Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers (emphasis added) may be necessary in order to do so.”

The call for compact cities, filled to the brim with humans, is part of the UN’s depopulation agenda for sure. Within these proposed mega-cities humans will be allowed to use RFID technology so they can be kept in check. The rest of the world, the “countryside” as one of the scientists told MSNBC, is reserved for the elite.

Similar/Related Articles

1. China Plans A New Mega City: Population, 42 Million
2. Ted Turner Repeats Call For Population Curb
3. Scientists stumped as bee population declines further
4. SW China mega-city building huge security system
5. UK “Green Advsior” Says Population Must Fall to 30 Million
6. China says population control key to Copenhagen deal
7. Now Scientists Say Earth May Experience “Sudden Ice Age”
8. Harvard scientists reverse the ageing process in mice – now for humans
9. The real 2001: Scientists teach robots how to trick humans
10. Texas’ population reaches 25.1 million
11. Clinton Advisor: Earth Population “Exceeds Limits”
12. Population of world ‘could grow to 15bn by 2100′

Org

FOX News
March 25, 2012

The Green Climate Fund, which is supposed to help mobilize as much as $100 billion a year to lower global greenhouse gases, is seeking a broad blanket of UN-style immunity that would shield its operations from any kind of legal process, including civil and criminal prosecution, in the countries where it operates.

There is just one problem: it is not part of the United Nations.

Whether the fund, which was formally created at a UN climate conference in Durban, South Africa last December, will get all the money it wants to spend is open to question in an era of economic slowdown and fiscal austerity.

Read more

Similar/Related Articles

1. UN Talks Endorse $100 Billion Climate Aid Fund, Forest Protection Program
2. Durban climate change: Talks descend into farce
3. Obama Extends Diplomatic Immunity to Interpol by Executive Order
4. Stern backs $100bn IMF climate fund plan
5. S. African activist slams UN’s ‘Green Climate Fund’
6. IMF floats climate change fund idea
7. Final accord reached at Cancun despite Bolivia’s objection
8. Failed Banks May Get Pension-Fund Backing as FDIC Seeks Cash
9. Ground Zero Mosque Seeks Money From 9/11 Fund
10. World Government Climate Deal Fails In Durban
11. U.N.’s Ban says U.S. to work for 2009 climate deal
12. Brown says Obama must attend climate change talks to avoid ‘catastrophe’ for the planet

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 12, 2012

If Obama works with the United Nations and NATO against Syria and does not seek authorization from Congress for the use of the U.S. military, he may face impeachment, according to a resolution introduced by Republican Representative Walter B. Jones Jr.

“Expressing the sense of congress that the use of offensive military force by a president without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution,” the resolution states.

Jones introduced his resolution after Obama’s Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told Senator Jeff Sessions during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last week that they would seek “international permission” to attack Syria. Congrerss would not be consulted, but merely informed of the decision.

“Our goal would be to seek international permission and we would… come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress – I think those are issues we would have to discuss as we decide what to do here,” Panetta told Sessions.

“Well, I’m almost breathless about that,” the senator from Alabama replied, “because what I heard you say is, ‘We’re going to seek international approval, and then we’ll come and tell the Congress what we might do, and we might seek congressional approval.’ And I just want to say to you that’s a big [deal].”

Panetta said a NATO or United Nations resolution would provide the legal basis for using U.S. troops in military action against Syria. 

“They can provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that is required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution,” Sessions told Panetta.

The startling admission led to Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., to introduce “an official resolution calling for impeachment should Obama take offensive action based on Panetta’s policy statement, because it would violate the Constitution,” former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo told WorldNetDaily on Sunday.

Obama’s decision to avoid Congress and violate the Constitution takes on a renewed urgency this week as the UN Security Council meets to discuss the Syria issue. Any UN decision to attack Syria following the failure of talks with the country’s leader, Bashar al-Assad, over the weekend would be questionable since both Russia and China are opposed to military intervention. In February, Russia and China vetoed a resolution condemning Syria’s clamp down on the opposition.

Assad said over the weekend his government will not negotiate while “armed terrorist groups were still operating in the country.” The Free Syria Army (FSA) fighting against Assad inside Syria is a creation of NATO. Sources indicate 600 to 1,500 fighters from the Islamic Fighting Group in Libya, now known as al-Qaeda in Libya, are working with the FSA to topple the Assad regime. An Arab League report revealed last month that Mossad, MI6, the CIA, and British SAS are in Syria working with the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Council.

Syria blames “terrorist gangs” backed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar for much of the violence in the country, according to Syrian Information Minister Adnan Mahmoud.

Congressman Jones introduces bill that would subject Panetta & Obama to impeachment

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, March 8, 2012

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military, words which effectively declare Congress a ceremonial relic, have prompted Congressman Walter Jones to introduce a resolution that re-affirms such behavior as an “impeachable high crime and misdemeanor” under the Constitution.

During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.

Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”

The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”

Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.

“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”

In an effort to re-affirm the fact that “the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution,” Republican Congressman Walter Jones has introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives.

The full text reads;

Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

Under the terms of Jones’ resolution, both Panetta and Obama would be subject to impeachment for abusing their power and violating the Constitution in disregarding the authority of Congress and placing a foreign power above its jurisdiction.

Despite the Pentagon’s efforts to claim that Panetta’s words were misinterpreted, the Obama administration itself has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations in relation to last year’s invasion of Libya, which was conducted without approval from Congress.

In June last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”

Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”

In boldly asserting the authority of international powers over and above the legislative branch, Panetta and Obama are openly declaring that they no longer represent the American people and instead are water carriers for a global dictatorship that has usurped the sovereignty of the United States.

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
February 14, 2012

Gene “the Machine” Sperling has called for a “global minimum tax” on corporations. Obama’s director of the National Economic Council linked the call to the so-called Buffett Rule, a scheme based on statements made by investor Warren Buffett who said government should confiscate more money from the rich in order to reduce the tax burden on the poor.

Following Sperling’s comments yesterday and heated response in the blogosphere, officialdom responded by saying “there’s no United Nations-imposed duty in the works,” as Politico phrased it.

Sperling said the government “is looking for shared sacrifice” in its quest for more revenue. “He was referring to our proposal in the Blueprint for an American Built to Last that removes tax incentives for companies that ship jobs overseas,” a White House official said.

The Cato Institute did some fact checking after Obama’s SOTU teleprompter reading. Cato points out that the government encourages sending American jobs to slave labor hellholes like China and Vietnam and imposes a 40 percent tax rate on corporations that invest in the United States.

Obama’s “Blueprint for an American Built to Last” is cynical class warfare rhetoric for the ill-informed who will vote him back into office in November. The so-called 1% never pay taxes. They put their money into tax-exempt securities and move it offshore.

“In other words, the genuinely rich are likely to be the least harmed by high tax rates in the top brackets,” writes Thomas Sowell. “People who are looking for jobs are likely to be the most harmed, because they cannot equally easily transfer themselves overseas to take the jobs that are being created there by American investments that are fleeing from high tax rates at home.”

Likewise, small business – the real engine of job creation in America – is unable to transfer themselves overseas and escape the tax collectors.

Officialdom insists Obama’s blueprint wasn’t cooked up at the United Nations. Instead, it was conceived by the globalists at the Council on Foreign Relations, where Mr. Sperling is on staff as Senior Fellow for Economic Policy.

The CFR, Federal Reserve, Geithner’s Treasury where Sperling works, the IMF, World Bank, the Trilateral Commission, and the United Nations all work for the international bankers who are installing world government and a centralized global banking structure, so any dismissals by the White House are irrelevant.

Similar/Related Articles

1. Obamas and Ultra-Wealthy Live High Life as Most Americans Go Through Economic Hell
2. Head Of Obama’s Jobs Council, Is Moving Jobs And Economic Infrastructure To China
3. Rubin Protégé Selected to Head Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers
4. Obamas get royal welcome at Buckingham Palace
5. AFL-CIO President and Member of PERAB Calls for “New Economic Order”
6. Obamas find a way to do Broadway at home, hosting star-studded PBS taping
7. 47 Signs That China Is Absolutely Destroying America On The Global Economic Stage
8. WTO Director General: Global Governance Based on the EU Model
9. UK’s Brown says G20 to become main economic council
10. Obama Picks Skull and Bones Member and Ex-CFR Employee to Head his Council of Economic Advisers
11. Why the Economic Destruction of America May Be Step One of A Global Banking Power Grab
12. Obama’s Economic Team Planning for Global Economic Collapse

Ron Paul
Infowars.com
September 27, 2011

The Palestinian Authority’s recent announcement that it would seek UN recognition as an independent state dominated the news and the political debate in the United States last week, though in truth it should mean very little to us. Only a political class harboring the illusion it can run the world obsesses over the aspirations of a tiny population on a tiny piece of land thousands of miles away. Remember, the UN initiated this persistent conflict with its 1947 Partition Plan.

Unfortunately the debate is dominated by those who either support the Israeli side in the conflict, or those who support the Palestinian desire for statehood. We rarely seem to hear the view of those who support the US side and US interests. I am on that side. I believe that we can no longer police the world. We can no longer bribe the Israelis and Palestinians to continue an endless “peace process” that goes nowhere. It is not in our interest to hector the Palestinians or the Israelis, or to “export” democracy to the region but reject it when people vote the “wrong” way.

I have reservations about the Palestinian drive for UN recognition. Personally I wish the United States would de-recognize the United Nations. As most readers already know, in every Congress I introduce legislation to end our membership in that organization. The UN is a threat to our sovereignty– and as we are the main source of its income, it is a threat to our economic well-being. Increasingly over the past several years, we see the United Nations providing political and legal cover for the military aspirations of interventionists rather than serving as an international forum to preserve peace. Neoconservatives in the US have grown to love the United Nations as they co-opt the organization under the guise of endless “reform.” Under the sovereignty-destroying doctrine of “Responsibility to Protect,” adopted at the 2005 World Summit, the UN takes it upon itself to intervene in internal conflicts of its member states whenever it believes that human rights are being violated. Thus under “Responsibility to Protect,” the UN provides the green light for a kind of global no-knock raid on any sovereign country.

If asked, I would personally counsel the Palestinians to avoid the United Nations. UN membership and participation is no guarantee that sovereignty will be respected. We see what happens to UN members such as Iraq and Libya when those countries’ leaders fall out of favor with US administrations: under US and allied pressure a fig leaf resolution is adopted in the UN to facilitate devastating military intervention. When the UN gave NATO the green light to bomb Libya there was no genocide taking place. It was a purely preventative war. The result? Thousands dead, a destroyed country, and extremely dubious new leaders.

While I do not see UN membership as a particularly productive move for the Palestinian leadership, I do not believe the US should use its position in the UN Security Council to block their membership. I believe in self-determination of peoples and I recognize that peoples may wish to pursue statehood by different means. As we saw after the Cold War, numerous new states were born out of the ruins of the USSR as the various old Soviet Republics decided that smaller states were preferable to an enormous and oppressive multi-national conglomerate.

The real, pro-US solution to the problems in the Middle East is for us to end all foreign aid, stop arming foreign countries, encourage peaceful diplomatic resolutions to conflicts, and disengage militarily. In others words, follow Jefferson’s admonition: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.”

The above reposted from Ron Paul’s House website.

Steven Edwards
Postmedia News
April 12, 2011

UNITED NATIONS — Bolivia will this month table a draft United Nations treaty giving “Mother Earth” the same rights as humans — having just passed a domestic law that does the same for bugs, trees and all other natural things in the South American country.

The bid aims to have the UN recognize the Earth as a living entity that humans have sought to “dominate and exploit” — to the point that the “well-being and existence of many beings” is now threatened.

The wording may yet evolve, but the general structure is meant to mirror Bolivia’s Law of the Rights of Mother Earth, which Bolivian President Evo Morales enacted in January.

Read entire article

UN-backed Ivory Coast Leader Accused in Massacres

BBC
April 3, 2011

The UN secretary general has urged Ivory Coast’s internationally-backed president to investigate hundreds of deaths blamed partly on his supporters.

Ban Ki-moon said he was “concerned and alarmed” about the reports, from the town of Duekoue, but Alassane Ouattara said his followers were not involved.

The BBC’s Andrew Harding, in Duekoue, says UN workers have found hundreds of bodies.

Read entire article

Cassandra Anderson
Infowars.com
March 24, 2011

The media hailed Warren Buffett last December for donating $50 million dollars toward a United Nations nuclear bank with control over uranium enrichment.  The intent is control over nuclear weapons and nuclear power by the elites who are the true forces behind the UN.

The UN nuclear bank is will be under the authority of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is NOT independent; it was created through a UN treaty and answers to the UN and the UN Security Council.  The fully funded UN nuclear bank does not require nations to stop uranium enrichment, which was the original plan; however, the final terms have not been set.  The fuel bank will sell enriched uranium for power plants to countries in “good standing“.  Therefore, only countries who kow-tow to the UN and IAEA will be provided with enriched uranium.

The United Nations is a supranational entity that answers to no one.  After WWII, the UN was sold to the public as an voluntary collection of nations committed to peace and ending war.  The UN pretends to vote on issues democratically, but its true goal is a totalitarian world government ruled by the elites at the top.  They are happy to bully countries and go to war over resources, as evidenced by the UN resolution last week to attack Libya.  They claim that war is necessary for peace.

The UN nuclear bank will consolidate power under the UN for nuclear energy and weaponry, which is another piece of UN Agenda 21, the blueprint for total control and depopulation.

UN WORLD DOMINANCE

Four things are needed to take political control over a population (the UN has set its sights on the entire world):

1.  Money
2.  An army
3.  Control over the media
4.  Control over education

If you have enough money and an army, then control over the media and education are useful but not essential.

UN NUCLEAR BANK FINANCING

Warren Buffet proposed the UN nuclear bank and made a self-serving “donation” of $50 million while demanding matching funds of $100 million from governments.  Obama provided $50 million in US taxpayer money and the EU, UAE, Kuwait and Norway made up the rest.  At $150 million, world domination is astonishingly cheap!  Buffett, a proponent of depopulation, was celebrated as a hero in the media because most people are ignorant about the UN’s true goals.

Warren Buffett is in the energy utility business and owns MidAmerican Energy; his motivation for “donating” to the UN nuclear bank could benefit him later with regard to a UN monopoly over nuclear power for electricity.

Taxpayers will ultimately fund the UN nuclear bank that is in opposition to public interest and freedom.  This trick is accomplished through foundations convincing governments to regulate or take action on an issue and then passing the cost on to taxpayers (click here to find out how individuals create public policy that has been used for depopulation).

Buffett proposed the UN nuclear bank through a foundation that he provides funding, called the ‘Nuclear Threat Initiative‘ (NTI).  Ted Turner, known for supporting depopulation, is co-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative and Sam Nunn, a former US Senator, is the other co-chair of NTI.

NUCLEAR SECURITY PROJECT

Nunn is the front man working with Cold-War hawks Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State, George Schulz, former Defense Secretary and William Perry, former Secretary of State in the ‘Nuclear Security Project‘ to dismantle nuclear weapons.  This project is supported by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell and many others.

Nunn, Kissinger, Schulz and Perry are aggressively pushing the dismantling of nuclear weapons through the US-Russia-UN START Treaty and the UN Non-Proliferation Treaty.  The objective of these types of treaties, according to Department of State Publication 7277, is to disarm states to a “point where no state would have the military power to challenge the strengthened UN Peace Force….”

Buffett has provided funding for the Nuclear Security Project, too.  Buffett said that an atomic attack on the US by mid-century is a “virtual certainty”.  In my opinion, with psychopaths like Buffett, Turner and Kissinger (a Rockefeller lieutenant) at the helm, this is practically unavoidable.

CONCLUSION

As sovereign countries dismantle their nuclear weapons under UN treaties, the UN is simultaneously building its nuclear arsenal by way of the nuclear bank.

Additionally, the UN is locking in another uranium enrichment monopoly over nuclear power for electricity, which will also increase “interdependency of nations.”

SOLUTIONS:

Michael Shaw, UN Agenda 21 expert and president of FreedomAdvocates.org, says:

The UN has a plethora of schemes to advance the goal of world government. The most important of these is Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. This is the global to local movement designed under the cover of green to transform our systems of government and economics. Every county in America has adopted its Sustainable plan moving us all closer to the one world order where your unalienable rights are no longer politically recognized.

While there is little the citizen can do to halt the UN’s control of uranium, the typical American can do much toward exposing the local application of the UN’s march under the local Agenda 21 protocol. In particular, Americans need to understand city alliances with the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). ICLEI is an NGO, accredited by the United Nations for the purpose of implementing Agenda 21 at the local level. Such contracts have been entered into by over 600 American cities. This is treasonous.

In short, the Sustainable objective is the abolition of private property, education for global citizenship, and the use of technology to control  human action. As ordinary people become aware of Agenda 21 hope rises that the Republic can be reestablished and that then the US can sever its ties with the United Nations and end the globalists’ one world ambition.

For full analysis of Agenda 21 Sustainable Development visit www.FreedomAdvocates.org.

Cassandra Anderson’s article first appeared on the MORPHCity website.

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
March 21, 2011

As the contrived moral high ground behind the absurdly hypocritical “humanitarian” pretext of the attack on Libya collapses in the wake of Russia, the Arab League and the African Union condemning the US-led NATO bombings, so does any pretense of legality that the “no fly zone” resolution holds, because the obvious attempt to assassinate Gaddafi violates not only U.S. law, but the UN’s own charter.

Vladimir Putin’s characterization of the air strikes as a “medieval crusade” and his warning that the attacks prove why Russia has to build up its defenses against NATO is the most damning indictment of the campaign thus far. It follows an Arab League u-turn as well as an African Union condemnation, as all the lies and bluster about a “humanitarian mission” crumble within days of the assault being launched.

The Orwellian delusion that the “no fly zone” anything other than a cruel hoax became obvious within hours, as NATO rejected Libya’s proposal for independent third party countries to patrol the skies and instead launched an instantaneous bombardment of Gaddafi’s military facilities, strikes that have killed dozens of innocent people according to Libyan claims that have been confirmed by Russia.

From the very beginning, this war had nothing to do with “protecting civilians” and everything to do with toppling the leader of Africa’s richest oil nation.

Now western leaders have all but admitted that the sole focus of the campaign is to kill Gaddafi, as air strikes pound targets around the beleaguered Libyan leader.

Asked if Gaddafi could be assassinated to force regime change, British defence secretary Liam Fox said that the Libyan leader was a “legitimate target,” adding, “That would potentially be a possibility,” entertaining a notion that was soon backed up by force as RAF warplanes reduced Gaddafi’s Tripoli compound to rubble last night after a massive air bombardment.

Fox later said that a “bunker-buster” attack on Gaddafi’s residence was also being considered.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and British Prime Minister David Cameron have all gone on record to state that Gaddafi “must go,” “needs to go,” and has “lost his legitimacy”.

In addition, Salwa el-Deghali, of the national transitional council, called for, “More attacks on Gaddafi’s forces, and fast. We need these attacks until he is crushed.”

Does this sound like a mission to protect civilians or a mission to topple Gaddafi, especially given the fact that SAS commanders have been on the ground for weeks, again in violation of the UN resolution, directly supporting Libyan rebel armies?

The UN resolution that supposedly gave the air strikes their legal foundation does not authorize the use of military force to enact regime change, and yet that’s precisely what NATO and the United States is pursuing – the murder or removal of Gaddafi.

Once again we are reminded of the fact that the United Nations only abides by its own resolutions when it is convenient. The UN will flagrantly violate its own charter with relish if there is a pre-existing geopolitical agenda to accomplish.

International law codified under the UN prohibits state-sponsored assassination, except under conditions of warfare. By characterizing the attack on Libya as merely a “no fly zone,” and stopping short of declaring war on on the country, the UN along with the powers that signed the resolution, namely America, France, Britain and Italy, are in violation of their own resolution by targeting Gaddafi.

Indeed, killing Gaddafi would be a war crime because it clearly qualifies as an act of “treachery” under Article 23 of the Hague Convention IV of 1907. Even in times of declared war, assassinating a leader under false pretenses is illegal.

“A state that uses “treachery” to kill an enemy may be guilty of war crimes,” states the Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity. “Article 23 of the Hague Convention IV of 1907 provides that “it is especially forbidden . . . to kill or wound treacherously, individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army.” Treachery is usually defined as a breach of confidence, such as an attack on an individual who believes that there is no need to fear the attacker.”

In addition, under U.S. law, employees of the United States are prohibited from engaging in assassination during peacetime. This law has of course been violated numerous times, most notably in 1986 when the Reagan administration attempted to kill Gaddafi by bombing army barracks where Libyan leader was known to be sleeping.

The attack on Libya is not only immoral, with the “humanitarian” pretext transparently a pack of lies, it is also completely unconstitutional having not been authorized by the U.S. Congress. As Francis Boyle, Professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, points out, “Without authorization by the United Nations Security Council and express authorization from the U.S. Congress pursuant to the terms of the War Powers Resolution, for President Obama to establish any type of so-called ‘no-fly zone’ over Libya would be illegal and unconstitutional.

Above all, since the assault was launched under UN auspices with the presumed “legitimacy” of the international community, it directly violates the UN’s own charter in that the entire scope of the mission is about regime change, supporting one side in a civil war, and has nothing whatsoever to do with “protecting civilians”.

HAARP mitt tidigare inlägg.

Ethan Jacobs, J.D.
Infowars.com
March 21, 2011

Is it possible that the radiation released from Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant is intended to sicken and harm the populations of Japan, Hawaii and the United States?   There is evidence that suggests that the disaster fits neatly into the globalists’ well-documented plan to significantly reduce the world’s population.

The Fukushima Nuclear Crisis

After experiencing a devastating earthquake, resulting tsunami and leaking nuclear reactors, the Japanese government’s priority is not in saving lives and rebuilding Japan’s infrastructure, but rather saving a financial asset of Tokyo Electric Power Company (the nuclear facility) at the expense of the health and safety of the entire Northern Hemisphere.  It has been over a week since Fukushima Reactor 3 exploded releasing deadly radiation. Reactor 4 is known to be leaking as well.  Nonetheless, the Japanese government still has not covered the reactors with concrete and sand to stop the radiation leak, as was eventually done at Chernobyl.   The leaking reactors could have been covered and sealed in a matter of days if not hours using aircraft to drop tons of sand and concrete around the clock.  Instead, Japan continues the risky venting of radioactive gas to relieve a new spike in pressure in its troubled nuclear reactors.

While the initial damage to the nuclear plant could be attributed to the Tsunami that devastated Japan (a natural event assuming that HAARP or other technology was not involved), the lack of government action to protect the public demonstrates extreme incompetence of Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan, if not malice.

Contrary to government propaganda distributed by the mainstream media, there is no safe dose of radiation.  Dr. Chris Busby, Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, states that the leaked radiation from Fukushima will have a negative health impact on the people of Japan and the United States.  After days of delay, “Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency admitted that the disaster was a level 5, which is classified as a crisis causing ‘several radiation deaths’ by the UN International Atomic Energy.”  As Paul Joseph Watson writes, governments have a history of deceiving the public in times of crises:

The same people telling us that the levels are miniscule and the radiation ‘harmless,’ are from the same organizations who assured us that the Chernobyl disaster only killed 9,000 people, when in reality it exposed 550 million Europeans, and 150 to 230 million others in the Northern Hemisphere to notable contamination and led to nearly a million deaths.

Japan is already facing a food safety crisis due to the radioactive fallout.  “Tests found levels of radioactive iodine up to seven times the legal limit in samples of raw milk, spinach and two leaf vegetables as far away from the nuclear plant as Chiba prefecture, to the east of Tokyo.”  California and the Unites States may face a similar problem as the jet stream has already carried the toxic radiation from Japan across the Pacific Ocean.

Depopulation Agenda

This prolonged nuclear crisis at Fukushima may be tied to the depopulation agenda laid-out in Ecoscience, co-authored by Obama’s top science and technology advisor, John P. Holdren, in which he advocated the formation of a “planetary regime” that would use a “global police force” to enforce totalitarian measures of population control, including forced abortions, mass sterilization programs conducted via the food and water supply, as well as mandatory bodily implants that would prevent couples from having children.

The Globalist depopulation agenda has a history of using radiation against populations in lands with natural resources to be conquered.  In her Global Research article entitled From Hiroshima to Iraq, 61 years of Uranium Wars, world renowned geoscientist, Leuren Moret, writes:

The conduct of secret nuclear wars since 1991, through the use of depleted uranium weaponry by the United States and Great Britain with their allies, has taken place in the Middle East, the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan2 and Lebanon.3 It has been carried out for the express purpose of destroying the public health and mutilating the genetic future of vast populations in oil rich and/or pipeline regions.

Carpet and grid bombing with depleted uranium weaponry in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan has guaranteed permanent radioactive terrain contamination. The recent discovery that U.S. depleted uranium bombs dropped by Israel on Lebanon in 2006 contained enriched uranium4, 5 suggests covert testing of fourth generation nuclear weapons.

Perhaps the uncapped leaking Fukushima reactors are being used to reduce the population of Japan, the United States, and Europe, in a manner that allows for plausible deniability.

Conclusion

A few years from now people in the Northern Hemisphere will likely experience increased rates of cancer, birth defects, and other health issues triggered by the Fukushima radiation release.  Most people will not connect the dots as to the cause of their suffering; and, even if they do, will have trouble proving the link and obtaining compensation for their injuries.

Prime Minister Kan and Barack Obama have once again revealed themselves as powerless puppets of the global elite.  Rather that bury the Fukushima plant a half mile deep in sand and concrete to protect the public, they allow toxic radiation to continue leaking which could possibly cause millions of injuries and a contaminated food supply.   Who cares if millions of lives are endangered and the workers trying to stop the Fukushima meltdown sign their own death certificates?  The important thing is that the reactors are eventually saved and restored to generate further profits for Tokyo Electric Power Company.  Business as usual in the New World Order.

The people of Japan and all those affected must hold their government officials, and their global elite handlers, accountable for failing to seal the reactors.

-Vi tänker inte lämna vårt land och vi tänker befria det, säger Gaddafi till statlig libysk tv och kallar västmakternas flygräder för terrorism.

Inte ofta jag håller med någon men Gaddafi har faktiskt rätt här.
Först fick dem muslimska extremistiska rebellerna fonder av: USA, EU och England.
När rebellerna hade kört fast så skickade britterna in sina sas trupper.
När dem misslyckades så förklarade FN krig mot lybien i namnet av lybiens folk.

Vad FN säkert glömde tänka på var: All senapsgas och alla andra kemiska vapen Gaddafi har.

Vad tror ni sker om man släpper ut stora mängder senapsgas? Jo det åker med vinden, vart når vinden?

Men jag tror vi kan strunta i dem kemiska vapnen eftersom att vi bor i Sverige, eller?

(kommer mer)

Lite roligt här är: Frankrike importerar sin olja från? Lybien

Lite roligt här är: USA bryter mot sina egna krigs regler bla i afganistan, iraq och nu tydligen lybien med.

Lite roligt här är: Sedan när fick FN makten att beordra USA att dra in i krig?

Lite roligt här är: Landet kommer bli så sönder bombat så dem civila som ville ha in nato/FN kommer inte ha chansen att ångra sig.

Lite roligt här är: Varken ryssland eller kina röstade emot i FN. Det betyder att både ryssland och kina har mycket att vinna på ett krig i Lybien. Kan det vara att dem tjänar på att olje priset kommer att stiga rejält? Vi såg ju tidigare idag att priset på olja sönk med 3 dollar efter förklarad vapenvila.

Lite roligt här är: Gaddafi kämpar faktiskt emot al-qaeda. Men nej det är den äka al-qaeda han kämpar mot, det vill säga: Pentagon, CIA och mer.

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 18, 2011

Libya attempted to derail the United Nations’ cobbled together vote to bomb the country by declaring a ceasefire.

Libyan Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa made the announcement in a televised news conference carried by al-Arabiya TV earlier today.

He added that the UN resolution authorizing a no-fly zone violates the UN’s charter.

Since when do the globalists and their minions and functionaries at the United Nations follow that organizations charter? It is to be applied selectively to official enemies.

Kadafi’s son, Saif al-Islam, announced after the unanimous UN resolution that government troops would not enter the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.

Meanwhile, the corporate media is stepping up the required propaganda campaign required prior to the heavy bombing of Libya that will likely unfold within hours.

Reuters reports that Kadafi’s forces brutally attacked the city of Misrata in western Libya. “They are bombing everything, houses, mosques and even ambulances,” Gemal, a rebel spokesman, said from the city, according to The Telegraph.

Al-Arabiya television reported four people were killed and 70 wounded in the attack, which began hours after the UN Security Council passed a resolution endorsing a no-fly zone and military attacks.

In other words, forget about the ceasefire. Kadafi does not mean it.

Let the high-tech mass murder of Libyans begin.

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 18, 2011

Editor’s note: Kadafi attempts to preempt the globalist scheme by ceasing all military action and declaring it will start talks with rebels.

The Pentagon has deferred to France, Britain, and a handful of corrupt Arab oil sheikdoms following a unanimous vote at the United Nations to bomb Libya. The world’s premier war-making outfit will allow the Europeans and the Arabs take the lead in killing Libyans.

The United States “has been largely mum on what its role will be in the attacks, and while they have deployed some additional ships and aircrafts to the region it is unclear exactly how far they will go in attacking targets within Libya,” writes Jason Ditz.

India, China, Russia, Brazil and Germany abstained from voting.

China said it has “serious reservations” about killing Libyans (the authoritarian slave labor gulag however does not show such reluctance when it comes to killing its own citizens and selling their internal organs).

“We oppose the use of force in international relations and have some serious reservations with part of the resolution,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu said in a statement.

On Thursday, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe was enthusiastically rattling his saber even before the quisling junior partners of the globalists voted to commence with murder.

“We and our partners are preparing the follow-up decisions,’ Juppe told reporters. “France and other countries are ready to put into action the resolution of the Security Council. It’s very important that Arab countries become involved in the intervention when it takes place.”

The globalists will use the Arabs to crush Libya and kill Moammar Kadafi – or ultimately deliver him to the gallows like the former CIA asset Saddam Hussein. Qatar and the United Arab Emirates – both heavily involved in snuffing out demonstrations in Bahrain and rounding up activists in typical fascist fashion – are also expected to take a role soon in the attack on Libya.

“There will be participation by Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. That has been confirmed at the Security Council,” a faceless UN bureacrat proudly announced.

David Cameron will follow his predecessors – most notably Tony Blair – and enter the pantheon of war criminals. The British PM will deliver a pro-war speech today and the House of Commons will go through a stale formality and vote to rubber stamp the looming mass murder campaign.

On cue, the price of crude oil shot up following the globalist vote to bomb the African nation, home to much sought after sweet crude that is easily refined.

U.S. crude futures, which had jumped $3.44 to $101.42 a barrel in regular trading prior to the UN vote, were trading at $102.94 a barrel at about 8:15 p.m. PDT yesterday evening. The price of oil in London was at $116 a barrel, up $1.09.

Earlier this month, oil prices hit a two-year high of $105.44 a barrel on the excuse of unrest in Libya and the Middle East. It moved back down to $97.18 on Tuesday, in part on predictions that Japan’s earthquake will significantly dampen the country’s oil demand in the short term by reducing industrial production.

–

Kurt Nimmo edits Infowars.com. He is the author of Another Day in the Empire: Life In Neoconservative America.

–

Alex Jones and Midas Resources has come together to offer you three of the most hard hitting videos ever produced: End Game, Obama Deception, and Fall of the Republic.

After viewing this collection you will know who is pulling the strings of our puppet government. It’s not about Left or Right: it’s about a One World Government. The international banks’ plan to loot the people of the United States and turn them into slaves on a Global Plantation.

If you want to know the facts and cut through all the hype, this eye-opening film collection is for you. For a limited time this collection is being offered with three constitutional silver dollars, the real money our for-fathers intended for us to use. Order this special collection today and get the perfect solution to the perfect economic storm.

Som vi sett i tidigare artiklar från TT så är Japansk media styrd av FN.
Jag talar antagligen inte om all Japansk media men informationen man får from tepco.
Men kan man styra informationen från Tepco så kan man "styra" informationen i annan media.

Då stället jag bara kuggfrågan: Vem styr FN?

Two hints: money, follow the money.

Jedi mind trick: These are not the droids you are looking for -FN

Här har ni ett fint exempel på en Coverup.

Ni kan ju läsa lite tidigare nyhetsartiklar eller tidigare inlägg på min blogg.

The containment vessel has not been damaged.

Man hör ju hur skriptat det är! Man ser explosionen! Men byggnaden tog inte skada, nej nej.