Friday, December 28, 2007

Video: Alex Jones on Media's Anti-Gun Propaganda

The CFR Election of ‘08 And The Butcher's Apron

The CFR Election of ‘08 And The Butcher's Apron

Mike Whitney
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2778.shtml
Thursday, December 27, 2007

Every four years the country is swept up in the pomp and pageantry of presidential elections. And every four years loyal Americans flock to the voting booths to select the candidate of their choice. Elections, we are told, are the true expression of democratic government. But they aren't. They're a sham and most people know it. The balloting creates the illusion of choice where there is none. It's a meaningless ritual that has nothing to do with representative government.
The 2008 elections have already been marred by a number of controversies, the worst of which is the report that was published earlier this month by Ohio’s top election official, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner. The report proves that the voting systems that decided the 2004 election in Ohio were rife with “critical security failures." The election was rigged, pure and simple; stolen by the Bush clan and their friends in the establishment media who refuse to report the news. It's actually funny, in a cynical kind of way. The perpetrators were so cocksure they could pull it off that, according to Democracy Now, “the servers for the computation of the Ohio vote count were in the same basement in Chattanooga, Tennessee, that houses servers for the Republican National Committee. The programmers who (worked) for Ken Blackwell, the Republican secretary of state, were Republicans who did websites for the Bush administration.” (Democracy Now)
What gall. Blackwell's thugs didn't even try to hide what they were up to. Why should they? It's not like there's an independent media that's going to report a stolen election. No way. Blackwell ripped off the election and then thumbed his nose at the public. No investigation. No accountability. No nothing. Just like a banana republic only bigger.
So why do we keep throwing billions of dollars down a black hole just to maintain a charade that fools no one? Why not just load up the boxcars with pallets of crisp-new hundred dollar bills and ship them off to Crawford where they'll end up anyway. Let Bush worry about how to dole out the loot. Besides, with Congress' public approval dithering at 11 percent, we'd be better off paying them to stay at home and turning the House of Representatives into condos.
This year every one of the leading candidates is a member of the openly globalist Council on Foreign Relations. Every one is a “dual loyalist” that accepts the new regime of curtailed civil liberties, endless war, and free trade. There's not a nationalist or a patriot among them. None. They're all part of the same corporate effluent that washed into Washington on a wave of special interest payola drowning all visible symbols of a once-vibrant democracy. Romney pontificates about expanding Guantanamo while Clinton boasts about an attack on Iran. Blah, blah, blah. How can anyone listen to this gibberish? There's not a dime's worth of difference between any of them. They're all lacquer-hair phonies who've never had an original thought in their lives. Everything they think or say comes off a teleprompter that flashes poll-tested, focus-group mumbo-jumbo which they reiterate robotically. It's all rubbish.
If a prospective candidate hasn't sworn his undying allegiance to the cabal of transnational corporations, or taken a blood-oath to defend the doctrine of unfettered self-aggrandizement, or pledged to carry out a bloodthirsty “economy-busting” global crusade; he is quickly banished to the wilderness.
Just look at Ron Paul, who collected $6 million in donations in a matter of hours but still can't even get his picture in the papers. Why is that?
It's because he hasn't sold his soul to the carpetbagging freebooters who run the system. Apart from Kucinich, he's the only red-blooded, Constitution-toting American in the race. The rest are just bunko-artists and Pharisees.
Everyone knows what's going on. The whole campaign extravaganza is a pointless farce. Why continue the deception?
We all watched in 2000 while the five loonies on the Supreme Court suspended the hand counting of ballots, overturned the ruling of the Florida Supreme Court, and awarded the election to their own Party's candidate. How is that any different than Blackwell's manipulations in Ohio? It's all the same. In fact, the five justices had so little respect for the intelligence of the American people they invoked the 14th Amendment, which had never been used except in cases of racial discrimination. They didn't care. Who was going to stop them?
Can you imagine, dear reader, the peals of laughter that must have rung out at the right-wing think tanks after that ruling? Hooray for the oligarchy of racketeers! Pass the brandy.
That was a turning point in American history. It showed that the ruling class really doesn't care what the people think anymore. This is THEIR country and they'll run it whatever way they want. To hell with democracy.
The reason there's more coverage of the campaigns this year is because the Two-Party Mandarins want to restore the illusion that we actually have a choice. We don't. They pick the candidates and we pull the lever and go home. End of story. The debates are nothing more than a public relations smokescreen designed to lend a bit of credibility to a system that is rotten to the core. What part of the body politic has been spared the ravages of corporate corruption. The Congress? The Executive? The High Court? The media?
Don't make me laugh. The entire system is marinated in a culture of violence and dishonesty. Nothing is salvageable. It all stinks.
The real difference between the parties is minuscule but significant. The Democrats have become the party of traditional imperialism spearheaded by Brzezinski, Holbrooke, Albright and the other guardians of Empire. These are the master-puppeteers who operate behind the scenes for the real powerbrokers. Their focus is mainly on Central Asia, controlling resources from the Caspian Basin, “pacifying” Afghanistan, rallying the EU to a greater role in NATO, and continuing the apocryphal “war on terror” into infinity. It's the Great Game redux.
The Republican Party has become the party of neoconservatives. Their operational plan is “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm." It aligns the US with the foreign policy objectives of Israel's Likud Party. The focus is Balkanizing the Middle East, undermining Arab nationalism, installing US-Israeli client regimes, and controlling the region's prodigious natural resources. It is a straightforward strategy for regional hegemony.
This is the REAL split between the parties, not the comical Democrat-Republican labels. Presently, the traditional imperialists have taken the upper hand since the Bush bandwagon has swerved into the ditch. But that could change in the future. And, yes, there is some cross-pollinating between the two parties; the differences are not absolute. But this is a pretty accurate overview. What's important is that neither party has any intention of restoring the Bill of Rights, slowing the outsourcing of jobs, or abandoning the "war on terror." No way. That is not in their collective interests at all.
When civil liberties are stripped away; elections become pointless. Freedom has nothing to do with pushing a colored-nob on a touch-screen computer every four years. Its about containing the power of the state. Doesn't anyone grasp that? Freedom has become an empty sound bite that's sprinkled through presidential speeches or used to defend the latest bloody intervention in some foreign country. It's lost whatever meaning it had. We've forgotten that the Bill of Rights doesn't give us special, superhuman powers. It's merely a straitjacket for power-hungry politicians to ensure they comply with the law. That's all it is, a shackle on government. Now, all that's been lost. The basic rules of the game have changed. The social contract has been repealed. Even the flag, which once embodied the hopes and aspirations of the nation, has been raised over Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and countless other black sites spread across the planet. What does the world see when they look at that flag now? Do they see a symbol of liberty and justice or the butcher's apron flapping lazily above some far-flung torture chamber.
Everything has changed. America has lost its way. Casting a ballot for one silver spoon CFR plutocrat over another is utterly meaningless. That's not democracy. It's a fraud.

We Are All Prisoners Now

We Are All Prisoners Now

Paul Craig Roberts
http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts229.html
Thursday, December 27, 2007

"They’re locking them up today
They’re throwing away the key
I wonder who it’ll be tomorrow, you or me?"
~ The Red Telephone (LOVE, 1967)

At Christmas time it has been my habit to write a column in remembrance of the many innocent people in prisons whose lives have been stolen by the US criminal justice (sic) system that is as inhumane as it is indifferent to justice. Usually I retell the cases of William Strong and Christophe Gaynor, two men framed in the state of Virginia by prosecutors and judges as wicked and corrupt as any who served Hitler or Stalin.
This year is different. All Americans are now imprisoned in a world of lies and deception created by the Bush Regime and the two complicit parties of Congress, by federal judges too timid or ignorant to recognize a rogue regime running roughshod over the Constitution, by a bought-and-paid-for media that serves as propagandists for a regime of war criminals, and by a public who have forsaken their Founding Fathers.
Americans are also imprisoned by fear, a false fear created by the hoax of "terrorism." It has turned out that headline terrorist events since 9/11 have been orchestrated by the US government. For example, the alleged terrorist plot to blow up Chicago’s Sears Tower was the brainchild of a FBI agent who searched out a few disaffected people to give lip service to the plot devised by the FBI agent. He arrested his victims, whose trial ended in acquittal and mistrial.
Raising doubts among Americans about the government is not a strong point of the corporate media. Americans live in a world of propaganda designed to secure their acquiescence to war crimes, torture, searches and police state measures, military aggression, hegemony and oppression, while portraying Americans (and Israelis) as the salt of the earth who are threatened by Muslims who hate their "freedom and democracy."
Americans cling to this "truth" while the Bush regime and a complicit Congress destroy the Bill of Rights and engineer the theft of elections.
Freedom and democracy in America have been reduced to no-fly lists, spying without warrants, arrests without warrants or evidence, permanent detention despite the constitutional protection of habeas corpus, torture despite the prohibition against self-incrimination – the list goes on and on.
In today’s fearful America, a US Senator, whose elder brothers were (1) a military hero killed in action, (2) a President of the United States assassinated in office, (3) an Attorney General of the United States and likely president except he was assassinated like his brother, can find himself on the no-fly list. Present and former high government officials, with top-secret security clearances, cannot fly with a tube of toothpaste or a bottle of water despite the absence of any evidence that extreme measures imposed by "airport security" makes flying safer.
Elderly American citizens with walkers and young mothers with children are meticulously searched because US Homeland Security cannot tell the difference between an American citizen and a terrorist.
All Americans should note the ominous implications of the inability of Homeland Security to distinguish an American citizen from a terrorist.
When Airport Security cannot differentiate a US Marine General recipient of the Medal of Honor from a terrorist, Americans have all the information they need to know.
Any and every American can be arrested by unaccountable authority, held indefinitely without charges and tortured until he or she can no longer stand the abuse and confesses.
This predicament, which can now befall any American, is our reward for our stupidity, our indifference, our gullibility, and our lack of compassion for anyone but ourselves.
Some Americans have begun to comprehend the tremendous financial costs of the "war on terror." But few understand the cost to American liberty. Last October a Democrat-sponsored bill, "Prevention of Violent Radicalism and Homegrown Terrorism," passed the House of Representatives 404 to 6.
Only six members of the House voted against tyrannical legislation that would destroy freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and that would mandate 18 months of congressional hearings to discover Americans with "extreme" views who could be preemptively arrested.
What better indication that the US Constitution has lost its authority when elected representatives closest to the people pass a bill that permits the Bill of Rights to be overturned by the subjective opinion of members of an "Extremist Belief Commission" and Homeland Security bureaucrats? Clearly, Americans face no greater threat than the government in Washington.

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Population, Religion and Sex Education

Population, Religion and Sex Education

Brent Jessop
Knowledge Driven Revolution
http://www.knowledgedrivenrevolution.com/Articles/200712/20071224_Bomb_Sex_Education.htm
Wednesday, December 26, 2007

We must have population control at home, hopefully through changes in our value system, but by compulsion if voluntary methods fail." - Paul Ehrlich, 1968 (pXI)
The previous two articles in this series described some of the compulsory techniques for controlling population growth in America and the third world proposed by Paul Ehrlich in his 1968 book, The Population Bomb*. What about changing our value system into something more compatible with Ehrlich's mindset? How do you change a societies value system?
Sex Education and the Role of Women
When trying to institute a change in society, especially a long-term change, the most important and easily manipulated group are children. And there is no better tool than the education system for indoctrination of children.
From The Population Bomb:
"One of the most important roles of sex education must be to impress on everyone that death control in the absence of birth control is self-defeating, to say the least." - 87
"We need a federal law requiring sex education in schools - sex education that includes discussion of the need for regulating the birth rate and of the techniques of birth control. Such education should begin at the earliest age recommended by those with professional competence in this area - certainly before junior high school.
By "sex education" I do not mean course focusing on hygiene or presenting a simple-minded "birds and bees" approach to human sexuality. The reproductive function of sex must be shown as just one of its functions, and one that must be carefully regulated in relation to the needs of the individual and society. Much emphasis must be placed on sex as an interpersonal relationship, as an important and extremely pleasurable aspect of being human, as mankind's major and most enduring recreation, as a fountainhead of humor, as a phenomenon that affects every aspect of human life... In short, sex as we know it, is a peculiarly human activity. It has many complex functions other than the production of offspring. It is now imperative that we restrict the reproductive function of sex while producing a minimum of disruption in the others." - 133
Another obvious group of society that needs to have their values changed, if the population is to be reduced, are women.
"With a rational atmosphere mankind should be able to work out the problems of deemphasizing the reproductive role of sex. These problems include finding substitutes for the satisfaction and rewards that women derive from childbearing and for the ego satisfaction that often accompanies excessive fatherhood. Implicit attitudes and social pressures within our society toward parenthood, especially motherhood, add up to an even more powerful prenatal policy than our legal system represents. Equal opportunities and salaries for women in business and the professions, which are now being sought by the women's liberation movement, would strongly encourage them to seek other outlets for their energy and talents besides motherhood. Society would greatly benefit both from the resulting lowered fertility and the productive contributions of women.
All too often today marriage either provides a "license" for sexual activity or a way of legitimizing the unplanned results of premarital sexual activity. But greater equality between the sexes, reliable contraceptives, and changing attitudes among today's young people are solving the former problem; the greater availability of contraceptives and abortion could solve the latter." - 134
Religion
What about American religious values? Are they in need of change too?
"Somehow we've got to change from a growth-oriented, exploitative system to one focused on stability and conservation. Our entire system of orienting to nature must undergo a revolution. And that revolution is going to be extremely difficult to pull off, since the attitudes of Western culture toward nature are deeply rooted in Judeo-Christian tradition. Unlike people in many other cultures, we see man's basic role as that of dominating nature, rather than as living in harmony with it. This entire problem has been elegantly discussed by Professor Lynn White, Jr., in Science magazine. He points out, for instance, that before the Christian era trees, springs, hills, streams, and other objects of nature had guardian spirits. These spirits had to be approached and placated before one could safely invade their territory. As White says, "By destroying pagan animism, Christianity made it possible to exploit nature in a mood of indifference to the feelings of natural objects... Both our present science and our present technology are so tinctured with orthodox Christian arrogance toward nature that no solution for our ecological crisis can be expected from them alone. Since the roots of our trouble are so largely religious, the remedy must also be essentially religious, whether we call it that or not." " [emphasis mine] - 155
Spreading the Message of the New Religion: Population Missionaries
Ehrlich finishes his book with a very descriptive answer to the question: How can people spread the new faith?
"The question I am most frequently asked after giving talks about the population explosion is, "What can I do to help?" The obvious first answer is, "Set an example - don't have more than two children." " -159
"First of all, get together with people who share your concerns. It's easier, pleasanter and generally more effective to crusade in a group." [emphasis mine] - 160
The major thrust of this section is to write letters to politician and others.
"Above all, if you really want to survive, start writing!" - 164
"Editors of magazines and newspapers are excellent targets for letters. Complain bitterly about any positive treatment of large families. Attack the publicizing of "mothers of the year" unless they have no more than two children or have adopted the extra ones. Request that the publications you address stop carrying any advertising implying by statement or inference that it is socially acceptable to have more than two children. Point out that any promotion of the idea that a growing population means prosperity is making a contribution to the destruction of America. Television and radio stations should be subjected to similar constant pressure. Series featuring large families should be assailed. More programming about the population crisis should be demanded. Ask for prime time programs on sex education and the use of contraceptives. Raise a fuss whenever programming or commercials promote reproductive irresponsibility." [emphasis mine] - 163
"Another target for your letters is the business community... "Dear Sir: Your company's advertisement was shown in the middle of The Saturday Family, implying your sponsorship of that program. The day is upon us when we can no longer tolerate television programs that feature large families as if they still represented acceptable behaviour on the part of parents." [emphasis mine] - 164
A fair bit of attention was devoted to children, as should be expected with Ehrlich's focus on sex education.
"Give your child an IUD [intrauterine device] to take to "show and tell." " - 166
He also encourages people to "proselytize friends and associates" by giving specific arguments tailor made for different types of people. Under the heading "Target is a Schoolteacher," he suggests that it is:
"easy for you to convince most schoolteachers that the population problem is very real. They have been struggling with overcrowded classrooms and ghetto children for a long time." - 176
Because of the limits placed on individual teachers by school boards:
"Subtle propaganda to the kiddies and letter writing may be all you can ask for [from a teacher]." - 177
Conclusion
The next part in this series will examine the major organizations, foundations and individuals working toward population control. The final article will compare the current arguments for global warming with the arguments for population control, including a direct comparison between The Population Bomb (1968) and Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth (2006).

Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Video: Skull and bones, and their new world order plans.

Chertoff Attacks Bill of Rights, Corporate Media Ignores Story

Chertoff Attacks Bill of Rights, Corporate Media Ignores Story

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/211207_b_chertoff.htm
Friday, December 21, 2007

Do a Google news search on “National Applications Office.” As of this morning, the search engine returns a measly ten results, never mind that the National Applications Office, described as a subset of the Ministry of Homeland Security, will “coordinate access to spy-satellite data for non-military domestic agencies, including law enforcement,” according to Nick Juliano of Raw Story, citing a recent article published in the Wall Street Journal.
“Chertoff insists the scheme to turn spy satellites — that were originally designed for foreign surveillance — on Americans is legal, although a House committee that would approve the program has not been updated on the program for three months,” in other words there is no “legal framework,” but then the neocons don’t need no stinkin’ legal framework.
Even so, Chertoff said not to worry, because “warrants will be obtained when required before collecting satellite intelligence, and the program won’t use technology to intercept verbal communications.”
Of course, capturing verbal communications is not the job of the Ministry, but rather the NSA. Chertoff takes us for morons — and, apparently, a lot of us are — when he promises to obtain warrants and obey the Constitution, sort of the same way Bush’s massive snoop program obtains warrants. Chertoff is simply attempting to mollify us, not that the corporate media is following this story. Naturally, this makes perfect sense, as there are other, more important stories to report on, for instance the pregnancy of Britney Spears’ sixteen year old sister.
But wait a minute. Chertoff wasn’t finished. In addition to the eye in the sky, our Lavrentiy Beria of the neocon commissariat promised “a cyber-security strategy, part of an estimated $15 billion, multiyear program designed to protect the nation’s Internet infrastructure,” according to the Wall Street Journal. Replace the words “cyber-security strategy” with “cyber snoop strategy” and you’ll get a better idea of what Chertoff and the Ministry have in mind. “The program has been shrouded in secrecy for months and has also prompted privacy concerns on Capitol Hill because it involves government protection of domestic computer networks.” in other words, “domestic computer networks,” that is to say the network you are using to read this, will be protected from thought crime.
“Both areas put Homeland Security in the middle of a public debate over domestic spy powers, kicked off by the revelation two years ago that the National Security Agency had been eavesdropping on some conversations in the U.S. without a warrant.”
Some? As we know, the NSA is employing a vacuum cleaner approach, grabbing everything going over domestic networks, both telephonic and internet, and running keyword algorithms on it all to ferret out al-Qaeda associations. Of course, in this context, al-Qaeda is anybody who disagrees with the government, not strictly a couple mythical guys in a CIA constructed cave complex in Afghanistan.
Back in April, the Ministry demanded Verisign hand over the “master keys” to the internet, an effort that drew about as much attention from the corporate media as the current “cyber-security strategy” and the Ministry’s eye in the sky.
“If it succeeds, the US will be able to track DNS Security Extensions (DNSSec) all the way back to the servers that represent the name system’s root zone on the Internet,” Nick Farrell wrote at the time. “Effectively it would mean that US spooks could snoop on anyone in the Worldwide wibble and place control of the Interweb tubes firmly in the paws of the US government.”
If the U.S. and the Ministry controlled the DNS root zone, they would be able not only to snoop more effectively, but would be able to control DNS lookups. Put in layman’s terms, this means the Ministry would be able control a wide range of internet activity, from email delivery to surfing the net. Imagine a “no-fly” list for the internet.
As for the Ministry’s “satellite surveillance tools,” operated by the newly created National Applications Office, it’s all about real-time snooping.
“The spy surveillance satellites are considered by military experts to be far more powerful than those currently available to civilian officials,” notes Wikipedia. “For example, they can take color photos, see through cloud cover and forest canopies, and use different parts of the light spectrum to locate traces left by chemical weapons. However, the full capabilities of these systems are among the most carefully held governmental secrets.” In October, Congress filed an injunction against the NAO, fretting over civil liberty issues, that is to say at least some of our Congress critters are worried about the Ministry using secretive government technology to further erode the Constitution.
Bureaucrats and underwear drawer snoopers fear not. Because, as should be expected, Congress will flip somersaults like a well-trained dog, afraid of being seen as rolling out a red carpet for al-Qaeda.
“If the plan goes forward, the NAO will create the legal mechanism for an unprecedented degree of domestic intelligence gathering that would make the United States one of the world’s most closely monitored nations,” writes Tim Shorrock. It has nothing to do with Muslim miscreants and everything to do with keeping tabs on the sort of people who hand out sandwiches to Halliburton employees.
In fact, dropping Halliburton’s name in here is entirely appropriate, as the NAO effort will be subcontracted. “The intelligence-sharing system to be managed by the NAO will rely heavily on private contractors, including Boeing, BAE Systems, L-3 Communications and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC),” Shorrock continues. “These companies already provide technology and personnel to U.S. agencies involved in foreign intelligence, and the NAO greatly expands their markets. Indeed, at an intelligence conference in San Antonio, Texas, last month, the titans of the industry were actively lobbying intelligence officials to buy products specifically designed for domestic surveillance.”
Finally, recall Donald Kerr, principal deputy director of National Intelligence and the National Reconnaissance Office, instructing us to surrender any antiquated reverence for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. “I think all of us have to really take stock of what we already are willing to give up, in terms of anonymity,” declared Kerr in October.
“Anonymity has been important since the Federalist Papers were written under pseudonyms,” explains Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “The government has tremendous power: the police power, the ability to arrest, to detain, to take away rights. Tying together that someone has spoken out on an issue with their identity is a far more dangerous thing if it is the government that is trying to tie it together.”
Indeed, it is all about people speaking out. It has absolutely nothing to do with al-Qaeda, now a perennial boogieman used to scare school children and intellectually flabby adults alike. The Ministry, NRO, NAO, working with the likes of Boeing, BAE Systems, L-3 Communications and Science Applications International Corporation, are dismantling the Constitution and erecting a high-tech control grid.
But never mind. Didn’t you know that MTV’s Tila Tequila is bisexual? I mean, who has the time to worry about the Bill of Rights when we are offered such lurid spectacles?

Borg Hive Technology Now Nearly Main Street

Borg Hive Technology Now Nearly Main Street

Kurt Nimmo
TruthNews
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1337
December 19, 2007

“All over the world, systems that directly connect silicon circuits to brains are under development, and some are nearly ready for commercial applications, according to a new report from the World Technology Evaluation Center and announced by a news release of the University of Southern California (USC),” writes ZDNet blogger Roland Piquepaille. “Some of the conclusions of this report about brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are quite surprising. For example, North America researchers focus almost exclusively on invasive BCIs while noninvasive BCI systems are mostly studied in European and Asian labs.”
By “invasive,” Mr. Piquepaille means they plant this stuff right in your gray matter. Of course, we are told all of this is for the betterment of man, sort of like that cure for cancer or the one for the common cold. It is indeed odd that the rate of cancer has skyrocketed over the last decade and new, more virulent and deadly forms of influenza viruses are appearing all the time, complete with warnings that if a really bad outbreak occurs we’ll be slapped under martial law.
Sure, a couple lucky souls may receive a “BCI” for damaged regions of the hippocampus, as this program must be sold to the public, but when you see DARPA stamped on something, be afraid. “This is a project funded by the EU Future Emerging Technology Program to develop a hierarchical, distributed-control, multiple-degrees-of-freedom robotic hand for replacement of lost limbs. The hand is designed to respond to signals from the human nervous system. It is included in the DARPA Revolutionizing Prosthetics program.”
DARPA and the European Union?
Of course, that’s only kid’s stuff, as the real scary totalitarians will soon begin developing this wonderful technology. “Future BCI research in China is clearly developing toward invasive BCI systems, so BCI researchers in the US will soon have a strong competitor.”
Prediction: China will take “invasive” to the limit. Imagine millions of Chinese workers, already fair to middling in the passive department, cranking out lead dusted toys and plastic spiked pet food with nary a bleat of protest, let alone need for breaks or, for that matter, sleep and entertainment.
It’s the ultimate technocratic Borg Hive, that much closer to realization.
In Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley predicted an era when “most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution.” But if DARPA, the EU, and China have their way, the very act of loving and dreaming will likely become impossible with the right silicon-based, nanotechnological BCI system in place.
You will be assimilated.

Is Blackwater the Private Mercenary Army of the Oligarchy?

Is Blackwater the Private Mercenary Army of the Oligarchy?

Kurt Nimmo
TruthNews
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1277
December 14, 2007

In a democracy, or rather a corporate oligarchy, it does not matter what the people want, who they elect to office, or what they vote for in booths outfitted with Diebold election thievery devices. For instance, the people voted to end the occupation and looting of Iraq in 2004 by installing Democrats in Congress but this did not result in an end to that criminal operation. Democrats went about their merry way enabling the neocons in their serial murder of Iraqis — the body count now numbering well over a million — a war crime by any standard, and Nancy Pelosi had the gall to complain about antiwar demonstrators perched on the sidewalk outside her lair. Democrats, who swore to impeach Bush before the election, suddenly changed course after they were safely installed in the halls of the greatest whorehouse in the nation, complete with three “lobbyists” for each prostitute, er “representative.” Once again, the people were duped, as they will probably be duped in 2008, that is if they don’t elect Ron Paul.
As a choice example of corporate interest trumping the will of the people, consider Blackwater Worldwide. “Government security contractor Blackwater Worldwide reaffirmed plans Wednesday to build a rural training camp, a day after residents recalled five town officials who endorsed the project involving the North Carolina-based company,” reports the Associated Press. “The company wants to build 11 firing ranges, a driving track and a helipad in a valley just north of Potrero, a sleepy hamlet of about 850 people in the desert mountains about 45 miles east of San Diego.”
Potrero residents have repeatedly demonstrated their disapproval of Blackwater’s move into their community. But, of course, this does not matter. Regardless of what the people want, declared Brian Bonfiglio, Blackwater VP, the move is underway, no matter “who’s sitting in that seat,” that is to say the seat occupied by the San Diego County board of supervisors. “Voters gave the boot by wide margins to members of the advisory planning board,” notes the Associated Press.
“Bonfiglio said he thought objections to Blackwater’s other activities were irrelevant to the camp case.” These “other activities” include killing Iraqis at will, activity so egregious it resulted in congressional and criminal investigations. “He said the facility in Potrero would focus solely on training law-enforcement officers, not contractors who work for the company in Iraq and Afghanistan.” In other words, law enforcement, already riddled with goons who derive pleasure from tasering pregnant women, will get up to speed on the latest Blackwater tactics, for instance clearing intersections with automatic gunfire.
According to Gordon Hammers, one of the ousted advisory planning board members, the community was brainwashed by antiwar and anti-Bush “elements,” and it has nothing to do with the fact Blackwater hires trigger-happy mercenaries. “Certain elements made it an anti-Bush, anti-Iraq war surrogate and sold that to the community. They were successful,” Hammers complained.
“Americans tend to think in an American way, and therefore nobody seems to have noticed that the location of this camp is right on the US-Mexico border, just a few miles from Tecate.” writes Nancy Conroy. From an international perspective, there are a number of geopolitical reasons that could explain why this border location was selected. This is probably not merely an issue for the local planning commission, given that the idea of mercenaries along the border has broader international implications…. A Blackwater camp on the border may be a covert attempt to militarize the border without going through congressional oversight or public debate. A so-called ‘training camp’ could probably also function as an operational base. Perhaps Blackwater will obtain government contracts to patrol the border, gradually edging out US agents and putting border security into the hands of a private army away from public scrutiny.”
Of course, this is nonsense, as the ruling neocons and Congress have no intention of patrolling the border and keeping out illegal immigrants. In fact, by way of the SPP and NAU, our rulers are attempting to eradicate the border, not bolster it with mercenaries.
“The first Blackwater employees arrived in New Orleans just 36 hours after the levies broke,” Dina Temple-Raston wrote for NPR last September. “At one point, more than 600 Blackwater employees were in the city. Some were guarding the local Sheraton hotel. Others were helping fish people out of the water or were rescuing them off rooftops. Eventually, Blackwater landed a $73 million contact to protect FEMA staff helping with the Katrina recovery operation.”
Of course, FEMA did not really need to be protected and they did not run a “recovery operation” in New Orleans. Blackwater was invited to partake in a large experiment… call it an exercise for the corporate fascist security state. “What I saw when I was in New Orleans was really the emergence of an absolutely unmasked corporate military state,” explains Naomi Klein. “Now, I know these sound like buzz words, but I’ll give you an example. One of the images that’s really stuck in my mind is the conversion of a huge Wal-Mart into a military base in downtown New Orleans. They call it Camp Wal-Mart. So here you have — and we even hear people suggesting that Wal-Mart should replace FEMA at running disaster response… the presence of these privatized police forces, I think is more ideological than it is anything else.”
Indeed, Blackwater’s glaring presence in Potrero, California, a stone’s throw from the Mexican border, is more about an “ideological… privatized police force” than working to impede the crossing of illegal immigrants. As in Iraq, the presence of Blackwater in America is about a “merger — completely unmasked — of corporate and state interests. There’s no distinction,” as Klein characterizes it. In Iraq, Blackwater and other mercenary outfits worked side-by-side and often supplanted U.S. troops. In America, they will work with and possibly even replace domestic law enforcement.
Finally, all of this begs the question: as contractors, intimately connected to the neocons and the government, what does Blackwater know about what’s coming down the road that the residents of Potrero and America at large don’t know?
Maybe it is something the UK Ministry of Defense foresees, something the rest of us only dimly perceive: “The middle classes could become a revolutionary class,” a Ministry report states. “The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat… Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest” and “flashmobs” comprised of “terrorists and criminals” may undermine the “highly visible super-rich,” who will naturally hire their own mercenary armies, as did the elite in the Late Roman era, as the citizenry was no longer dependable as cannon fodder and inevitably became political enemies.

Audio: Hillary Clinton Thinks You Are An Idiot

Audio: Alex Jones - Greg Palast Charged Criminally for filming FEMA

Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Video: FEMA: Part I - The Truth

Video: FEMA: Part II - The Camps

Great video! You gotta see this one!

Video: FEMA concentration camps

Well said!

Video: Concentration Camp In Texas

Video: FEMA camp chicago

Video: Off To Camp FEMA

Video: FEMA Concentration Camps

Video: FEMA Camp Footage (Concentrations Camps in USA)

Video: Congress is kept away from Rex 84 FEMA camp Martial Law plan

Video: Ron Paul on Federal Reserve destroying America

Ron Paul on NBC: U.S. Moving Toward “Soft Fascism”

Ron Paul on NBC: U.S. Moving Toward “Soft Fascism”

Nick Langewis and David Edwards
Raw Story
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Ron_Paul_warns_Tim_Russert_of_1223.html
December 23, 2007

“It reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once said, he says: ‘When fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross.’”
Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) argues to Meet the Press’ Tim Russert that in the statement above, he is not calling presidential contender and Republican competitor Mike Huckabee a fascist, but what could be the image of a cross planted in a recently released Huckabee campaign ad brought the quote to his mind.
Paul does, however, believe that the United States has adopted fascist leanings. Changes in the country’s tone, says the Congressman, such as the PATRIOT Act, questioning dissenters’ patriotism during the war, and civil liberties abuses indicate corporatism, or “soft fascism,” namely a stronghold by the military-industrial complex on society.
“So,” Russert follows up, “you think we’re close to fascism?”
Mentioning a documentary entitled “Freedom to Fascism,” Paul responds, “We’re not moving toward Hitler-type fascism, but we’re moving toward a softer fascism: Loss of civil liberties, corporations running the show, big government in bed with big business. So you have the military-industrial complex, you have the medical-industrial complex, you have the financial industry, you have the communications industry. They go to Washington and spend hundreds of millions of dollars.”
“That’s where the control is,” says the Congressman. “I call that a soft form of fascism — something that’s very dangerous.”

Friday, December 21, 2007

U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007

U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007

U.S. Senate Committee
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb
Thursday, December 20, 2007

Complete U.S. Senate Report Now Available: (LINK)
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport

Complete Report without Introduction: (LINK)
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report


INTRODUCTION:

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.

Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking." Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears “bite the dust.” (LINK) In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement. (LINK)


This blockbuster Senate report lists the scientists by name, country of residence, and academic/institutional affiliation. It also features their own words, biographies, and weblinks to their peer reviewed studies and original source materials as gathered from public statements, various news outlets, and websites in 2007. This new “consensus busters” report is poised to redefine the debate.

Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.

“Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media,” Paldor wrote. [Note: See also July 2007 Senate report detailing how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation - LINK ]

Scientists from Around the World Dissent

This new report details how teams of international scientists are dissenting from the UN IPCC’s view of climate science. In such nations as Germany, Brazil, the Netherlands, Russia, New Zealand and France, nations, scientists banded together in 2007 to oppose climate alarmism. In addition, over 100 prominent international scientists sent an open letter in December 2007 to the UN stating attempts to control climate were “futile.” (LINK)

Paleoclimatologist Dr. Tim Patterson, professor in the department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University in Ottawa, recently converted from a believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic. Patterson noted that the notion of a “consensus” of scientists aligned with the UN IPCC or former Vice President Al Gore is false. “I was at the Geological Society of America meeting in Philadelphia in the fall and I would say that people with my opinion were probably in the majority.”

This new committee report, a first of its kind, comes after the UN IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri implied that there were only “about half a dozen” skeptical scientists left in the world. (LINK) Former Vice President Gore has claimed that scientists skeptical of climate change are akin to “flat Earth society members” and similar in number to those who “believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona.” (LINK) & (LINK)

The distinguished scientists featured in this new report are experts in diverse fields, including: climatology; oceanography; geology; biology; glaciology; biogeography; meteorology; oceanography; economics; chemistry; mathematics; environmental sciences; engineering; physics and paleoclimatology. Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many shared a portion of the UN IPCC Nobel Peace Prize with Vice President Gore.

Additionally, these scientists hail from prestigious institutions worldwide, including: Harvard University; NASA; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR); Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the UN IPCC; the Danish National Space Center; U.S. Department of Energy; Princeton University; the Environmental Protection Agency; University of Pennsylvania; Hebrew University of Jerusalem; the International Arctic Research Centre; the Pasteur Institute in Paris; the Belgian Weather Institute; Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute; the University of Helsinki; the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S., France, and Russia; the University of Pretoria; University of Notre Dame; Stockholm University; University of Melbourne; University of Columbia; the World Federation of Scientists; and the University of London.

The voices of many of these hundreds of scientists serve as a direct challenge to the often media-hyped “consensus” that the debate is “settled.”

A May 2007 Senate report detailed scientists who had recently converted from believers in man-made global warming to skepticism. [See May 15, 2007 report: Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics: Growing Number of Scientists Convert to Skeptics After Reviewing New Research – (LINK) ]

The report counters the claims made by the promoters of man-made global warming fears that the number of skeptical scientists is dwindling.

Examples of “consensus” claims made by promoters of man-made climate fears:

Former Vice President Al Gore (November 5, 2007): “There are still people who believe that the Earth is flat.” (LINK) Gore also compared global warming skeptics to people who 'believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona' (June 20, 2006 - LINK)

CNN’s Miles O’Brien (July 23, 2007): The scientific debate is over.” “We're done." O’Brien also declared on CNN on February 9, 2006 that scientific skeptics of man-made catastrophic global warming “are bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry, usually.” (LINK)

On July 27, 2006, Associated Press reporter Seth Borenstein described a scientist as “one of the few remaining scientists skeptical of the global warming harm caused by industries that burn fossil fuels.” (LINK)
Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC view on the number of skeptical scientists as quoted on Feb. 20, 2003: “About 300 years ago, a Flat Earth Society was founded by those who did not believe the world was round. That society still exists; it probably has about a dozen members.” (LINK)
Agence France-Press (AFP Press) article (December 4, 2007): The article noted that a prominent skeptic “finds himself increasingly alone in his claim that climate change poses no imminent threat to the planet.”

Andrew Dessler in the eco-publication Grist Magazine (November 21, 2007): “While some people claim there are lots of skeptical climate scientists out there, if you actually try to find one, you keep turning up the same two dozen or so (e.g., Singer, Lindzen, Michaels, Christy, etc., etc.). These skeptics are endlessly recycled by the denial machine, so someone not paying close attention might think there are lots of them out there -- but that's not the case. (LINK)

The Washington Post asserted on May 23, 2006 that there were only “a handful of skeptics” of man-made climate fears. (LINK)

ABC News Global Warming Reporter Bill Blakemore reported on August 30, 2006: “After extensive searches, ABC News has found no such [scientific] debate” on global warming. (LINK)

# #

Brief highlights of the report featuring over 400 international scientists:

Israel: Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has authored almost 70 peer-reviewed studies and won several awards. “First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) have occurred in Earth's climatic history. There's nothing special about the recent rise!”

Russia: Russian scientist Dr. Oleg Sorochtin of the Institute of Oceanology at the Russian Academy of Sciences has authored more than 300 studies, nine books, and a 2006 paper titled “The Evolution and the Prediction of Global Climate Changes on Earth.” “Even if the concentration of ‘greenhouse gases’ double man would not perceive the temperature impact,” Sorochtin wrote.

Spain: Anton Uriarte, a professor of Physical Geography at the University of the Basque Country in Spain and author of a book on the paleoclimate, rejected man-made climate fears in 2007. “There's no need to be worried. It's very interesting to study [climate change], but there's no need to be worried,” Uriate wrote.


Netherlands: Atmospheric scientist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, and an internationally recognized expert in atmospheric boundary layer processes, “I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting – a six-meter sea level rise, fifteen times the IPCC number – entirely without merit,” Tennekes wrote. “I protest vigorously the idea that the climate reacts like a home heating system to a changed setting of the thermostat: just turn the dial, and the desired temperature will soon be reached."

Brazil: Chief Meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart of the MetSul Meteorologia Weather Center in Sao Leopoldo – Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil declared himself a skeptic. “The media is promoting an unprecedented hyping related to global warming. The media and many scientists are ignoring very important facts that point to a natural variation in the climate system as the cause of the recent global warming,” Hackbart wrote on May 30, 2007.

France: Climatologist Dr. Marcel Leroux, former professor at Universit√© Jean Moulin and director of the Laboratory of Climatology, Risks, and Environment in Lyon, is a climate skeptic. Leroux wrote a 2005 book titled Global Warming – Myth or Reality? - The Erring Ways of Climatology. “Day after day, the same mantra - that ‘the Earth is warming up’ - is churned out in all its forms. As ‘the ice melts’ and ‘sea level rises,’ the Apocalypse looms ever nearer! Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average citizen in bamboozled, lobotomized, lulled into mindless ac­ceptance. ... Non-believers in the greenhouse scenario are in the position of those long ago who doubted the existence of God ... fortunately for them, the Inquisition is no longer with us!”

Norway: Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, a professor and head of the Geological Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN IPCC: “It is a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere. It is all a fiction.”

Finland: Dr. Boris Winterhalter, retired Senior Marine Researcher of the Geological Survey of Finland and former professor of marine geology at University of Helsinki, criticized the media for what he considered its alarming climate coverage. “The effect of solar winds on cosmic radiation has just recently been established and, furthermore, there seems to be a good correlation between cloudiness and variations in the intensity of cosmic radiation. Here we have a mechanism which is a far better explanation to variations in global climate than the attempts by IPCC to blame it all on anthropogenic input of greenhouse gases. “

Germany: Paleoclimate expert Augusto Mangini of the University of Heidelberg in Germany, criticized the UN IPCC summary. “I consider the part of the IPCC report, which I can really judge as an expert, i.e. the reconstruction of the paleoclimate, wrong,” Mangini noted in an April 5, 2007 article. He added: “The earth will not die.”

Canada: IPCC 2007 Expert Reviewer Madhav Khandekar, a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling: “To my dismay, IPCC authors ignored all my comments and suggestions for major changes in the FOD (First Order Draft) and sent me the SOD (Second Order Draft) with essentially the same text as the FOD. None of the authors of the chapter bothered to directly communicate with me (or with other expert reviewers with whom I communicate on a regular basis) on many issues that were raised in my review. This is not an acceptable scientific review process.”

Czech Republic: Czech-born U.S. climatologist Dr. George Kukla, a research scientist with the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at University of Columbia expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “The only thing to worry about is the damage that can be done by worrying. Why are some scientists worried? Perhaps because they feel that to stop worrying may mean to stop being paid,” Kukla told Gelf Magazine on April 24, 2007.

India: One of India's leading geologists, B.P. Radhakrishna, President of the Geological Society of India, expressed climate skepticism in 2007. “We appear to be overplaying this global warming issue as global warming is nothing new. It has happened in the past, not once but several times, giving rise to glacial-interglacial cycles.”

USA: Climatologist Robert Durrenberger, past president of the American Association of State Climatologists, and one of the climatologists who gathered at Woods Hole to review the National Climate Program Plan in July, 1979: “Al Gore brought me back to the battle and prompted me to do renewed research in the field of climatology. And because of all the misinformation that Gore and his army have been spreading about climate change I have decided that ‘real’ climatologists should try to help the public understand the nature of the problem.”

Italy: Internationally renowned scientist Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the University of Bologna in Italy, who has published over 800 scientific papers: “Significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming."

New Zealand: IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr. Vincent Gray, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001: “The [IPCC] ‘Summary for Policymakers’ might get a few readers, but the main purpose of the report is to provide a spurious scientific backup for the absurd claims of the worldwide environmentalist lobby that it has been established scientifically that increases in carbon dioxide are harmful to the climate. It just does not matter that this ain't so.”

South Africa: Dr. Kelvin Kemm, formerly a scientist at South Africa’s Atomic Energy Corporation who holds degrees in nuclear physics and mathematics: “The global-warming mania continues with more and more hype and less and less thinking. With religious zeal, people look for issues or events to blame on global warming.”

Poland: Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Central Laboratory for the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiological Protection in Warsaw: ““We thus find ourselves in the situation that the entire theory of man-made global warming—with its repercussions in science, and its important consequences for politics and the global economy—is based on ice core studies that provided a false picture of the atmospheric CO2 levels.”

Australia: Prize-wining Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide in Australia: "There is new work emerging even in the last few weeks that shows we can have a very close correlation between the temperatures of the Earth and supernova and solar radiation.”

Britain: Dr. Richard Courtney, a UN IPCC expert reviewer and a UK-based climate and atmospheric science consultant: “To date, no convincing evidence for AGW (anthropogenic global warming) has been discovered. And recent global climate behavior is not consistent with AGW model predictions.”

China: Chinese Scientists Say C02 Impact on Warming May Be ‘Excessively Exaggerated’ – Scientists Lin Zhen-Shan’s and Sun Xian’s 2007 study published in the peer-reviewed journal Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics: "Although the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate change is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated." Their study asserted that "it is high time to reconsider the trend of global climate change.”

Denmark: Space physicist Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen is the director of the Danish National Space Centre, a member of the space research advisory committee of the Swedish National Space Board, a member of a NASA working group, and a member of the European Space Agency who has authored or co-authored around 100 peer-reviewed papers and chairs the Institute of Space Physics: “The sun is the source of the energy that causes the motion of the atmosphere and thereby controls weather and climate. Any change in the energy from the sun received at the Earth’s surface will therefore affect climate.”


Belgium: Climate scientist Luc Debontridder of the Belgium Weather Institute’s Royal Meteorological Institute (RMI) co-authored a study in August 2007 which dismissed a decisive role of CO2 in global warming: "CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. “Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible for at least 75 % of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it.”

Sweden: Geologist Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, professor emeritus of the Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology at Stockholm University, critiqued the Associated Press for hyping promoting climate fears in 2007. “Another of these hysterical views of our climate. Newspapers should think about the damage they are doing to many persons, particularly young kids, by spreading the exaggerated views of a human impact on climate.”

USA: Dr. David Wojick is a UN IPCC expert reviewer, who earned his PhD in Philosophy of Science and co-founded the Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie-Mellon University: “In point of fact, the hypothesis that solar variability and not human activity is warming the oceans goes a long way to explain the puzzling idea that the Earth's surface may be warming while the atmosphere is not. The GHG (greenhouse gas) hypothesis does not do this.” Wojick added: “The public is not well served by this constant drumbeat of false alarms fed by computer models manipulated by advocates.”

# # #

Background: Only 52 Scientists Participated in UN IPCC Summary
The over 400 skeptical scientists featured in this new report outnumber by nearly eight times the number of scientists who participated in the 2007 UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers. The notion of “hundreds” or “thousands” of UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to scrutiny. (See report debunking “consensus” LINK) Recent research by Australian climate data analyst Dr. John McLean revealed that the IPCC’s peer-review process for the Summary for Policymakers leaves much to be desired. (LINK)
Proponents of man-made global warming like to note how the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called "consensus" view that man is driving global warming. But both the NAS and AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing boards of these institutions produced the "consensus" statements. This report gives a voice to the rank-and-file scientists who were shut out of the process. (LINK)
The most recent attempt to imply there was an overwhelming scientific “consensus” in favor of man-made global warming fears came in December 2007 during the UN climate conference in Bali. A letter signed by only 215 scientists urged the UN to mandate deep cuts in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. But absent from the letter were the signatures of these alleged “thousands” of scientists. (See AP article: - LINK )

UN IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri urged the world at the December 2007 UN climate conference in Bali, Indonesia to "Please listen to the voice of science.”

The science has continued to grow loud and clear in 2007. In addition to the growing number of scientists expressing skepticism, an abundance of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast considerable doubt about man-made global warming fears. A November 3, 2007 peer-reviewed study found that “solar changes significantly alter climate.” (LINK) A December 2007 peer-reviewed study recalculated and halved the global average surface temperature trend between 1980 – 2002. (LINK) Another new study found the Medieval Warm Period “0.3C warmer than 20th century” (LINK)

A peer-reviewed study by a team of scientists found that "warming is naturally caused and shows no human influence." (LINK) – Another November 2007 peer-reviewed study in the journal Physical Geography found “Long-term climate change is driven by solar insolation changes.” (LINK ) These recent studies were in addition to the abundance of peer-reviewed studies earlier in 2007. - See "New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears" (LINK )

With this new report of profiling 400 skeptical scientists, the world can finally hear the voices of the “silent majority” of scientists.

Technology for a Male-less Matriarchal Society

Technology for a Male-less Matriarchal Society

Ann Shibler
JBS
http://www.jbs.org/node/6713
Thursday December 20, 2007

Scientists in the United Kingdom believe that women may be evolving as humanity's sole representatives.
Follow this link to the original source: "Homo erectus extinctus"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/men/article3040118.ece
There is a bill in the British parliament that may become law next summer saying fathers of artificially conceived children need not be recognized by the state. It's called The Human Tissue and Embryos Bill and is barely raising an eyebrow in the UK. But it has caught the attention of some of those who would stand to gain from present scientific advances, social changes, and subsequently the legal changes that would result.
As if to lend credence to the dire predictions made in the bizarre 1969 hit song, In the Year 2525, scientists drawing on the premise that male fertility is on the decline due to damaged genes on the Y chromosome are predicting that heterosexual reproduction may only last another 125,000 years or so. They draw this conclusion after noting that 7 percent of men are now infertile. They ignore, of course, that 93 percent of men are not infertile and probably very capable of reproduction. Despite this, "The core sex is female," says Bryan Sykes, professor of human genetics at Oxford University, as he lends his voice to those in favor of proceeding with male-less involvement in conception. But can it really be accomplished?
In Japan, artificial sperm produced from bone-marrow cells led to pregnancies and live births in mice. Karim Nayernia, a professor of stem-cell biology at Newcastle University, has demonstrated that sperm can be manufactured from embryo stem cells, thereby ensuring unlimited sperm availability, but also unlimited dead babies in the process. Nayernia is presently awaiting permission to proceed with his experiments to produce synthetic sperm cells from women's stem cells.

What does all this mean? It means scientists are more than willing to attempt to create a baby without the need for male involvement. It is proof positive that the push to destroy traditional families and morality continues all out. And it shows the intent that parenthood be reduced to nothing but a legal responsibility and not a human biological one. It also means that the state is willing to set a precedent, redefining a child's biological origins in total opposition to the natural law.
The Human Tissue and Embryos Bill does recognize a new approach to parenthood suited to the gay and lesbian communities, and perhaps that's the point. Even if the grandiose scheme to create babies could not be done without male involvement, genetic or otherwise, the legislation itself would still be a social sea change in favor of gays and lesbians.
Of course, the notion of men eventually dying off completely, leaving only females to run and rule the world is the height of absurdity and most likely wishful thinking — male bashing at its best (can't you just feel the anger?) However, the damage done by this type of social engineering in recognizing, legitimizing, and promoting lesbian "families" in this fashion can have catastrophic consequences. David Velleman, professor of philosophy at New York University warned, "Our society has embarked on a vast social experiment in producing children designed to have no human relations with some of their biological relatives … permanently severed from their biological past … by deliberate intention." He means there will be no father figure, no one to call upon to help deal with the problems presented by developing adolescents, and the loneliness and unhappiness of children who don't know their own fathers.
One wonders if the developers of the new technology and recipients of artificially created babies will only accept female babies who are lesbians. It's all so silly. The London Times article is not based on proper science. But it is an attack on the foundation of society — the family.

Video: Ron Paul on "Morning Joe" 12-18-07

Very nice interview!

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Video: The Model for the New World Order is China

NASCO Director Spins More Lies About Treasonous N.A.U. Merger

NASCO Director Spins More Lies About Treasonous N.A.U. Merger

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
http://infowars.net/index.html
Tuesday, Dec 18, 2007

North America's SuperCorridor Coalition (NASCO), often referred to as a principle player in the proposal for a "NAFTA superhighway", has hit out at presidential candidate and Texas Congressman Ron Paul, branding him as "confused" and stating that it's business "has nothing to do with any of his concerns" over the increasing move towards a North American Union.
In a letter published in the Des Moines Register, NASCO's executive director, Tiffany Melvin, J.D., responds to a piece penned by Ron Paul last November, entitled Renew Devotion to Freedom, Limited Government, in which the Congressman referred to the proposed NAFTA highway, stating:
This superhighway would connect Mexico, the United States and Canada, cutting a wide swath through the middle of Texas and through Kansas City. One proposed path takes the superhighway right through Iowa. This superhighway can be built only by sacrificing family farms through eminent domain.
Melvin and NASCO respond with the following:
Paul states the NAFTA superhighway will cut a wide swath through Iowa. For decades, I-35 has carried international trade with Canada, the United States and Mexico. Since the enactment of NAFTA, people have referred to the existing I-35 with the slogan "NAFTA superhighway" because it is a major north-south artery that moves a substantial amount of international trade.
Recently, there have been rumors of a new NAFTA superhighway - a giant new highway being planned to link the three countries - and North America's SuperCorridor Coalition Inc.'s promotional map has been used erroneously as proof that a blueprint of the proposed giant highway is, in fact, a reality.
NASCO can state unequivocally that plans for a new giant NAFTA superhighway do not exist. Our map depicts existing transportation infrastructure not drawn to scale, but enlarged for promotional purposes.
Paul is confused and has tied separate initiatives together into a sinister plot to destroy the sovereignty of the United States. NASCO has nothing to do with any of his concerns. NASCO is good for Iowa.

There is no dispute over the existence of the NAFTA superhighway, NASCO admits that it already exists in the form of I35 and other connecting roads. NASCO is claiming that the proposal to link Canada, the US and Mexico does not exist on the basis of semantics by insinuating that NAFTA trade corridors do not incorporate the building of a "new" superhighway by NASCO itself.
Although this convoluted word play has constituted enough to deflect most mainstream hack journalists in recent months, it has not swayed those who have actually researched the North American Union agenda in its entirety, and that includes Ron Paul and other members of Congress and State Houses of Representatives.





NASCO describes itself as a “non-profit organization dedicated to developing the world’s first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America.”
It has received $250 million in earmarks from the U.S. Department of Transportation to adapt existing roads as part of one NAFTA trade corridor. Reports indicate that proposals include a 10-lane limited-access road (five lanes in each direction) plus passenger and freight rail lines running alongside pipelines laid for oil and natural gas. One glance at the map of the NAFTA Super Highway as produced by NASCO makes clear that the design is to connect Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. into one transportation system.
Toll roads are to be placed upon existing roads in Security Prosperity Partnership agreements that bypasses Congress, agreements between the bureaucracies of the US and Mexican governments, to raise capital to build the Superhighway that will go South of Texas and into Mexico.
Security Prosperity Partnership documents reveal that out of 85 interstate highways, 83 of them are slated to go under this agreement and toll roads are going down on them already. The money from this operation with further fund the dismantling of US sovereignty by seizing the infrastructure at it's very heart in a bloodless coup.
The highway is to be linked to the Trans-Texas Corridor the first leg of the highway which will connect Mexico with the US. This is being overseen by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) which is a member of NASCO. The Trans-Texas Corridor is a separate part of the physical infrastructure but is being built as part of overall plans to deepen the integration of Mexico, the United States, and Canada in a North American economic community that is a precursor to further union.
The NAFTA corridor movement also involves CANAMEX, another trade organization that promotes a Western tri-lateral route utilizing I-19, I-10, I-93 and I-15 in the states of Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho and Montana to link the three countries in trade. See below (click to enlarge).
Another non-profit group, the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI), identifies four bands of NAFTA corridors (Pacific, West, East and Atlantic), all relying primarily upon internationalizing north-south existing interstate highways into NAFTA trade corridors. See below.








The NAFI website states the following:
"Following the implementation of NAFTA, coalitions of interest have been formed in order to promote specific transport channels, to develop the infrastructures of these channels and to propose jurisdictional amendments to facilitate the crossing of borders. These coalitions include businesses, government agencies, civil organizations, metropolitan areas, rural communities and also individuals, wishing to strengthen the commercial hubs of their regions."
"The North American trade corridors are bi- or tri-national channels for which various cross-border interests have grouped together in order to develop or consolidate the infrastructures. The North American corridors are considered multimodal in the sense that they bring into play different modes of transport in succession."
"The infrastructures may include roads, highways, transit routes, airports, pipelines, railways and train stations, river canal systems and port facilities, telecommunications networks and teleports.




The government of the province of Alberta, Canada, highlights the four trade corridors on its own website, referring to NASCO's arm as "the NAFTA superhighway". The Province's Infrastructure and Transportation division helpfully published online the map of the NAFTA Superhighway seen opposite.
They also provide detailed information regarding their involvement with the aforementioned CANAMEX Trade Corridor, stating:
CANAMEX was one of the first north-south corridors designated as a High Priority Corridor under the National Highway Systems Designation Act. Actively pursued by Alberta since the early 1990's, the CANAMEX Trade Corridor links Canada, the United States and Mexico and stretches 6,000 km from Alaska to Mexico, truly a pan-American corridor.
The goals of the CANAMEX Trade Corridor are to:
Improve access for the north-south flow of goods, people and information
Increase transport productivity and reduce transport costs
Promote a seamless and efficient intermodal transport system, and
Reduce administration and enforcement costs through harmonized regulations.
Of course, as we have highlighted, such improvements and efforts to increase the flow of traffic requires immense funding (hence the tolls roads which come with their own threat to freedom of movement) and will incorporate enlargements to existing road networks. Enlargements that DO constitute the "building of a new" Superhighway and WILL threaten anyone who owns property wherever the enlargements need to be made.
The architects of this North American unification are not just in name merging agencies, laws and regulations, they are physically getting rid of the borders by buying off and lobbying the politicians at the state level, who then hand the roads over to international bodies and their subsidiary companies.
An article in MIT's Technology Review magazine, for June 30, 2006, provides in-depth insight as to how the Spanish company Cintra has become a leading player in superhighway toll road projects in both Canada and the US In 1999 Cintra, working in conjunction with Australia's Macquarie Bank, won a 99-year contract to operate Toronto's Highway 407 toll road, now already built and operating in 2007, which happens to run along Canada's premier NAFTA trade corridor.
Cintra is also contracted to operate toll roads in Indiana and on the Trans-Texas Corridor.
At the end of January we reported on the revelation that one of Cintra's conglomerate partners, the afore mentioned Macquarie, has agreed to buy dozens of newspapers in Texas and Oklahoma that have up until now been harsh critics of the Trans Texas Corridor superhighway. This indicates a clear example of influence peddling pointing to racketeering, and a desperate lunge to silence dissent against the sellout of American infrastructure and the North American Union.
Further evidence of the future planning for the various roads comprising the "superhighway" can be found in Canadian policy documents. Firstly a document prepared last year for the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada entitled Embracing the Future: The Atlantic Gateway and Canada's Trade Corridor states:
Since the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement was signed with the US, later expanded to become NAFTA, Canadians have reoriented their trade links away from a national focus (east-west) to a North American focus (north-south).... As globalization proceeds, not as an offset to US-Canada trade or NAFTA enlargement and integration, but as a close complimentary advantage, Canada must adjust its thinking and design transportation strategies accordingly....
Again we see a call for "an adjustment of thinking" in accordance with NAFTA enlargement and integration.
A second Canadian policy document was signed on July 30 this year by the governments of Canada, Ontario, and Quebec which announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on the development of the Ontario-Quebec Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor. The official press release stated:
Canada's New Government has developed a National Policy Framework for Strategic Gateways and Corridors to advance the competitiveness of the Canadian economy in the rapidly changing field of global commerce.... Future federal gateway and corridor strategies will be guided by this framework, focused on transportation systems of road, rail, marine and air infrastructure of national significance to international commerce.
The Ontario-Quebec Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor represents the North Eastern portion of the "NAFTA superhighway" depicted on NASCO's map of existing road networks.
The mainstream media will keep telling you none of this is real, that its on a par with invading space aliens and that if you believe in any of it you are totally crazy. And NASCO, who as we have shown are a major player, will keep using semantics to insinuate anyone who talks about it is "confused" or has "erroneously tied them into a sinister plot".
Of course, as with a great deal of the agenda for a North American Union, there is no all encompassing "sinister plot", it operates very bureaucratically, yet without Congressional oversight, and is unfolding piecemeal for everyone to see. However, this does not mean it has not been carefully planned is not a threat to the Sovereignty of America, Canada and Mexico.
The agenda is being driven by elitist private interests operating in cooperation with the globalist think tanks and lobbyists who have usurped the overriding interests and responsibilities of our governments for their own corporate gain and the power that brings to them. They consequently have no duty to the prosperity of the countries involved and the people who populate them, despite being intimately involved in the fundamental operation of the infrastructure.
For NASCO to therefore declare that their business "has nothing to do with any of his concerns" when referring to Ron Paul's exposure of such activity represents the height of arrogance and insults the intelligence of any free thinking person living in America, Canada and Mexico.

China detains cyber-dissident who criticised Olympics

China detains cyber-dissident who criticised Olympics

Wed Dec 19, 2:41 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071219/wl_asia_afp/chinamediarightsinternetoly2008chn

A Chinese cyber-dissident who criticised the government over human rights abuses ahead of the Beijing Olympic Games has been detained on suspicion of subverting state power, his wife said Wednesday.
Wang Dejia, better known by his pen name Jing Chu, was hauled off by police who raided his home in the southern province of Guangxi last Thursday, his wife Wen Zhenyan told AFP.
"They said his crime was incitement to subvert state power," said Wen, who has been barred from seeing her husband.
She said his arrest was linked to articles he had written and posted on banned overseas websites in which he criticised China's human rights record, including the jailings of many writers.
In recent months, Wang also gave an interview to the Epoch Times, a media group backed by the banned sect Falun Gong, in which he claimed the Olympics would exacerbate the sufferings of Chinese people and leave them "living like dogs and pigs."
Wang blamed the "autocratic nation" for destroying ordinary people's homes in mass demolitions in order to build grandiose Olympic venues, and criticised China's intensified crackdown on dissidents.
"I am very worried about him and feel really pained," his wife said. "This regime, if you oppose it, it will only oppress you."
His wife said his arrest could also be connected with his meeting with US consulate representatives in October to discuss human rights in China.
A US embassy spokesman said he did not know if the meeting took place, and was looking into Wang's case.
Police in Guangxi refused to comment when contacted by AFP.
Paris-based Reporters Without Borders said it was concerned to see further evidence of a crackdown linked to the Games.
"Eight months before the Beijing Olympic Games, it is very worrying to learn of the arrest of another writer who had criticised the way the Games are being organised," the group said in a statement
Despite China's pledge to ease curbs on media and individual freedoms ahead of the 2008 Olympics, human and media rights groups say Beijing's leaders are contining to tighten a crackdown on dissent amid increasing social unrest.
In an August report, Reporters Without Borders said at least 30 journalists and 50 cyber-dissidents were being detained in China for work that had angered authorities.
It ranks China 163rd out of 167 nations on its global press freedom index.

NSA Gets Real Time Access to Your Email

NSA Gets Real Time Access to Your Email

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/191207_b_nsa.htm
Wednesday, December 19, 2007

It was inevitable: the Advanced Research Projects Agency, later to become DARPA, right out of the Pentagon, created the internet. The RAND Corporation invented modern packet switching. DARPA and ARPANET recruited Vint Cerf of Stanford University to work on TCP/IP. Cerf is regarded as “the father of the Internet,” or maybe that should be the military-NSA snoop network. Now we learn NSA increasingly controls SSL, now called Transport Layer Security, the cryptographic protocol that provides secure communications on the internet for web browsing, e-mail, instant messaging, and other data transfers.
In other words, increasingly, the NSA is reading your email and everything you type in your IM client — and in real time, that is to say there is no delay in the timeliness of the information, the underwear drawer snoopers have the ability to read your IMs as you type them.
“Certain privacy/full session SSL email hosting services have been purchased/changed operational control by NSA and affiliates within the past few months, through private intermediary entities,” notes Cryptome.
Hushmail: now fully owned by private entity NSA affiliate; has had informal relationship with NSA for a number of years that effectively provided NSA with real time access to Hushmail’s hosting servers.
Safe-mail.net: Israeli-based, ironically privately lauded by NSA and US military several years ago for its sound implementation of SendMail with SSL webmail GUI frontend. Now provides mail server info to NSA in real time.
Guardster.com (SSH/SSL proxy): NSA contractors have “bought” full access rights to Guardster servers a few days ago. Separate but related: facilitated port sniffing of hosting servers at Everyones Internet, on NSA affiliates’ behalf, has been ongoing for a number of months now.
Geekspeak aside, what this means is that the NSA is buying up key technology in an effort to snoop you even more closely. If this trend continues, we may as well call the internet the NSAnet.
Moreover, according to Cryptome’s research, if you own “security” software produced by Zone Alarm, Symantec, and MacAfee, you are in essence throwing out a welcome mat for the NSA and its bevy of underwear drawer sniffing goons. “All facilitate Microsoft’s NSA-controlled remote admin access via IP/TCP ports 1024 through 1030,” and without a “security flag,” that it to say you will be none the wiser.
It won’t be long now before Winston Smith’s telescreen is barking orders.

Monday, December 17, 2007

Offshoring interests and economic dogmas are destroying the US dollar

Offshoring interests and economic dogmas are destroying the US dollar

Paul Craig Roberts
Online Journal
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2741.shtml
Saturday December 15, 2007

On December 8, Chinese and French news services reported that Iran had stopped billing its oil exports in dollars.
Americans might never hear this news as the independence of the US media was destroyed in the 1990s when Rupert Murdoch persuaded the Clinton administration and the quislings in Congress to allow the US media to be monopolized by a few mega-corporations.
Iran's oil minister, Gholam Hossein Nozari, declared: "The dollar is an unreliable currency in regards to its devaluation and the loss oil exporters have endured from this trend." Iran has proposed to OPEC that the US dollar no longer be used by any oil exporting countries. As the oil emirates and the Saudis have already decided to reduce their holdings of US dollars, the US might actually find itself having to pay for its energy imports in euros or yen.
Venezuela's Chavez, survivor of a US-led coup against him and a likely target of a US assassination attempt, might follow the Iranian lead. Also, Russia's Putin, who is fed up with the US government's efforts to encircle Russia militarily, will be tempted to add Russia's oil exports to the symbolic assault on the dollar.

The assault is symbolic, because the dollar is not the reserve currency due to oil exports being billed in dollars. It's the other way around. Oil exports are billed in dollars, because the dollar is the reserve currency.
What is important to the dollar's value and its role as reserve currency is whether foreigners continue to consider dollar-denominated assets sufficiently attractive to absorb the constant flow of red ink from US trade and budget deficits. If Iran and other countries do not want dollars, they can exchange them for other currencies regardless of the currency in which oil is billed.
Indeed, the evidence is that foreigners are not finding dollar-denominated assets sufficiently attractive. The dollar has declined dramatically during the Bush regime regardless of the fact that oil is billed in dollars. Iran is dropping dollars in response to the dollar's loss of value. This is a market response to a depreciating currency, not a punitive action by Iran to sink the dollar.
Oil bills are only a small part of the problem. Oil minister Nozari's statement about the loss suffered by oil exporters applies to all exporters of all products.
A quarter century ago, US oil imports accounted for the US trade deficit. The concerns expressed over the years about "energy dependence" accustomed Americans to think of trade problems only in terms of oil. The desire to gain "energy independence" has led to such foolish policies as subsidies for ethanol, the main effect of which is to drive up food prices and further ravage the poor.
Today, oil imports comprise a small part of the US trade deficit. During the decades when Americans were fixated on "the energy deficit," the US became three to four times more dependent on foreign made manufactures. America's trade deficit in manufactured goods, including advanced technology products, dwarfs the US energy deficit.
For example, the US trade deficit with China is more than twice the size of the US trade deficit with OPEC. The US deficit with Japan is about the size of the US deficit with OPEC. With an overall US trade deficit of more than $800 billion, the deficit with OPEC only comprises one-eighth.
If abandonment of the dollar by oil exporters is not the cause of the dollar's woes, what is?
There are two reasons for the dollar's demise. One is the practice of American corporations offshoring their production for US consumers. When US corporations move to foreign countries their production of goods and services for American consumers, they convert US Gross Domestic Product (GDP) into imports. US production declines, US jobs and skill pools are destroyed, and the trade deficit increases. Foreign GDP, employment, and exports rise.
US corporations that offshore their production for US markets account for a larger share of the US trade deficit than does the OPEC energy deficit. Half or more of the US trade deficit with China consists of the offshored production of US firms. In 2006, the US trade deficit with China was $233 billion, half of which is $116.5 billion or $10 billion more than the US deficit with OPEC.
The other reason for the dollar's demise is the ignorance and nonchalance of "libertarian free market free trade economists" about offshoring and the trade deficit.
There is a great deal to be said in behalf of free markets and free trade. However, for many economists free trade has become an ideology, and they have ceased to think.
Such economists have become insouciant shills for the offshoring interests that fund their research and institutes. Their interests are tied together with those of the offshoring corporations.
Free trade economists have made three massive errors: (1) they confuse labor arbitrage across international borders with free trade when nothing in fact is being traded, (2) they have forgot the two necessary conditions in order for the classic theory of free trade, which rests on the principle of comparative advantage, to be valid, and (3) they are ignorant of the latest work in trade theory, which shows that free trade theory was never correct even when the conditions on which it is based were prevalent.
When a US firm moves its output abroad, the firm is arbitraging labor (and taxes, regulation, etc.) across international borders in pursuit of absolute advantage, not in pursuit of comparative advantage at home. When the US firm brings its offshored goods and services to the US to be marketed, those goods and services count as imports.
David Ricardo based comparative advantage on two necessary conditions: One is that a country's capital seek comparative advantage at home and not seek absolute advantage abroad. The other is that countries have different relative cost ratios of producing tradable goods. Under the Ricardian conditions, offshoring is prohibited.
Today capital is as internationally mobile as traded goods, and knowledge-based production functions have the same relative cost ratios regardless of the country of location. The famous Ricardian conditions for free trade are not present in today's world.
In the most important development in trade theory in 200 years, the distinguished mathematician Ralph Gomory and the distinguished economist and former president of the American Economics Association, William Baumol, have shown that the case for free trade was invalid even when the Ricardian conditions were present in the world. Their book, Global Trade and Conflicting National Interests, first presented as lectures at the London School of Economics, was published in 2000 by MIT Press.
While free trade economists hold on to their doctrine-turned-ideology, the US dollar and the American economy are dying.
One of the great lies of the offshoring interests is that US manufacturing is in trouble because of poor US education and a shortage of US scientists and engineers. Pundits such as Thomas Friedman have helped to spread this ignorance until it has become a dogma. Recently, General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt lent his weight to this falsehood. (See "The US No Longer Drives Global Economic Growth," Manufacturing & Technology News, Nov. 30, 2007.)
The fact of the matter is that the offshoring of US engineering and R&D jobs and the importation of foreign engineers and scientists on work visas have combined with educational subsidies to produce a surplus of American scientists and engineers, many of whom are unable to find jobs when they graduate from university or become casualties of offshoring and H-1b visas.
Corporate interests continue to lobby Congress for more foreign workers, claiming a non-existent shortage of trained Americans, even as the Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology concludes that real salary growth for American scientists and engineers has been flat or declining for the past 10 years. The "long trend of strong US demand for scientific and technical specialists" has come to an end with no signs of revival. (See "Job and Income Growth for Scientists and Engineers Comes to an End," Manufacturing & Technology News, November 30, 2007.)
What economist has ever heard of a labor shortage resulting in flat or declining pay?
There is no more of a shortage of US scientists and engineers than there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The US media has no investigative capability and serves up the lies that serve short-term corporate and political interests. If it were not for the Internet that provides Americans with access to foreign news sources, Americans would live in a world of perfect disinformation.
Offshoring interests and economic dogmas have combined to create a false picture of America's economic position. While the ladders of upward mobility are being dismantled, Americans are being told that they have never had it better.