The trillion dollar bubble

Subject: The trillion dollar bubble

Ronald

They owe a trillion dollars and
they can't pay.

The impending student loan
disaster in the US.

Video:

http://www.realecontv.com/page/20479.html

- Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.

That's how we grow. Thanks.

================================

Visit out partner sites:

Real Econ TV: http://RealEconTV.com
Financial news without the big bank baloney

The Real Food Channel: http://RealFoodChannel.com
The truth about the food you eat

================================
Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115

To unsubscribe or change subscriber options visit:
http://www.aweber.com/z/r/?zAxs7OwctKxMHAzsTMwctEa0jKycbGzsDEw=

Harrier Squadron wiped out in Afganistan

Subject: Harrier Squadron wiped out in Afganistan

This is an excerpt from an article by Mark Steyn, my favorite Canadian.  This is the first place I had heard of the incident and wonder how many others have no knowledge of it either.  File it under Are you mad yet, I guess.

Two weeks ago in this space, I wrote that, in striking contrast to the official line, the Benghazi slaughter was not a spontaneous movie review that got a little out of hand but a catastrophic security breach and humiliating fiasco for the United States. Even more extraordinary, on Sept. 14, fewer than two dozen inbred, illiterate goatherds pulled off the biggest single destruction of U.S. airpower since the Tet Offensive in 1968, breaking into Camp Bastion (an unfortunate choice of name) in Afghanistan, killing Lieutenant-Colonel Christopher Raible, and blowing up a squadron's worth of Harriers. And, even though it was the third international humiliation for the United States in as many days, it didn't even make the papers. Because the court eunuchs at the media are too busy drooling over Obama's appearance as what he calls "eye candy" on the couch between Barbara and Whoopi.

Eye candy is in the eye of the beholder. And to the baying mob from Tunis to Jakarta those dead Americans and al-Qaida flags over U.S. embassies and an entire USMC air squadron reduced to charred ruins are a veritable Willie Wonka production line of eye candy. To the president, they're just "bumps in the road" to the sunlit uplands of "the future." Forward! Obama has lived on "the promise of the future" all his life – Most Promising Columbia Grad of 1983, Most Promising Community Organizer of 1988, Most Promising Fake Memoirist of 1995, Most Promising Presidential Candidate of 2008 ... The rest of us, alas, have to live in the present that he has made, which is noticeably short of promise. The Chinese Politburo get it, Czar Putin in the Kremlin gets it, and even the nutters doing the "Death to the Great Satan!" dance on the streets of Cairo and Lahore get it. On Nov. 6, we will find out whether the American people do.

Link to rest of article:   http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1012/steyn100112.php3?printer_friendly


Here is more on the subject:
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/campbastion/index?tab=articles

I am so tired of the cover-ups and media bias I want to yell I am sick and tired of it and am not going to take it anymore.  Vote early and often.

WF said will have RV Rate Friday

[6:07:19 PM] brokenwrench:  a personal
friend of mine I just talked with said his personal banker at WF called him just after the bank closed today. He said they have the RV rate. they will do a final training session until noon then after lunch the RV will be live for personal bankers to contact large dinar holders to start making appointments Monday morning but walk ins with small amounts of dinar will start processing at 1pm in all progressive time zones. he said he cant tell what the rate is until after lunch Friday. He did say WF got a direct notice from the CBI as well as the UST. cash out will not be in FRNs.

Two Coffees in Heaven

Two Coffees in Heaven

Having arrived at the Gates of Heaven, Barrack Obama meets a man with  a beard. 'Are you Mohamed?' he asks. 'No my son, I am St. Peter; Mohamed is higher up.' Peter then points to a ladder that rises into the clouds. Delighted that Mohamed should be higher than St. Peter, Obama climbs the ladder in great strides, climbs up through the clouds and comes into a room where he meets another bearded man. He asks again, 'Are you Mohamed?' 'Why no,' he answers, 'I am Moses; Mohamed is higher still.' Exhausted, but with a heart full of joy he climbs the ladder yet again. He discovers a larger room where he meets an angelic looking man with a beard. Full of hope, he asks again, 'Are you Mohamed?' 'No, I am Jesus, the Christ; you will find Mohamed higher up.' Mohamed higher than Jesus! Man, oh man! Obama can hardly contain his delight and climbs and climbs ever higher. Once again, he reaches an even larger room where he meets this truly magnificent looking man with a silver white beard and once again repeats his question: 'Are you Mohamed?' he gasps as he is by now, totally out of breath from all his climbing. 'No, my son, I am Almighty God, the Alpha and the Omega, but you look exhausted. Would you like a cup of coffee?' Obama says, 'Yes!' As God looks behind him, he claps his hands and yells out: 'Hey,  Mohamed, two coffees!' Keep your trust in God, for your president is an idiot.

US judge: No probable cause for some RNC arrests 05 October 2012 WMBF - Larry Neumeister/AP, 10/1/12 NEW YORK (AP) - Saying the Constitution does not recognize guilty by association, a federal judge ruled Monday that hundreds of protesters were arrested without probable cause during the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York. U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan said in a written decision that "undisputed fact" included a video of a march in lower Manhattan showing Ware Resisters League marchers were trying to comply with police instructions when officers abruptly withdrew consent for the rally and made mass arrests without giving anyone a realistic chance to leave the scene. To read the rest of this story, visit WMBFnews.com. http://soundofheart.org/galacticfreepress/content/us-judge-no-probable-cause-some-rnc-arrests

US judge: No probable cause for some RNC arrests

05 October 2012

WMBF - Larry Neumeister/AP, 10/1/12

NEW YORK (AP) - Saying the Constitution does not recognize guilty by association, a federal judge ruled Monday that hundreds of protesters were arrested without probable cause during the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York.

U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan said in a written decision that "undisputed fact" included a video of a march in lower Manhattan showing Ware Resisters League marchers were trying to comply with police instructions when officers abruptly withdrew consent for the rally and made mass arrests without giving anyone a realistic chance to leave the scene.

To read the rest of this story, visit WMBFnews.com.

http://soundofheart.org/galacticfreepress/content/us-judge-no-probable-cause-some-rnc-arrests

Mexico arrests 35 police officers for 'helping Zetas'

05 October 2012

BBC - 9/24/12

The Mexican armed forces have arrested 35 police officers accused of having links with one of the country's most powerful drug cartels, the Zetas.

The Zetas were set up in the 1990s by defectors from Mexico's special forces
 

The officers were arrested in operations in the eastern states of San Luis Potosi and Veracruz.

A turf war between the Zetas and rival criminal organisations in Veracruz has led to some of Mexico's worst massacres in recent years.

To read the rest of this story, visit BBC.co.uk.

http://soundofheart.org/galacticfreepress/content/mexico-arrests-35-police-officers-helping-zetas

Our Future is Much, Much Brighter Than Most Think!

             Hello All:
                      Bix Weir latest info.   God Bless   Love to all    

---

From: bix@roadtoroota.com
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 13:03:41 -0400
Subject: Our Future is Much, Much Brighter Than Most Think!

Let's face it...The Road to Roota is all about the future but where we are headed is a result of what was done in the past. My analysis has show that there ARE people working on freeing us from the Banking Cabal who has controlled us for so long. Obviously, the work is not done...but it is very close. Our future is much, much brighter than most think!

I have posted the latest Friday Road Trip for Private Road members here:

http://www.roadtoroota.com/members/1016.cfm

Topics this week include:

- There's a New Silver Rigger In Town!

- Like A Thief in the Night, Good Guys Hit Hard

- CME Reopens The Doors For The Market Riggers

- "Buzz Lightyear" Bernanke Carries Through With The Master Plan

- How Many Times Can Jeffrey Christian Be Wrong?!

- John Gault Arrives Right On Time

You can sign up for the Private Road and gain access to all the articles about what is happening to us here:

http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/10.cfm

Stay safe out there!

May the Road you choose be the Right Road.

Bix Weir

www.RoadtoRoota.com

Beyond the Propaganda: The Real Reason Why the U.S. and Israel Do Not Want a Nuclear Iran

By Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
October 4, 2012
As the war drums beat faster and louder for an aggressive assault against Iran amidst the shock and horror at the mere thought of Iran gaining an unproven and currently unfeasible nuclear weapon, there remains the occasional kernel of truth that manages to slip through the firewall of the mainstream media.
For instance, in an article published on October 2 in the Guardian entitled, “The true reason US fears Iranian nukes: they can deter US attacks,” Glenn Greenwald points out the fact that the main concern is not necessarily that Iran may be able to attack the United States or its allies (meaning Israel) with a nuclear bomb, but simply the fact that if Iran were to obtain such a weapon, it would be able to resist U.S. dominance and aggression more effectively.
Although clearly not the sole reason for a Western attack on Iran, Greenwald is correct to point out that destroying the ability of Iran to resist American assault is indeed part of the overarching agenda. Thus, soon after introducing the thesis of the article, Greenwald asks an important question.
That Iran will use its nuclear weapons against the US and Israel is rather obviously the centerpiece of the fear-mongering campaign against Tehran, to build popular support for threats to launch an aggressive attack in order to prevent them from acquiring that weapon.
So what, then, is the real reason that so many people in both the US and Israeli governments are so desperate to stop Iranian proliferation?
He goes on to answer this question by writing, “Iranian nuclear weapons would prevent the US from attacking Iran at will, and that is what is intolerable.”
Ironically, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, whom Greenwald accurately refers to as “one of the US’s most reliable and bloodthirsty warmongers,” seems to agree with Greenwald’s thesis.
Recently, Graham gave a speech in North Augusta, South Carolina where he was asked about the sanctions implemented against Iran and how these sanctions were affecting the average Iranian.
In response and, after heaping praise on Obama for continuing the head-on charge toward WW3, Graham stated that “the Iranian people should be willing to suffer now for a better future.”
He then went on to compare Iranian nuclear capacity with the appeasement of Hitler in the 1930s – a tale that is often told when war proponents are backing up their case for wholesale slaughter of innocent people in third world countries or developing nations for the benefit of Wall Street, corporations, and other interested parties.
Of course, what is so ironic about the analogy is the fact that, in 2012, it is not Iran that the world should fear appeasing – it is the United States and its associates in NATO.
Indeed, it is the United States who most resembles the Nazi regime as it steamrolls across the Middle East and Africa with reckless abandon waging war, destabilizations, and political and financial intimidation.
Regardless, Graham stated:
They have two goals: one, regime survival. The best way for the regime surviving, in their mind, is having a nuclear weapon, because when you have a nuclear weapons, nobody attacks you.
Unwittingly, Graham only confirms the suggestions made by Greenwald in his article – i.e. “the true threat of nuclear proliferation is that it can deter American aggression.”
As Greenwald comments, “In other words, we cannot let Iran acquire nuclear weapons because if they get them, we can no longer attack them when we want to and can no longer bully them in their own region.”
This thesis is by no means the monopoly of Greenwald, however. Pre-eminent scholars such as Dr. David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor and dispeller of the 9/11 myth, as well as prominent Neo-Cons and war proponents have all forwarded the concept of nuclear weapon prevention as an act of establishing “full spectrum dominance” and the prevention of nuclear deterrence.
For instance, Neo-Con Thomas Donnelly of the American Enterprise Institute and the now infamous Project for the New American Century has stated previously (in regards to Iranian nuclear capability) in his 2004 strategy paper entitled, “Strategy For A Nuclear Iran:
The surest deterrent to American action is a functioning nuclear arsenal…
To be sure, the prospect of a nuclear Iran is a nightmare. But it is less a nightmare because of the high likelihood that Tehran would employ its weapons or pass them on to terrorist groups—although that is not beyond the realm of possibility—and more because of the constraining effect it threatens to impose upon U.S. strategy for the greater Middle East.
The danger is that Iran will “extend” its deterrence, either directly or de facto, to a variety of states and other actors throughout the region.
This would be an ironic echo of the extended deterrence thought to apply to U.S. allies during the Cold War.
Most notably, Donnelly echoes the same sentiment in the Project for a New American Century’s most famous document, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, a paper that has been eerily prophetic ever since its publication.
Keep in mind, this was the very same paper that called for a “new pearl harbor” shortly before the “new pearl harbor” of the 21st Century happened on September 11, 2001. In that document, Donnelly wrote,
When their missiles are tipped with warheads carrying nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, even weak regional powers have a credible deterrent regardless of the balance of conventional forces.
. . . . .
In the post cold war era, America and its allies, rather than the Soviet Union, have become the primary objects of deterrence and it is states like Iraq, Iran and North Korea who most wish to develop deterrent capabilities.
. . . . .
the United States also must counteract the effects of the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction that may soon allow lesser states to deter U.S. military action by threatening U.S. allies and the American homeland itself. Of all the new and current missions for U.S. armed forces, this must have priority
. . . . .
effective ballistic missile defenses will be the central element in the exercise of American power and the projection of U.S. military forces abroad. Without it, weak states operating small arsenals of crude ballistic missiles, armed with basic nuclear warheads or other weapons of mass destruction, will be in a strong position to deter the United States from using conventional force, no matter the technological or other advantages we may enjoy. Even if such enemies are merely able to threaten American allies rather than the United States homeland itself, America’s ability to project power will be deeply compromised.
As David Ray Griffin comments in The New Pearl Harbor, “This statement further suggests that Iran, Iraq, and North Korea were later determined by President Bush to deserve the title of ‘axis of evil’ because of their perverse wish to develop the capacity to deter the United States from projecting military force against them.”[1]
Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld echoed the same sentiment in 2001 when he stated that, “Several of these [small enemy nations] are intensely hostile to the United States and are arming to deter us from bringing our conventional or nuclear power to bear in a regional crisis.”
Rumsfeld also writes, “These universally available [centrifugal] technologies can be used to create ‘asymmetric’ responses that cannot defeat our forces, but can deny access to critical areas in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia…’asymmetric; approaches can limit our ability to apply military power.”
According to Greenwald, Philip Zelikow, former Bush administration State Department official, Condoleeza Rice co-author, and Executive Director of the shameful 9/11 commission cover-up, stated in regards to Iraq and the dire possibility of allowing it to keep its non-existent WMDs, “they now can deter us from attacking them, because they really can retaliate against us.”
Furthermore, in 2008 in an op-ed for the Washington Post, Senators Chuck Robb and Dan Coates wrote:
[A]n Islamic Republic of Iran with nuclear weapons capability would be strategically untenable. It would threaten U.S. national security … While a nuclear attack is the worst-case scenario, Iran would not need to employ a nuclear arsenal to threaten US interests. Simply obtaining the ability to quickly assemble a nuclear weapon would effectively give Iran a nuclear deterrent.
Thus, Greenwald concludes, “The No 1 concern of American national security planners appears to be that countries may be able to prevent the US from attacking them at will, whether to change their regimes or achieve other objectives. In other words, Iranian nuclear weapons could be used to prevent wars – ones started by the US – and that, above all, is what we must fear.”
Yet, the debate over the purpose of Iran’s nuclear weapon is one that is built entirely upon a false foundation. The fact is there is a startling lack of evidence to show that Iran is, in fact, even attempting to gain a nuclear weapon.
While the warmongers in government positions like Lindsey Graham as well as the mainstream media and other commentators continue to beat their chests with the claims of Iranian commitment to nuclear weapons, the reality is quite different.
Numerous individuals close to the scene in Iran have stated on as many occasions that Iran does not possess nor is it seeking to possess a nuclear weapon.
Consider briefly the statement by Israeli Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, who stated,
the program is too vulnerable, in Iran’s view. If the supreme religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wants, he will advance it to the acquisition of a nuclear bomb, but the decision must first be taken. It will happen if Khamenei judges that he is invulnerable to a response.
I believe he would be making an enormous mistake, and I don’t think he will want to go the extra mile. I think the Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people.
Even Defense Minister Ehud Barak has clearly stated that, “[Iran has] not yet decided to manufacture atomic weapons.”
In addition, warmonger Leon Panetta, the Secretary of Defense who has been browbeating the need to strike Iran for the better part of a year, has stated that the Iranians do not have a nuclear weapon nor are they attempting to build one.
Nevertheless Panetta continues to promote the coming attack if the Iranians “take the next step,” however that “step” may be defined.
This is most ironic considering his February 2012 remarks on Face The Nation, where he stated, “Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability. And that’s what concerns us. And our red line to Iran is do not develop a nuclear weapon. That’s a red line for us.”
Yet Panetta cannot be accused of “misspeaking” on the national news show. Indeed, he has restated his position as quoted by The Raw Story by saying, “I think [Iran is] developing a nuclear capability [but] our intelligence makes clear that they haven’t made the decision to develop a nuclear weapon.”
Furthermore, consider the comments made by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper:
We continue to assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so. We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.[…] We continue to judge Iran’s nuclear decision making is guided by a cost-benefit approach, which offers the international community opportunities to influence Tehran.
Similarly, US General Martin Dempsey:
In response to Fareed Zakaria’s question, ‘Do you think that is still unclear, that [Iran is] moving on a path for nuclear technology, but whether or not they choose to make a nuclear weapon is unclear?’ Dempsey:
‘It is. I believe it is unclear, and on that basis I think it would be premature to exclusively decide that the time for a military option was upon us. I mean, I think that the economic sanctions and the international cooperation that we’ve been able to gather around sanctions is beginning to have an effect. I think our diplomacy is having an effect, and our preparedness.’
As Tabassum Zakaria and Mark Hosenball of Reuters wrote in regards to the ongoing pro-war propaganda circling the globe, “The United States, European allies and even Israel generally agree on three things about Iran’s nuclear program: Tehran does not have a bomb, has not decided to build one, and is probably years away from having a deliverable nuclear warhead.”
Yet, even if Iran were seeking a nuclear weapon, building one, or attained the bomb, the fact is that, as Greenwald and others have pointed out, the weapon would only serve as a deterrent to aggressive attacks – not as an asset to wage Iranian imperialist wars.
Not only that, but one must logically ask exactly what threat would one nuclear weapon pose to states such as Israel and the United States who are known nuclear powers, with one being the only nation in the region currently possessing the weapons and the other existing as a powerhouse in terms of nuclear weaponry.
As Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated before the UN, “Let’s even imagine that we have an atomic weapon, a nuclear weapon. What would we do with it? What intelligent person would fight 5,000 American bombs with one bomb?”
Ahmadinejad has hit the nail on the head with this statement. Indeed, assuming the unlikely event of a successful attack via a nuclear weapon, such a move would be complete suicide on the part of Iran, bringing down the wrath of the victim nation, the United States, NATO, and the entire international community.
Considering the constant sabre-rattling of the United States, Israel, and a gaggle of European countries regarding the impending war of aggression against the nation of Iran which, in recent time has significantly reduced its isolation, the country would almost be foolhardy not to pursue a nuclear weapon.
One thing that is for certain, however, is that the United States, Israel, and NATO have already played their hand.
If the constant political, financial, and military harassment efforts aimed at Iran by much of the Western world do not descend into a conflagration of global scale which itself ends in the use of nuclear weapons, then they will have certainly accomplished the task of providing the motivation for Iran to develop one.
[1] Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor. 2004. Interlink Publishing Group. P.54
Read other articles by Brandon Turbeville here.
Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of three books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, and Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident. Turbeville has published over one hundred articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville is available for podcast, radio, and TV interviews. Please contact us at activistpost (at) gmail.com.
http://theintelhub.com/2012/10/04/beyond-the-propaganda-the-real-reason-why-the-u-s-and-israel-do-not-want-a-nuclear-iran/

WAR ON DRUGS TOTAL FRAUD

By JG Vibes
theintelhub.com
October 4, 2012
As I have explained in many previous articles, the war on drugs is a total fraud and the world would be a lot better off if there were not prohibitions on objects or nonviolent actions.
One of the most ridiculous things about the war on drugs, especially in regards to the prohibition of marijuana, is the fact that at the end of the day it’s just a plant.  If you really think about it, we have come to a very strange place in society when plants are illegal.
The idea of banning plants looks even more ridiculous when a swat team shows up with a warrant to dig up and confiscate 1624 Daisies that were mistaken for marijuana.
Believe it or not, this actually really happened back in July, but news is just now starting to surface that this wasn’t a successful bust.
At the time when police were first interviewed Staff Sergeant Wes Houston said that “This is a significant bust, given the size of this operation.”  As he greeted reporters he was actually proudly displaying garbage bags full of daises, thinking that he was holding marijuana.

(Can you spot the difference between Marijuana & Montauk daisies?)
Now months later that same officer is talking to reporters again, only this time admitting that the whole raid was a mistake.
This week he told reporters that, “In any investigation, police count public safety as our top priority, our decision to seize the plants was made with the best information we had at the time.”
It has since come forward that “the best information” they had at the time would have been enough to make any sane person think twice before schedualing a raid, or atleast before ripping the garden up.
First off this garden is in plan view, in a back yard in a suburban neighborhood where these daisies have been growing for over a decade, obviously not a drug running operation.
Ryan Thomas Rockman the owner of the garden had even told the police exactly what the plants were, yet they refused to even investigate any further, and the whole raid squad totally mistook these daisies for marijuana.
Unfortunatly for Mr. Rockman, his well-tended back yard garden wasn’t the only casualty in this act of theft, vandalism and home invasion.
Rockman freely admits smoking pot to alleviate back pain, and says he’s applied to the federal government for a medicinal marijuana license.  Coincidentally, during the course of the raid, police found 1.5 pounds of marijuana and 6.3 grams of resin in Rockmans house.
Now a 41 year old grandfather who uses a safe and effective medicine to make his life easier is facing serious charges, and has his reputation totally soiled in his community.
Even though he is an open user and advocate of medical marijuana, the police have still put out official word that he was manufacturing and trafficking drugs, a situation that he says has had a significant impact on his reputation.
Prohibition advocates would say that since this search did result in confiscation of actual drugs, that the raid was warranted.  However, the drugs that were found were merely an unintended consequence of a raid that never should have happened to begin with.
Nonviolent people are not criminals, and people like Mr. Rockman who use drugs responsibly are not any kind of threat to society.
What is a threat to society is the growing police state that is bringing violence upon nonviolent people, kidnapping them, putting them in cages, and robbing them of every last cent that they have over the course of their probation or parole.
If you have any questions or disagreements feel free to email me at jgvibes@aotmr.com

J.G. Vibes is the author of an 87 chapter counter culture textbook called Alchemy of the Modern Renaissance and host of a show called Voluntary Hippie Radio. 
He is also an artist with an established record label and event promotion company that hosts politically charged electronic dance music events. You can keep up with his work, which includes free podcasts, free e-books & free audiobooks at his website www.aotmr.com

Leading World Bank Demographer: Vaccination Campaigns Part Of Population Reduction Policy

By Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
October 4, 2012
On October 2nd a retired demographer at the World Bank admitted that vaccination campaigns are an integral part of the World Bank’s population policies. John F. May, the Bank’s leading demographer from 1992 to 2012, told the French web journal Sens Public (and in turn transcribed by the think-tank May works for) that vaccination campaigns, especially in so-called “high-fertility countries”, are means to achieve population reduction in those countries. May:

“The means used to implement population policies are “policy levers” or targeted actions such as vaccination campaigns or family planning to change certain key variables.”
Defining “population policy” as “a set of interventions implemented by government officials to better manage demographic variables and to try to attune population changes (number, structure by age and breakdown) to the country’s development aspirations”, May continues to explain that the World Bank is taking up the lead role in achieving general population reduction.
It is not the first time that World Bank officials boast about their willingness to implement strict population control policies in the Third World. In its 1984 World Development Report, the World Bank suggests using “sterilization vans” and “camps” to facilitate its sterilization policies for the third world.
The report also threatens nations who are slow in implementing the bank’s population policies with “drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom.”:
“Population policy has a long lead time; other development policies must adapt in the meantime. Inaction today forecloses options tomorrow, in overall development strategy and in future population policy.
Worst of all, inaction today could mean that more drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom, will seem necessary tomorrow to slow population growth.”, the report states.
Some of those steps are now being taken.
A study published in Human and Experimental Toxicology in May of 2011 concluded that “nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates.” (page 8).
After an in-depth study into the effects of vaccine-coverage in relation to mortality rates among infants, the authors Neil Z. Miller and Gary S. Goldman came to this disturbing conclusion and advised that “a closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs, is essential.”- but naively concluded that “All nations—rich and poor, advanced and developing—have an obligation to determine whether their immunization schedules are achieving their desired goals.”
The authors cannot be expected to know that, actually, that the desired goals are exactly being achieved.
Their final point is significant in this regard, that they obviously were not working on the notion that vaccines were harmful and obviously drew their final conclusions on the basis of the idea that the increase in high mortality rates among infants were unintended.
The opposite is the case. The World Health Organization, the World Bank, The UN environmental department, the UN Population Fund, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and all the other arms of the creature we call the scientific dictatorship are closing in on all of humanity with mass-scale vaccination programmes and genetically engineered food.
Where the mantra used to be “to combat global warming, we need a one world government”, now it sounds something along the lines of “when we wish to eradicate poverty, we must have a global government and reduce human numbers, by the way.” Any pretext will do. More recently it were oceans in need that prompted the World Bank to initiate a global “alliance”. The same argument can of course be applied and is being applied to every other possible calamity.
Following this line of reasoning will inevitably bring you to pretexts under which global population control can be sold. Want to reduce victims of drunk driving? Reduce human numbers. Looking to cure cancer? Reduce the birthrate so less people will die as a result of it. The scientific community has joined the effort, attempting to sell population reduction to stop poverty and disease worldwide.
Under the guidance of Ban Ki-moon’s top advisor, Dr. Jeffrey Sachs, several studies have been published which call for mass population reduction in the name of poverty-reduction. In 2009 Sachs and his protégé’s Pejman Rohani and Matthew H. Bonds wrote the paper Poverty trap formed by the ecology of infectious diseases. They write that the “poverty trap may (…) be broken by improving health conditions of the population.”
The question that arises, of course, is how to improve “health conditions”. In another study from 2009 Bonds and Rohani say:
““(…) the birth of a child in the poorest parts of the world represents not only a new infection opportunity for a disease, but also an increase in the probability of infection for the rest of the susceptible host population. Thus, epidemiological theory predicts that a reduction in the birth rate can significantly lower the prevalence of childhood diseases.”
Earlier that same year, Bonds wrote a dissertation entitled Sociality, Sterility, and Poverty; Host-Pathogen Coevolution, with Implications for Human Ecology. The study concludes that the best way to eradicate poverty and disease is to, well… eradicate humans.
“We find that, after accounting for an income effect, reducing fertility may result in significantly lower disease prevalence over the long (economic) term than would a standard S-I-R epidemiological model predict, and might even be an effective strategy for eradicating some infectious diseases. Such a solution would make Malthus proud”, Bonds writes.
“(…) the new model, which accounts for an economic effect, predicts that a reduction in fertility may be significantly more effective than a vaccine. It also illustrates that a sustained vaccination policy would be more likely to eradicate a disease if done in conjunction with decreased reproduction.”
“This model”, Bond continues, “is likely to understate the true benefits of reduced fertility because the effect of reducing the birth rate is to reduce the flow of susceptible for all diseases, which is the equivalent of a vaccine for all infectious diseases at the same time.”
If you eradicate the human, you eradicate the disease- problem solved:
“Infectious diseases, however, continue to be most significant in developing countries, which experience relatively rapid population growth. The effect of this influx of children on the persistence and dynamics of childhood diseases, as well as on the critical vaccination coverage, is reasonably well-established (McLean and Anderson, 1988a; Broutin et al., 2005). But it is now warranted to turn this framework on its head: can fertility reduction be an integral element of a disease eradication campaign?”
The answer to that question is given by Bill Gates in 2010 when he promoted using vaccines to lower the population by 10 to 15%:
Disease and poverty, intertwined as they are, can therefore be eliminated by mas-scale fertility reduction. The religion of the scientific dictatorship in a nutshell.
It wasn’t the first time that Mr. Sachs called for global coordination in regards to population control. In a September 2009 UN press release, Sachs not only lamented human activity on the planet, but argued for scientists and engineers to take the steering-wheel in this process:
“We’re in the age of this planet where human activity dominates the earth’s processes. Humanity has become so large in absolute number and in economic activity that we have overtaken earth processes in vital ways to the point of changing the climate, the hydrologic cycle,” he told the UN Conference on Trade and Development.”
“We don’t necessarily need diplomats around the table”, Sachs continued. “We need engineers around the table, scientists around the table. We need to put the cards down and have a new kind of process.”
What kind of model does Sachs envision for his usurping utopia? He stated in an Economist publication in 2000:
“The model to emulate is the Rockefeller Foundation, the pre-eminent development institution of the 20th century, which showed what grant aid targeted on knowledge could accomplish.”
I don’t have to remind readers that it was the Rockefeller Foundation that funded and developed vaccines designed to reduce your fertility, and intended to distribute these vaccines on a mass-scale.
In his commentary The Specter of Malthus Returns, Sachs gives an adequate description of Agenda 21 without actually mentioning the UN plan for wealth redistribution and global population reduction:
“We will need to rethink modern diets and urban design to achieve healthier lifestyles that also reduce consumption. And to stabilize the global population at around eight billion, we will have to help Africa and other regions in speeding their demographic transition. We are definitely not yet on such a trajectory.
We will need new policies to push markets down that path and to promote technological advances in resource saving. We will need a new politics to recognize the importance of a sustainable growth strategy and global cooperation to achieve it.”
As Paul Joseph Watson reported in his September 2010 article Global Tax Scam Shifts From Climate Change to Poverty, the pretexts under which the ongoing effort to establish a world government is moving forward is undergoing a transformation.
The focus has now drifted away from the thoroughly debunked global warming myth to poverty-reduction. As usually is the case, once the pretext is sold to the unsuspecting, the eugenicists move in to “reduce fertility.” Global government, in other words, to facilitate global scientific dictatorship.\
Jurriaan Maessen’s blog is Explosivereports.com