Lord Nagin: Go Outside, Go to Jail

These two NOLA residents made the mistake of carrying weapons for protection in the government lock down zone.

Those who dared disobey the government decreed “mandatory hurricane evacuation” in New Orleans will be arrested and sent to jail if they wander “outside their properties during a dusk-to-dawn curfew,” according to the AFP. “Those persons who remain within the City of New Orleans do so at their own risk and are subject to arrest if they are outside the boundaries of their own property,” said Lord Nagin, Surpeme Commander of New Orleans. “Nagin warned Sunday that looters would be arrested and sent directly to prison.”

“What, no trial? I mean, I realize ‘legal niceties’ simply get in the way of maintaining recht und ordnung… um, sorry, law and order … but this is a nifty approach. Get arrested, go straight to the big house, no muss, no fuss, only the ease of legal administration,” writes Charles Featherstone for the LRC blog.

“You know, prisoners sitting in cells are so, well, economically unproductive. Wouldn’t it simply be easier if in the future, the kinds of people who refuse to obey gummint orders, would simply get whisked away to special camps, I mean detention centers, where they can spend their days laboring for the good of society? You know, felling trees and quarrying rocks and digging canals?”

Source

US boasts of laser weapon's 'plausible deniability'

An airborne laser weapon dubbed the "long-range blowtorch" has the added benefit that the US could convincingly deny any involvement with the destruction it causes, say senior officials of the US Air Force (USAF).

The Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) is to be mounted on a Hercules military transport plane. Boeing announced the first test firing of the laser, from a plane on the ground, earlier this summer.

Cynthia Kaiser, chief engineer of the US Air Force Research Laboratory's Directed Energy Directorate, used the phrase "plausible deniability" to describe the weapon's benefits in a briefing (powerpoint format) on laser weapons to the New Mexico Optics Industry Association in June.

Plausibly deniable

John Corley, director of USAF's Capabilities Integration Directorate, used the same phrase to describe the weapon's benefits at an Air Armament Symposium in Florida in October 2007 (see page 15, pdf format).

As the term suggests, "plausible deniability" is used to describe situations where those responsible for an event could plausibly claim to have had no involvement in it.

Corley and Kaiser did not respond to requests from New Scientist to expand on their comments. But John Pike, analyst with defence think-tank Global Security, based in Virginia, says the implications are clear.

"The target would never know what hit them," says Pike. "Further, there would be no munition fragments that could be used to identify the source of the strike."

Silent strike

A laser beam is silent and invisible. An ATL can deliver the heat of a blowtorch with a range of 20 kilometres, depending on conditions. That range is great enough that the aircraft carrying it might not be seen, especially at night.

With no previous examples for comparison, it may be difficult to discern whether damage to a vehicle or person was the result of a laser strike.

The 5.5-tonne ATL combines chlorine and hydrogen peroxide molecules to release energy, which is used in turn to stimulate iodine into releasing intense infra-red light.

The US uses Hercules aircraft for accurate cannon strikes on moving vehicles. The ATL is touted as bringing a new level of accuracy to such attacks, for example being able to pinpoint a vehicle's tyres to disable it safely.

A second, larger version of the laser is also nearing initial testing. The much larger Airborne Laser is intended for missile defence and will be carried by a Boeing 747.

Source

Bush quietly seeks to make war powers permanent, by declaring indefinite state of war

As the nation focuses on Sen. John McCain's choice of running mate, President Bush has quietly moved to expand the reach of presidential power by ensuring that America remains in a state of permanent war.

Buried in a recent proposal by the Administration is a sentence that has received scant attention -- and was buried itself in the very newspaper that exposed it Saturday. It is an affirmation that the United States remains at war with al Qaeda, the Taliban and "associated organizations."

Part of a proposal for Guantanamo Bay legal detainees, the provision before Congress seeks to “acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us and who are dedicated to the slaughter of Americans.”

The New York Times' page 8 placement of the article in its Saturday edition seems to downplay its importance. Such a re-affirmation of war carries broad legal implications that could imperil Americans' civil liberties and the rights of foreign nationals for decades to come.

It was under the guise of war that President Bush claimed a legal mandate for his warrantless wiretapping program, giving the National Security Agency power to intercept calls Americans made abroad. More of this program has emerged in recent years, and it includes the surveillance of Americans' information and exchanges online.

"War powers" have also given President Bush cover to hold Americans without habeas corpus -- detainment without explanation or charge. Jose Padilla, a Chicago resident arrested in 2002, was held without trial for five years before being convicted of conspiring to kill individuals abroad and provide support for terrorism.

But his arrest was made with proclamations that Padilla had plans to build a "dirty bomb." He was never convicted of this charge. Padilla's legal team also claimed that during his time in military custody -- the four years he was held without charge -- he was tortured with sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation, forced stress positions and injected with drugs.

Times reporter Eric Lichtblau notes that the measure is the latest step that the Administration has taken to "make permanent" key aspects of its "long war" against terrorism. Congress recently passed a much-maligned bill giving telecommunications companies retroactive immunity for their participation in what constitutional experts see as an illegal or borderline-illegal surveillance program, and is considering efforts to give the FBI more power in their investigative techniques.

"It is uncertain whether Congress will take the administration up on its request," Lichtblau writes. "Some Republicans have already embraced the idea, with Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, introducing a measure almost identical to the administration’s proposal. 'Since 9/11,' Mr. Smith said, 'we have been at war with an unconventional enemy whose primary goal is to kill innocent Americans.'"

If enough Republicans come aboard, Democrats may struggle to defeat the provision. Despite holding majorities in the House and Senate, they have failed to beat back some of President Bush's purported "security" measures, such as the telecom immunity bill.

Bush's open-ended permanent war language worries his critics. They say it could provide indefinite, if hazy, legal justification for any number of activities -- including detention of terrorists suspects at bases like Guantanamo Bay (where for years the Administration would not even release the names of those being held), and the NSA's warantless wiretapping program.

Lichtblau co-wrote the Times article revealing the Administration's eavesdropping program along with fellow reporter James Risen.

He notes that Bush's language "recalls a resolution, known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force, passed by Congress on Sept. 14, 2001... [which] authorized the president to 'use all necessary and appropriate force' against those responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks to prevent future strikes. That authorization, still in effect, was initially viewed by many members of Congress who voted for it as the go-ahead for the administration to invade Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban, which had given sanctuary to Mr. bin Laden."

"But the military authorization became the secret legal basis for some of the administration’s most controversial legal tactics, including the wiretapping program, and that still gnaws at some members of Congress," he adds.

Source

Cancer Vaccine Linked to Pancreatitis

Gardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine, which is being advised for all young women, may be causing pancreatitis, a painful, debilitating disease that can be fatal. Australian sources reported that three women developed pancreatitis shortly after receiving the vaccine.

Gardasil protects women from strains of the HPV (human papillomavirus) that cause 70 percent of all cervical cancer. But numerous cases of young women being stricken with various potentially deadly complications have arisen all over the world. Eighteen deaths have been reported as well as 8,000 adverse reactions which include paralysis and seizures. Australia alone reported over 1,000 suspected reactions to the vaccine, although most were not life-threatening and included headaches, dizziness and vomiting.

Acute pancreatitis is characterized by sudden, severe abdominal pain. Pancreatic enzymes burn and irritate the pancreas, then leak out into the abdominal cavity. Complications can include heart, respiratory or kidney failure, all of which can be fatal.

Dr. Amitabha Das, writing in the Medical Journal of Australia, said, “We suggest that pancreatitis be considered in cases of abdominal pain following HPV vaccination.

Source

DNC Cops Refuse To Stand Down After Ordered To Threaten Iraq War Vets

If you're like most Americans who watch one of the mainstream media channels for coverage of the DNC, you'll be hard pressed to see fair coverage of the anti-war protesters. Thanks to the Internet, we are no longer limited in our ability to learn the facts.

Enter IVAW (Iraq Veterans Against the War) - A group of our service men and women dedicated to bringing our families home from this illegal war. Their presence at the DNC was met with hostility by baton wielding police that also could very well be war vets.

What do you get when peaceful war veterans are surrounded by police with tear gas weapons, shields and batons? Well to most, the death of liberty. Liberty isn't a big deal to the Zombies of America, so long as they drive a car, talk on a cell phone, and watch reality TV...

The real question is, why did these police show up to harass war vets in the first place? For taking a stroll outside of the communist free speech zone? The police should be ashamed of themselves for not refusing to execute orders. Where is the common sense now a days?

Those who ordered these stormtroopers to corner Iraq war vets exercising their first amendment right, should be removed from their position of power. A disturbing trend has emerged out of 911 where those who bare responsibility for disaster are promoted and never reprimanded, even when people have lost their lives.

Sickening.

More Evidence Malkin Crew Set-up Alex Jones

Calling into his nationally syndicated radio show today from the DNC in Denver, Alex Jones provided more evidence that Michelle Malkin and her dirty tricks crew attempted to set-up him up. Alex revealed that he has video footage documenting the set-up and this will be made public upon his return from Denver.

Malkin and company leave the scene on August 25. Note the "photographer" wearing a white ball cap at the left.

As we reported yesterday, several people associated with Malkin and apparently taking orders from her people attempted to claim Alex threatened the neocon blogger by chanting “Kill Malkin,” a lie parroted by neocon bloggers. As it turns out, two individuals not associated with Alex Jones, described as “frat boys,” were responsible for making the threatening comment and then attempted to claim Alex made the comment. Several videos of the confrontation provide conclusive evidence that Alex did not make the comment. Fox News commentator John Gibson tried to claim Alex had “mind controlled” the crowd into calling for the murder of Malkin.

Additional video shows a man associated with Malkin, posing as a photographer, telling the police that Alex had threatened her. On the following day, this man, wearing a white ball cap he wore the day before, was confronted on camera over his participation in the orchestrated event. He quickly went over and talked with the police and was caught on video leaving with two cops mounted on bicycles.

As the photo here shows, Malkin left the scene with her body guard, who bumped Alex during the confrontation, and the photographer in the white ball cap. The photo was posted on the Face the State website. “Instigated by Alex Jones, a Texas conspiracy theorist and radio show host, a crowd quickly swarmed around Malkin after she was discovered taking photos of the event,” FTS staff claims. “As the crowd of agitators grew in numbers, at one point up to approximately 25, Malkin began to move her way out of the mob and fled to her car for safety.” In fact, she “fled” because she was unable to debate the fact she has called for putting Americans in concentration camps.

Related

Alex Jones Confronts Michelle Malkin at the DNC
“Liberal” Re-Create 68 Group: Neo-Con Malkin A “True Patriot”
Media Distorts Malkin Confrontation
Provocateurs Call For Violence To Demonize Legitimate Protesters At DNC
Police Informer Exposed
Malkin Attempts to Spin Confrontation on Fox News

Source

Media Distorts Malkin Confrontation; Provocateurs Caught On Tape

Reading Fort Collins Now, formerly Fort Collins Weekly, one has to ask if Julia Cobb got her journalism degree out of a crackerjack box. Reporting on the events outside the DNC yesterday, Cobb describes Alex Jones’ confrontation with the neocon Michelle Malkin as follows:

But soon, the attention was diverted from the peaceful protest by an altercation between a member of the conservative media and a citizen attending the protest. This was the second incident of its kind; on Sunday, protesters took exception to a Fox News reporter trying to question Ward Churchill, controversial former professor at the University of Colorado. Today it was radical Alex Jones, from the group 9/11 Truth, which believes that the September 11 terrorist attacks were planned by the U.S. government, verbally confronting Michelle Malkin, a conservative columnist and Fox News contributor.

“You support torture. Shame on you, you fascist piece of trash,” Jones yelled. He also accused Malkin of supporting the U.S. Marines when they drown puppies.

Malkin found an ally in Recreate 68’s Sanchez, who pushed his way into the crowd of TV cameras to yell at Jones: “Michelle Malkin is a true patriot!”

Sanchez later said he had no idea why Jones was attending the protest and added that Recreate 68 does not support Jones’ ideas. He added that although they strongly disagree with her views, Recreate 68 supports Malkin’s right to free speech.

Drown puppies? Lance Cpl. David Motari didn’t drown a puppy. He threw it over a cliff. This was a big story back in March, but for some reason Ms. Cobb didn’t bother to do any research.

She also did not mention the fact that Michelle Malkin insisted the puppy was not real. “The puppy doesn’t move. It’s clear to me that it’s either dead or a stuffed toy. The sound effects of a dog yapping seem to have been dubbed in,” Malkin wrote on her blog on March 3. “Disturbing whether the dog is real or fake, dead or alive? Yes. A hanging offense? No. But the clip is a useful cultural Rorschach test. Those who buy into the soldier-as-monster narrative are up in arms — demanding that the soldiers be hunted down and shot.”

Malkin then includes a few obscenity laced quotes that accompanied the video on YouTube. “I’m sure Gloria Steinem and the Berkeley City Council would agree,” she adds. This is the same Gloria Steinem who enjoyed “a 10-year association with the CIA,” according to Nancy Borman and the Village Voice. As a member of the CIA’s Mockingbird corporate media — Malkin works for Fox News — it would seem Michelle Malkin has more in common with Ms. Steinem than she would care to admit.

It is bizarre to claim Malkin “found an ally” in Recreate 68’s Kenneth Sanchez, who along with co-founder Mark Cohen attempted to “levitate” the U.S. Mint in Denver. Of course, this is not even original, it was ripped off from Abbie Hoffman. Back in 1967, 50,000 hippies attempted to levitate the Pentagon, turn it orange, and drive out the evil spirits responsible for the Vietnam War. Mark Cohen, wearing a red velvet wizard costume, and Recreate 68 managed to attract 50 people to this less than original stunt.

It makes sense Sanchez would declare Malkin a “true patriot,” although Recreate 68 allegedly disagrees with her views. According to Truth Alliance, Recreate 68 is a COINTELPRO project designed to discredit legitimate antiwar groups by instigating violence in Denver during the DNC. Malkin did her part, adding to the hype on her blog on March 21 when she wrote that Recreate 68 is part and parcel of “the history of left-wing violence against law enforcement” and admonished the cops to “take the nutballs seriously.” In response, nutball Sanchez embraced Malkin and disavowed the “radical” Alex Jones.

“Recreate 68 co-founder Glenn Spagnuolo agreed [with Sanchez] saying [Alex Jones] is “the true agent provocateur, he was so busy hating, he missed all the love.” Spagnuolo’s “love” is rather peculiar, as the point of Recreate 68 is to initiate a re-run of the 1968 police riot in Chicago. Is it possible Mr. Spagnuolo echoes Yippie Jerry Rubin, who wished for martial law in Chicago? Love has nothing to do with bashing heads.

According to Aaron Dykes of The Jones Report, “frat-boy type” instigators “wearing court jester hats” called for Michelle Malkin to be killed, not Alex Jones.

John Ingold, writing for the Denver Post, says Alex Jones engaged in a “brief shoving match” during the Malkin confrontation. In fact, Malkin’s goons initiated this “shoving match,” as videos of the incident reveal. “Police mostly stood by,” writes Ingold, even though Malkin’s “security” assaulted both Jones and his cameras.

Finally, according to the Gateway Pundit blog and others, Alex Jones screamed “Kill Michelle Malkin” during the confrontation.

In fact, Alex did not call for Malkin’s murder and witnesses say this call came from others not associated with Alex Jones or his crew. It was “frat-boy type” instigators, notes Aaron Dykes, editor of The Jones Report, “wearing court jester hats and making inflammatory statements.” Dykes further states that, after chanting for Malkin’s death, these instigators asked why Alex had called for violence against Faux News’ neocon darling. “The court jesters are just like the Wonkette people who would try to ridicule Ron Paul with Mickey Mouse cameras and demeaning questions,” Aaron adds. “The point is, it is disingenuous and meant to ridicule, not to confront or raise real questions.”

Wonkette is a reference to a popular “progressive” blog run by Ana Marie Cox, the wife of insider Chris Lehmann, formerly of The Washington Post and now an editor at Congressional Quarterly. Cox’s blog obsessively criticized and stalked the Ron Paul presidential campaign.

Source

Obama's pick - Joe Biden refers to New World Order in 1992 speech

According to the University of Delaware's website, Sen. Biden returns to campus during United Nations week (10-29-92) to give a speech in front of 150 faculty and students. His speech refers to "setting an American agenda for a new world order", and a "profound alteration in traditional thought".

The speech follows George Bush Sr.'s September 11, 1990, January 16, 1991 and January 29, 1991 calls for a New World Order.

One should wonder, what is Obama's definition of change if his choice for VP is pro new world order?

September 11, 2001 proved that George Bush's new world order can protect America from terrorism is false:

Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective—a new world order—can emerge: a new era—freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony.

Joe Biden believes in this new world order. An order that changed our country for the worse, by not preventing the pre-warned, self inflicted attacks of September 11th. This change has also given rise to a barrage of attacks on the Constitution and Bill of Rights through the not so patriot - Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act.

What kind of change do Americans really want? Do they want their liberties taken? Do they want to be labeled as terrorists for disagreeing with their corrupt puppet government? If Americans continue to believe in the left right paradigm, true change, will never be achieved.

Disproof of Global Warming Hype Published

A mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” has been published in debate on global warming in Physics and Society, a scientific publication of the 46,000-strong American Physical Society.

Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007.

The article, entitled Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered demonstrates that later this century a doubling of the concentration of CO2 compared with pre-industrial levels will increase global mean surface temperature not by the 6 °F predicted by the IPCC but, harmlessly, by little more than 1 °F. Lord Monckton concludes –

“… Perhaps real-world climate sensitivity is very much below the IPCC’s estimates. Perhaps, therefore, there is no ‘climate crisis’ at all. … The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.”

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chair (2004) of the New England Section of the American Physical Society (APS), has been studying climate-change science for four years. He said:

“I was impressed by an hour-long academic lecture which criticized claims about ‘global warming’ and explained the implications of the physics of radiative transfer for climate change. I was pleased that the audience responded to the informative presentation with a prolonged, standing ovation. That is what happened when, at the invitation of the President of our University, Christopher Monckton lectured here in Hartford this spring. I am delighted that Physics and Society, an APS journal, has published his detailed paper refining and reporting his important and revealing results.

“To me the value of this paper lies in its dispassionate but ruthlessly clear exposition – or, rather, exposé – of the IPCC’s method of evaluating climate sensitivity. The detailed arguments in this paper, and, indeed, in a large number of other scientific papers, point up extensive errors, including numerous projection errors of climate models, as well as misleading statements by the IPCC. Consequently, there are no rational grounds for believing either the IPCC or any other claims of dangerous anthropogenic ‘global warming’.”

Lord Monckton’s paper reveals that –

► The IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000%;
► CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100;
► Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly;
► The IPCC’s values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500;
► The IPCC’s values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated;
► “Global warming” halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years;
► Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling;
► The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists’ draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%;
► It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible;
► Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed;
► In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years.

Global Warming gets the Cold Freeze
Global warming hoax exposed by record global cold
by F. William Engdahl

The media and governmental hype over a danger from global warming that already is allegedly causing the polar icecaps to melt and threaten a global climate catastrophe, looks more and more like the political hype it is. This year to date, snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.

According to the US National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) many American cities and towns have suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was - 0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 average."

China is surviving its most brutal winter in one hundred years. Temperatures in the normally mild south were low for so long that some middle-sized cities went weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.

There have been so many snow and ice storms in Ontario and Quebec in the past two months that the real estate market has been hurt as home buyers have stayed home. In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, breaking the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in 1950.

Arctic Ice Melt has Reversed

One of the most dramatic results of the record cold over much of the planet is the reversal of the much-reported melt of the icebergs in the Arctic Ocean. Last autumn the world was alarmed to hear from certain climatologists that the ice in the Arctic had melted to its "lowest levels on record.” What was carefully omitted from those scare stories was the fact that those records only date back as far as 1972, and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.

Now, as a result of the recent record cold weather, the ice is back. According to Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year.

What few people know and what the Global Warming lobby seems at pains to keep known is the fact that there is considerable seasonal variation in how much pack ice of the Arctic ice pack covers the Arctic Ocean. Much of the ocean is also covered in snow for about 10 months of the year. The maximum snow cover is in March or April — about 20 to 50 centimeters over the frozen ocean. The thickness is not one of the universal constants, never was.

Admit flawed Climate Model

There is also admission by several intellectually honest climatologists that their predictive models are flawed. Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona, two very prominent climate modellers, recently admitted that the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (as in the fictional movie The Day After Tomorrow) are wrong. In a recent interview Russell said, “It’s not ice melt, but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind’s effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of man-made warming on polar ice melt.” Now that’s very interesting.

When professors Toggweiler and Russell reprogrammed their model to include the 40-year cycle of winds away from the equator, then back towards it again, the role of ocean currents bringing warm southern waters to the north was obvious in the recent Arctic warming.

Russian climatologists believe recent weather changes around the globe are results of solar activity and not man-made emissions. Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, calls the argument for man-made climate change "a drop in the bucket." His research shows that now the recent very active solar activity has entered an inactive phase. He advised people to "stock up on fur coats."

Kenneth Tapping of Canada’s National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon. The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased.

The Global Warming Geopolitics

The recent Global Warming hysteria is in reality a geopolitical push by leading global elite circles to find a way to get the broader populations to willingly accept drastic cuts in their living standards, something that were it demanded without clear reason by politicians, would spark strikes and protest. The UN’s latest IPCC report on Global Warming calls for diverting a huge 12% of global GDP to “prevent the harmful effects of climate change.” The UN report, for example, estimated that its recommendations to reduce certain manmade emissions would cost about $2,750 per family per year in the price of energy.

Today there are two principal policy options of the Anglo-American power establishment to impose their further control over a world that is rapidly slipping out from under them. We might call them Plan A and Plan B for short.

The first, Plan A, was the option represented by Bush-Cheney and the big oil and military industrial complex behind them. Cheney and his close Houston friend, Matt Simmons, propagated the myth of Peak Oil to lull populations into accepting the inevitability of $100 a barrel or even higher oil prices. In the meantime, the relative strength of the Big Oil and the related US military establishment grew with higher oil prices.

Their global War on Terror provided a cover or pretext to justify military control over the major oil reserves and oil transit passages of the world. From Iraq to Afghanistan to Kosovo, the US and NATO agenda was aimed at future control of the extraordinary economic powers emerging from Russia to China to India to Brazil and Venezuela and beyond. Through China’s effective diplomacy in Africa, many African countries are on the brink of slipping out from under the US or British control into Chinese or more independent status.

If John McCain becomes the next choice of the US power elites to be President, that will signal that that military and oil agenda will escalate, especially as the USA sinks into a severe economic depression in coming months.

The second broad faction of maintaining their control over the greater part of the world economy, Plan B, sees Global Warming and “soft power” as embodied in the organs of the United Nations and IMF and World Bank as the more suitable vehicle to convince people to willingly accept drastic reduction in living standards.

Barack Obama, the apparent choice of the same elites as a “breath of change” to allow them to regroup after the debacle of the Bush-Cheney years, would likely opt for the second faction of the global elite—the Global Warming option to lowering general living standards, ‘Plan B’ of the Anglo-American establishment. In a recent campaign speech in Wallingford Pennsylvania, Mr. Obama replied to a question about Al Gore, the hero of Global Warming. As President, Obama said he would consider putting Al Gore in a Cabinet-level position—or higher. He stated, “I will make a commitment that Al Gore will be at the table and play a central part in us figuring out how we solve this problem. He’s somebody I talk to on a regular basis. I’m already consulting with him in terms of these issues but climate change is real."

The two major global factions

Today there are two major factions within the Western political power establishment internationally. They cooperate and share broad elitist goals, but differ fundamentally on how to reach these goals. Foremost is their goal of sharply controlling global economic growth and population growth. The first faction is best described as the Rockefeller Faction. It has a global power base and is today best represented by the Bush family faction which got their start, as I document in my book, as hired hands for the powerful Rockefeller machine. The Rockefeller faction has for more than a century based its power and influence on control of oil and on use of the military to secure that control. It is personified in the man who is since 2001 de facto President in terms of decision-making—Dick Cheney. Cheney was former CEO of Halliburton Corp., which is both the world’s largest oilfield services company (now based in Dubai for tax reasons), and the world’s largest military base constructor.

The second faction might be called the Soft Power Faction. Their philosophy might be summed up that they think its “possible to kill more flies with honey than with vinegar.” Their preferred path to global population control and lowering of the growth rates in China and elsewhere is through promoting the fraud of global warming and imminent climate catastrophe. Al Gore is linked to this faction. So is British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. They see globalist institutions, especially the United Nations, as the best vehicle to advance their agenda of global austerity.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created by the United Nations Environment Programme. Its reports have been demonstrated to be fundamentally flawed in scientific methodology, yet they are aggressively being promoted as revealed truth by the powerful media behind this faction. Others in the circle include billionaire speculator George Soros, parts of the British Royal family and representatives of European “old money.”

With the meteorological evidence of their claims for global warming dissolving as the ice forms anew, it is not surprising that news of the Arctic refreeze and other contrary evidence to their doomsday thesis are kept from mainline international media.

Source

Turkish prez says US must share power in ‘new world order’

Turkey's president Abdullah Gul watches the 'Youth and Sports Day' ceremonies at 19 May stadium in Ankara. Photograph: Ates Tumer/EPA

Days after Russia scored a stunning geopolitical victory in the Caucasus, President Abdullah Gül of Turkey said he saw a new multipolar world emerging from the wreckage of war.

The conflict in Georgia, Gül asserted, showed that the United States could no longer shape global politics on its own, and should begin sharing power with other countries.

"I don't think you can control all the world from one centre," Gül told the Guardian. "There are big nations. There are huge populations. There is unbelievable economic development in some parts of the world. So what we have to do is, instead of unilateral actions, act all together, make common decisions and have consultations with the world. A new world order, if I can say it, should emerge."

Gül, relaxing in a hotel suite with a spectacular view of the glistening Bosphorus, spoke just hours before meeting with the visiting president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

He rejected the idea, promoted by the United States and Israel, that the best way to deal with Iran was to isolate, sanction and punish it. "There are so many important issues, like the nuclear issue, Iraq, the Caucasus, Afghanistan," he said. "Iran is definitely having some influence of these issues, so we are talking."

Gül said Iran had a right to develop nuclear energy but not nuclear weapons. "We don't want to see weapons of mass destruction in this region," he said. "If it's in our neighbourhood, we definitely don't want to see it."

Asked about the possibility of an American attack on Iran, Gül replied: "I don't want to think about that. Everybody should take a lesson from what happened in Iraq," he said. "Diplomatic solutions are always better than hard solutions."

Few countries in the world have changed as dramatically as Turkey over the last decade, and Gül is among the most intriguing new political leaders to emerge here during that period.

When first elected, he seemed to be part of a new Islamic wave that was challenging the entrenched secular elite. He is a practicing Muslim who married his wife when she was 15; she wears the headscarf that some secular Turks consider a badge of reactionary Islam. Yet he and his closest political ally, the prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, have led a political revolution that has brought Turkey closer to democracy than any regime in the modern state's 85-year history.

Gül said Turkey could play a decisive role in bridging the chasm that separates the west from more turbulent regions. His country's effort to join the European Union, he said, was its "main agenda".

"I wish to see Turkey as an island where the European standard of democracy is being fulfilled and the free market economy is functioning very well," he said. "This will be a real gift to the region, to the world, for peace. And this Turkey will be a source of inspiration for so many.

"As we are transforming ourselves in that direction, we will not forget our natural links and relationships and advantages with other countries - Muslim countries, central Asian countries, Caucasus countries, Middle Eastern and other countries," he added, speaking in fluent English.

"Turkey is having a positive impact on them, spreading the values of democracy, freedom, rule of law. Also, the economic changes here ... are admired. Maybe that is the indirect influence of this country."

For much of this year, political life in Turkey was frozen as the constitutional court considered a prosecutor's charge that the ruling Justice and Development party should be banned because it was a "focus of anti-secular activity". Last month the court rejected that argument.

Now, Gül said, Turkey's priority must be to resume its stalled progress towards political reform. "In the last two years, we spent our energy on domestic issues, and the reforms slowed down," he said. "Now, after the court case, there is a new era. This is a big opportunity for Turkey. Everybody realises that reforms are necessary."

Some European leaders, Gül said, fail ed to recognise the contribution that Turkey was making to stability in the world's most volatile region.

"This is a big asset for Europe," he said. "Turkey has great capacity to influence the region, indirectly, very peacefully, being an inspiration for changes. Turkey has been playing this role already. This has not been appreciated enough."

Opposition to Turkish membership in the EU was for years based on the country's failure to meet democratic standards. More recently, politicians in some European countries have sought votes by bashing Turkey and pledging to keep it out of the EU regardless of its progress toward democracy. These campaigns, Gül said, harmed Europe's long-term interests.

"Europe should realise that Turkey can do more for the stability and security of the region," he said. "Start with the Caucasus; last month, the problem was not serious, but suddenly we found ourselves in a war situation.

"Europe should encourage Turkey, and not create some artificial problems during the negotiation process with us. Some member countries or some politicians should not mix domestic issues and strategic issues. Domestic issues are conjunctural; today it's there and tomorrow it's not. But the strategic issues are always there, and we cannot sacrifice strategic issues for domestic issues. Unfortunately, nowadays we see this kind of shortsighted policies in some countries."

Gül repeatedly returned to the importance of Turkey's democratisation process. He said it would ultimately resolve all of the country's domestic problems, including the long-festering conflict with Kurdish nationalists in south-eastern provinces. "Some call it terror, some call it the south-east problem, some call it the Kurdish problem - whatever you call it, we will find a solution," he said.

"There are other problems - secularism and anti-secularism - those things will also find solutions in this climate. That is why I focus on the reform process. The problem was this: the lack of democracy, the standard of democracy. That was creating problems, not only in the south-east but in other issues. That is when we upgrade the standards, these problems will find solutions."

With that, Gül was off to meet Ahmadinejad. "Our values are different," he said with a smile, "but having a good relationship helps the stability of the region."

Source