Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Feinstein (Again) Says Metadata Program 'Is Not Surveillance'

not only was she beat~in  wit an ugly stick! but an dumb ass stick ..2 boot !! these ass pipes R sooooo fucking far outta touch !!!    with ANY fucking ...reality  lol     they (ass pipes)  spew fucking shit out  & than look around ....  like they  said some~thin   LMMFAO  (laughing my motherfuckng ass off)  i mean they look u&i  ..fucking dead straight in the face  lol  nattery fuck~in kooks :o lol  she says this shit & u's just fucking KEEP put~in her in office lol    the fucking demons in hell jaws just drop 2 the floor & they (demons)  look around &  go WTF did she just say lol  ,than they (demons) look at you's kooky fucks  ... look ,look they( kooky dummycocks)  R fall~in fer it ?   ... again   WTF ???  lol

from the you're-only-embarrassing-yourself,-Dianne dept

Senator Dianne Feinstein's war of words in defense of the NSA's programs continues, despite both the political tide and public favor shifting in the other direction. According to Feinstein, everyone is still suffering from some sort of mass delusion when it comes to the Section 215 program.
“It’s not a surveillance program, it’s a data-collection program,” she said while appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday.
Oh, but it's actually both. According to supporters of the NSA, metadata is just a bunch of anonymous numbers harvested in hopes of discovering needles. To those actually paying attention, metadata is a very efficient way to collect very personal information about someone. Just because it looks like data doesn't mean it's not surveillance. Let's not forget that metadata provides enough information to justify extrajudicial killings.

It's still surveillance. It just bears no resemblance to what spying used to mean. What the NSA has done is turn "surveillance" into something abstract, but equally invasive. It has eliminated the targeted nature of its classic definition and replaced it with servers full of data, all of it theoretically linked to another abstraction: "terrorism."

The headline says Feinstein "blasts" critics, but this sort of clueless pedantry doesn't actually "blast" anyone. Months after the defenders' assertions have been repeatedly dismantled (including two similar assertions by the senator), Feinstein's willingness to cling to a nostalgic view of surveillance could almost be termed "delightfully old school" -- if only she still didn't have at least one hand on the controls as the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

She also said she wasn't aware of another revelation released in conjunction with Glenn Greenwald's book on Snowden and the NSA.
In “No Place to Hide,” released last week, Greenwald said the U.S. government places surveillance tools in technology equipment to be sold abroad, an accusation the U.S. government often lobs at the Chinese government.

That program “does not sound familiar,” Feinstein said Sunday.
Well, I'm sure the NSA keeps secrets from even you, Dianne. And I'm sure the NSA is at least as surprised as you are that the information is now public. No one seems to be aware of some of the stuff that has been leaked, elements of which have escaped even the attention of those on the committees that have performed actual oversight, rather than just stood cheering on the sidelines.

Ultimately, whether it doesn't fit into Feinstein's dewy-eyed surveillance ideal or if it has escaped (read: been withheld from) her attention, she's behind it. Because without all of this, we're doomed.
“I know they will come after us if they can, I see the intelligence,” she said.

“Terror is not down in the world, it is up.”
If that's so, remind us again why all the surveillance and expansion of government powers is necessary. Because it doesn't seem to have improved anything.

UK: The Wealth of the Super-Rich has Doubled Since the 2008 Economic Crisis

our cuz's across the pond ... how's IT going fer u's huh ?

Sunday Times rich list: “Astonishing year” for Britain’s most wealthy

Region:

bankster-chess
The annual rich list published by the Sunday Times has revealed a staggering rise in wealth for Britain’s super-rich.
The headline story, made public a week prior to the release of the list on May 18, was that the number of billionaires in Britain had surpassed 100 for the first time. With a total of 104 billionaires, Britain has witnessed the emergence of more than 20 new billionaires over the past year and has the highest concentration of billionaires of any country.
In its entirety, the list reveals that the richest 1,000 people in Britain possess combined wealth of £519 billion, equivalent to a staggering one third of the country’s GDP. This is a rise of 15.4 percent from the 2013 list, when the super-rich held total wealth of £449 billion. Since 2008, the year of the global financial crisis and the implementation of a multi-billion-pound bailout of the banks, the wealth of the super-rich in the UK has doubled.
As well as being the product of speculation and outright criminality, the rapid rise of such obscene levels of wealth over the past five years confirms the true purpose of the austerity policies of successive governments since the financial crisis. While for the vast majority the near collapse of the financial system has meant the deepest assault on living standards, jobs and public services since the Second World War, an oligarchy has gorged itself on state sponsored bailouts to enrich themselves to a degree without precedent.
The wealth required to be even considered for the list, £85 million, was more than that at the peak of the pre-crisis boom in 2008, when the figure was £80 million. A place in the top 500 could only be secured with total wealth of £190 million, more than double the £80 million in 2004 and almost 20 percent more than the £160 million in 2013.
London, one of the world’s leading centres of financial swindling, has established itself as a global destination of choice for the oligarchy, with 72 billionaires residing there. This is more than double the total of British-based billionaires from just 10 years ago. But the explosion in wealth is not confined to the capital. In Scotland, the richest 100 people saw their combined riches rise by 19 percent in the past year to top £25 billion.
The vast accumulation of wealth at the pinnacle of society was further illustrated by government figures released just days before the rich list.
According to the Office of National Statistics, the top 1 percent of Britain’s population now controls more wealth than the bottom 55 percent, i.e., the richest 600,000 individuals possess more wealth than the poorest 33 million. Another report from the charity Oxfam revealed that just five billionaire families controlled more wealth than the bottom 20 percent of the population.
The concentration of wealth in a few hands contrasts ever more horrifically with worsening impoverishment for a growing proportion of the population. A report released by the European Union statistics agency Eurostat earlier this month revealed four poverty black spots in Britain where the standard of living was comparable or worse than that in areas of the eastern European countries Lithuania, Poland and Hungary. According to the report, poverty-stricken areas such as Cornwall and the Welsh valleys have average annual incomes of just £14,300.
A letter signed by 170 medical professionals in the Lancet compared the living conditions and diets of many with the Victorian era. “The spectre of Oliver Twist is back. Children are going hungry in the UK: they may not be eating gruel but their parents are having to choose cheap food that is filling but not nutritious,” the letter stated. One of the letter’s authors, Professor John Ashton, described the situation as “a public health emergency.”
Even Phillip Beresford, who has worked to compile the rich list since its inception in 1989, was somewhat taken aback by the rapidity with which the wealth of the super-rich had expanded over the past year. He commented, “I’ve never seen such a phenomenal rise in personal wealth as the growth in the fortunes of Britain’s richest 1,000 people over the past year.” He added, “The richest people in Britain have had an astonishing year. While some may criticise them, many of these people are at the heart of the economy and their success brings more jobs and more wealth for the country.”
It is a measure of the control enjoyed by such fabulously wealthy layers, and the utter subservience of the press to them, that Beresford’s outrageous remarks were reported in the media with virtually no comment. The classic Thatcherite “trickle down” theory is still treated as if it were a self-evident truth by a ruling elite desperate to find justifications for its crumbling social order, even after it has been wholly refuted by actual events.
Typical was the reaction of the Times, which remarked in an editorial that tens of thousands should seek to emulate the rich list 1,000. “Britain needs to be seen as a place where success is applauded,” the paper intoned.
The reality is that the vast wealth of the oligarchy is accumulated at the direct expense of the rest of society in the form of savage wage cuts, the decimation of public services, shifting the tax burden onto working people and handing over billions to the banks.
The vast quantities of wealth hoarded by the super-rich have been invested in the financial sector and property. On the same day the rich list was released, an interview with the Bank of England governor, Mark Carney, was cited by a number of newspapers. In it, he warned about the danger of exploding property prices, particularly in London where they have risen by 25 percent since 2008 due to speculative investment.
Labour made some timid criticism of the list, with shadow treasury secretary Chris Leslie commenting, “No wonder the super-rich have got much richer over the last year when David Cameron has given millionaires a huge tax cut.” He claimed that “Labour is determined to ensure all working people feel the benefit of economic growth, not just a few at the top.”
While the Conservative-Liberal Democrat decision to cut the top income tax rate was undoubtedly a handout to the wealthy, to claim that a reduction in the top rate of tax from 50 to 45 percent can account for such astronomical increases in wealth is a fraud. The reality is that the multi-billion bailout of the banks, initiated by Labour in 2008, and the policies which have followed—including the Bank of England’s quantitative easing and the cuts to public services—have resulted in billions of pounds flowing into the coffers of Britain’s super-rich. Labour intends to continue with these austerity measures if it takes power after next year’s election, as it seeks to defend the interests of Britain’s modern-day aristocracy.

Tax, Debt, Wage and Fiat Slavery: How the Elites Extract Wealth from the People

I’m a Fiat Slave, And So Are You


debt
Fiat money is at base a form of indirect wealth transfer from those forced to hold the money to those issuing the money.
I describe the pernicious servitude created by debt as debt serfdom, as serfdom implies a neofeudal arrangement that requires serfs’ acceptance of this financial yoke of servitude. In other words, debt is freely accepted as the line of least resistance in a system that incentivizes debt and places high barriers to debt-free independence from a Status Quo operated to benefit the owners and issuers of debt, not the debtors.
Correspondent Jeff W. has identified an even more insidious form of monetary servitude that he calls fiat slavery, as the servitude is enforced by fiat (unbacked government-issued) money.
In other words, being forced to use state-issued fiat currency is a form of servitude, as fiat money is at base a form of indirect wealth transfer from those forced to hold the money to those issuing the money.
Beyond this state-enforced wealth transfer from citizens to the state, there is a secondary wealth transfer going on in any fiat-money system: the neofeudal financial nobility who are closest to the money spigot get to buy whatever real-world assets and income streams offer the best return before the money trickles down to the debt-serfs paying interest and taxes.
For example, the financial nobility can borrow billions of dollars at near-zero interest from the Federal Reserve, and use this nearly-free fiat money to buy student loans that pay 7+% annually. They can also snap up houses for cash that the nobility then rents to debt-serfs who have been outbid by those with the extraordinary advantage of unlimited access to the Fed’s nearly-free fiat money.
Here is Jeff’s commentary and analysis:
In a world where every country prints fiat money, the entire human race today, except for its money masters, is subjected to fiat slavery.
Almost everyone understands what it means to be a tax slave. It means that people must work several months of the year for the benefit of the taxing authorities. Taxes in the U.S. today are several times higher than they were 100 years ago, and at present-day tax levels, today’s Americans are rightly called tax slaves.
What it means to be a debt slave is also easy to understand.
It means that one must spend a large fraction of one’s time to earn money to pay creditors. Millions of Americans today are mired deeply in debt, but today’s America is also a country where if you personally stay out of debt, the government will go into debt for you.
Each American taxpayer is on the hook for his or her share of over $17 trillion in debt that government admits to; the real debt total is much higher. Government leaders are eagerly plunging us ever deeper into debt each year.
Most Americans also have personal experience of being a wage slave.
It means that a person has no way to make a living except by selling his labor into a glutted market. Thomas Jefferson hoped that most Americans could own their own farms and thereby profit from capital improvements that they made through their own efforts. Such Americans could be their own bosses and escape wage slavery. But today we live in an age of huge factory farms, and it is more difficult than ever to establish or run any small business. Thus wage slavery is the norm for Americans today.
But few people understand what it means to be a fiat slave.
Being a fiat slave means that one lives in a country where the machinery of money printing is used to maximize wealth extraction from its citizens.
How do they maximize the wealth they can extract through money printing? First of all, it is done by increasing of the volume of transactions that take place in a given fiat currency. Each newly-printed unit of fiat is a drop in the bucket in terms of the inflation it creates, and more fiat can be printed without causing serious inflation if a country has a bigger bucket.
For example, Canada’s GDP is about 11% the size of America’s. At first glance this might be taken to mean that Americans can print nine times more dollars than Canadians. But we must also remember that U.S. dollars circulate throughout the world, and Eurodollars and petrodollars also add to the total of U.S. dollar transactions.
Because of extraterritorial dollar circulation, the U.S. might actually be able to print 20 times more than Canada without causing serious (in terms of causing political problems for the money printers) inflation. From this we see why money printers may want to fight wars to protect America’s dollar circulation areas in the Middle East or in Afghanistan, where much of the opium trade is transacted in dollars.
But a country’s fiat transaction volume is only part of the equation. A more important part of the equation is the inflation level. Imagine two countries: Country A with an annual fiat transaction volume of 100 trillion units per year and Country B with a volume of 50 trillion. Everything else being equal, Country B can only print half as much fiat each year to give to its government and its banking elite.
But suppose further that the inflation rate in Country A is 5% absent any money printing, and the inflation rate in Country B is negative 2% due to global wage arbitrage, regulatory suppression of small businesses, and high unemployment. Suppose further that a real inflation rate of 5% is the money printers’ upper limit because it is the maximum asset erosion that wealthy bondholders will tolerate. Now we see that potential money printing in Country A is reduced to zero, while potential money printing in Country B is 3.5 trillion units (50 trillion times seven percent).
American money printers thus have trillions of dollars in incentive to support deflationary policies, which may include global wage arbitrage (sending work to the country where labor is cheapest), suppression of job creation by small businesses, suppression of private-sector labor unions, support for open borders immigration, commodity price suppression through market interventions, support for genetically modified seeds so as to push agricultural prices down, support for owners taking a larger share of corporate revenues so as to reduce labor’s share, and support for high levels of consumer debt so as to dampen inflationary pressure in a nation of demoralized debt slaves. All of these oppressive policies enrich the money printers at the citizens’ expense.
Tax slavery, debt slavery, wage slavery, and fiat slavery are four methods that elites employ to extract wealth from the people.
To this list we should also add their encouragement of Ponzi gambling. Ponzi asset bubbles are constantly being created and citizens are encouraged to go into debt to “cash in” on bubble profits (or get wiped out in bubble crashes). Those five methods are the major wealth extraction methods they use.
Those who support the cause of human freedom must resist tax slavery by insisting on a government that keeps its spending down to the bare basics. Free people must also support a culture that discourages people from getting into debt and encourages them to get out of debt and stay out. They must demand that government debt be rolled back to zero.
Policies that favor capital accumulation in families and a supportive legal environment for small businesses are the antidotes to wage slavery, and free people must also demand that there be zero wealth extraction from the citizens through money printing. That can best be done by requiring 100% gold backing for currency and eliminating fractional reserve banking. Eliminating the inflation that comes from money printing will also go a long way toward eliminating asset bubbles and Ponzi gambling on asset bubbles.
Older Americans have watched as a once-free people have been reduced to slave-like conditions. Not only has wealth been ruthlessly extracted from the people, but today’s surveillance state is more intrusive than ever, and the police are increasingly insolent and imperious.
What are we going to do? A necessary first step is to take the blinders off and to see clearly how elites are victimizing you. A second step is to figure out what practical steps you can take as an American to secure the blessings of liberty for yourself and your posterity. Freedom is not free, as the saying goes, and the price of freedom is not only eternal vigilance, but also intelligent action. We should begin this work today.
Awareness of the sources of wealth transfer and monetary servitude is the first step forward.

Cracking The “Conspiracy Theories’” Psycholinguistic Code: The Witch Hunt against Independent Research and Analysis


depression2
A new crusade appears to be underway to target independent research and analysis available via alternative news media. This March saw the release of “cognitive infiltration” advocate Cass Sunstein’s new book, Conspiracy Theories and Other Dangerous Ideas. In April, the confirmed federal intelligence-gathering arm, Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), released a new report, “Agenda 21: The UN, Sustainability, and Right Wing Conspiracy Theory.” Most recently, Newsweek magazine carried a cover story, titled, “The Plots to Destroy America: Conspiracy Theories Are a Clear and Present Danger.”
As its discourse suggests, this propaganda campaign is using the now familiar “conspiracy theory” label, as outlined in Central Intelligence Agency Document 1035-960, the 1967 memo laying out a strategy for CIA “media assets” to counter criticism of the Warren Commission and attack independent investigators of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination. At that time the targets included attorney Mark Lane and New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, who were routinely defamed and lampooned in major US news outlets.
Declassified government documents have proven Lane and Garrison’s allegations of CIA-involvement in the assassination largely accurate. Nevertheless, the prospect of being subject to the conspiracy theorist smear remains a potent weapon for intimidating authors, journalists, and scholars from interrogating complex events, policies, and other potentially controversial subject matter.
As the title of Newsweek’s feature story indicates, a primary element of contemporary propaganda campaigns using the conspiracy theory/ist label is to suggest that citizens’ distrust of government imperatives and activities tends toward violent action. The “conspiracy theorist” term is intentionally conflated with “conspiracist,” thus linking the two in the mass mind. Images of Lee Harvey Oswald, Timothy McVeigh, and Osama bin Laden are subtly invoked when the magic terms are referenced. In reality, it is typically Western governments using their police or military who prove the foremost purveyors of violence and the threat of violence—both domestically and abroad.
In his Newsweek article, author and journalist Kurt Eichenwald selectively employs the assertions of the SPLC, Sunstein, and a handful of social scientists to postulate in Orwellian fashion that independent research and analysis of the United Nations’ Agenda 21, the anti-educational thrust of “Common Core,” the dangers of vaccine injury and water fluoridation, and September 11—all important policies and issues worthy of serious study and concern—are a “contagion” to the body politic.
In a functioning public, honest academics and journalists would uninhibitedly delve into these and similar problems–GMOs, state-sponsored terrorism, the dangers of non-ionizing radiation– particularly since such phenomena pose grave threats to both popular sovereignty and self determination. Such intellectuals would then provide important findings to foster vigorous public debate.
Absent this, segments of the populace still capable of critical thought are inclined to access and probe information that leads them to question bureaucratic edicts and, in some cases, suggest a potentially broader political agenda. In today’s world, however, such research projects carried out by the hoi polloi that are expressly reserved for government or foundation-funded technocrats “’distort the debate that is crucial to democracy,’” says Dartmouth political scientist Brendan Nyhan.
With the above in mind, a simple yet instructive exercise in illustrating the psycholinguistic feature of the conspiracy theory propaganda technique is to replace “conspiracy theories/ists” with the phrase, “independent research and analysis,” or “independent researchers.” Let us apply this to some passages from Eichenwald’s recent Newsweek piece.
For example, “Psychological research has shown that the only trait that consistently indicates the probability someone will believe in conspiracy theories independent research and analysis is if that person believes in other conspiracy theories independent research and analysis,” Eichenwald sagely concludes.
“One of the most common ways of introducing conspiracy theories independent research and analysis is to ‘just ask questions’ about an official account,’’’ says Karen Douglas, co-editor of the British Journal of Social Psychology and a senior academic … at Britain’s University of Kent.”
In fact, substituting the phrases accordingly throughout the article significantly neutralizes its overall propagandistic effect.
Researchers agree; independent research and analysis are espoused by people at every level of society seeking ways of calming the chaos of life, sometimes by simply reinforcing convictions.
While the growth in the number of news outlets has helped spread independent research and analysis, it doesn’t compare to the impact of social media and the Internet, experts say.
9/11 conspiracy theorists independent researchers protest outside the World Trade Center in 2011 [Photo caption]
“If you have social networks of people who are talking with one another, you can have independent research and analysis spread in a hurry,’’ says Cass Sunstein, a professor at Harvard Law School … “It literally is as if it was contagious.”
While some may dismiss independent researchers as ignorant or unstable, research has shown that to be false. “The idea that only dumb people believe this stuff is wrong,’’ says Dartmouth’s Nyhan.
People who more strongly believed in independent research and analysis were significantly less likely to use sunscreen or have an annual medical checkup.
According to a just-released report from the Southern Poverty Law Center, the independent research and analysis flowed in April at a hearing before Alabama’s Senate Education Committee about legislation to allow school districts to reject Common Core.
It’s true. Since September 11, 2001 the internet has increasingly allowed for everyday people to retrieve, study, and share information on important events and phenomena as never before. And as a recent study published in the prominent journal Frontiers of Psychology suggests, tendering “alternative conspiracy theories” to the government-endorsed explanations of September 11, 2001 is a sign of “individuation,” or psychological well being and contentment.
Such a condition is a clear danger to those who wish to wield uncontested political authority. Indeed, the capacity to freely disseminate and discuss knowledge of government malfeasance is the foremost counterbalance to tyranny. Since this ability cannot be readily confiscated or suppressed, it must be ridiculed, marginalized, even diagnosed as a psychiatric condition.
The recent abandonment of network neutrality may eventually further subdue the nuisance of independent research, thought, and analysis. Until then, the corporate media’s attempts to bamboozle and terrify the American public with the well-worn conspiracy theory meme will be a prevalent feature of what passes for news and commentary today.

Always Low Wages, Anti-Union, More Pollution: The Obama Administration Does the Bidding of Wal-Mart

hey America ! hows them 10.50 hr welcome 2 wal~mart motherfuckers jobs going !! huh ... we's going gooooooooooooood hum !!!


obama-wall-mart
Democrats in labor unions and figures like former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and others were justly outraged at Barack Obama’s latest wet kiss to Wal-Mart earlier this month. But First Lady Michelle Obama has been in bed with the giant retailer for years. Is this a nasty bug in the Obama presidency, or a corrupt core feature?
Earlier this month President Obama visited a Bay Area Wal-Mart to praise the world’s largest and most anti-union retailer for its supposed environmental responsibility. The fact is that Wal-Mart’s maintenance of diesel-fueled supply chains between its stores and wherever on the planet wages are lowest and environmental restrictions are totally absent make it a major ongoing contributor to runaway climate change. The president’s appearance therefore, was simply a hypocritical exercise ingreenwashing for Wal-Mart.
Though it was an insult to working people and to many of his abject and fervent supporters, it should have been no surprise. It wasn’t President Obama’s first wet kiss to Wal-Mart and with almost three more years in office to go it won’t be his last. Still the willingness of the Obama Administration to do the bidding of Wal-Mart shows just how hollow has become the pretense of elected black Democrats to representing the poor and oppressed.
There was a time when Democrats in the White House did not dare openly shill for the giant retailer. Hillary Clinton served on Wal-Mart’s board of directors through most of the 1980s, while her husband Bill was governor of Arkansas. Even then, Wal-Mart was notorious for overworking and underpaying its workers, violating labor laws to thwart unions, and sopping up prodigious amounts of corporate welfare in the forms of tax breaks and subsidies of all kinds. Being in bed with those crooks wasn’t just an embarrassment, it was a hypocritical affront to Democratic voters, so somewhere on the 1992 road to the White House, Hillary resigned from Wal-Mart’s board. Similarly in 2007 with her husband on the way to the White House, Michelle Obama felt compelled to resign from the board of TreeHouse Foods,a major Wal-Mart vendor. “I won’t shop there,” said presidential candidate Barack Obama when questioned about Wal-Mart at an AFL-CIO labor forum.
Of course labor audiences in 2007 and 2008 were where Obama pledged to renegotiate NAFTA, andimmediately raise the minimum wage as soon as he took office. The president never mentioned raising the minimum wage again till about 2012 when Republicans were safely in control of the House of Representatives, and instead of renegotiating NAFTA, President Obama is engaged in secret negotiations to extend it across the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Evidently the Obama that promises is a different guy, and far less powerful, than the Obama that acts.
Safely in office, Michelle and Barack Obama have enthusiastically embraced Wal-Mart. The first lady allowed the unscrupulous retailer to leverage her personal image as an advocate of exercise and healthy eating in her “Let’s Move” initiative, and spouting the company line that the best solution to urban “food deserts” is opening more Wal-Mart neighborhood grocery stores. Michelle Obama’s many appearances at and pronouncements around Wal-Mart have done the retailer more good than she and Hillary could ever have done in another decade or two apiece on its board of directors.
Right now Wal-Mart is approaching 30% of the US retail grocery market, with far lower wages, fewer hours, skimpier benefits, and longer and dirtier supply chains than its major competitors. As I said a couple years ago in an article about Michelle Obama’s cynical embrace of Wal-Mart:
Wal-Mart’s business model of corrupting public officials, lying about job creation numbers, rampant sex and race discrimination, relentlessly low wage and benefit levels, and aspirations to monopoly control of local markets across the country make it a bad neighbor, a worse boss, an unfair competitor and sometimes a criminal enterprise.
Wal-Mart has been a leader in the corporate practice of weaponizing its charitable giving, turning it into a lever to open new markets in urban America, to neutralize and isolate opposition, and to curry favor with local political figures. Wal-Mart made it rain on selected charities and ministries in areas like Newark and Chicago when it needed to colonize those new markets. President Obama recognized this “achievement” in the corruption of Democratic party politics in March 2014 by nominating Wal-Mart’s chief of charitable giving to head up his Office of Management and Budget.
Wal-Mart was even allowed, along with McDonalds and other large, low-wage employers, to shape the drafting of regulations governing Obamacare, in ways that exempted the retailer from having to ensure large numbers of its workers for the first several years.
The fiction that elected Democrats represent poor and working people and stand for safeguarding the environment is just that – a fiction. There is a new neoliberal paradigm that allows Democrats to mumble a few words about raising the minimum wage when the other party controls Congress, that claims the moment they took office was the day the oceans stopped rising. If these were curable bugs in the political system, votes and advocacy would wake enough people up to change them. But what if they’re not bugs in the system at all. What if these are its core and immutable features? What then? Isn’t it time to step outside their two-party, capitalist box, to dream and begin to build something else?
Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report and a state committee member of the GA Green Party. He lives and works in Marietta GA and can be reached via this site’s contact page or at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com.

The Era Of Chimeras: Scientists Fearlessly Create Bizarre Human/Animal Hybrids

When we start monkeying with human DNA, we could be opening up doorways that we never even knew existed.            & THAT is exactly what "they" r ...after !  re~opening "doorways"     hey doors Open both ways huh ? wonder ,wonder who/what IS on the "other" side :o 

Human/Animal HybridsDid you know that scientists are creating cow/human hybrids, pig/human hybrids and even mouse/human hybrids?  This is happening every single day in labs all over the western world, but most people have never even heard about it.  So would you drink milk from a cow/human hybrid that produces milk that is almost identical to human breast milk?  And how would you interact with a mouse that has a brain that is almost entirely human?  These are the kinds of questions that we will have to start to address as a society as scientists create increasingly bizarre human/animal hybrids.  Thanks to dramatic advances in genetic technology, we have gotten to the point where it is literally possible for college students to create new hybrid lifeforms in their basements.   Of course our laws have not kept pace with these advances, and now that Pandora’s Box has been opened, it is going to be nearly impossible to shut it.
Scientists try to justify the creation of human/animal hybrids by telling us that it will help “cure disease” and help “end world hunger”, but what if scientists discover that combining human DNA with animal DNA can give us incredible new abilities or greatly extended lifespans?  Will humanity really have the restraint to keep from going down that road?
In my previous article entitled “Transhumanists: Superhuman Powers And Life Extension Technologies Will Allow Us To Become Like God“, I explored the obsession that transhumanists have with human enhancement.  The temptation to “take control of our own evolution” will surely be too great for many scientists to resist.  And even if some nations outlaw the complete merging of humans and animals, that does not mean that everyone else in the world will.
And once animal DNA gets into our breeding pool, how will we ever put the genie back into the bottle?  As the DNA of the human race becomes corrupted, it is easy to imagine a future where there are very few “pure humans” remaining.
Sadly, most of the scientists working in this field express very little concern for these types of considerations.  In fact, one very prominent U.S. geneticist says that we should not even worry about hybridization because he believes that humans were originally pig/chimpanzee hybrids anyway…
The human species began as the hybrid offspring of a male pig and a female chimpanzee, an American geneticist has suggested.
The startling claim has been made by Eugene McCarthy, who is also one of the world’s leading authorities on hybridisation in animals.
He points out that while humans have many features in common with chimps, we also have a large number of distinguishing characteristics not found in any other primates.
So if we are just hybrid creatures ourselves, why should we be scared of making more hybrids?
From their point of view, it all makes perfect sense.
And right now, extremely weird human/animal hybrids are being grown all over the United States.
For example, just check out the following excerpt from an NBC News article about what is going on in Nevada…
On a farm about six miles outside this gambling town, Jason Chamberlain looks over a flock of about 50 smelly sheep, many of them possessing partially human livers, hearts, brains and other organs.
The University of Nevada-Reno researcher talks matter-of-factly about his plans to euthanize one of the pregnant sheep in a nearby lab. He can’t wait to examine the effects of the human cells he had injected into the fetus’ brain about two months ago.
“It’s mice on a large scale,” Chamberlain says with a shrug.
When this article came across my desk recently, I noted that it was almost ten years old.
Over the past decade, things have gotten much, much stranger.
For example, scientists have now created mice that have artificial human chromosomes “in every cell in their bodies“…
Scientists have created genetically-engineered mice with artificial human chromosomes in every cell of their bodies, as part of a series of studies showing that it may be possible to treat genetic diseases with a radically new form of gene therapy.
In one of the unpublished studies, researchers made a human artificial chromosome in the laboratory from chemical building blocks rather than chipping away at an existing human chromosome, indicating the increasingly powerful technology behind the new field of synthetic biology.
And researchers at the University of Wisconsin figured out a way to transfer cells from human embryos into the brains of mice.  When those cells from the human embryos began to grow and develop, they actually made the mice substantially smarter
Yet experiments like these are going forward just the same. In just the past few months, scientists at the University of Wisconsin and the University of Rochester have published data on their human-animal neural chimeras. For the Wisconsin study, researchers injected mice with an immunotoxin to destroy a part of their brains–the hippocampus–that’s associated with learning, memory, and spatial reasoning. Then the researchers replaced those damaged cells with cells derived from human embryos. The cells proliferated and the lab chimeras recovered their ability to navigate a water maze.
For the Rochester study, researchers implanted newborn mice with nascent human glial cells, which help support and nourish neurons in the brain. Six months later, the human parts had elbowed out the mouse equivalents, and the animals had enhanced ability to solve a simple maze and learn conditioned cues. These protocols might run afoul of the anti-hybrid laws, and perhaps they should arouse some questions. These chimeric mice may not be human, or even really human, but they’re certainly one step further down the path to Algernon. It may not be so long before we’re faced with some hairy bioethics: What rights should we assign to mice with human brains?
So what should we call mice that have brains that are mostly human?
And at what point would our relationship with such creatures fundamentally change?
When they learn to talk?
Scientists all over the planet are recklessly creating these chimeras without really thinking through the implications.
In China, scientists have actually inserted human genes into the DNA of dairy cow embryos.
Now there are hundreds of human/cow hybrids that produce milk that is virtually identical to human breast milk.
Would you buy such milk if it showed up in your supermarket?  The scientists that “designed” these cows say that is the goal.
But of course this is just the tip of the iceberg.  A very good Slate article detailed some more of the human/animal hybrid experiments that have been taking place all over the planet…
Not long ago, Chinese scientists embedded genes for human milk proteins into a mouse’s genome and have since created herds of humanized-milk-producing goats. Meanwhile, researchers at the University of Michigan have a method for putting a human anal sphincter into a mouse as a means of finding better treatments for fecal incontinence, and doctors are building animals with humanized immune systems to serve as subjects for new HIV vaccines.
And Discovery News has documented even more bizarre human/animal hybrids that scientists have developed…
-Rabbit Eggs with Human Cells
-Pigs with Human Blood
-Sheep with Human Livers
-Cow Eggs with Human Cells
-Cat-Human Hybrid Proteins
As technology continues to advance, the possibilities are going to be endless.
One professor at Harvard even wants to create a Neanderthal/human hybrid.  He says that he just needs an “adventurous female human” to carry the child…
Professor George Church of Harvard Medical School believes he can reconstruct Neanderthal DNA and resurrect the species which became extinct 33,000 years ago.
His scheme is reminiscent of Jurassic Park but, while in the film dinosaurs were created in a laboratory, Professor Church’s ambitious plan requires a human volunteer.
He said his analysis of Neanderthal genetic code using samples from bones is complete enough to reconstruct their DNA.
He said: ‘Now I need an adventurous female human.
‘It depends on a hell of a lot of things, but I think it can be done.’
I don’t know about you, but that sounds like a really, really bad idea to me.
And right now, the U.S. federal government is actually considering a plan which would allow scientists to create babies that come from genetic material drawn from three parents
A new technology aimed at eliminating genetic disease in newborns would combine the DNA of three people, instead of just two, to create a child, potentially redrawing ethical lines for designer babies.
The process works by replacing potentially variant DNA in the unfertilized eggs of a hopeful mother with disease-free genes from a donor. U.S. regulators today will begin weighing whether the procedure, used only in monkeys so far, is safe enough to be tested in humans.
Because the process would change only a small, specific part of genetic code, scientists say a baby would largely retain the physical characteristics of the parents. Still, DNA from all three — mother, father and donor — would remain with the child throughout a lifetime, opening questions about long-term effects for this generation, and potentially the next. Ethicists worry that allowing pre-birth gene manipulation may one day lead to build-to-order designer babies.
Many scientists believe that these kinds of technologies will “change the world”.
They might be more right about that than they ever could possibly imagine.
When we start monkeying with human DNA, we could be opening up doorways that we never even knew existed.

Why Does Christian Persecution Get Worse In Every Country The U.S. “Liberates”?

White House MeetingWhen the U.S. military “liberates” a nation, shouldn’t it result in more liberty, freedom and peace for the people living there?  Instead, we find just the opposite.  In fact, in every single case since 9/11, when the U.S. military has “liberated” a nation it has resulted in the persecution of Christians in that country becoming much worse.  In areas where we spent hundreds of billions of dollars and where thousands of precious American lives were sacrificed, churches are regularly being bombed, Christians are being brutally beheaded, and laws have been passed to make it illegal for a Muslim to convert to Christianity.  If we were not even able to provide the most basic of liberties and freedoms to the people living in those nations, what in the world did we actually accomplish by “liberating” them?
Just look at what has happened in Afghanistan.  We have been at war in Afghanistan for more than a dozen years, and yet things are so bad for Christians in that country at this point that there is not a single church left
The supposedly “moderate” Karzai government installed by the U.S. upholds many of the draconian laws enforced by the Taliban—including the apostasy law, fiercely persecuting those who seek to convert to Christianity—and, in 2011, under U.S. auspices, it destroyed Afghanistan’s last Christian church.
We find a similar story in Iraq.  It is estimated that before the invasion, there were up to 2 million Christians living in Iraq.  Now that number is down to less than 450,000, and it is falling fast.
In fact, things are so dire for Iraq’s Christian community that some Iraqi Christian leaders are warning that Christians may soon become “extinct” in that nation…
As the mass exodus of Iraq’s Christians continues, so does the call for ending the plight of those who have remained. Like Iraq’s ancient Jewish community before them, one of the world’s oldest Christian communities may soon cease to exist.
The disappearance of Iraq’s religious minorities has been a troubling trend since the US-led invasion in 2003, and it has threatened to end the cultural diversity of Iraq. As the violence in the country spikes and religious intolerance grows, many Christians, Yazidis, Mandaeans and other minority community members are leaving the country.
Last week, the head of the Iraqi Catholic Church sent a chilling warning that Iraq’s 2,000-year-old Christian community is on the brink of extinction as new waves of Christians take the journey of exodus.
It is estimated that the Iraq war cost U.S. taxpayers more than 2 trillion dollars.
We spent more than a million dollars on one soccer field alone (which has now turned to dust).
In the end, what did we actually accomplish?
The Obama administration likes to brag about how it got rid of Qaddafi and “liberated” Libya, but now al-Qaeda is in control of much of the country and things are much worse for Christians than ever before
Ever since U.S.-backed, al-Qaeda-linked terrorists overthrew Qaddafi, Christians—including Americans—have indeed suffered extreme persecution. Churches have been bombed; Christians have been tortured and killed (including for refusing to convert); and nuns have been threatened.
In Syria, the Obama administration is shamelessly allying with radical al-Qaeda jihadists in a desperate attempt to overthrow the Assad regime.
As these jihadists torture, behead and even crucify Christian believers, the mainstream media in the United States is virtually silent about it.
Why is the media being so quiet?
Well, because exposing what is going on would make the Obama administration look bad.
Those carrying out this persecution of Christians in Syria are being directly funded and aided by the governments of the United States and Saudi Arabia.  For much more on what is going on in Syria, please see my previous article entitled “Why Is The Media Silent About The Crucifixion Of Christians By Radical Jihadists?
And of course it is not just in the Middle East where this kind of persecution of Christians is taking place.
While Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, the State Department refused to label Boko Haram as a terrorist organization.
But now the whole world is talking about Boko Haram.  This group has attacked more than 700 churches in Nigeria over the past seven years, and this has resulted in a massive exodus of Christians from northern Nigeria to southern Nigeria…
Christian groups estimate that up to a quarter of the 4,000 people killed by Boko Haram since 2009 have been Christians, and more than 700 churches have been attacked in the last seven years alone, according to the Nigerian Catholic Bishop’s Conference. Across the troubled north-east, many Christian neighbourhoods are now ghost towns as tens of thousands of residents flee south. It is one of the biggest Christian exoduses of the century, yet largely unremarked outside of Nigeria.
It is hard to put into words how brutal Boko Haram can be.  As a recent article in the Telegraph described, the persecution of Christians in northern Nigeria by Boko Haram  has been absolutely relentless…
Arriving at St Joseph’s church in the Nigerian town of Gashua, Father John Bakeni knew he was taking on a tough posting. A flyblows settlement near the northern border with Niger, his new parish was smack in the heart of Boko Haram territory, and in the previous three years, all but a fraction of its 3,000-strong Christian minority had fled.
Sent by his bishop to show that the diocese had not deserted the town, he spent much of the following year trying to reassure the 200 remaining parishioners. But nearly every time he ventured from his rectory, a reminder would await him of the difficulty of his mission.
“Several times a week I would find a dead animal had been thrown in the compound, usually a chicken, goat or sheep, but sometimes dead cats too,” said Fr Bakeni, 38. “Stones would get thrown at the church almost every day, and sometimes also people would bang the gates and shout: ‘Infidel, we are going to kill you.’
So why has the Obama administration been so hesitant to speak out against Boko Haram until now?
In fact, although most Americans do not realize this, the Obama administration has been quite supportive of Boko Haram in the past.  Obama even actually threatened the Nigerian government with economic sanctions in 2013 in an attempt to keep them from cracking down on Boko Haram.
What in the world was the Obama administration thinking?
Whose side are they on anyway?
If you love liberty and freedom, you should be deeply troubled by the spread of groups such as Boko Haram.
Just look at what is happening in another part of Africa where jihadists have gained control.  In Sudan, a pregnant woman was recently sentenced to death by hanging for marrying a Christian man…
A Sudanese woman doctor who married a Christian man and who was convicted earlier this week on charges of “apostasy” was sentenced to death on Thursday, judicial officials said.
According to the Sudanese officials, 26-year-old Meriam Ibrahim, whose father was Muslim, was convicted on Sunday and given four days to repent and escape death. She was sentenced after that grace period expired, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with regulations.
The BBC reported the woman’s death by hanging will not be carried out until two years after the birth of her child.
This kind of tyranny should not be tolerated in today’s world.
But instead, the U.S. government seems to be helping to spread it.

Pope Francis Goes Public With Support Of RFID Chip Implantation

&  u  R  surprised  lol  

truther  

In a controversial move by the Catholic church, Pope Francis has come out in vocal support of RFID Chip technologies and the extraordinary potential they hold for mankind. The outrage stems from a belief held by many Evangelicals, Fundamentalists and Catholics, that RFID implants are the Mark Of The Beast, spoken about in their Holy Book’s chapter regarding the end of the world.
Pope Francis Goes Public With Support Of RFID Chip Implantation
During the Pontiff’s weekly general address, he spoke to the crowd about his view on the RFID technology, and assured his many followers that no spiritual harm can come from receiving an RFID implant.
“We have examined the scriptures thoroughly, and I can conclusively say that there’s nothing to indicate that RFID Chips are Satanic in anyway. If anything, these devices are a blessing from God himself, bestowed upon humanity to solve many of the world’s ills.”
He went onto urge his devotees to be open minded in this era where brilliant new technological advancements are being made everyday. The Bishop of Rome explained to those in attendance his excitement over making RFID implantation a mandatory procedure for all employees and residents of the Vatican.
Last month, NBC predicted that by 2017, every American will own a RFID implant. Not surprising, considering humanities ever increasing reliance on technology. With the advent of products like Google Glass, the merging of Man and Machine inches closer each day. Widespread implantation of the RFID chip would be an enormous and historic leap into that glorious, utopian future.
Late last year the citizens of Hanna, Wyoming helped to beta test RFID implantation. Everyone residing in the small town carries an RFID device between the skin of their thumb and forefinger, using it both as an ID and a method for paying for goods and services. Towns members state that the opinion of the RFID is overwhelmingly positive, and are proud to be the first Americans to have received the implant.
Several aspects of modern society can be improved with the implementation of RFID technology. Crimes such as kidnapping and identity theft would cease to exist. In medical emergencies where the patient is incapacitated, doctors can find life saving information by scanning the individual’s RFID chip, and for those people who love shopping, you’ll never have to carry money that can be stolen, or debt cards that can be lost; Now your entire banking information is literally in the palm of you hand.
With the Pope’s endorsement and blessing, interest in RFID implantation is sure to see a wider acceptance from members of the church. This could, hopefully, be the push that this agenda needs to gain household recognition.
Source

THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: RUSSIA CONSIDERING BILL TO MAKE GMOs A TERRORIST THREAT

…yes, you read that correctly. There is a bill being considered before the Russian state Duma to consider those who introduce GMOs into a region to be “terrorists”:
GMO producers should be punished as terrorists, Russian MPs say
What’s interesting here is that the headline of the article is not targeting the grower or farmer of GMOs, but rather, the producer, i.e., the large agribusiness giants themselves. The key paragraphs in this article are here:
“The draft legislation submitted on Wednesday amends Russia’s law regulating GMOs and some other laws and provides for disciplinary action against individuals and firms, which produce or distribute harmful biotech products and government officials who fail to properly control them.
“At worst, a criminal case may be launched against a company involved in introducing unsafe GMOs into Russia. Sponsors of the bill say that the punishment for such deeds should be comparable to the punishment allotted to terrorists, if the perpetrators act knowingly and hurt many people.
“’When a terrorist act is committed, only several people are usually hurt. But GMOs may hurt dozens and hundreds. The consequences are much worse. And punishment should be proportionate to the crime,’ co-author Kirill Cherkasov, member of the State Duma Agriculture Committee told RT.
“Russian criminal code allows for a punishment starting with 15 years in jail and up to a life sentence for terrorism.” (Emphasis in the original)
While I can to a certain degree sympathize with the idea that criminals – whether the criminally negligent or criminally intentioned regarding this issue – should be treated as such, I suspect that there may be another agenda in play here, and it may be a subtle one. 
 
Whatever the intent of the Russian law or those behind it (are they just old Communists grasping at whatever issue they can as a means of clawing their way back to power?), I suspect that what we may really have here, whether or not the bill ever becomes the law in Russia, is a subtle move towards precisely what I have been predicting, namely, that the BRICSA nations will turn GMOs into an international geopolitical issue, both by questioning the obviously flawed corporate “science” behind them, but also by placing themselves as the champions of the non-GMO farmer in the teeth of the questionable Mafia-mercantilist policies of the West’s agribusiness giants. And eventually, they may seek to become a new market for international “heirloom seeds.” 
 
And to do this, you need a law or a policy on the books. 
 
Thus far, it has been Russia that in the BRICSA entente has been driving most of the discussion about GMOs within that bloc of nations. If this strategy or prediction therefore is to have any merit, one will expect to see similar policies or measures being entertained in the other BRICSA nations, particularly Brazil, India, South Africa, with their own rich agricultural economies. But there is also another safe prediction here: Russia, regardless of what the other BRICSA nations may do, may be serving more notice that it is willing to buck the mercantilist policies of American on this issue as well. If so, there will be a rising market for Russian agricultural products.

One Single Porn Copyright Troll, Malibu Media, Accounted For Nearly 40% Of All Copyright Lawsuits This Year

from the shakedown dept

We've written about porn copyright troll Malibu Media a bunch of times in the past, including noting late last year that it had filed over 1,100 copyright lawsuits in 2013 alone. Many who follow copyright trolling have noted that Malibu Media's practices (and those of the lawyers who represent it) may be much worse than even Prenda, who has become synonymous with questionable copyright trolling practices. The New Yorker has written up a profile of Malibu Media and its copyright trolling, generously referring to the company as an "erotica" website.

Matthew Sag, who has written up an empirical study on copyright trolling, with lots of data, notes that Malibu Media alone is swamping the court system with lawsuits. Of 872 copyright claims filed in the first quarter of 2014, 343 of them were from Malibu Media. Sag also recently updated his chart showing different types of copyright lawsuits, from "regular" copyright lawsuits, those against "porn John Does" and "other John Does." The "red" sections for "porn John Does" is basically almost entirely Malibu Media at this point (back in 2011 and 2012, many were Prenda).
Oh, and if you're wondering about the bump from 2004 to 2007, much of that was back when the RIAA decided to sue thousands of music fans for file sharing music. That strategy turned out to be a disaster, but the RIAA, in many ways, wasn't quite as bad as the trolls. The RIAA was on a moral mission -- it never cared about squeezing money out of people. Malibu Media, on the other hand, is all about the trolling: using the court system as part of a shakedown system to scare people into settling. The New Yorker article only hints at how this is not a legal strategy, but rather a business model, to use the fear of the judicial system to get tons of people to just pay up.

Seeds of Destruction: The Diabolical World of Genetic Manipulation

PREFACE. This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO.


Seeds of Destruction: The Diabolical World of Genetic Manipulation
Click here to order the book now! 
Control the oil, and you control nations. Control the food, and you control the people.”* -Henry Kissenger
Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation” by F. William Engdahl is a skillfully researched book that focuses on how a small socio-political American elite seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival: the provision of our daily bread.
This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO.  Engdahl takes the reader inside the corridors of power, into the backrooms of the science labs, behind closed doors in the corporate boardrooms. The author cogently reveals a diabolical world of profit-driven political intrigue, government corruption and coercion, where genetic manipulation and the patenting of life forms are used to gain worldwide control over food production. If the book often reads as a crime story, that should come as no surprise. For that is what it is.
Engdahl’s carefully argued critique goes far beyond the familiar controversies surrounding the practice of genetic modification as a scientific technique. The book is an eye-opener, a must-read for all those committed to the causes of social justice and world peace.
What follows is the Preface to ”Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation” by F. William Engdahl (available through Global Research):
Introduction
“We have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so,we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives.We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.”
-George Kennan, US State Department senior planning official, 1948
This book is about a project undertaken by a small socio-political elite, centered, after the Second World War, not in London, but in Washington. It is the untold story of how this self-anointed elite set out, in Kennan’s words, to “maintain this position of disparity.” It is the story of how a tiny few dominated the resources and levers of power in the postwar world.
It’s above all a history of the evolution of power in the control of a select few, in which even science was put in the service of that minority. As Kennan recommended in his 1948 internal memorandum, they pursued their policy relentlessly, and without the “luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.”
Yet, unlike their predecessors within leading circles of the British Empire, this emerging American elite, who proclaimed proudly at war’s end the dawn of their American Century, were masterful in their use of the rhetoric of altruism and world-benefaction to advance their goals. Their American Century paraded as a softer empire, a “kinder, gentler” one in which, under the banner of colonial liberation, freedom, democracy and economic development, those elite circles built a network of power the likes of which the world had not seen since the time of Alexander the Great some three centuries before Christ—a global empire unified under the military control of a sole superpower, able to decide on a whim, the fate of entire nations.
This book is the sequel to a first volume, A Century ofWar: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order. It traces a second thin red line of power. This one is about the control over the very basis of human survival, our daily provision of bread. The man who served the interests of the postwar American-based elite during the 1970’s, and came to symbolize its raw realpolitik, was Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Sometime in the mid-1970’s, Kissinger, a life-long practitioner of “Balance of Power” geopolitics and a man with more than a fair share of conspiracies under his belt, allegedly declared his blueprint for world domination: “Control the oil and you control nations. Control the food, and you control the people.”
The strategic goal to control global food security had its roots decades earlier, well before the outbreak of war in the late 1930’s. It was funded, often with little notice, by select private foundations, which had been created to preserve the wealth and power of a handful of American families.
Originally the families centered their wealth and power in New York and along the East Coast of the United States, from Boston to New York to Philadelphia and Washington D.C. For that reason, popular media accounts often referred to them, sometimes with derision but more often with praise, as the East Coast Establishment.
The center of gravity of American power shifted in the decades following the War. The East Coast Establishment was overshadowed by new centers of power which evolved from Seattle to Southern California on the Pacific Coast, as well as in Houston, Las Vegas, Atlanta and Miami, just as the tentacles of American power spread to Asia and Japan, and south, to the nations of Latin America.
In the several decades before and immediately following World War II, one family came to symbolize the hubris and arrogance of this emerging American Century more than any other. And the vast fortune of that family had been built on the blood of many wars, and on their control of a new “black gold,” oil.
What was unusual about this family was that early on in the building of their fortune, the patriarchs and advisors they cultivated to safeguard their wealth decided to expand their influence over many very different fields. They sought control not merely over oil, the emerging new energy source for world economic advance. They also expanded their influence over the education of youth, medicine and psychology, foreign policy of the United States, and, significant for our story, over the very science of life itself, biology, and its applications in the world of plants and agriculture.
For the most part, their work passed unnoticed by the larger population, especially in the United States. Few Americans were aware how their lives were being subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, influenced by one or another project financed by the immense wealth of this family.
In the course of researching for this book, a work nominally on the subject of genetically modified organisms or GMO, it soon became clear that the history of GMO was inseparable from the political history of this one very powerful family, the Rockefeller family, and the four brothers—David,Nelson, Laurance and John D. III—who, in the three decades following American victory in World War II, the dawn of the much-heralded American Century, shaped the evolution of power George Kennan referred to in 1948.
In actual fact, the story of GMO is that of the evolution of power in the hands of an elite, determined at all costs to bring the entire world under their sway.
Three decades ago, that power was based around the Rockefeller family. Today, three of the four brothers are long-since deceased, several under peculiar circumstances.However, as was their will, their project of global domination—“full spectrum dominance” as the Pentagon later called it—had spread, often through a rhetoric of “democracy,” and was aided from time to time by the raw military power of that empire when deemed necessary. Their project evolved to the point where one small power group, nominally headquartered in Washington in the early years of the new century, stood determined to control future and present life on this planet to a degree never before dreamed of.
The story of the genetic engineering and patenting of plants and other living organisms cannot be understood without looking at the history of the global spread of American power in the decades following World War II. George Kennan, Henry Luce, Averell Harriman and, above all, the four Rockefeller brothers, created the very concept of multinational “agribusiness”. They financed the “Green Revolution” in the agriculture sector of developing countries in order, among other things, to create new markets for petro-chemical fertilizers and petroleum products, as well as to expand dependency on energy products. Their actions are an inseparable part of the story of genetically modified crops today.
By the early years of the new century, it was clear that no more than four giant chemical multinational companies had emerged as global players in the game to control patents on the very basic food products that most people in the world depend on for their daily nutrition—corn, soybeans, rice, wheat, even vegetables and fruits and cotton—as well as new strains of disease-resistant poultry, genetically-modified to allegedly resist the deadly H5N1 Bird Flu virus, or even gene altered pigs and cattle. Three of the four private companies had decades-long ties to Pentagon chemical warfare research. The fourth, nominally Swiss, was in reality Anglodominated. As with oil, so was GMO agribusiness very much an Anglo-American global project.
In May 2003, before the dust from the relentless US bombing and destruction of Baghdad had cleared, the President of the United States chose to make GMO a strategic issue, a priority in his postwar US foreign policy. The stubborn resistance of the world’s second largest agricultural producer, the European Union, stood as a formidable barrier to the global success of the GMO Project. As long as Germany, France, Austria, Greece and other countries of the European Union steadfastly refused to permit GMO planting for health and scientific reasons, the rest of the world’s nations would remain skeptical and hesitant. By early 2006, the World Trade Organization (WTO) had forced open the door of the European Union to the mass proliferation of GMO. It appeared that global success was near at hand for the GMO Project.
In the wake of the US and British military occupation of Iraq, Washington proceeded to bring the agriculture of Iraq under the domain of patented genetically-engineered seeds, initially supplied through the generosity of the US State Department and Department of Agriculture.
The first mass experiment with GMO crops, however, took place back in the early 1990’s in a country whose elite had long since been corrupted by the Rockefeller family and associated New York banks: Argentina.
Seeds of DestructionThe following pages trace the spread and proliferation of GMO, often through political coercion, governmental pressure, fraud, lies, and even murder. If it reads often like a crime story, that should not be surprising. The crime being perpetrated in the name of agricultural efficiency, environmental friendliness and solving the world hunger problem, carries stakes which are vastly more important to this small elite. Their actions are not solely for money or for profit. After all, these powerful private families decide who controls the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan and even the European Central Bank. Money is in their hands to destroy or create.
Their aim is rather, the ultimate control over future life on this planet, a supremacy earlier dictators and despots only ever dreamt of. Left unchecked, the present group behind the GMO Project is between one and two decades away from total dominance of the planet’s food capacities. This aspect of the GMO story needs telling. I therefore invite the reader to a careful reading and independent verification or reasoned refutation of what follows.
F. William Engdahl is a leading analyst of the New World Order, author of the best-selling book on oil and geopolitics, A Century of War: Anglo-American Politics and the New World Order,’ His writings have been translated into more than a dozen languages.