To be free

Freedom from Alaska!

Category: Joel Skousen Page 15 of 19

Joel Skousen: A Nuclear Knife Aimed at America’s Heart — In November 1997, President Clinton signed a top-secret Presidential Decision Directive (PDD-60) directing U.S. military commanders to abandon the time-honored nuclear deterrence of "launch on warning."

By

On August 8, 2012

In America's Getting Jacked!, Bomb Bomb America?, China, Joel Skousen, Russia, The End of America?, War

PDD-60 leaves us completely unable to respond:

We have no mobile missiles to avoid being targeted. We have already unilaterally agreed to keep over half of our ballistic missile submarines in port at any one time, so they can easily be targeted. After all, we don’t want our Russian “allies” to feel insecure!

All of our Navy and Air Force strategic forces are incapable of withstanding a nuclear strike. Even the remaining Trident subs on patrol would be unable to respond when communication links and satellites are downed in a first strike.

From: Infowars

A Nuclear Knife Aimed at America’s Heart

..March 25, 1999
By Joel M. Skousen

In November 1997, President Clinton signed a top-secret Presidential Decision Directive (PDD-60) directing U.S. military commanders to abandon the time-honored nuclear deterrence of “launch on warning.”

Ironically, this was done in the name of “increased deterrence.” Every sensible American needs to understand why this reasoning is fraudulent at best and deadly at worst. First, some background.

The impetus to change U.S. strategic nuclear doctrine came on the heels of Clinton’s demand to the Joint Chiefs of Staff in early 1997 that they prepare to unilaterally reduce America’s nuclear warhead deployment to 2,500 in eager anticipation of the ratification of the START II disarmament treaty. This pact has yet to be ratified by the Russian Duma.

Gen. John Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, responded that he couldn’t comply, since the U.S. military was still operating on a former Presidential Decision Directive of 1981 to prepare to “win a protracted nuclear war.” A winning strategy couldn’t be implemented without the full contingent of current nuclear strategic warheads.

According to Craig Cerniello of Arms Control Today (November/December 1997 issue), “the administration viewed the 1981 guidelines as an anachronism of the Cold War. The notion that the United States still had to be prepared to fight and win a protracted nuclear war today seemed out of touch with reality, given the fact that it has been six years since the collapse of the Soviet Union.”

Certainly, the apparent collapse of the Soviet Union is the linchpin in every argument pointing toward the relaxation of Western vigilance and accelerated disarmament. Indeed, it is the driving argument that is trumpeted constantly before Congress, U.S. military leaders, and the American people.

Almost everyone is buying it — even most conservatives who should know better. However, the most savvy Soviet-watchers can point to a host of evidence indicating that the so-called “collapse” was engineered to disarm the West and garner billions in direct aid to assist Russia while inducing the West to take over the economic burden of the former satellite states.

But the most ominous evidence is found in defectors from Russia who tell the same story: Russia is cheating on all aspects of disarmament, and is siphoning off billions in Western aid money to modernize and deploy top-of-the-line new weapons systems aimed at taking down the U.S. military in one huge, decapitating nuclear strike.

Contrast this with the Clinton administration’s response. Incredibly, while still paying lip service to nuclear deterrence, Assistant Secretary of Defense Edward L. Warner III went before the Congress on March 31, 1998, and bragged about the litany of unilateral disarmament this administration has forced upon the U.S. military:

Warner noted the “success” the Clinton administration has had in recent years, which has:

# Eliminated our entire inventory of ground-launched non-strategic nuclear weapons (nuclear artillery and Lance surface-to-surface missiles).

# Removed all nonstrategic nuclear weapons on a day-to-day basis from surface ships, attack submarines, and land-based naval aircraft bases.

# Removed our strategic bombers from alert.

# Stood down the Minuteman II ICBMs scheduled for deactivation under Start I.

# Terminated the mobile Peacekeeper and mobile small ICBM programs.

# Terminated the SCRAM-II nuclear short-range attack missile.

In January 1992, the second Presidential Nuclear Initiative took further steps which included:

# Limiting B-2 production to 20 bombers.

# Canceling the entire small ICBM program.

# Ceasing production of W-88 Trident SLBM (submarine-launched missile) warheads.

# Halting purchases of advanced cruise missiles.

# Stopping new production of Peacekeeper missiles (our biggest MIRV-warhead ICBM).

“As a result of these significant changes, the U.S. nuclear stockpile has decreased by more than 50 percent,” Warner enthused.

All of this has been done without any meaningful disarmament by the Russians.

The Clinton administration would counter this charge by citing the “successful” dismantling of 3,300 strategic nuclear warheads by Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus, and the destruction of their 252 ICBMs and related silos — all paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds to the tune of $300 million per year. But the real story is otherwise.

Yes, Americans paid for the dismantling of these systems — the oldest and most out-of-date in the Soviet inventory. They were scheduled for replacement anyway, so the U.S. taxpayer ended up saving the Russians over a billion dollars, allowing them to use this and other Western aid to develop and build new systems, coming on line right now. But that isn’t all.

What the administration doesn’t say is that they allowed the Russians to reclaim all the nuclear warheads, and paid them to recycle the usable material into new, updated warheads. We didn’t diminish the threat at all. We only helped them to transform it into something more dangerous.

Thus, the Russians still maintain a more than 3-to-1 advantage over the United States in both throw-weight and nuclear delivery vehicles. That disparity is widening dramatically with the Clinton administration’s unilateral disarmament while at the same time encouraging the Russians to proceed not only with the deployment of 500 new Topol-M missiles (which are mobile-launched and therefore difficult to target), but to put three MIRVed warheads on each missile instead of the treaty limit of one warhead — for a total deployment of 1,500 warheads.

Not counting the presumed minimum 4,000 to 6,000 warheads in the current Russian inventory, these 1,500 new warheads would overwhelm a measly 200-interceptor ABM system in North Dakota — which the Clinton administration is insisting should NOT be deployed before 2005. I wonder why?

With our 50 Peacekeeper ICBMs scheduled to be decommissioned in 2003, that gives the Russians or Chinese a wide-open window for attack, should they choose to exercise their first-strike, nuclear-decapitation option.

So much for the “new realism” of the Clinton disarmament team and their assertion that Russia poses no threat. Judging strictly by public data from establishment sources (which is always understated due to Moscow’s heavy shroud of secrecy) the Russian threat is much greater than it ever was, both in quantity and quality of strategic nuclear forces. This is thanks, in part, to ongoing technology transfers by IBM and other defense contractors with the knowing participation and encouragement of this administration.

Now let’s take a close look at this presumed “increased deterrence” the Clinton Department of Defense is promising. The administration claims its brand of deterrence is still based on the “mutual assured destruction” (MAD) concept — a truly appropriate acronym.

This is the presumption that, since both sides have an overwhelming capability to destroy each other, that no sane leadership would engage in nuclear war. Let’s examine this closely. MAD could only stand as a viable assumption if:

# Both sides had sufficient weapons and delivery vehicles to inflict total devastation.

# Neither side had an effective anti-ballistic-missile system.

# Neither side had electronic jamming capability on its incoming ICBMs.

# Neither side had hardened shelters protecting its population and leadership.

These assumptions clearly do not exist today:

First, we barely have enough nuclear warheads to take out the Russian arsenal as presently constituted if we used them all at once (which no sane military commander could afford to do, leaving him with no reserves). Russia, on the other hand, has enough to devastate our entire strategic forces and still retain 60 percent of her weapons in reserve, for a prolonged conflict.

Second, we have no ABM system to protect against ICBMs at all. Our dumbed-down and slowed-down Patriots are theater weapons (built to conform to the flawed ABM Treaty) and can barely catch slow, low-flying Scud missiles, let alone ICBMs that coming screaming in from space at 6 to 12 kilometers per second. The Russians have (in violation of the same ABM Treaty) a nationwide system of ABMs tied to phased-array radars and satellite guidance systems.

Third, we have no electronic jamming on our missiles to help them penetrate the Russian ABM system, and the Russians claim their newest Topol-M missiles do have such a capability. Whether or not this claim is a bluff is immaterial. The fact is, they are building new, high-tech missiles and our technology is 10 years old and stagnant. We are not developing or building anything new. This aspect can only worsen as time goes on.

Fourth, our civilian population is totally unprotected, while a large portion of the Russian cities have public fallout shelter facilities. New bunkers are being constructed for the Russian leadership despite the economic hardships the people suffer. This should tell us something about Russian leadership intentions.

Is this Mutually Assured Destruction? Hardly. It equates to United States Assured Destruction! In every category of deterrence, we are disarming and stagnant, and the Russians are building and deploying. There is, in fact, only one type of deterrence that is capable of somewhat balancing the scales: the nuclear response doctrine of Launch on Warning.

Launch on Warning takes advantage of the fact that long-range ballistic missiles take time to arrive on target — up to 25 minutes, depending on where the missiles are fired from. If the Russians were to launch a first strike, our satellites would detect and confirm that launch within seconds. In a Launch on Warning doctrine, our missiles (if on alert status) could be launched before the Russian or Chinese missiles hit our silos. There is also time to retarget our missiles so that they are not wasted on Russian silos that are now empty.

Thus, one of the great advantages for a Launch on Warning doctrine is that it allows the nation that launches second to have an advantage over the nation that launches first. The one to launch first wastes a certain number of its missiles on our silos that are now empty. By contrast, our missiles (utilizing real-time targeting data from satellites) strike targets that are still viable.

Now that is deterrence — a deterrence that we presently do not have due to PDD-60.

Clinton national security aide Robert Bell proudly proclaimed to a group of disarmament advocates, “In this PDD, we direct our military forces to continue to posture themselves in such a way as to not rely on Launch on Warning — to be able to absorb a nuclear strike and still have enough force surviving to constitute credible deterrence.”

This is patently preposterous. Respond with what?

We have no mobile missiles to avoid being targeted. We have already unilaterally agreed to keep over half of our ballistic missile submarines in port at any one time, so they can easily be targeted. After all, we don’t want our Russian “allies” to feel insecure!

All of our Navy and Air Force strategic forces are incapable of withstanding a nuclear strike. Even the remaining Trident subs on patrol would be unable to respond when communication links and satellites are downed in a first strike.

PDD-60 removes all alternate submarine launch codes so that our subs cannot fire without direct communication with the president. Those vital communications links will assuredly not survive a massive first strike. When you tell the Russians we are going to absorb a first strike, you induce them to make sure they hit us with everything necessary to make sure we cannot respond.

This is not deterrence. This is suicide.

Related:
Dumitru Duduman: The Russian Invasion of America — “It will start with the world calling for ‘peace, peace.’ Then there will be an internal revolution in America…. The government will be busy with internal problems. Then, from the oceans…” — The rapture will occur AFTER America is destroyed, as God destroys the enemies of Israel!
[ audio ] Henry Gruver’s Three Visions: Russian (and Chinese) Invasion of America — “When Russia opens her gates and lets the masses go, the free world will occupy themselves with transporting, housing and caring for the masses, and will begin to let their weapons down, and will cry ‘peace and safety,’ and that’s when it will happen.”
Dumitru Duduman: Wake Up America
Skousen: U.S. Intentionally Vulnerable to Nuclear Attack from China/Russia
[2-hour audio] Henry Gruver with Steve Quayle: Visions of War – Visions of Heaven
[mp3 audio] Henry Gruver’s Vision of America being invaded by Russia
[47-minute audio] Henry Gruver: Russian Invasion of America
Skousen: U.S. Intentionally Vulnerable to Nuclear Attack from China/Russia
Skousen: Analysis of Strategic Threats in the Current Decade
[Updated May 2010] Joel Skousen: Analysis of Strategic Threats in the Current Decade — The Big Picture!
All 100 of my Joel Skousen posts in reverse chronological order

Obama signs an illegal executive order, allegedly giving him the INTERNET KILL SWITCH — to be used in times of crisis

By

On July 27, 2012

In Barack Obama, Joel Skousen, Police State, The End of America?

World Affairs Brief, July 20, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Syria: West Using Terror to Provoke Defections
Obama’s Statist View of Success
Obama Protects Russian Uranium Deal from Litigation
Another Obama Illegal Executive Order
HSBC Executive Resigns over Money Laundering
Book Review: Gen. Brady’s Vietnam Saga: “Night in the Dog’s Head”
DISCLOSE Act Fails
Ron Paul Takes on Bernanke One Last Time
[…]
ANOTHER OBAMA ILLEGAL EXECUTIVE ORDER
Executive orders can only direct federal departments under the Executive Branch’s control, and cannot create new law. Obama has overstepped this legal boundary by issuing an Executive Order taking over all communications during an emergency. Dara Kerr of CNet has the story:
“A new executive order addresses how the country deals with the Internet during natural disasters and security emergencies, but it also puts a lot of power in the government’s hands. President Barack Obama signed an executive order last week that could give the U.S. government control over the Internet.
“With the wordy title ‘Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions,’ this order was designed to empower certain governmental agencies with control over telecommunications and the Web during natural disasters and security emergencies. …
“According to The Verge, critics of the order are concerned with Section 5.2, which is a lengthy part outlining how telecommunications and the Internet are controlled. It states that the Secretary of Homeland Security will ‘oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment’ of national security and emergency preparedness measures on all systems, including private ‘non-military communications networks.’ According to The Verge, critics say this gives Obama the on/off switch to the Web. …
It’s time the Congress begins to challenge these illegal forays into legislation and reassert its exclusive authority to enact laws. It’s time to raise the threat of impeachment and tie it to the illicit use of Executive Orders. But that won’t happen as long as the dirty tricks boys in the FBI have incriminating files on about 75% of Congress. Only about a dozen Congressmen are both clean and willing to fight the system.
Related:
All 50+ of my Republicans Blackmailable posts (latest appear first, 10 posts per page)

Joel Skousen: 75% in Congress are Blackmailable, while only about a dozen congressmen are both clean and willing to fight the system

By

On July 21, 2012

In Homosexuality, Joel Skousen, Republicans & Dems Blackmailable, Why we're getting jacked

Executive orders can only direct federal departments under the Executive Branch’s control, and cannot create new law. Obama has overstepped this legal boundary by issuing an Executive Order taking over all communications during an emergency.

It’s time the Congress begins to challenge these illegal forays into legislation and reassert its exclusive authority to enact laws. It’s time to raise the threat of impeachment and tie it to the illicit use of Executive Orders. But that won’t happen as long as the dirty tricks boys in the FBI have incriminating files on about 75% of Congress. Only about a dozen Congressmen are both clean and willing to fight the system.

* * *

World Affairs Brief, July 20, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Syria: West Using Terror to Provoke Defections
Obama’s Statist View of Success
Obama Protects Russian Uranium Deal from Litigation
Another Obama Illegal Executive Order
HSBC Executive Resigns over Money Laundering
Book Review: Gen. Brady’s Vietnam Saga: “Night in the Dog’s Head”
DISCLOSE Act Fails
Ron Paul Takes on Bernanke One Last Time
[…]
ANOTHER OBAMA ILLEGAL EXECUTIVE ORDER
Executive orders can only direct federal departments under the Executive Branch’s control, and cannot create new law. Obama has overstepped this legal boundary by issuing an Executive Order taking over all communications during an emergency. Dara Kerr of CNet has the story:
“A new executive order addresses how the country deals with the Internet during natural disasters and security emergencies, but it also puts a lot of power in the government’s hands. President Barack Obama signed an executive order last week that could give the U.S. government control over the Internet.
“With the wordy title ‘Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions,’ this order was designed to empower certain governmental agencies with control over telecommunications and the Web during natural disasters and security emergencies.
“Here’s the rationale behind the order. …
It’s time the Congress begins to challenge these illegal forays into legislation and reassert its exclusive authority to enact laws. It’s time to raise the threat of impeachment and tie it to the illicit use of Executive Orders. But that won’t happen as long as the dirty tricks boys in the FBI have incriminating files on about 75% of Congress. Only about a dozen Congressmen are both clean and willing to fight the system.
Related:
Joel Skousen: Is there a path to winning back America? No, I think we’ve past the point of no return — “Religion is not leading to righteousness … this callous disregard for the ‘still small voice’ leads to bigger problems and worse decisions”
Fmr Agent Russ Tice: NSA has been BLACKMAILING Supreme Court judges, Congressmen and PRESIDENT OBAMA! — We must now assume the NSA is in charge, not elected representatives
(video/article) Top NSA Whistleblower: Federal Government Has Gone Rogue — LYING to judges • BLACKMAIL gov’t officials • Population CONTROL — “That’s the whole point of why they had to build Bluffdale with all that storage… for content of communications like ALL OF YOUR EMAILS and PHONE CONVERSATIONS…. If you wanted to put together all of the relationships of everybody in the world on metadata relations… then you could do that and store it in a room 20 foot by 40 foot”

(video) NSA Whistleblower William Binney: How NSA Lies to US — “They keep saying they don’t build profiles of people. No they don’t. The software does. They have the profile on everybody. They play all kinds of word games with people” • They have the keys to hack encryption software • Uploading to iCloud? Assume the NSA collects everything

NSA Whistleblower Binney: NSA Recording 80% of U.S. Phone Calls — “The ultimate goal of the NSA is total population control”
(video) Whistleblower William Binney: NSA Records All Emails!
NSA Whistle-Blower Tells All – Op-Docs: The Program — The NSA’s new facility in Utah can store 100 years worth of EVERYONE’S communications!
Ron Paul Reacts to State of the Union Address: “WELFARE-ISM and WARFARE-ISM FOREVER” — Agrees with Skousen: Only 6-12 Good Congressmen…

(video) Massive UK Pedophile Ring Exposed by Richie Allen

(video) Exposed: A World Run By Powerful Pedophiles

“Conspiracy of Silence”: The program that many compromised (and now blackmailable) Republicans don’t want you to see. It is the story of a cancer at the heart of America and its continuing cover-up at the highest level!

John DeCamp discusses the Franklin Cover-up: “The biggest monster I’ve ever encountered!”

Insider: Pedophilia Among America’s Leaders — Including ‘Conservative’ Republican Presidents?

Pedophilia in the White House — Interview with John DeCamp (Nebraska State Senator)

[ audio ] Nick Bryant, author of ‘The Franklin Scandal’ on The Power Hour with Joyce Riley: How REPUBLICAN politicians were BLACKMAILED — The audio-visual blackmail house in Washington D.C. — Rick Santorum?
Ted Gunderson: Many of our congressmen and senators have been blackmailed through children, sex and drugs…”and we don’t have enough people like Kucinich and Ron Paul to stand up.”
[NBC 1989] Call Boys Take Midnight Tour of Reagan/Bush White House
Invisible Empire Sneak Peek #4 — Call Boy Rings Exposed. “Many of us believe that our leaders are in fact Christian conservatives with our best interest at heart…” | But WE must have INTEGRITY no matter what.
(video) Eyewitness to Murder at Bohemian Grove – America’s Satanic Hellfire Club
Mark Dice: Hunter S. Thompson produced child porn & snuff films?
[The Prophecy Club] The Ted Gunderson Chronicles
Dr. Stan & Ted Gunderson on How “They’re” Able to Do It: “Once you understand the things that actually go on at Bohemian Grove…” — “This Satanic element has infiltrated all levels of our government”
‘Presidential Secrets’: Former CIA Operative Chip Tatum Speaks About Drug Running, G.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Oliver North, Neutralizing Ross Perot, Task Force 160’s Darkest Green (‘Black’) Helicopters, Assassinations

Dr. Stan interviews Nick Bryant: The Franklin Scandal — A Story of Powerbrokers, Child Abuse & Betrayal

The Homosexual Guild in D.C.: “They’re outing their white, male straights.”

Blackmail: How The Controlling Elite Owns Politicians — Almost every one of them has some dark secret that they can be blackmailed over if they fail to follow the Washington consensus.

Brian Gerrish: Powerful Paedophile Ring Linked to Parliament Exposed

(video) Children’s Revelations Prove Satanists Control UK

‘Let Us Be ONE’ Prophecy Continues 10/8/08: “It’s TOO LATE to REVERSE what’s been done for MY MEN have been REJECTED … Now is the Time to OVERCOME and GET RIGHT With ALL … FREEeeeeeeeeeeeee———DOM at last … Your HEART will SWELL with LOVE and it will be EASY to REMAIN In Me when others are On The BOAT With You”
All 50+ of my Republicans Blackmailable posts (latest appear first, 10 posts per page)

Skousen – Syria: West Using Terror to Provoke Defections — The Syrian overthrow is a “must accomplish” goal of the US and Israel prior to the coming attack on Iran … so that Israel doesn’t have to face Syrian missiles as part of the inevitable Iranian retaliation.

By

On July 21, 2012

In Bomb-Bomb-Bomb Iran, Israel, Joel Skousen, Syria, War, Why they hate US

World Affairs Brief, July 20, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Syria: West Using Terror to Provoke Defections
Obama’s Statist View of Success
Obama Protects Russian Uranium Deal from Litigation
Another Obama Illegal Executive Order
HSBC Executive Resigns over Money Laundering
Book Review: Gen. Brady’s Vietnam Saga: “Night in the Dog’s Head”
DISCLOSE Act Fails
Ron Paul Takes on Bernanke One Last Time
SYRIA: WEST USING TERROR TO PROVOKE DEFECTIONS
A well coordinated rebel attack on Damascus has been going on all this week. Although the chances of beating Assad’s well-equipped army are slim, it appears that the West (who is directing the tactics for the rebels) is unleashing this attack, combined with a terror attack to spur a lot more people in the Syrian leadership to defect. Just to prove how vulnerable these leaders might be if they stay with Assad, western security services planted a bomb at the meeting place of the country’s top military and civilian leaders—undoubtedly timed to create panic among Assad’s ranks.
According to Reuters, “An explosion inside the Syrian national security headquarters in Damascus targeted ministers from President Bashar Assad’s regime who were meeting with defense officials on Wednesday, killing two of the most senior members of Assad’s inner circle, including his brother-in-law. The Syrian Army said Defense Minister Gen. Dawoud Rajha and his deputy Asef Shawkat were both killed in the explosion. Shawkat, Assad’s brother-in-law, also held the title of Deputy Chief of Staff [and had a ruthless reputation].
“Other ministers and military officials were seriously wounded in the explosion, according to the state-run TV channel… The explosion appeared to be part of a coordinated assault on the fourth day of fighting in the capital that rebel fighters have called the ‘liberation of Damascus’ after months of clashes which activists say have killed more than 17,000 people [highly exaggerated].”
The US is openly trying to make it appear as if the Assad regime is on the verge of collapse, which they are actively working to make true: Reuters said, “The United States said on Wednesday that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was losing control of his country and urged Russia and the international community to get behind a political transition plan to avert sectarian civil war.”
And the Guardian added, “US defense secretary, Leon Panetta, says the situation in Syria is spiraling out of control. He called on the international community to ‘bring maximum pressure on Assad to do what’s right to step down and allow for that peaceful transition.’ Abdelbasset Seida, head of the opposition Syrian National Council, said today was ‘a turning point in Syria’s history,’ and said the Assad regime would ‘fall soon.’”
Given the strength of the Syrian Army, there’s only one way in which the rebels can win: The US has to gain at least a dozen more key defections from top Syrian military leaders, just as they did in Libya. When you can’t beat an army directly, you have to compromise its leaders so the Army ceases to back its political leaders. I think the infiltration of a suicide bomber into Assad’s highest level of security is a major coup and must have shaken the confidence of Assad’s core leaders badly. This is the kind of terror act that is capable of scaring the rest into cutting a deal with the West before they are killed too.
There are two other conflicting stories on timing relative to the attacks on Syria and Iran that are adding fuel to the fire. Jason Ditz reports that “Pro-Syrian-opposition lobbyists say the Obama Administration has warned Syrian rebel factions as well as other pro-war allies that they will not intervene in a serious way against the Assad regime until after the November US election [judging by this week’s actions, the US is hoping they won’t have to intervene in a direct way, even though they are deeply involved in every covert way possible using third parties].”
The Syrian overthrow is a “must accomplish” goal of the US and Israel prior to the coming attack on Iran. The West must overthrow Assad prior to any attack whether it be before the election or after so that Israel doesn’t have to face Syrian missiles as part of the inevitable Iranian retaliation.
In another leaked prediction date, Debka-Net-Weekly says, “It is already decided…. The first week of October is now tagged as decision-time for attacking Iran.” If that timetable is correct, then that would explain why the desperate push to eliminate Assad now. That said, Debka publishes a lot of hype each week and has only about a 50% success rate in predictions. This small Israeli outfit claims to get all of their info from western intel sources, much of which has to be disinformation, judging by how often Debka is led astray. So, we’ll have to wait and see on this prediction.
The only reason the US would not intervene directly in Syria before the election is if they were sure that other black operations on behalf of the rebels would produce the necessary results—which remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, the propaganda machine continues to gear up to ever higher levels against Syria. One not-so-subtle threat that is being communicated to the Syrian leadership is that of being tried as war criminals. That’s why the West went to all that trouble to condemn Mubarak even though he was on his death bed. It sends a message.
This is also the reason why it has been so important to falsify the evidence of massacres against Syria, so that US or Israeli agents can make good on their threats against Syrian leaders about future war crime tribunals. The BBC, perhaps the worst purveyor of the big lie, promoted the myth about the massacre of Houma. Here’s Justin Raimundo’s brief summary on how the West is falsifying these massacres:
“For what seems like months we have been inundated with reports of ‘massacres’ carried out by Syrian government troops against defenseless villagers. The sourcing for these reports is always Syrian ‘activists,’ sometimes named but often not, and the details are always quite horrific: There was the ‘massacre’ at Houla, touted by the BBC in a story that included a photo of a boy jumping over the shrouded bodies of the victims. The report claimed Syrian forces had murdered children and women in a house to house rampage in the village of Houla: it was all very dramatic.
“There was just one problem with the story: it wasn’t true. The photo used by the BBC to illustrate this tall tale was taken in Iraq, not Syria, and it had been pilfered by the Syrian ‘activists’ who palmed it off to the BBC as ‘evidence’ of atrocities committed by the regime.
“Now we have another such attempt: in Tremseh, a village near the city of Hama, the rebels claim, hundreds of civilians were wantonly slaughtered in a full-scale military operation by the Syrian army and air force. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon denounced the Syrian action as ‘an outrageous escalation of violence,’ and went on to ‘condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the indiscriminate use of heavy artillery and shelling of populated areas, including by firing from helicopters.’”
Except the firing wasn’t indiscriminate. As the New York Times reports: “New details emerging Saturday about what local Syrian activists called a massacre of civilians near the central city of Hama indicated that it was more likely an uneven clash between the heavily armed Syrian military and local fighters bearing light weapons.”
Now the BBC is on the forefront of another big lie campaign. Blaring the headline, “Assad regime ‘ready to use chemical weapons,’” the Brits are trying to set up the public for a phony “weapons of mass destruction” justification for intervention. This one is easier than Saddam since there is no question Assad has chemical and biological weapons. In fact, Assad took possession of many truck loads of Saddam’s weapons when the Russians convoyed them out of the country into Syria, just prior to the US invasion.
But the threat of Syria using these weapons on the rebels is pure hype. Having captured Libya’s chemical weapons, the West can easily plant some chemical weapons at will and blame it on Assad– making the case for immediate intervention.
Landdestroyer.blogspot.com offered the following analysis: “After unconfirmed reports [always the mantra of media propaganda] by nameless US officials that Syria was moving chemical weapons out of storage, and now in the midst of a massive media disinformation campaign, several leading ‘activist’ Twitter accounts have been hysterically warning about an ‘imminent’ chemical attack by a ‘desperate regime.’ The US has repeatedly insinuated that any use of chemical weapons would require either it, or Israel to militarily intervene [naturally].
“In reality, it is NATO’s militant front that has the means (chemical weapons brought in from Libya), the motivation (subsequently receiving military intervention on their behalf), and a demonstrated willingness to carry out indiscriminate, mass-casualty terrorist attacks as demonstrated by their months’ long bombing campaign.”
Then, there’s this little “coincidence” which just happens to add urgency to the agenda to attack Iran: “With confusion surrounding events in Syria, there is now news of a bombing in Bulgaria involving buses full of Israeli tourists. Before any investigation has been carried out, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already placed the blame on Iran [latest report says the suspect had a fake Michigan driver’s license and fake American passport]
“Similar attacks, but on a smaller scale, were carried out in Georgia and Thailand with all signs pointing not to Iran, but Israeli and US trained, armed, funded, and directed MEK terrorists. Not only is the timing of the most recent attack in Bulgaria suspicious – corresponding with a major push to destabilize Syria, but the rush to judgment by Israeli officials seems all to conveniently assisting Western, not Iranian objectives.” Correct. Iran knows the West is just looking for an excuse to attack. They aren’t stupid enough to provide that excuse. This smells like agent-provocateurs.
Assad also knows exactly how the cards are stacked against him. He’s not about to do anything stupid that gives the West an excuse to intervene like using chemical weapons or killing hundreds of unarmed people [the “protestors” the Syrian army did kill were armed]. So if some chemical weapons show up, they will be planted. Of course, the way our lackeys in the media operate, all the US has to do is say they have ‘reliable intel’ about chemical weapons and the media will run with the story as fact.
Once again, let me say that I’m no fan of Bashar al-Assad and his tyrannical regime. I also have contempt for our own government which used the Assad regime to torture subjects sent to Syria under “extraordinary rendition.” But I’m also completely convinced that the entire Arab rebellion in the name of democracy is contrived. Not that there aren’t legitimate longings for freedom in Syria, but that the US never lifted a finger for decades to help till now—when it serves a globalist purpose of taking down Iran and creating hatred against the West among the Muslim world.
As in Egypt and Libya, the so-called democratic opposition will be no better than Assad, or Saddam, or Gaddafi. Syrians will be trading one tyrant for a different form of oligarchical control, masquerading as democracy. It’s a bit more complicated to keep up pretenses of elections and representing the people, but the US has proved how it’s done for decades. This is not going to turn out well for the Syrians no matter what the outcome.
Related:
Skousen: Beheading of James Foley as a New Provocation for War — “Remember that the US has a long history of creating horrific stories to justify going to war. Remember the supposed ripping of premature babies out of incubators in Iraq? It didn’t happen. The supposed chemical weapons attack on civilians by Assad in Syria? Also not true”
U.S.-Backed ISIS Beheads American Journalist — U.S. government provided weapons and training to the same jihadists in Syria who later crossed into Iraq!

OBAMA PLANS TO ‘FIGHT ISIS’ BY ARMING ISIS — ISIS the excuse to get done what the PTB have so far failed to accomplish – the overthrow of the Assad government

NSA Doc Reveals ISIS Leader is U.S., BRITISH and ISRAELI Intelligence Asset | Israel’s Hornet Nest Strategy
(video) Leaked Documents: U.S. Framed Syria in Chemical Weapons Attack
(video) U.S. Intelligence: Rebels Used Sarin — And is there a moral imperative to bomb Syria even if there were 400 children killed? How about 500,000 killed by US foreign policy that Albright said was worth it?
[Why-they-hate-US video] Webster Tarpley: Syria & Iran, the Colorado Shooting — We are murdering Syrians, falsely blaming it on Assad in order to justify invasion so Syria can’t strike us when we/Israel strike Iran. The German people are being told while our presstitutes go along with the deception.
Joe Biden (2012 Hypocrisy): If Romney Wins, We’ll Go To War With Syria | CNN (2012): ROMNEY has accused Obama and his administration of being weak in dealing with President Bashar al-Assad, and has called for the United States and allies to ARM SYRIAN REBELS

Joel Skousen: Why isn't Russia backing up its allies? "They want help the US and NATO build up their reputations as the bullies of the world."

By

On July 3, 2012

In Joel Skousen, Russia

This way, when they eventually do invade US, which Joel thinks is maybe 10 years out, the world will cheer!
– –

Russia keeps failing to back up allies like Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and Bashar Assad because they want help the US and NATO build up their reputations as the bullies of the world. This is a real slick game of cat and mouse….”

* * *

From:
World Affairs Brief, June 29, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

Joel Skousen: Rash of Dire Economic Collapse Predictions — Hyperinflation or a complete and sudden collapse of the dollar won't happen this year or in the next couple of years.

By

On July 3, 2012

In $Money$ ToBeFree, Inflation$$$$$$, Joel Skousen, The End of America?, Timing Predictions

World Affairs Brief, June 29, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

RASH OF DIRE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE PREDICTIONS

I field more questions from subscribers and preppers each week on the subject of economic collapse than any other topic, despite having covered in the WAB numerous reasons why neither hyperinflation nor a complete and sudden collapse of the dollar can happen this year or in the next couple of years. In fact, a total collapse could never be sudden just because of the sheer size of the dollar pool internationally.

Yet there is an unending flow of predictions of complete and imminent collapse coming from both the uninformed and the informed financial newsletter writers on the conservative/libertarian side. The latter should know better, but simply haven’t thought this out very well and are using the hype to generate sales of newsletters, financial products or the need to redeem themselves from their long litany of failed collapse predictions already posted.

Pastor Lindsey Williams is continuing to push the banking holiday/collapse scenario based upon his bogus insider sources. My late friend Bob Chapman also got fooled into believing the various scenarios supposedly touted by law enforcement people claiming that the banks were going to close down due to an imminent collapse. That was in August of 2010. But even though that failed, Bob continued to push the collapse scenario.

There is absolutely no reason why the FED would call a banking holiday which would cut off people’s access to money. The economy would collapse within weeks, and they would get the blame. As long as they’ve got the means to keep creating money, there simply is no rationale for this. People who continue to make these claims simply don’t understand either the power of the Fed or the plans of the PTB.

The list of those calling for imminent collapse is growing longer by the week, but it doesn’t mean it is any more true. R.G. Allen, Robert Kiyosaki, Gonzalo Lira, Mike Maloney, Mike Dillard (who’s been pushing the collapse of the EURO for years now and still won’t stop despite the failure of his predictions), and more recently the National Inflation Association, Porter Stansberry and Sandy Leeds are all pushing imminent collapse. While economic fundamentals are crying out for a collapse, these good people don’t understand the powerful nature of the conspiracy we are dealing with and their ability to manipulate the economic numbers.

Even Peter Schiff is predicting collapse by 2014, as reported by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul of Beacon Equity Research—and she’s a believer too. “Gold and silver investors watching metals prices move back down near to the Dec. 29 lows of $1,523.90 and $26.15, respectively, should seriously consider accumulating the metals now. The ‘Big Reset’ of the global financial, slated for no later than 2014, will reward precious metals holders as the big winners among investors [that part is true, if you take possession], according to Peter Schiff.

“Schiff, the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital said, ‘The United States is in a lot of trouble [true].’ After the Fed presumably embarks on QE3, and that stimulus wears off, ‘I think we’re going to have a crisis. I don’t think we’re going to have time for QE4 or QE5. I mean, ultimately, that’s where we’re headed, because that’s all QE does. Each QE sows the seeds of the next QE [also true, there’s no solution in the Fed monetizing the debt, but it does prolong things—a lot longer than these guys think].’

“And global money looking for a safe haven won’t stand for another repeated currency debasements through debt monetization by the U.S. central bank [but, in fact, do stand for it and they applaud it. All the big investors were hoping for the bailout in Europe, even those not directly involved, because it means the chances are better at keeping the whole system propped up. Few have any principles anymore]. Because Europe’s woes have forced politicians to make tough choices there, the spotlight has been taken off, temporarily, the even-more dire circumstances of debt loads and deficits of the U.S., according to Schiff [true, but understates the FEDs far greater ability to inflate and get away with it, without causing a collapse]. ‘Nationalism will emerge. Healthier countries will not see fit to spend their hard earned money to bail out their less responsible neighbors [Not true at all. While there is growing public sentiment for national interests before global interests, all the politicians in power are wedded to globalism and go along. Chancellor Merkel of Germany is a prime example—always bashing bailouts but going along and pushing for even more EU powers to deal with the crisis].’

“Schiff’s time line for the Armageddon scenario of a U.S. dollar crisis matches predictions made by commodities legend Jim Rogers and ShadowStat’s economist John Williams, with each man projecting 2014 as the year the U.S. dollar no longer maintains its former role as the world’s premiere reserve currency—implying a severe decline of its global purchasing power and much higher metals prices [The latter is mostly true, but not the destruction of the reserve status, as I will explain].

“In 2014, that’s the year the U.S. economy is expected to reach fresh new lows and the year politicians will finally be forced to face the tough choices regarding proposed cuts to federal, state and local government budgets, according to the three men [There will be no facing of the tough choices—no politician will survive if they cut spending to a balanced budget level]. It will also be the year that ushers in severe social unrest, similar to what is happening in Greece, in the case of Jim Rogers’ prediction for 2014 [maybe, if they really cut benefits and special interest spending, but that’s not going to happen].

Social unrest would only come if the government had the courage to really cut back in not only welfare and benefits, but all their other spending outlays that put millions into the hands of government connected companies and foundations.

Look at the political realities: There are huge constituencies for welfare, bailouts, foods stamps, school loans, foreign aid, military spending, loan guarantees, export-import banks, etc, etc. There are 45 million people on food stamps alone and 25 million government employees, 3 million total military, including civilian employees, and most of these people vote for a continuation of the status quo.

In addition there are millions of liberal, well healed Americans that vote for their favorite government spending programs: the arts, entertainment subsidies, education and foreign aid. After all, they aren’t getting a tax bill for it—it’s mostly deficit spending. None of these are going to tolerate the massive spending cuts necessary for national solvency.

Let me quickly review, once again, the reasons why a collapse or devaluation of the dollar, hyperinflation, or the dollar quickly losing its reserve currency status is not imminent and can’t happen quickly any time in the next few years:

1) Collapse: Collapse of a currency can only happen if it becomes relatively worthless in a short period of time. Inflation of the currency at high rates is the only thing that can cause this, ending either in devaluation and/or hyperinflation. Neither of these are real threats to the dollar currently despite the huge debt crisis.

2) Devaluation: Devaluation happens when a currency value is pegged to another at a fixed exchange rate, and the smaller currency inflates at a more rapid rate than the pegged currency causing an imbalance in demand which eventually causes the peg to be broken and a new fixed rate set. The dollar isn’t pegged to anything—it’s the standard. In a non-pegged system an informal devaluation can only occur if the dollar is being inflated at a much higher rate than other currencies. That isn’t happening because every other currency is inflating about the same rate proportional to their base as is the dollar. In fact, other currencies approve of US inflation, because it allows them to inflate their currency while maintaining the same relative exchange rate with the dollar.

3) Hyperinflation: Two things must be present for hyperinflation to happen. First, you must start with a relatively small money supply that can be expanded multiple times. The dollar base is so large, after having been inflated and spread around the world for so long that it literally can’t be inflated rapidly as compared to smaller currencies. The quantity of dollars in circulation is estimated at $300 trillion (not counting the huge non-monetized economy of derivatives, contracts and hedges perhaps as big as $500T). The FED could create $30T a year and it wouldn’t exceed 10% inflation rate. Even that huge amount isn’t hyperinflation, which results in panic spending due to rapidly rising prices. Second, a nation has to have an automatic injection mechanism to put increasing quantities of money into the pockets of consumers so they can keep up with rising prices, otherwise the inflation kills stops economic growth. We don’t have that, and what we do have (food stamps, unemployment compensation, Soc. Sec. etc) isn’t effectively indexed to inflation. Without the public’s ability to get more money each month as in Germany in 1936, the economy retracts as people can’t keep up, and spending decreases—again stopping hyperinflation and causing stagflation.

4) Loss of Reserve Status. This also can’t happen anytime soon since the dollar base is so much larger than any other currency. You’d have to print up probably 5 times the existing quantities of Euros to supplant the dollar and that would have devastating inflationary effects on the Eurozone. The same with the British Pound. No one would trust the Chinese Yen because there’s no transparency there either. What about a basket of currencies? —The same problem exists there as in the EU—even their strict rules about one nation expanding their Euros over another, the southern tier of nations found ways of cheating. No one can trust any of these voluntary agreements anymore.

If there is a real threat right now, it’s the huge derivatives and hedge fund bubble—trillions of dollars committed in contracts but almost without actual asset backing. No big paper investment happens today with CDS derivative insurance or hedging, and little of that can actually be paid to the beneficiary if a sufficient crisis develops. However, this mainly affects the huge speculative economy—and these have the most power to get a bailout from their fellows at the FED.

Rather than see a collapse coming this year or even by 2014, I think we are going to see another mild inflationary recovery (not a true recovery), but one where inflation finally starts to overpower deflationary forces and people start to spend again, and hire. It won’t be big, but it will help the PTB extend this debt spiral until the end of the decade where even bigger world conflicts will help them escape final blame. Don’t underestimate the power of the PTB to keep inflating enough to stave off default and yet keep inflation below 10%.

That said, we are dealing with conspiracies here—and the PTB could simply decide to pull the plug on the economy. All they would have to do is stop intervening in the huge derivative market to keep those contracts from defaulting, as they have been recently in Europe. The derivatives bubble is by far the largest ponzi scheme ever—trillions in promises to pay without any means to make good on all those promises, even after the hedges balance out the excess exposure.

In fact, the derivative mess has been threatening to collapse ever since AIG in 2008, and yet the financial PTB continue to stop the derivative contracts from being collected on. In Europe, for example, they kept insisting that no default had occurred when investors in Greek bonds had to take a 50% haircut (loss on their bond investments). Hence no one could make good on those CDS default swap insurance policies (which are sold as guarantees on all these big risky investments). They change the rules all the time, and control the higher powers that might rule those changes illegal. I think they can keep this up for several more years.

This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be preparing for a major disaster in the world, I just don’t think it’s imminent or that it is going to be financial in nature alone. I think war is the big thing that will drop all the world’s economies and that’s at least 10 years away. So, you’ve barely got time to prepare.

Joel Skousen on Obamacare (Obamneycare?): "I personally think that, if elected, Romney will fail to repeal Obamacare. This is another of those causes so dear to the PTB that they won’t take no for an answer. That’s why they got Roberts to switch sides and write this deplorable court ruling.

By

On July 3, 2012

In Barack Obama, Joel Skousen, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul

World Affairs Brief, June 29, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
Joel Skousen on Obamacare (Obamneycare?):

I personally think that, if elected, Romney will fail to repeal Obamacare. This is another of those causes so dear to the PTB that they won’t take no for an answer. That’s why they got Roberts to switch sides and write this deplorable court ruling.

One thing is for sure: Obamacare will turn into the largest future deficit driver in history. Nothing will be solved in the health care industry and the benefit mentality of free health care will march forward inexorably adding to the total government control scheme.

One final side note: Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch was quick to voice his opposition to the decision, claiming that most Americans want the law repealed, but Utah Democrats responded with the irony that Hatch was the biggest supporter of John Robert’s ascension to the high court.

As usual, Congressman Ron Paul said it best, “I strongly disagree with today’s decision by the Supreme Court, but I am not surprised. The Court has a dismal record when it comes to protecting liberty against unconstitutional excesses by Congress.” Indeed!

Joel Skousen: Bilderberg Meeting and Webster Tarpley

By

On June 10, 2012

In Joel Skousen, Ron Paul

World Affairs Brief, June 8, 2012. Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Ron Paul Concedes Race for President
Bilderberg Meeting and Webster Tarpley
US Military Brass Marching to CFR Agenda
France Shoots Itself in the Foot
Union Backlash in WI fails to Unseat Walker
Obama Justice Dept. Actively Shielding Illegals
Secret Surveillance Warrants Increase
Skepticism about Secret Killing List Meetings
Protecting the President Goes to Extremes
[…]
BILDERBERG MEETING AND WEBSTER TARPLEY
Although little insider information was extracted by Bilderberg watchers from last week’s annual meeting of globalist leaders and wannabees, the meeting at the Westfield Marriott Hotel near Washington DC generated large protests and a lot of well deserved negative publicity. Lyndon LaRouche disciple, Webster Tarpley, an anti-establishment historian often interviewed by Alex Jones and Jeff Rense, was also on hand to spread his opinions. I have always opposed conservative attention given to Tarpley because he’s never been on the side of individual liberty. His virulent attacks on Ron Paul and Austrian free market economics during recent interviews have quite openly exposed the real FDR worshiping socialist that Tarpley really is.
RT.com [Russia Today, which is not a trustworthy news outlet] gave a summary which set the stage for this controversy: “The items discussed during last week’s Bilderberg Conference might remain under lock and key, but some eyewitnesses on hand at the elusive meeting of the elite say they might know who was involved in the top-secret talks.
The Bilderberg Group has officially released what they say is the list of attendees invited to last week’s conference outside of Washington, D.C. in Chantilly, Virginia, but others insist that they caught one high-profile personality on hand that was excluded from the official roster. According to some sources, presidential hopeful Mitt Romney made it to this year’s event [pretty weak evidence].
Charlie Skelton, a contributor for the UK’s Guardian, claims that “four eyewitnesses on the hotel staff” have confirmed to him that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was on hand at the 2012 Bilderberg Conference.
Skelton says that, when reached for comment, Romney’s office would not confirm or deny the rumor but eventually insisted that their official stance is one that does not put Romney at last week’s meetings.
“Journalist Webster Tarpley adds to Skelton’s Guardian report that the elite politicians and bankers that make up a good chunk of the Bilderberg Group roster want a Romney administration to take Washington by storm [pure supposition on his part. See below] and suspects that the recent meeting might have had something to do with the secret society’s plans for the upcoming election [true insofar as the Vice Presidency is concerned].
“’They want Romney and Mitch Daniels, who will run together as moderate Rightists,” Tarpley tells the Guardian. Daniels, the Republican governor of Indiana, was listed on the official sheet of Bilderberg attendees. Investigative journalist, Jim Tucker adds in his own report that Governor Daniels was most likely picked to be Romney’s running mate during this year’s conference [the only part of Tarpley’s analysis that may come true].
My opinion on Tarpley: Webster Tarpley is not on the side of liberty. He is a socialist and former follower of Lyndon LaRouche who, in turn, has many links with the Socialist International (a communist front) along with his European communist wife. LaRouche wormed his way into the conservative political scene by putting out a lot of anti-Jane Fonda material and bashing the extreme environmental movement. But his agenda was not liberty—it was anti-capitalism.
Tarpley fits into the same mold. He’s a rabid anti-capitalist and his acknowledged hero is Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal. All his solutions are socialist. He’s been a regular contributor to the Alex Jones show because he is rather effective at slamming the New World Order and it’s globalist promoters—but NOT because he is against globalism if he or other “enlightened moderates” could run it. From his remarks, he detests the free market. He views rich capitalists as the real enemy, not government.
Professor Kevin Barret was shocked to hear these views as he interviewed Tarpley about the Bilderberg conference. If you can get past the rap music intro, Tarpley shows his true colors. Here’s the link with my analysis below: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnI0Djr9dn4&feature=related

Read More

Joel Skousen: US STRATCOM Commander Says Chinese no Threat — "With idiots like this in charge of US deterrence, America is doomed to suffer a nuclear first strike"

By

On June 9, 2012

In China, Joel Skousen, The End of America?

World Affairs Brief, June 1, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Provoking Armed Intervention in Syria
Neocons Purging GOP of Anti-War Patriots
Marriot Hotels Shield Bilderberg Elite from Scrutiny
US STRATCOM Commander Says Chinese no Threat
Romney Claims Delegate Victory
CNN Denigrates Trump and Birther Issue
Where does Ron Paul Go from Here?
Appeals Court Rules Against DOMA
Spain Follows Greek Bailout Path
Why We Cannot Win Politically
[…]
US STRATCOM COMMANDER SAYS CHINESE NO THREAT
With idiots like this in charge of US deterrence, America is doomed to suffer a nuclear first strike. AFP News tells the horror story of ignorance. Notice that the naive General is speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations who is promoting this disinformation. “China’s nuclear weapons do not pose a direct threat to the United States, the man in charge of America’s arsenal said Wednesday in calling for greater dialogue with the Chinese.
“’We would like to have routine contact and conversations with China’s military,’ General Robert Kehler, head of Strategic Command, which oversees US nuclear deterrence, told the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. ‘We think there would be tremendous benefit to that in both China and the United States, in particular to help us avoid some misunderstanding or some tension in the future.’
“The STRATCOM commander said that although the United States and Russia account for roughly 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons, dealing with the Chinese on the matter would become increasingly important [Not True. Nobody knows how many missiles the Chinese have, so how can they quantify. But the miles of underground tunnels hiding missiles in China indicates their arsenal is much larger than the US is admitting]. ‘I do not see the Chinese strategic deterrent as a direct threat to the United States. We are not enemies,’ he said.” He’ll have to eat those words someday, but he’ll be retired by then and unaccountable.

Joel Skousen: Why We Cannot Win Politically — "I am all too afraid that Benjamin Franklin correctly saw our nation's destiny when he said, 'When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.' I’m fully convinced we’ve gone past the point of no return…"

By

On June 9, 2012

In Joel Skousen, The End of America?, Timing Predictions

World Affairs Brief, June 1, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Provoking Armed Intervention in Syria
Neocons Purging GOP of Anti-War Patriots
Marriot Hotels Shield Bilderberg Elite from Scrutiny
US STRATCOM Commander Says Chinese no Threat
Romney Claims Delegate Victory
CNN Denigrates Trump and Birther Issue
Where does Ron Paul Go from Here?
Appeals Court Rules Against DOMA
Spain Follows Greek Bailout Path
Why We Cannot Win Politically
[…]
WHY WE CANNOT WIN POLITICALLY
The failure of the US and Europe to stop spending in the face of devastating debt loads is symptomatic of why there is no political solution. Professor Walter Williams of George Mason University wrote a wonderful, if not negative, piece this week on the psychological case against democracy ever curing itself through majority rule. It buttresses my contention that once the majority of voters become corrupted by benefits from government, they will never voluntarily relinquish the power to vote themselves benefits through the democratic process. The lesson Dr. Williams uses to illustrate our dilemma is absolutely crucial for each of my readers to understand.
“The heart of our problem can be seen as a tragedy of the commons. That’s a set of circumstances when something is commonly owned and individuals acting rationally in their own self-interest produce a set of results that’s inimical to everyone’s long-term interest. Let’s look at an example of the tragedy of the commons phenomenon and then apply it to our national problem.
[…]
“What we’re witnessing in Greece, Italy, Ireland, Portugal and other parts of Europe is a direct result of their massive spending to accommodate the welfare state. A greater number of people are living off government welfare programs than are paying taxes. Government debt in Greece is 160 percent of gross domestic product. The other percentages of GDP are 120 in Italy, 104 in Ireland and 106 in Portugal. As a result of this debt and the improbability of their ever paying it, their credit ratings either have reached or are close to reaching junk bond status.
Here’s the question for us: Is the U.S. moving in a direction toward or away from the troubled EU nations? It turns out that our national debt, which was 35 percent of GDP during the 1970s, is now 106 percent of GDP, a level not seen since World War II’s 122 percent. That debt, plus our more than $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities, has led Standard & Poor’s to downgrade our credit rating from AAA to AA+, and the agency is keeping the outlook at “negative” as a result of its having little confidence that Congress will take on the politically sensitive job of tackling the same type of entitlement that has turned Europe into a basket case.
I am all too afraid that Benjamin Franklin correctly saw our nation’s destiny when he said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
I’m fully convinced we’ve gone past the point of no return in the corruption of the American voter. It’s not only that half of all the people in the US get some form of check from the US government every month—it’s that half of the rest are sympathetic to the notion of using government funds to cure all the ills they perceive, and NONE are willing to give up their particular favorite government schemes in order to save this nation from the inevitable bankruptcy that is looming. They all want their share of the diminishing pie for as long as it lasts.
So what is the solution? I’ve seen the specter of revolution raised on more than one occasion of late. It is true, that one never regains essential rights like we have lost without using force to strip socialist powers out of the hands of citizens, unions, and politicians who use the promise of benefits to keep themselves in power and money.
That said, a revolution such as happened at the beginning of our Republic can never happen without broad support and dissatisfaction among the people. Despite some dissatisfaction, it is only skin deep, and doesn’t arise to anywhere near the level of crisis that is necessary to overthrow tyranny.
And, unlike the former revolution, who do you target as the evil force? Where is the discernible enemy? Who do you rise up against? As much as I’ve studied this globalist conspiracy, I can’t give you a definite list, based up on public statements of proof, that name names. Sure, I’m sure about some of the participants, but you have to have real proof of conspiracy and collusion through wiretaps—which only they control.
Sadly, there is no clearly identifiable King George to target, and it’s not enough to say “throw the rascals out of Congress” because that blanket strategy would eliminate the dozen or so true fighters for liberty that still remain.
That’s what makes our situation so difficult and resistance so futile—the enemy is hiding behind the veil of national security and working through puppets who don’t actually make the larger decisions, who are protected by judges who act out of a variety of bad motives, not all of which are outside their powers of discretion. In the end, if you don’t have the subpoena power to get the proofs of conspiracy, and can’t rely on the courts to penetrate that veil of secrecy within government, you can’t target the evil leaders directly.
That leaves “us versus them” (“them” being the majority of people who want to retain the power to take from the productive class through government laws) and we are vastly outnumbered. Ultimately, that leaves us with little choice to continue what we are currently doing:
1) Building our numbers as we continue to educate and convert those with a good conscience to recognize the problem for what it is: a vast conspiracy of control and power against liberty
2) Preparing for the inevitability of eventual war (which the PTB will bring upon us) in order to herd free peoples into a New World Order they control, and preparing for the social unrest that will ensue.
3) Prepare to escape and evade the roundup of anti-NWO dissidents that will surely come someday.
If I am right, there is little hope of saving the whole country as presently constituted. We are in political gridlock now, and there is absolutely no way that the voters will tolerate any serious cuts in government spending. We will see a continual downhill slide as one succession of politicians after another promises solutions, none of which will ever be instituted, unless they call for yet more control and more government bailout and intervention. Even Ron Paul would be powerless to gain the assent of Congress in order to do what is right.
But there may be hope in crisis. Perhaps in the very crisis the PTB are planning to bring to pass, the resulting social unrest with force good people to flee the cities and seek refuge among like minded people in rural areas where it may be possible to gain the partial majority status needed to control the destiny of local freedom.

[Fukushima Truth] Joel Skousen: Worries Over Fukushima — Danger is 'exaggerated' & "Long distance radiation effects at relative small doses are highly dependent on personal nutritional habits and the relative strength of the individual’s immune system."

By

On May 15, 2012

In Joel Skousen, Timing Predictions

World Affairs Brief, May 11, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:

Another Phony Underwear Plot

The Truth about the Russian Troops at Fort Carson

Hagmann Claims Based on Dubious “Insider” Source

New Army Prison Camp Manual: Detention of and Reeducation of Dissident Citizens

Russia’s Preemptive Threat to Europe’s Missile Defense

Worries over Fukushima

Ex-presidential Gravy Trains

Greek Left Fails to Form a Government

Obama Risks All on Gay Marriage Support

[…]

WORRIES OVER FUKUSHIMA

Natural News put out a dramatic and apocalyptic piece on the Fukushima nuclear crisis that had dozens of subscribers calling to find out “is it true?” While most of the data was correct, except the exaggerated issue of how radiation has already floated over to America (nothing even close to danger levels) the author was way over the mark in predicting an imminent melt down of the fuel storage pools of reactor building #4.

The partially damaged reactor building still stores spent fuel rods 3 stories up in earthquake damaged buildings which many pundits are claiming is about to collapse. The truth is that this is a dangerous situation only because of the potential for more earthquakes in the future. That’s the only danger that could threaten the integrity of the building, which is not “about to collapse.”

Even though chances of an earthquake sufficient strong to collapse this buildings and its fuel rods (which would lead to a meltdown and high radioactivity release) is not high, I completely agree that the Japanese government needs to demand that these rods all be removed from elevated storage and be put in below ground containment—as has been done in other plants.

If this disaster happens, it will still not affect the US as much as Chernobyl did the Ukraine and Belorussia—close neighbors to the reactor—due to the much longer distances between Japan and the US. Most of the health damage was limited to populations a few hundred miles from Chernobyl. Western Europe did see a fairly small percentage of the population affected, but the fact that it did not affect most people indicates that long distance radiation effects at relative small doses are highly dependent on personal nutritional habits and the relative strength of the individual’s immune system—not absolute exposure itself, which is nearly impossible to avoid unless you leave the country. There is no reason at this time to take extreme measures to relocate away from North America, but we will keep watching this situation, which is of concern.

* * * 

Related: I’m assuming this is the Natural News article in question:

Fukushima reactor No. 4 vulnerable to catastrophic collapse; could unleash 85 times Cesium-137 radiation of Chernobyl; human civilization on the brink

[ audio ] Joel Skousen on 'Coast to Coast AM' with John B. Wells 4/29/12: Globalism & Gov't Control

By

On May 13, 2012

In Bomb Bomb America?, China, Globalism—One-World Gov't, Joel Skousen, Real Reason for U.S. Wars = NWO!, Russia, The End of America?, Timing Predictions, War

I was going to transcribe some quotes from this excellent interview. Perhaps I will, but for now, I’ll just post it without.

– –

“Joining John B. Wells, political scientist Joel Skousen provided his insights on globalism and a future nuclear war with Russia and China, economic issues and the flight of American businesses overseas, as well as domestic politics, loss of liberty, and the U.S. government’s agenda of control.

* * *

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X8k40D3GhA]28.4.2012 – 2/4 – Megacatastrophes

Published on Apr 29, 2012 by 

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PIBIdEIek0]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp-ROhEHmfo]

[video/audio] Joel Skousen: Army Document Reveals Citizens to be Treated as Enemy Combatants! | NATO Expansion into Russian Satellite States will Backfire

By

On May 5, 2012

In Joel Skousen, Police State, Russia

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYvWhu-C1Zo]Joel Skousen: Army Document Reveals Citizens to be Treated as Enemy Combatants!

Published on May 5, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel

Joel Skousen, editor of World Affairs Brief and author of Strategic Relocation: North American Guide To Safe Places, talks with Alex. Mr. Skousen’s book is available at the Infowars Store.
http://www.joelskousen.com/
http://www.infowars.com/
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/
http://twitter.com/#!/RealAlexJones
http://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerikJones

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkvNkiZSt3s]Joel Skousen: NATO Expansion into Russian Satellite States will Backfire

Joel Skousen & Paul Watson: Capitalizing on bin Laden’s Faked Death

By

On May 4, 2012

In Barack Obama, Joel Skousen

World Affairs Brief, May 4, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Chinese Dissident Betrayed by the USA
NY Times Admits the FBI Foments Terror
Obama Continues Push for North American Union
Demonization of Survivalism
Capitalizing on bin Laden’s Faked Death
Hit Men Strike Two This Week
Sea Change in French Politics
Ammo Shortages Starting to Appear
Labor Department Backs Down of Family Farms
RFK Assassination Witness Confirms Second Shooter
[…]
CAPITALIZING ON BIN LADEN’S FAKED DEATH
The establishment never loses an opportunity to play the terror card in keeping America compliant. Obama’s politicization of the Bin Laden death is facing mounting criticism even in the mainstream media. The Obama propaganda machine reveled in the claim that Osama was killed in a US commando attack in his alleged compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The trouble is, the entire raid was completely contrived by the US as a propaganda stunt.
Paul Joseph Watson of infowars.com put out “10 Facts That Prove The Bin Laden Fable Is a Contrived Hoax” I’ll add what he left out [in brackets] and edit them down to the 8 essentials:
1) Before the raid, every intelligence analyst, geopolitical commentator or head of state worth their salt was on record as stating that Osama Bin Laden was already dead, and that he probably died many years ago, from veteran CIA officer Robert Baer, to former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, to former FBI head of counter terrorism Dale Watson.
2) The official narrative of how the raid unfolded completely collapsed within days of its announcement. First there had been a 40 minute shootout, then there was no shootout and just one man was armed, first Bin Laden was armed then he was not, first Bin Laden used his wife as a human shield and then he did not. First the compound was described as a ‘$1 million dollar mansion’ then it turned out to be a rubbish-strewn dilapidated compound that was worth less than a quarter of that. Almost every single aspect of the official narrative has changed since Obama first described the raid last Sunday as the White House struggles to keep its story straight.
3) The alleged body of Bin Laden was hastily dumped in the sea to prevent any proper procedure of identification. The White House claimed this was in accordance with normal Islamic burial rituals, however numerous Muslim scholars all over the globe disputed this claim, pointing out that Muslims can only be buried at sea if they die at sea. While the White House claimed that Bin Laden’s death on May 1st was proven by DNA and facial recognition evidence, such proof was never released for public scrutiny and the Obama administration refused to release photos of Bin Laden’s dead body, suggesting a cover-up.
4) Despite the fact that the White House released ‘situation room’ photos which purported to show Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and the rest of Obama’s security staff watching the raid which killed Bin Laden live, it was later admitted by CIA director Leon Panetta that Obama could not have seen the raid because the live feed was cut off before the Navy SEALS entered the compound. The photos were described by many as having ‘historical significance,’ forming a ‘captivating’ record of Obama’s greatest success and being the ‘defining moment’ of his Presidency. One image showed Hillary Clinton with her hand over her mouth as if witnessing an anxious or crucial moment in the raid. Media reports at the time claimed that the photos represented the moment when ‘The leader of the free world saw the terror chief shot in the left eye.’ However, the photos were staged as a PR stunt for public consumption, nobody in the photos ever saw Bin Laden killed live, nor did they see the Navy SEALS even enter the compound.
5) The media reported that Al-Qaeda itself had confirmed every detail of Obama’s address to the nation. However, the conduit for such a claim was in fact an organization called SITE, which is a notorious Pentagon propaganda front run by the daughter of an Israeli spy that has been caught on numerous occasions releasing fake cartoonish ‘Al-Qaeda’ videos at the most politically expedient times for both the Bush and Obama administrations. The SITE organization is nothing more than a contractor for the U.S. government, receiving some $500,000 a year annually from Uncle Sam [Al Qaeda, itself, is a US run black operation funded through Saudi Arabia].
6) Almost every single neighbor that lived near the alleged Bin Laden compound in Abbottabad that was interviewed by news reporters said with absolute certainty that they had never seen Bin Laden and that they knew of no evidence whatsoever to suggest he lived there. Since the town is a staging ground for the Pakistani military, which has a training facility situated virtually a stone’s throw away from the alleged Bin Laden compound, residents were required to show ID when they moved into the area. Pakistani troops and anti-terror police in the town refused to confirm that Bin Laden had lived in the house. [More importantly, one neighbor documented to the Pakistan media how the team of commandos all died in the helicopter crash that occurred during the staged raid–pictured in many news stories. He said that no one got out alive in the fiery crash. This means that the supposed death of seal team six members in a larger army helo months later was done to provide cover for the earlier death during the staged raid].
7) The videos released by the White House this past weekend which purport to show Osama Bin Laden making Al-Qaeda tapes in October-November 2010 are almost identical to footage first released by Pentagon front group SITE nearly four years ago. Remember, a May 2010 Washington Post story reported how the CIA had admitted to making fake Bin Laden videos. Despite the White House’s insistence that the footage of Bin Laden is recent, he looks younger and healthier than tapes released almost a decade ago, having apparently dyed his beard black. A separate video that purports to show Bin Laden in his compound flicking through satellite TV channels depicts a much older looking man with a gray beard. Analysts have pointed out that the man has different shaped ears to real Osama pictures from back in 2001.
8) Despite the fact that numerous neo-cons came out on the days after the alleged raid to erroneously assert that torturing terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay led to the discovery of Bin Laden [The claims of Sheik Khalid Mohammed were so ludicrous as to be unbelievable. 10 teams of CIA operates couldn’t have done all that Khalid claims in his ‘confession.’], Osama himself, the supposed world’s most wanted terrorist and a treasure trove of terror information, despite the fact that he was unarmed, was not taken in for questioning, he was instantly shot in the head according to the official narrative.”
As I mentioned above, Paul Watson overlooked the story about the crash of the stealth helicopter in the courtyard, killing all on board, according to local witnesses in Abbottabad. They said nobody got out, and no second helo ever landed. That means there was no taking Osama away and dumping his body in the sea, and no victorious Seal Team Six eulogized by Obama at Fort Cambell. The US had to falsify a different death scenario of Seal Team Six by placing their names on a later Army helicopter crash in Afghanistan.
To capitalize on this anniversary threat, ABC reported on Monday that officials fear al Qaeda may soon attempt to explode United States-bound aircraft with body bombs. The body bomb threat has surfaced before, but the renewed concern is based on new information originating overseas, the official said. Details of the threat have been shared among intelligence agencies in the United States and the United Kingdom within the past two weeks, the official said.”
What now, X-ray machines at every airport to counter this new manufactured threat? When will it all end? One thing all this tells me is that if the American people ever got up enough courage to demand the TSA stop all this nonsense (Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is sponsoring a bill to dismantle TSA), they’d throw another manufactured terror event at us within a month to chase all the opposition back into submission. Using false flag terror is extremely effective. Look closely at how the 9/11 attack, a government operation from beginning to end, changed the way everyone thinks and acts. They can keep doing those kinds of things for as long as necessary.
Nothing is more emblematic of the callousness of government about not caring about civilian ‘collateral damage’ in the face of fighting terror, than the high handed way in which the Obama administration talked openly about drone attacks and how we’re going to see more of these in the future: Jason Ditz has the story:
“It’s no real secret that the Obama Administration’s ever escalating drone war has killed a massive lot of innocent people, but White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan was surprisingly glib today when pressed on the matter in an interview with ABC’s This Week.
“‘Unfortunately, in war, there are casualties, including among the civilian population,’ Brennan insisted, though he did not mention that the drone strikes have been carried out almost exclusively in nations with which the United States is not at war: Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.
Brennan went on to defend the killings, saying ‘sometimes you have to take life to save lives [that old excuse].’ He provided no examples of how the killing of nearly 2,000 people, virtually all of them unidentified, had ‘saved lives.’
“Indeed the only thing that the drone strikes have conclusively done is ruin the US relationship with Pakistan, whose parliament has conditioned a return to normal relations on the US ending such attacks.”
Obama also slipped away on a secret trip to Afghanistan in order to emerge in a high profile meeting with Afghan president Karzai, announcing the signing of the tenuous agreement giving a longer lease on life to the US occupation there, and the payoffs to high officials that keep some semblance of cooperation going. Having the president fly out there is an indication of just how strained the relationship is with Afghanistan and how hard it is for puppet president Karzai to remain in power without periodic public relation stunts like this.
But as Gareth Porter writes, the agreement doesn’t do what the White House claims. “The optics surrounding the Barack Obama adminisration’s ‘Enduring Strategic Partnership’ agreement with Afghanistan and the Memorandums of Understanding accompanying it emphasize transition to Afghan responsibility and an end to U.S. war.
“But the only substantive agreement reached between the U.S. and Afghanistan – well hidden in the agreements – has been to allow powerful U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) to continue to carry out the unilateral night raids on private homes that are universally hated in the Pashtun zones of Afghanistan.
“It also allows President Hamid Karzai to claim he has gotten control over the SOF night raids while getting a 10-year commitment of U.S. economic support. But the actual text of the agreement and of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on night raids included in it by reference will not end the U.S. war in Afghanistan, nor will they give Karzai control over night raids.” That’s the real story!
[…]

Joel Skousen: US Stockpiling Aircraft and Troops Near Iran — Another war for no valid reason

By

On February 14, 2012

In Bomb-Bomb-Bomb Iran, Joel Skousen, War, Why they hate US

World Affairs Brief, February 10, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)
THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Santorum Triple Win Too Good To Be True
Corruption in Nevada GOP Caucus
US Stockpiling Aircraft and Troops Near Iran
Failure in Afghanistan
Georgia Court Rules Obama Eligible, Despite No Show
Bank Mortgage Settlement a Bailout in Disguise
[…]
US STOCKPILING AIRCRAFT AND TROOPS NEAR IRAN
Philip Giraldi summarizes the situation around Iran in such a way that no one can mistake the head long determination of the globalists in Israel and the US to attack Iran. “There has been considerable press coverage during the past week that makes one think of a world turned upside down. Washington is unnaturally consumed with the Iranian Problem. Talk shows resonate over the question of what to do about Tehran’s nuclear program. There is a whole smorgasbord of things that Iran might do that are forbidden, including even having the knowledge of how to build a bomb. The negative press and commentary are being spun into a casus belli, something called the Iranian Threat writ large. The message is clear: even though Iran has a minuscule defense budget, has never attacked anyone, and is essentially a Third World country, it is nevertheless a global menace that must be dealt with by military means if all else fails. Oh yes, and brave little Israel will do the job if President Obama doesn’t have what it takes.
“The only problem with all of the above is that the United States intelligence community [at least the honest portion] confirms that Iran does not have a nuclear device and has not made the political decision to build one. Even Israeli intelligence agrees. So if you want a war, what do you do when that happens? You shift your narrative and develop a new way of defining the threat. Israel and its friends have consequently initiated a major offensive both back at home and in the United States to heighten the impression that Iran poses a genuine threat to Israel, the United States, and even to world peace in general. And make no mistake about what it entails: this is a major disinformation strategy that involves diplomatic, intelligence, and media resources.
“The new narrative goes roughly as follows: Iran is developing a nuclear weapon and is close to having one in spite of what the intelligence people think. The weapon will inevitably be used directly by Iran or even given to terrorists to threaten Israel, Europe, and even the United States using ballistic missiles that are currently being developed. Because Iran is concealing or defensively ‘hardening’ its new nuclear facilities, the window is closing on a military option to destroy the program. Iran is also planning to attack Jewish and American targets worldwide, including inside the United States, so a military attack is doubly essential to deter it from sponsoring such terrorist activity. …
I have no doubt that this attack on Iran is inevitable— not because Iran is a threat, but because the PTB have some evil ulterior motive that is served by taken down Iran and bullying the Arab world. New evidence came out this week that the US is planning for the attack in earnest despite playing the reluctant partner in “lock step” (said Obama) with Israel.
In prior briefs we have talked about the concentration of 3 aircraft carrier task forces in the Gulf. Now come reports of multiple flights of US aircraft in transit to land bases in the Middle East.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is making mention almost constantly about the Iranian threat and has hinted that the nuclear red line will be crossed this year. Panetta warned, “If we have to do it, we will do it.” Debka reported on the multiple flights of warplanes headed for Saudi Arabia this week. You don’t keep a lot of aircraft on station for long before a strike takes place.
US troops are now in Israel, Kuwait, and several of the smaller Arab nations surrounding the Gulf–totaling about 40 or 50 thousand troops and support personnel. These troop concentrations become tempting targets for Iran should Israel pull off its long-anticipated pre-emptive strike. It appears the US wants to make sure some of our troops get bloodied if Iran retaliates against Israel for the pre-emptive strike they are sure to pull off soon.
The US and Israel continue to claim they are preparing for a “surgical strike” against Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. It may start out with a precision attack, but the US and Israel know full well this will provoke a massive retaliation from Iran against US troops in the area and Israel. Such retaliation is all they need to launch the real war the globalists have been planning. I believe they will devastate not only Iran’s ample military but its civilian infrastructure as well. That way, there is no need to invade and occupy–which would be very unpopular.
I take issue, however, with the many fearmongers on the Right who claim we are weeks away from WWIII. I can say with near certainty that China and Russia will not intervene to save either Iran or Syria and that this war will stay contained in the Middle East. WWIII is still several years away since Russia and China aren’t yet ready to take on the West. But they are moving steadily in that direction.

Joel Skousen: Evidence of South Carolina Vote Tampering — “For Newt Gingrich to go from a 15% rating in South Carolina to winning 40% of the vote took much more than manipulated polling. There had to be electronic vote manipulation on a large scale.”

By

On January 27, 2012

In Dr. Stanley Monteith, Joel Skousen, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul

Joel discusses this with Dr. Stanley Monteith
on Radio Liberty, 1/26/11, hour 1

Listen Here

* * *

World Affairs Brief, January 27, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:

Evidence of South Carolina Vote Tampering

Is Gingrich the New Frontrunner?

Watch Out for Jeb Bush

Obama’s State of the Union

Space Code Leading to Weapons-Free Space

TSA Detains a Senator

More Internet Censorship Proposed

Davos Gloom

Why Gas Prices aren’t Coming Down

EVIDENCE OF SOUTH CAROLINA VOTE TAMPERING

For Newt Gingrich to go from a 15% rating in South Carolina to winning 40% of the vote took much more than manipulated polling. There had to be electronic vote manipulation on a large scale. While no whistleblower has come forth there is the telling evidence that all authorized vote tally watchers were blocked from being in the actual room to observe the vote tally. They were relegated to watching it on a television or behind a soundproof glass wall. Why the secrecy?

More and more states are starting to seal off the tally rooms so that no one can hear any conversations going on. The law in South Carolina requires that the vote tallying be done in public. Isolating tally watchers from hearing the proceedings is a violation of that process. Of course, then there’s the fact that the final tally is being done out of state, where no one can see if the tally is being changed. Conveniently, this tactic allows local politicians to escape blame if vote fraud is found. Brandon Tubeville of the Activist Post provides some of the evidence we have up to this point.

“After Newt Gingrich’s stunning victory [because of the unbelievable change in the voter’s choices] in the South Carolina Republican primaries on Saturday, there are now questions surrounding the vote counting process that took place Saturday night. Indeed, some individuals who witnessed the actual certification of the vote are beginning to question whether or not the outcome is a result of clever campaigning, or that of voter fraud.

“Although no one is pointing fingers at the Gingrich campaign, or any other campaign at this point [that is because the PTB are the ones who pull the strings and control election machinery at the state and national level], the anomalies that are arising from the accounts of eyewitnesses call into question the certainty and the credibility of the final count in South Carolina.

“At this time, the most serious questions are centered around the precincts in Pickens County.

[…]

Joel Skousen: Here Comes Newt Again – The Establishment’s Choice — “[Marianne Gingrich’s] statement that ‘Newt Gingrich lacks the moral character to serve as President,’ is an absolute truth.”

By

On January 21, 2012

In Joel Skousen, Media Bias Exposed, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul

The biggest single threat to the strategy to sell Newt Gingrich to Republicans as a conservative is the truth. This week, Marianne Gingrich broke her silence and decided to tell America what the real Newt Gingrich is like. …

ABC aired the interview on NIGHTLINE Thursday evening and her charge that he sought an “open marriage” with wife, to include his mistress. Gingrich wanted this accommodation with his wife only to avoid another messy divorce which would expose him for the serial philanderer that he was. Her statement that “Newt Gingrich lacks the moral character to serve as President,” is an absolute truth.

* * *

World Affairs Brief, January 20, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:

Here Comes Newt, Again

Debt Ceiling Games

Europe Turns to the IMF for Next Bailout

Russia Warns Against Attack on Syria

SOPA Debate Not Over

Paul Proposes Repeal of NDAA

Drones Over America

HERE COMES NEWT, AGAIN

It’s hard to tell why the Powers That Be (PTB) seem so desperate to topple Mitt Romney as the frontrunner. Although not an insider, Mitt has taken every possible position the establishment wants—he has a neocon foreign policy, is in favor of NDAA and he has even hinted at using the dreaded VAT tax to solve the deficit problem. Only Gingrich could be worse than Romney and that is why the PTB are working overtime to create yet another phony surge for the former Speaker of the House who betrayed conservatives in 1994 due to his secret globalist ties. If they can get him a win in South Carolina they will try to keep him on a roll in Florida and beyond.

Sarah Palin showed her subservience to the PTB yet again this week by endorsing Gingrich, but Gingrich’s ex-wife is making good on her threat to derail his bandwagon with a no-holds-bar killer interview with ABC news exposing Gingrich’s hypocritical dark side. The network attempted to delay airing this devastating indictment until after the South Carolina primary, but a leak forced them to air it Thursday.

As Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry end their campaigns, the establishment is betting everything now on Gingrich or Santorum. Earlier, the kingmakers asked Perry to continue his campaign even after his poor showing in Iowa, not knowing who they would or could try to resurrect against Romney, but now they want him out so the manipulable voters in SC are not split between 3 false conservative—only two. That way Gingrich or Santorum has a better chance at coming out with a win above Romney’s numbers.

Right now, they are pushing for Gingrich more than Santorum, even after the first phony surge for Gingrich failed. This headline from the AP is emblematic of the typical media theme: “Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich is drawing big, enthusiastic crowds and fending off new attacks from GOP front-runner Mitt Romney while reveling in a strong debate performance and a nod from tea party favorite Sarah Palin.” Palin’s endorsement is bound to become the second most stupid thing she has done since joining John McCain.

Ever wonder why we’ve had so many debates this election cycle? In a normal election year, we’d be lucky to have 3 or 4. Now they come almost twice a month, and this week we got two in a week! Of course, they are all run by establishment news machines that have a clear agenda—to promote the latest “flavor of the month” candidate surging against Romney, and evade or embarrass Ron Paul. The first half hour is always spent showcasing whoever they want to promote. These always get the first softball question designed to make them to shine. Ron Paul always gets the token or quirky questions to make him look bad.

Ron Paul is clearly as much of a target of the hosts in these debates as Mitt Romney. The PTB may not want Romney but they can control him if he wins. Ron Paul is the only candidate who is a complete threat to establishment control in government. FoxNews.com, the supposed conservative TV network news made a blatant attempt to evade even mentioning Ron Paul in its Monday debate analysis. Steve Watson of Infowars.com has the story:

“The dirty tricks campaign against GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul reached new heights during the South Carolina debate last night, with virtual exclusion from the first 40 minutes of the program, poisonous questions in the second half, and a cringe inducing situation during the post debate analysis where Fox pundits were forced to admit that Paul had completely wiped the floor with the other candidates.

“During the post debate commentary, Fox reporter John Roberts blatantly excluded Paul from the charts and graphs he presented representing feedback from viewers. The results of Twitter surveys on which candidate had most accurately answered questions and who had performed the best were displayed with Ron Paul’s name nowhere to be seen.

“Almost one hour later, Roberts was called upon to go over the results one more time, after floods of complaints from viewers asking why Paul had been left out. ‘John, you caused a fury in my world.’ Fox anchor Harris Faulkner began. ‘You left off Ron Paul.’ she added, before Roberts attempted to slime out of the fact that he had totally excluded Paul from his results tally by saying that because Ron Paul won by huge margins in every category, it was unnecessary to report on it!

“Roberts then went through each debate topic again with Paul added to the graphic. As he explained the result Roberts downplayed and skipped over Ron Paul’s figures in every category, causing Harris Faulkner to interject. ‘John, can I stop you right there because I’m getting real time feedback.’ Faulkner said. ‘Ron Paul did not just do well, he did the best from that chart. I just want to be fair because people are watching for this.’ she added.”

“The fact that Ron Paul was the outright winner of the debate was remarkable, given the fact that the moderators had done their utmost to exclude, smear and misrepresent the Congressman earlier in the night. The opening portion of the debate was exclusively reserved for Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum [see what I mean about promoting the establishment favorites first?] to attack frontrunner Mitt Romney in an atmosphere that more resembled The Jerry Springer show than a coherent political debate.

“Refraining from joining in with such pantomime ridiculousness, Ron Paul patiently waited to be addressed by the moderators… and waited… and waited. Indeed, during the first 40 minutes Ron Paul was only asked one question, and that was about ‘scathing attacks’ on the other candidates in campaign ads [as if the others weren’t doing that]. Paul succinctly noted that he believed pointing out legitimate flaws in the other candidates voting records was fair game.

“As the exclusion of Paul continued, it even triggered a commercial break discussion between the Fox political panel about how Paul was being sidelined. Analyst Ed Rollins commented, “I thought Paul placed second in New Hampshire and was effectively second in Iowa – but they’ve got him standing way over on the side. [Even the placement of candidates on the stage is scripted]”

“When Paul was finally asked further questions, they were so leading and laced with underlying venom it defied belief. With almost every question the Congressman had to begin his answer by correcting the moderators for grossly distorting his position on multiple issues.

“Firstly, Paul had to once again explain that there is a significant difference between ‘defense spending’ and Pentagon waste, and that he is not about to decimate military funding, as the moderators suggested. Paul said to thunderous applause. ‘I want to cut military money. I don’t want to cut defense money,’ Paul said. ‘I want to bring the troops home.’”

The contrast between the Washingtonian principles of Paul and his neocon counterparts is vast. Conservatives were horrified as Romney proudly answered that he would have signed the NDAA giving government authority to indefinitely detain people aligned with al Qaeda and even said they don’t have rights. He pontificated upon the old neocon propaganda about “violent jihadists” having declared war on us, and that’s supposed to justify losing our civil liberties.

This growing skewed philosophy of terrorism justifying all manner of government power was illuminated by William Grigg in his latest column at Freedominourtime.com: “Santorum, who is regarded by some misguided conservatives as a champion of the pro-life cause, warned those who doubt that the U.S. government would assassinate civilian scientists should take heed to the way it treats American citizens designated enemies of the State: ‘When people say, `You can’t go out and assassinate people’ — well, tell that to al-Awlaki….We’ve done it. We’ve done it to an American citizen [he bragged].’

“According to Newt Gingrich – whose General Urko act drove the assembled Republicans into a simian frenzy of bloodlust – it is ‘irrational’ of Paul to insist that there are limits on the government’s powers of discretionary killing. Elaborating on that idea in a January 18 interview with South Carolina pastor Kevin Boling, Gingrich asserted that Dr. Paul’s insistence on applying the Golden Rule to foreign policy demonstrated that he had absorbed the ‘anti-American, self-hating attitude of the American Left.’

[…]

While Palin endorsed Gingrich, numerous South Carolina legislators came out for Ron Paul as the Denver Libertarian Examiner reported: “3 Conservative Senators, [including] leading SC State Senator, Tom Davis (R-Beaufort) endorsement on Sunday, collectively send a very big message to the people of South Carolina and the US by coming together and giving a combined endorsement that immediately propels the Ron Paul campaign into ‘serious contender’ status.”

The biggest single threat to the strategy to sell Newt Gingrich to Republicans as a conservative is the truth. This week, Marianne Gingrich broke her silence and decided to tell America what the real Newt Gingrich is like. Her interview was with ABC and they have been trying to bury the story ever since. Fortunately Matt Drudge got wind of it and is trying to shame ABC into airing the interview:

The Drudge report: “Marianne Gingrich has said she could end her ex-husband’s career with a single interview. Earlier this week, she sat before ABCNEWS cameras, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. She spoke to ABCNEWS reporter Brian Ross for two hours, and her explosive revelations are set to rock the trail.

“But now a ‘civil war’ has erupted inside of the network, an insider claims, on exactly when the confession will air!.. A decision was tentatively made to air the interview next Monday, after all votes have been counted. Gingrich canceled a press conference on Wednesday to deal with the matter. ‘He believes that what he says in public and how he lives don’t have to be connected,’ Marianne Gingrich, Newt’s wife of 18 years, explained to ESQUIRE last year.”

ABC aired the interview on NIGHTLINE Thursday evening and her charge that he sought an “open marriage” with wife, to include his mistress. Gingrich wanted this accommodation with his wife only to avoid another messy divorce which would expose him for the serial philanderer that he was. Her statement that “Newt Gingrich lacks the moral character to serve as President,” is an absolute truth.

The Open Marriage charge was brought up in the debate last night, giving Gingrich a chance to give a loud denunciation of the media. Gingrich has used this technique before with great success. Conservative audiences are rightly angry with media bias, and so switching the attack from himself to the media always generates applause. But he perjured himself in the end with a flat out denial that the conversation ever too place. If South Carolinians believe Gingrich over his wife after seeing that interview, then there is little hope of them making the right choice.

Romney made a major tactical mistake by acceding to demands to show his tax returns, even though delaying such to a point if and when he gets the nomination. No person ought to do this on principle. Tax returns are way too private for individuals of wealth to be forced to reveal. He should have taken the high ground and said no–it’s a private matter. I am personally glad that Romney was able to structure his income to fall under the capital gains tax rate of 15%. Deriding him for that is simply building more class warfare in the US.

Only Ron Paul got it right on taxes during the debate. When asked “What is the appropriate tax rate Americans should pay?” Romney said 24% and Paul said 0%. In other words, abolish it.

Contributions should be revealed, but even those are confusing and misleading. OpenSecrets.org provides profiling of where contributions come from for each candidate. Conservative pundits have made much about the fact that all the big banks and investment firms have backed Romney. Wait, but they are also backing Gingrich, and Santorum—everybody but Ron Paul.

But even that doesn’t tell the whole story. While Romney’s campaign for 2012 lists $376k from Goldman Sachs, this isn’t donations from the company itself, it’s from individual brokers. Goldman brokers gave Obama $1,2M during his campaign, so you have to compare the candidate’s numbers side by side to get the full story.

It is also noteworthy that employees of the big banks, big corporations, and big investment houses back all of the establishment candidates, and Congressmen, whether Republicans or Democrats. But they don’t support Ron Paul. He only gets contributions from the little guy. That should tell you who they don’t want and who we should be voting for.

But on other issues, Romney had no high ground to retreat to. The latest charge is that Romney accepted Federal pension bailouts for a steel company that went bankrupt during his tenure at Bain Capital. The bankruptcy triggered the federal pension insurance fund to kick in. He also got an $10B debt forgiveness decree for Bain Capital just as he entered the firm. All of this makes Romney’s denouncing of federal bank bailouts a bit hypocritical.

[…]

The Third Party question continues to plague the establishment. One subscriber wrote, “Will Ron Paul remain [within] the party confines, apply his capital leverage at the convention or bolt and go as an Independent/Libertarian? If he exercises the latter, the pundits generally agree upon a Ross Perot scenario1992. But this time around Ron Paul actually stands a solid chance to become the next President on a third party ticket.”

In an honest election, this would be true. Ron Paul’s core support is now above 20%. The Republican support is only 27% of the nation, and Democrats hold only 31% and many of them don’t vote. That means in a three-way race, for the first time since the Whigs lost their status as a major party, we have the opportunity to bust the two party system wide open. So don’t pass off lightly that an independent candidacy would be suicide. The ire of a substantial minority of Americans is so hot against the establishment, that this may well be our greatest opportunity to stage a political rebellion.

Related:

Joel Skousen: GOP WARMONGERS EMERGE IN CNBC DEBATES | Gingrich’s Unprincipled Life: “…he threatened her: ‘If you ever tell anybody about this, I’ll say you’re lying.’”

Joel Skousen: Stopping Ron Paul in Iowa — How They Did It

By

On January 7, 2012

In False Christians Trashing America, Joel Skousen, Ron Paul

Brilliant!

– –

World Affairs Brief, January 6, 2012 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:

Stopping Ron Paul in Iowa—How They Did It

Brokering the Republican Convention

Embargo of Iranian Oil—How Effective?

Pentagon Budget Cuts Modest but Dangerous

Missile Technology Leaks to Russians

Hillary Signs UN anti-Gun Treaty

Obama’s Eligibility challenge

STOPPING RON PAUL IN IOWA—HOW THEY DID IT

As the Iowa caucus drew near, the establishment GOP and the power that be (PTB) were faced with a dilemma: Ron Paul—that pesky anti-war libertarian Republican — kept rising in Iowa polls despite all establishment attempts to evade, denigrate, and dismiss him. Ron Paul was drawing crowds like a rock star and the nearest candidate in the polls was Romney, who the establishment is also trying to stop. Where could they steer the delegates? The establishment hates Paul even more than Romney and wanted to make sure he didn’t win a primary election in any state. The first blip of manipulation showed up last Friday when the polling numbers showed a “surge” for Rick Santorum, an establishment candidate that had been otherwise going nowhere. The Iowa Republican establishment pulled out all the stops from within to make sure Paul didn’t win. Even still, he came very close. Here’s how they did it.

In the end it was Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum tied for first at 25% and Ron Paul in third place with a close 21.5%. Despite media attempts to crucify Paul as someone to the Left of Obama (Clinton’s old buddy-turned-RINO-Republican, Dick Morris), Paul took it all in stride and told followers he was happy with a top tier third place result. Paul has always been satisfied with slow and steady growth, knowing that all the other candidates who have been flung ahead by the PTB have fallen flat once the voters find out more about them.

It’s one thing to take a candidate new to the race like Rick Perry and artificially boost his polling numbers, as they did last summer (after all, there was nothing to compare him to previously), but Santorum has been in the race from the beginning and never demonstrated more than single digit support, despite a presence in each and every debate. As I said before in the WAB, people don’t suddenly change their opinions about someone without some dramatic incident or change of position that is very popular and unique. Santorum has done nothing spectacular this whole race.

Disgusted, Aaron Dykes of Inforwars.com asks: “What accounts for Santorum’s swift rise to the top of polls in Iowa only days out from the contest when he barely showed a pulse in ANY state, let alone Iowa, among the crowded GOP field at any time in the weeks and months before?” Nothing. It was a total fraud.

In fact Rick Santorum is an establishment insider who is playing conservatives for fools. Sure he talks like a conservative but he’s voted for every expansion of federal power to come along. He advocated for and voted in favor of big government programs in education and transportation and benefits for low-income people while in Congress. Now that he is running for office again, he rails against big government. How convenient.

The real telling issue was his past support for Senator Arlen Specter who, although feigning Republican ideals for many years, was actually a Democrat in action and even a co-conspirator in the JFK assassination cover-up. Rick Santorum played the establishment lackey by backing Specter over the very conservative Pat Toomey who was challenging Specter. That alone tells volumes.

Although Santorum claims to be opposed to same-sex marriage, gay marriage and allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military, he supported Specter who switched to his home Democratic Party in 2009 and was a supporter of gay rights, gay marriage and repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the military. Specter is also a staunch supporter of abortion rights.

Brian Montopoli of CBS news focuses on Santorum’s dilemma: “As he works to build on his momentum and become the consensus conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, social conservatives are taking a second look at the two-term Pennsylvania senator’s record.

“There is one position, however, that social conservatives ask Santorum about regularly on the campaign trail, an issue that also comes up regularly on conservative talk radio: His support for former Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter in the 2004 GOP Senate primary. Santorum said he made a hard decision [claiming] that [it] was grounded in his opposition to abortion, saying Specter had agreed he would support then-President George W. Bush’s Supreme Court nominees no matter what. Specter denies this assertion [One or both are lying].”

The bottom line is that Santorum is someone who the establishment can get to do their bidding and that should be a disqualifier for conservatives, no matter what verbal positions he takes that please them. He’s business as usual in Washington, just like Gingrich and Perry. As further evidence that Santorum is an insider, consider how he got very wealthy after being defeated for re-election. He stayed within the revolving door system of the Washington Beltway:

Businessweek records, “Since his 2006 re-election defeat, the former Pennsylvania lawmaker has gone from being one of the poorer members of the U.S. Senate to earning $1.3 million between January 2010 and August 2011. In 2007, he spent $2 million to buy a 5,000-square foot home in Great Falls, Virginia, according to property records.

“Santorum’s financial rise was powered by consulting contracts with fuel producer Consol Energy Inc., faith advocacy group Clapham Group and American Continental Group, a Washington consultancy, as well as media engagements. ‘If he’s claiming he’s not an insider, this is the thing that insiders do — after public office they cash in,’ said Kent Cooper, a campaign finance expert and former Federal Elections Commission assistant staff director.”

As for Santorum’s sudden surge, the only thing that changed about this candidate was that GOP leaders on the national level conspired with the GOP establishment in Iowa to make sure Ron Paul got no extra votes beyond his faithful cadre of followers. The kingmakers did not want Ron Paul to benefit from the growing perception that he was leading in the polls.

A caucus system produces a much higher percentage of activists than an open primary where all voters are invited to participate—thus a bit harder to manipulation as many caucus delegates already have fixed positions. But still, at least a third of caucus participants in the Republican Party are conservatives by gut feeling only and not well schooled in the arguments. These are those that are concerned only about beating Obama, no matter how it is done, and without carefully considering what we’ll get instead. These are the votes that normally flow to the perceived leader (Romney).

The PTB knew that they couldn’t convert the Paulites to Santorum, and the pro-Romney votes were also pretty solid. So, they concentrated on the conservatives with evangelical tendencies who would not switch to support a Mormon candidate like Romney. Then the media drummed up the issue of Ron Paul’s position against foreign aid (even to Israel) knowing that this would elicit a negative reaction from Christians who have been fed the line that “Israel can do no wrong because God is behind Israel.” While God may be behind the Biblical doctrine of Israel’s return to its consecrated homeland, He certainly does not endorse the unrighteous policies and moral habits of Israel’s globalist leaders who masquerade as Right-wing conservatives (just like Republican leaders in the USA).

Santorum’s drum beating militarism is the perfect attraction for conservatives who can’t see the ulterior motives behind US intervention and unconditionally supporting Israel’s government.

Paul voters have solid intellectual, libertarian roots and can’t easily be persuaded to vote for another unless equally as principled and persuasive. But non-thinking Christians who base their conservatism on some generic notion of small government, militaristic patriotism and restoring Christian values in education can be fairly easily duped by wolves in sheep’s clothing who promise them the world (and always betray them once in office).

Few Christians understand the conspiratorial nature of the battle we are fighting in America and Israel and the necessity to elect someone who will directly fight against the establishment instead of going along with the globalist interventionist agenda. Only Ron Paul qualifies, even though he is reluctant to admit to conspiratorial evidence in government affairs (though privately he understands some of it). To say so publicly would be political suicide.

In Iowa, there were about 20-25% of caucus participants that were undecided. The Republican leaders decided they would concentrate on two forms of pressure to make sure these undecided didn’t vote for Ron Paul: 1) Create a false surge for Rick Santorum and promote his credentials that appeal to Christian conservatives. 2) Use fear tactics at the caucus meetings to ram home the message that if they voted for Ron Paul, Iowa would become the laughing stock of the nation and that the National GOP leadership would deny Iowa its coveted slot as the first primary in the nation.

They did all this with some degree of success. But it wasn’t enough. They had to fudge the voting results. However, the bane of all election manipulators are the entrance or exit polls, usually done by college students working for extra credit in political science. These are hard to falsify without students becoming aware of a conspiracy to commit fraud. This restricts manipulation of the results to within 5-10% of exit polls lest people get suspicious.

In Iowa the pollers use entrances where people are not all arriving at once, making it easier to do polling. These polls all showed Ron Paul leading both Romney and Santorum. The reversal of the end results were not totally attributable to GOP leaders in the caucus making threats about a Ron Paul win. They had to falsify some votes.

First they manufactured a reason for counting the votes in secret: the media announced that Occupy Wall Street was threatening unrest and that possibly the hacker group Anonymous would infiltrate the recording. All this to justify taking the vote count into secret chambers somewhere at GOP headquarters in Des Moines. I don’t believe there was any threat at all. However, this ruse did provide the Iowa GOP the suitable excuse to take the vote count away from the numerous volunteers who had assembled to make sure everything was done in the open.

So, instead of being public and audible to all in attendance (as happens in most caucus meetings), the results were only tallied among the Republican elite who, by open admission, had vowed not to allow Ron Paul to win. These intentions surfaced on BreitbartTV.com as one anti-Ron Paul GOP leader (Dee Dee Benki) told Brietbart how the GOP were going to stop people from voting for Paul. Here’s the link to the interview: http://www.breitbart.tv/republican-strategist-iowa-gop-will-not-allow-paul-to-win/

Aaron Dykes of Infowars.com then declares: “It is no secret that all the stops have been pulled to minimize Paul’s media visibility throughout the campaign trail, with many top GOP figures and media commentators going so far as to pre-script a plan to ignore Iowa in the event that Ron Paul won the caucuses, in order to prevent the Congressman from dominating the national stage. Did the GOP establishment succeed in sabotaging Ron Paul in the Iowa caucus vote as it vowed to do?

Fudging the vote in New Hampshire: the mechanism is being set in place to alter the vote in New Hampshire if necessary. This year New Hampshire has decided it will be optional to record how many people come in to vote so there may be no way to completely match up how many came in vs. actual vote count.

Even with Paul’s third place finish in Iowa, his star is rising significantly in New Hampshire. People are no longer embarrassed to say they are supporting Paul, especially since three local newspapers have endorsed him.

[audio & text] Joel Skousen: ATTACKS ON RON PAUL GO INTO HIGH GEAR — The principled, antiwar, Constitution-obeying, Fed-hating, libertarian Republican congressman from Texas stands firmly outside the bounds of permissible dissent as drawn by either the Republican establishment or the mainstream media

By

On December 23, 2011

In Joel Skousen, Media Bias Exposed, Ron Paul, Timing Predictions

To listen to Joel and Dr. Stanley Monteith discuss these topics,
click on the Radio Liberty 12/23/11 (hour 2) archived broadcast HERE.

* * *

World Affairs Brief, December 23, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:

Attacks on Ron Paul Go into High Gear

Sharing Secrets with China – Again

North Korean Coup?

US Military Ready for War with Iran

Pakistan has Nominal Democracy Only

Shuffling US Troops – Keeping Iraq Surrounded

Syria Attack Closer

Battle Against Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpiao

Economy: Scramble for Cash

Celente’s Economic Collapse Prediction

ATTACKS ON RON PAUL GO INTO HIGH GEAR

Ron Paul is suddenly the man to beat. With polls showing support for Newt Gingrich collapsing in Iowa the kingmakers are facing a very real problem: how to stop this growing anti-government, anti-war movement backing Ron Paul that draws from conservatives, libertarians and honest liberals alike. Despite media attempts to play like he doesn’t exist, he keeps growing in strength. Now both the liberal and faux-conservative media (Fox) is moving into outright attack mode. Establishment figures like former president George H W Bush have even condescended to endorse Romney—the very man the PTB have been trying to defeat with a succession of phony conservative candidates since the beginning. Nothing has worked so far. As a “final solution” they have only one option left to keep a puppet in the White House—engineer the reelection of Obama.

Philip Gourevitch of the very establishment New Yorker Magazine is enjoying the spectacle of the establishment powers failing time after time to stop Romney, and now to stop even Paul:

“True or false: there is nothing that Republicans want more than to drive Barack Obama out of the White House. But what we have instead is a whack-a-mole primary campaign, with a new frontrunner popping up every few weeks, only to be beaten back by the public recognition of his or her own haplessness: It’s Bachmann! No, it’s Perry! Sorry, it’s Cain! Wait a minute—what?!—it’s Gingrich!?!

“Disgraced, discredited, distrusted, despised by his party’s establishment, Newt Gingrich [is/was] the frontrunner, while the only non-preposterous Republican prospect for the general election, Mitt Romney, is shunned. Never mind that Gingrich was running behind Ron Paul in national polls from May to October…[that was before they artificially boosted his polling numbers, which now can’t be sustained and still be credible]… Wait again, yes, here are the latest poll numbers, showing Newt leveling out, maybe slipping a bit, and, rising hot on his heels in pre-Iowa caucus polls and New Hampshire town-hall rallies, here comes Paul!

“A new poll, out early in the week, shows Paul running almost neck-and-neck with Gingrich in Iowa. To be sure, in the relentless program of Republican debates this year, Paul—the Ayn Rand-loving, federal-government hating, practically (if not, as I earlier wrote, rabidly) isolationist Texas congressman—often seemed like the only candidate who was making any sense.

‘That was not a measure of Paul’s reasonableness or appeal, however, but of the disarray of the rest of the field. Paul wants to abolish the Federal Reserve, return to the gold standard, and do away with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, which he considers unconstitutional… But Paul calls the other candidates out on their serial hypocrisies, inconsistencies, and incoherencies.

“Paul’s critique of the control of politics by corporate interests, and of America’s imperial foreign policy and permanent war-footing around the world, strikes a chord more broadly with disaffected voters on both the political right and the left.”

Since the New Yorker piece, the numbers have gotten even worse for Gingrich. Here’s the Atlantic Wire: “A new poll from Public Policy Polling shows that Ron Paul has taken the lead in the Iowa caucus race, while Newt Gingrich’s support is fading fast. A different Gallup poll shows Gringrich still holding the lead [Gallop is a prime manipulator], but slipping, while The New York Times has Paul in the lead as well.

“Gingrich has seen his numbers in the PPP poll drop from 27 percent to 14 percent in just three weeks, while his favorability rating is now split at 46 percent for to 47 percent against, the worst of any candidate not named Jon Huntsman. That’s quite a fall for someone who looked to be running away with the state and taking charge on the national level.”

In each of these cases where the establishment has promoted one candidate after another, the polling numbers were manipulated upward in the most unbelievable ways. I’ve been in political analysis since high school and I’ve never seen these kinds of rapid changes. Why? Because people don’t change their minds that fast, especially upward. Besides, it is relatively easy now to fudge the polling results. They used to work hard to tilt the questions, but now they simply use computers to call people they have polled before who have predictable opinions. It’s called “dial a vote.”

The polls go down rapidly only when the kingmakers realize that the artificial support isn’t working. They are doing real polling behind the scenes that they never tell you about. In the case of Iowa, reality comes in two weeks when the caucuses actually vote. The pollsters have to stop fudging the polls early enough to avoid the embarrassment of being so wrong when the vote comes in.

The beauty of the caucus system is that they don’t use electronic voting and it’s done in open meetings, so it is almost impossible to rig the vote. In a caucus system, groups of voters in little sub districts elect delegates to go to the big caucus meeting where the candidates for office in each party are selected. Typically, only people who are activists in politics get chosen to be delegates. Normal apathetic voters don’t even show up at the neighborhood meetings to select delegates. Thus, groups that are better organized and passionate about voting are much better represented at caucus meetings. As a result, you normally get better results in a caucus than with a primary system, where people are easily influenced by media propaganda and distortions.

I can guarantee you that if Ron Paul wins the Iowa Caucus meetings, the entire media, in lock step, will claim it’s irrelevant and “not representative” of a real primary vote. Then you’ll see a concerted movement to force states that use the caucus system to abandon it in favor of a primary. The establishment has long wanted to get rid of the caucuses simply because they are resistant to external control. They will use Ron Paul’s win to decry the caucus system.

In fact it is starting even before the vote: Liberal USA Today made the incongruous claim that “ ‘Despite money and support [and leading in the polls], Ron Paul still not in lead‘. What the author Jackie Kucinich is saying is that because “mainstream Republicans” say he shouldn’t be leading, that means the voters are irrelevant and that Paul is not in the lead. Go figure.

The reason a Ron Paul win in Iowa worries the establishment is because New Hampshire is next where independent voters outnumber the two major political parties. The establishment has been crowing to the world that Ron Paul can’t win, and suddenly he wins a state primary. That could translate into votes in New Hampshire, and the PTB can’t let Paul win two in a row lest people really begin to see him as a potential winner.

So, there is now a flood of media coverage being directed at Ron Paul. Why, after so much effort evading even mentioning his name? Because they have to attack him and destroy him, concentrating on every little thing they can dig up. They don’t have much, but they are capitalizing on it in spades.

The New York Daily News talks about the latest common attack scheme: “The Republican presidential candidate walked out on a CNN interview Wednesday following a heated discussion over racist newsletters that were sent out in his name more than two decades ago. The usually mild-mannered, Texas congressman – who’s leading in some Iowa polls – became irked when network reporter Gloria Borger pressed Paul about the newsletters.

“Paul said he was sick of being ‘pestered’ by reporters about the issue. The newsletters, called Ron Paul’s Political Report, Ron Paul’s Freedom Report and the Ron Paul Survival Report went out under his name in the late 1980s and early 1990s during his time in office. They contain a series of offensive statements, including ‘We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.’ During the 1992 Los Angeles riots, another read ‘Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.’

“When Borger asked Paul if he ever read the newsletters, the politician quipped, ‘Why don’t you go back and look at what I said yesterday on CNN and what I’ve said for 20 something years…I didn’t write them. I disavow them.’”

It was a typical attack setup and “the two went back and forth until Paul became so annoyed that he took off his mic and walked out.. Paul told Borger the issue had become incendiary ‘because of people like you.’[Absolutely true. The media makes a drum beat and people take notice. When they choose to carefully bury a topic, the public remains ignorant.]

“The controversy over the newsletters is not new and has come up before, including his 2008 presidential run. Paul has argued that while the newsletters went out under his name, others did the writing.” That won’t stop the media from making an issue of it, plus his positions in favor of getting the federal government out of prosecuting for marijuana possession, raw milk and all other personal freedoms when not violating the rights of others.

It is interesting that this latest attack wave based upon these twenty-year old statements surfaced only after the Weekly Standard wrote about them in their latest issue. The Weekly Standard is Irving Kristol’s premier neo-con, pro-war publication in the US—the epitome of the establishment desire to defeat the only anti-war candidate in the Republican stable.

The Weekly Standard also figured prominently in attacking Pat Buchanan when he upset the establishment election plans. Here’s Timothy P. Carney, Senior Political Columnist for the Washington Examiner predicting that the establishment will take the gloves off in attacking Ron Paul:

“The Republican presidential primary has become a bit feisty, but it will get downright ugly if Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses. The principled, antiwar, Constitution-obeying, Fed-hating, libertarian Republican congressman from Texas stands firmly outside the bounds of permissible dissent as drawn by either the Republican establishment or the mainstream media.

“But in a crowded GOP field currently led by a collapsing Newt Gingrich and an uninspiring Mitt Romney, Paul could carry the Iowa caucuses, where supporter enthusiasm has so much value. If Paul wins, how will the media and the GOP react? Much of the media will ignore him (expect headlines like ‘Romney Beats out Gingrich for Second Place in Iowa’). Some in the Republican establishment and the conservative media will panic. Others will calmly move to crush him, with the full cooperation of the liberal mainstream media.

“For a historical analogy, study the aftermath of Pat Buchanan’s 1996 victory in the New Hampshire primary. ‘It was awful,’ Buchanan told me this week when I asked him about his few days as the nominal GOP front-runner. ‘They come down on you with both feet.’

“The GOP establishment that week rallied to squash Buchanan. Just after New Hampshire, Gingrich’s hand-picked group of GOP leaders, known as the Speaker’s Advisory Group, met with one thing on their minds, according to a contemporaneous Newsweek report: ‘How to deal with Buchanan.’

“While many Republicans dismissed Buchanan’s New Hampshire win as irrelevant, arguing his support was too narrow to ever win the nomination, the neoconservative wing of the GOP darkly warned of a Buchanan menace. ‘People are panicked,’ Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard told Newsweek. ‘If they’re not, it’s only because they don’t know what’s going on.’

“The liberal mainstream media dutifully filled out Kristol’s picture of ‘what’s going on.’ Newsweek put an ominously lit picture of Buchanan on the cover under the words ‘Preaching Fear.’ The article stretched itself into contortions to paint Buchanan as a white racist. (Buchanan was campaigning in South Carolina, which still flew the Confederate flag over its capitol.)

“Insinuations of racism and anti-Semitism were the weapons of the mainstream media, but Buchanan’s sins in the eyes of the GOP establishment were different. They feared Pat because he rejected a rare inviolable article of faith among the party elites: free trade. Also, in the post-Cold War era, Buchanan’s foreign policy had become far less interventionist than that of the establishment.

“It’s similar with Paul. There are many reasons he is unacceptable to the Republican elite. Some of these transgressions reflect badly on Paul. Others reflect badly on the party. In Paul’s favor, he holds to the professed principles of his party. He makes Republicans look bad by firmly opposing overspending and the unconstitutional expansion of federal power. He correctly predicted the troubles that would be caused by housing subsidies and the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

“Paul is also disliked for his foreign policy. His non-interventionism [always billed as isolationism just as with Robert Taft] has provoked clashes with the party elites, but it resonates with a growing number of Republicans who have grown tired of endless war and nation building that doesn’t seem to serve American interests. But Paul regularly goes too far for even these voters, criticizing the killing of al Qaeda leaders and at times sounding like he agrees with Iran’s grievances against the United States.

“But neither his establishment-irritating adherence to principle, nor his hawk-angering foreign policy, will be the focus of the anti-Paul attacks should he carry Iowa. His conservative critics and the mainstream media will imply that he is a racist, a kook, and a conspiracy theorist.

“Paul’s indiscretions — such as abiding 9/11 conspiracy theorists [a carefully worded charge (abide) meant to penalize anyone who doesn’t openly condemn conspiracies like everyone else] and allowing racist material in a newsletter published under his name — will be blown up to paint a scary caricature. His belief in state’s rights and property rights will be distorted into support for Jim Crow and racism.

“Many of Paul opponents will take heart in concluding that Paul cannot get more than 25 percent in any state, and so he can be dismissed as a spoiler. But for the enforcers of Republican orthodoxy, a Paul victory in Iowa will be an act of impudence that must be punished.” Indeed!

I believe the PTB will be able to derail Paul’s candidacy, not only in the primaries past New Hampshire, but at the convention as well. You will see Paul shunned and slighted at the Republican National Convention and given a speaking slot (if at all) not in prime time. All of this will anger and energize his passionate followers and they’ll vow revenge during the election. The anger at all the establishment betrayal during all of 2012 will be palpable among those that are forming a large minority in the nation demanding real change and a return to the Constitution.

Not only will they demand Paul not support Romney if Romney wins, but they will instigate a draft Paul movement to get him to run as an independent. Ron is considering such a move for several reasons:

1) He won’t owe anything to the Republican Party after this election cycle. He’s not running for reelection to Congress. That kept him from bolting during the 2008 election cycle, and time has proved his then strategy correct.

2) This is his last foray into politics. He hasn’t got anything to lose by going for broke.

3) His political star is still rising and his support is at a crescendo—greater than ever before, and his supporters don’t want him to compromise or go away.

4) There is no one in the wings to succeed him, except perhaps his son Rand, so he’ll be expected to make his influence felt as far as he can.

5) Splitting off the Republican vote is not a consequence he fears. He knows that a RINO Republican will do just as much damage to the nation in the next 4 years as Obama. He won’t be persuaded to support the lesser of two evils.

Lastly, the PTB for the first time since Ross Perot may want to promote an independent candidacy. Historically they ONLY do this when they want to split the vote and this time they want to split votes away from Romney. Of course the kingmakers are dead set against a Ron Paul being in the White House since he would actively work to undo all the illicit acts they have enshrined for generations.

But they also don’t want Romney. Despite successfully infiltrating his campaign with every neocon and establishment advisor they can muster, in spite of Romney’s excessive ambition which leads him to flip-flopping and compromise and in spite of his desperate wishes to be accepted by the establishment. To them that is not enough. As I said before, I think the PTB have grown so accustomed to having virtual puppets in the presidency since after Ronald Reagan, that they fear a non-insider as President. They know that he wouldn’t stomach many of the illegal things going on and turn against his establishment handlers.

So, if Romney gets the nomination, the PTB will engineer Obama’s reelection. 1) They will encourage a Ron Paul independent run. 2) They will allow Ron into the debates. 3) They will give him media coverage and make a big deal out of a Paul independent candidacy. Those are the signs.

They will also give us the long expected war with Iran, most likely close to the election. It’s the one sure way to get a president reelected—create a patriotic appearing war. If they were to pull off the war on Iran early in 2012, it would probably accrue to Ron Paul’s favor as more war is particularly unpopular now. But if it occurs in the fall, it will accrue to Obama’s favor, if accompanied with the expected media drumming about supporting our troops.

Thus, although I’m pessimistic about the chances the establishment will permit Ron Paul to win, he is building the constitutional reform movement more than anyone else in this or the past century. For that alone we owe Ron Paul our support. Give generously to his campaign to make sure he has the ammunition to make a difference.

[…]

Joel Skousen (keeping people honest): CELENTE’S ECONOMIC COLLAPSE PREDICTION

By

On December 23, 2011

In Gerald Celente, Joel Skousen, Ron Paul, Timing Predictions

Remember, for the globalists, their position is very tenuous while the people have an anti-government and anti-FED champion in the wings who is principled enough to shut down this corrupt system.

The PTB aren’t going to give Ron Paul that chance by provoking the very collapse that would rally people to his support. So, I’m predicting a continued inflationary downhill slide rather than collapse.

* * *

World Affairs Brief, December 23, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:

Attacks on Ron Paul Go into High Gear

Sharing Secrets with China – Again

North Korean Coup?

US Military Ready for War with Iran

Pakistan has Nominal Democracy Only

Shuffling US Troops – Keeping Iraq Surrounded

Syria Attack Closer

Battle Against Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpiao

Economy: Scramble for Cash

Celente’s Economic Collapse Prediction

[…]

CELENTE’S ECONOMIC COLLAPSE PREDICTION

Gerald Celente continues to ride his almost mythical reputation as the most prescient trends forecaster ever, but his recent prediction is more hype than substance. He’s definitely on the right track in criticizing the government and the horrendous debt situation the Banksters have put the world in. However, for the past two years he’s been preaching imminent collapse and he’s been wrong consistently on timing. He’ll be right eventually, but I don’t think he really understands the powers that conspire to control things in the world and how much more they can still do to prolong the illusions of prosperity.

Here are excerpts of his latest, with [my comments in brackets] “Hold onto your hat, your wallet, and your wits. After a tumultuous 2011 in which many of the trends we had forecast became headline news around the world [but the collapse didn’t happen], we are now forewarning of an even more tumultuous year to come [sells a lot of Trends Journals].

“One megatrend looms on the near horizon. And we forecast that when it strikes, it will be a shock felt around the world. Hyperbole it’s not! Our research has revealed that at the very highest levels of government this megatrend has been seriously discussed [now, that’s hype. If he were really inside the FED he’d see them working day and night to keep the system from imploding—not for our sakes but for theirs and their power].

1. “Economic Martial Law: Given the current economic and geopolitical conditions, the central banks and world governments already have plans in place to declare economic martial law with the possibility of military martial law to follow [absolutely false until real war comes]. They are going to call a bank holiday [no evidence of this at all. This is only done when there is mass panic about money or inflation and a run on the banks is occurring. I don’t see that as a legitimate threat at all in the near future.]. And a bank holiday is no holiday folks. You can’t get your money out and when you do get it out, you will get it out a little bit at a time [which would collapse the economy and accrue to the favor of candidate Ron Paul—which is the last thing they want]. It’s going to be worth a lot less. That’s what they do with bank holidays, they devalue your money [Argentina perhaps, which had it’s Peso pegged to the dollar artificially, but the US dollar is pegged to no other currency. Only gradual inflation can devalue–not a bank holiday and a lopping off of zeros].

2. “Battlefield America: With a stroke of the Presidential pen, language was removed from an earlier version of the National Defense Authorization Act, granting the President authority to act as judge, jury and executioner. Citizens, welcome to ‘Battlefield America.’[true, but you won’t see it implemented on any visible scale for several years. The PTB don’t want to prove us right while they are at risk of a Tea Party/Ron Paul revolution]

3. “Invasion of the Occtupy: 15 years ago, Gerald Celente predicted in his book Trends 2000 that prolonged protests would hit Wall Street in the early years of the new millennium and would spread nationwide [he was off by 10 years]. The ‘Occtupy’ is now upon us, and it is like nothing history has ever witnessed [actually, it’s nothing compared to real social unrest like I’ve seen in Latin America. The Occupy Wall Street movement is there to begin the process of unrest, but that too will take more time to mature].

4. “Climax Time: The financial house of cards is collapsing, and in 2012 many of the long-simmering socioeconomic and geopolitical trends that Celente has accurately forecast will come to a climax. Some will arrive with a big bang and others less dramatically but no less consequentially [He’s covered all the bases with that last sentence. I think it will be more gradual as has happened in Europe despite the premature predictions on the death of the Euro].

5. “Technocrat Takeover: “Democracy is Dead; Long Live the Technocrat!” A pair of lightning-quick financial coup d’états in Greece and Italy have installed two unelected figures as head of state. No one yet in the mainstream media is calling this merger of state and corporate powers by its proper name: Fascism, nor are they calling these “technocrats” by their proper name: Bankers! [All true. Every major problem nation in Europe has changed governments and installed someone who comes from the cadre of International bankers.]”

The fact that the PTB in Europe have maneuvered Goldman Sachs type people into power and demanded a complete restructuring of the European Union is strong evidence that the globalists are not yet willing to pull the plug and cause a precipitous collapse. They could allow the whole system to collapse, but if it happens it’s not because they couldn’t have forestalled the consequences. I believe they can and they will. As I have detailed in prior briefs, they can get away with a lot more inflation without resulting in hyper-inflation. Remember, for the globalists, their position is very tenuous while the people have an anti-government and anti-FED champion in the wings who is principled enough to shut down this corrupt system.

The PTB aren’t going to give Ron Paul that chance by provoking the very collapse that would rally people to his support. So, I’m predicting a continued inflationary downhill slide rather than collapse. The final half of Celente’s Mega Trends concerns his solutions and optimism for the future. I’ll save that for next week’s year end Big Picture Brief. Have a Merry Christmas. We still have time to prepare. [END]

Joel Skousen: Lindsey Williams – How Credible? — By the end of 2012 he claims “all private fortunes will be lost that are secured with paper.” [I’d say, no way. A total collapse of paper won’t happen till WWIII, and Iran won’t trigger the big war]

By

On December 16, 2011

In Joel Skousen, People, Timing Predictions

World Affairs Brief, December 16, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

LINDSEY WILLIAMS: HOW CREDIBLE?

I get asked quite frequently to comment on Lindsey Williams’ latest revelations which he claims comes from insider oil men that he came to know while a Baptist oil field chaplain in Alaska. At first Williams was very accurate because of first-hand knowledge about a giant US oil field on Gull Island in the Arctic that the government required to be capped to force US dependence on foreign oil. My own opinion is that it was done to preserve US oil for some future world war in which our foreign oil supplies will be cut off. The powers that be (PTB) aren’t hoping to use that oil for our benefit but for their own control of a provoked war that will push us into a New World Order.

Lindsey developed two sources of insider information while in Alaska. The most important was Ken Fromm who later became the head of ARCO oil and was later fired for talking to Williams about holding Gull Island oil off the market. Ken Fromm has since died and another executive close to Fromm has continued to feed Williams supposed insider information about oil and the globalist threat to America.

I do not believe Fromm was a true insider. He was a lower level player at best, who primarily came into contact with the PTB only when he was threatened by federal agents to cap the huge oil find. Obviously ARCO was compensated under the table. Fromm must have then decided to go along, but he was never high enough to know long-term insider plans (which are constantly between tweaked). His sources may have claimed they were telling him high secrets, but that would be very unlikely unless Fromm was evil enough to be trusted by the PTB. I believe Fromm was probably sincere and caught between the threats of government upon his company and his own principles. That is why he wanted to let Williams in on what he felt was going on.

But no true insider would have been talking to a Christian patriot like Lindsey Williams, and Fromm was eventually called on the carpet for doing so. I think Fromm was gleaning some things from those he knew who were part of the conspiracy and passing along orders from above, but Williams clearly doesn’t understand how the conspiracy works and why he had a too-good-to-be-true relationship going. Now he should be much more skeptical of those feeding him part truth and part error.

The PTB record all telephone conversations and email, especially insiders who might be tempted to talk too much, and all journalists—to make sure nothing gets out they don’t want getting out. No one on our side would be allowed deep into the inside, and if someone did by a fluke, he certainly would be discovered quickly and shut down if he were regularly leaking to someone like Williams who runs around telling everything to the world.

The inconsistent thing about Williams’ story is that he claimed he was threatened into shutting down his speaking engagements and stopping publication of his book (The Non Energy Crisis) about the same time Fromm was fired. But then, magically, new sources start feeding him information again and he can keep peddling stories. That’s fishy.

I have no doubt someone is actually talking to Williams, but that person is not on our side and he’s playing with Williams in order to get him discredited. After Fromm died, I think the PTB decided to keep giving Williams some truths and some falsehoods. Williams is rather naive and self-promoting about some things and that made him a good candidate for parlaying disinformation.

Fromm’s colleague took over the task of feeding Williams information and started off feeding information that correctly predicted a collapse in the price of oil. That cemented Williams’ reputation as someone who still had good inside information. A few years ago, the oil manipulators were storing oil in every possible storage facility and empty tanker they could find in order to create an artificial shortage and jack up the price of oil. Williams’ oil insider friend must have known that excess oil storage capacity was nearing an end and that the manipulation game had run out of rope. He told Williams that oil would drop precipitously to $50 a barrel from over $100, and it happened almost exactly that way.

From that point on, Williams was riding high on the claim that he had a perfect track record. But his sources have been more wrong than right lately. Over a year ago he predicted the price of oil would rise to $150 Barrel and that the dollar would be dead within a very short period. When the Euro crisis hit (which boosted the dollar) he said we have “just 2 to 3 weeks until it happens to US!” It didn’t happen. That isn’t to say there aren’t huge problems, just that his timing was way off.

We are still waiting for his “Get Ready for $5 a Gallon Gasoline and Major Food Price Increases!” claimed months ago. Certainly, he’ll be right eventually, but my point is that when he makes these announcements, he claims specific insider detailed information, and the details are wrong. The more Williams hypes the message the more he is beginning to sound like Chicken Little. His latest predictions are also a bit too specific, though generally have a better chance of coming true:

1). U.S./NATO will incite a war with Iran by Sept/Oct of 2012, just before the election which will boost Obama into office for a second term. I too think they will attack, but I’m not at all sure it will wait until then. However, it is very likely that if the PTB want to put Obama in again, a war right before elections is the way to do it. This is possible or even probable.

2) Next fall, it’s coming down (the whole economy). By the end of 2012 he claims “all private fortunes will be lost that are secured with paper.” [I’d say, no way. A total collapse of paper won’t happen till WWIII, and Iran won’t trigger the big war]

3) Gold going to at least $3,000 [unlikely within a year, but inevitable eventually]

4) Gas will be $8-10/gallon, once the war starts and 40% of the world’s oil supply is cut off [more like 10-20%], and Gull Island’s gigantic oil field in Alaska is already being tapped [Alaska pipeline figures don’t support this].

Frankly, since we never hear from Mr. X himself, we can’t tell if the source is putting out these questionable claims or weather Lindsey Williams is exaggerating them into something specific in order to be dramatic. Once a person gets a reputation for ever more dramatic revelations every time he appears on Alex Jones, it’s pretty hard to stop and say something normal, or admit you’ve been wrong—which he never does.

Related:

[ audio ] Lindsey Williams: U.S./NATO to Insite Iranian War by Sept/Oct of 2012 —”By the end of 2012, all private fortunes will be lost that are secured with paper.”

[Alex Jones TV] Lindsey Williams: Elite to cut off oil from Middle East | Gigantic, hushed up, Gull Island oil reserve in Alaska to be finally tapped!!!

Lindsey Williams: Soon, US will be forced to allow drilling in the massive Alaska oil fields — as middle east oil is cut off from our shores

Lindsey Williams Returns: China is the BIG ONE! Watch China and Russia. “They’re interested in the technology. And once they get it they’ll turn around and throw it right back in our face, just like the Japanese did [before WWII].”

Lindsey Williams Returns: Get Ready for $5 a Gallon Gasoline and Major Food Price Increases! – Alex Jones Tv

Lindsey Williams: The Elite Speak — Dollar to devalue by 30-50% in the next 12 months

Lindsey Williams on Radio Liberty: Lindsey predicts…

Lindsey Williams Returns: Confessions of an Elitist Who Has Now Passed. When the Euro dies we just have 2 to 3 weeks until it happens to US!

Lindsey Williams Returns: Get Ready for $150 Barrel of Oil and Mr. X Revealed!

Lindsey Williams: Deathbed Globalist “Spills Gut” On Plan to Destroy America

Lindsey Williams on Alex Jones Tv: Lindsey talked with elite insider again (2/24/10) about the future of America and monetary system, the globalist plans for the rest of the world — “The dollar will be dead by 2012.”

Lindsey Williams on the Two Year Globalist Timetable: “They have some definite plans. Now whether they will succeed and accomplish it or not is another story. I hope they don’t, but on the other hand, that is their timeline”

[10/23/09] Lindsey Williams: We Have Just 2 Years to Get Our Act Together?

[10/20/09] Lindsey Williams Back on Alex Jones Tv: Total Economic Collapse of America in 2 Years? / “The Devil’s Messiah”

[10/19/09] Globalist Insider Tells Lindsey Williams: “Within TWO YEARS you will not recognize America. … You will be so poor you will not be able to rebel”

Lindsey Williams’ Book Now Online: “The Energy Non-Crisis”

Lindsey Williams’ Life Threatened by Tycoon for Speaking Out About the Non-Energy Crisis

Skousen: Gas Price Manipulation—Public Needs to Demand Opening of the Gull Island Oil Field (Alaska)

Lindsey Williams: The Energy *Non*-Crisis—Alaska’s ‘Classified’ Oil Reserve Largest on Earth?

Joel Skousen: GOP Warmongers Emerge in CNBC Debate | Gingrich’s Unprincipled Life: “…he threatened her: ‘If you ever tell anybody about this, I’ll say you’re lying.'”

By

On November 25, 2011

In 'THEY' couldn't be that EVIL??, Joel Skousen, Lying, Media Bias Exposed, Newt Gingrich, Republicans & Dems Blackmailable, Ron Paul

World Affairs Brief, November 25, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:

No Fly Zone Proposal in Syria a Sign of War Coming

Super Committee Failure: No One Has the Courage to Stop Spending

GOP Warmongers Emerge in CNBC Debate

Ron Paul’s Finest Hour Defending Civil Liberties

Failure of US-Russia Arms Control Talks

Europe’s Rush to Liquidity

Official List: Too Big to Fail Banks

[…]

GOP WARMONGERS EMERGE IN CNBC DEBATES

This week’s Republican debate sponsored by Wolf Blitzer of CNBC showcased how far Republican candidates (excepting Ron Paul and sometimes Michelle Bachman) have descended into the control of neocons. I never saw so much warmongering in the past 4 years. It seems they were all intent on using the war drums of terrorism to increase rather than abolish the Patriot Act and increase war rather than stop these invasions and occupations of foreign nations. The hatred against the US is building and that’s just what these wars are intended to do in the globalist playbook.

Spencer Akerman noted that no one except Ron Paul offers a significantly different point of view than the Obama adminstration: “Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich pretty much agree with Obama on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Ex-Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, saying that he backed the ‘commanders on the ground,’ [who are mostly yes-men to the politicians] endorsed Obama’s current approach: ending the Afghanistan troop surge in 2012 and withdrawing most troops by the end of 2014.

“Romney’s challenger-of-the-week, ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, was more concerned with the other side of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. He said he’d tell Pakistanis to ‘get out of the way’ of U.S. troops conducting hot pursuit of terrorists running out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan. And it also sounded like he’d up the covert raids: ‘Don’t complain if we kill people you’re not willing to go after on your territory where you have been protecting them,’ Gingrich said [incredibly calloused].

“That’s a departure from Obama’s approach — but it’s a change in degree, not kind. NATO helicopters currently pursue terrorists fleeing into Pakistan, and U.S. troops on the border fire artillery at Pakistani positions where insurgents attack them. Then there are special-operations raids like the one deep into Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden. But those are still exceptional circumstances; Gingrich sounded like he’d turn them into something closer into the rule [they already are].

“Romney wants to get rid of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. Perry recently called for a no-fly zone over Syria. Romney ripped him apart: ‘You’d need a no-drive zone’ instead, since Assad’s military isn’t attacking Syrian dissidents from the air. But even if Romney wouldn’t launch a Libya war redux in Syria, he endorsed more sanctions, ‘covert action’ (without explaining), and backing Turkish and Arab League diplomacy to get Assad out, while ‘meeting with the Alawites so they understand they have a future after Assad [under US and NATO control].’ It was a much deeper policy answer than most on display tonight, and evidence that Romney’s thought through what his stated support of the Arab Spring would require [nonsense. He’s just parroting what his highly paid CFR advisors tell him—it’s the standard line].

“Practically everything else is up for grabs. Debate moderator CNN deserves its share of blame for this. In two hours, there were no questions about China [or Russia], no questions about the Eurozone financial meltdown, no questions about the Mexican drug cartels. Nine Republican candidates said practically nothing about whether they’d acquiesce to huge defense cuts or roll them back.” That is how the media frames the debates to evade many issues.

Think Progress criticized neocon and presidential hopeful Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) for his “wildly conflicting positions on Iran. Last month, Santorum defended Ronald Reagan’s decision to negotiate with Iran but contradicted himself a day later by asserting that the Iranian government ‘cannot be negotiated with.’ But in comments made on Friday at a campaign stop in Iowa, Santorum took a more extreme position than any other candidate, claiming Iranian nuclear scientists are ‘enemy combatants’ and could be targeted for assassination.”

Santorum completely ignores the fact that our assassination work by drones and its collateral damage to civilians is enraging the non-western world. But Newt Gingrich was the worst calling [for] more use of the warrantless surveillance and heavy handed tactics permitted by the misnamed PATRIOT ACT. You get the feeling from watching Newt’s smug looks while listening to Ron Paul’s impassioned response for preserving civil rights that Gingrich would welcome a 1984 style society. He’s a totally unprincipled man.

But what will really hurt the establishment chances of selling Republicans on Gingrich is his defense of amnesty for illegals that have been here for years (thanks to little enforcement by the federal government). “Newt adopted the ‘heart position,’ arguing that long-rooted families, even if illegal, ought to be given a path to citizenship. ‘The party that says it’s the party of the family is going to destroy families that have been here for a quarter of a century?’” This quote is already coming back to haunt him. “Along with Santorum, Gingrich also endorsed profiling, saying that ‘you need to use every tool you can possibly use to gather the intelligence.” Every tool? Scary.

Gingrich takes a hard line on expanding foreign policy in line with his globalist background and policy advisors. As pointed out on Jim Lobe’s blog, “Former House Speaker and GOP presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich announced his national security team last night, ahead of tonight’s CNN national security debate. David Wurmser: a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute [a neocon think tank where Gingrich is a former senior fellow], Wurmser served on the staffs of two top Bush administration hawks, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton and Vice President Dick Cheney (where Stephen Yates, another Gingrich adviser, also served). In 2007, a U.N. official called Wurmser one of the ‘new crazies’ who wanted to attack Iran. In 1996, Wurmser co-authored a paper from a right-wing pro-Israel group advocating the removal of Saddam Hussein from power.

“Ilan Berman: Berman, the vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council (which also gave the Gingrich campaign Herman Pirchner and Yates) and editor of the Jewish Institute For National Security Affairs journal, has advocated U.S.-led regime change in Iran and wrote that military action against Iran should be a ‘last resort.’ But he’s also attempted to minimize negative effects of an attack and, in 2005 at a Middle East Forum briefing, said Iran is a ‘prime candidate’ for Iraq-style pre-emption.

“James Woolsey: Woolsey served as honorary co-chair of Islamophobe Frank Gaffney‘s Center For Security Policy and is a current leadership board and executive team member at the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). Woolsey advocated for the Iraq war, supports illegal Israeli West Bank settlement construction, and now pushes a confrontational stance on Iran. In 1998, Woolsey signed onto a Project For a New American Century letter urging the military removal of Saddam Hussein.”

Margaret Carlson of Bloomberg, along with various other pundits has begun to notice the “new front runner of the month” syndrome affecting the Republican Party. Carlson blames it on lack of intellect within the Republican party: “Gripped by anti-intellectualism, the party has successively swooned over Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, Texas Governor Rick Perry and Herman Cain.”

Unthinking though the majority may be, this alone isn’t the reason for this too good to be true rise and fall of challengers to Romney. It’s the controlled media and their pollster whores that are outright forging the data in order to make it appear as if these new challengers are suddenly in first place. When the public fails to rally in support of each failed puppet candidate, the polling numbers are allowed to drop to their real level.

Carlson then engages in a fairly cogent analysis of “The Newt:” “In Gingrich, Republicans at least have a candidate who, unlike Cain, understands that the Taliban aren’t threatening to take over Libya (although Gingrich was for President Barack Obama’s intervention there before he was against it). Republicans can be certain that Gingrich’s overactive brain won’t freeze when confronted with rudimentary questions. It may, however, overheat.

“Gingrich has a hundred ideas, many of them half-baked, when a single consistent theme would suffice. He loves listening to his own voice and is so dazzled by his rhetorical skills that he believes he can wriggle out of the very tight spots in which he invariably wedges himself. The most recent example was his claim that he was paid by Freddie Mac not as an influence peddler, but for his advice as a ‘historian.’ Bloomberg News subsequently revealed that his fees had totaled more than $1.6 million, which is a whole lot of history.”

But Gingrich, a member of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations since 1990, is a lousy historian when it comes to remembering his own unprincipled past. “In giving Gingrich a second look, conservatives are bound to see some ugly things. Before reversing his position under a barrage of conservative criticism, Gingrich called the Medicare reform championed by Republican Representative Paul Ryan ‘right- wing social engineering.’ Earlier this year, his campaign imploded as Gingrich decamped with his wife for a cruise of the Greek isles (which he now characterizes, incredibly, as a prescient fact-finding mission to study Greece’s debt problem). When he returned, his staff quit.

“In addition to a longstanding credibility problem, Gingrich has committed multiple heresies against the conservative faith. He made an advertisement with House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi in which together they promoted global-warming awareness. Gingrich called it ‘probably the dumbest single thing I’ve done in recent years,’ an admission that won’t necessarily appease a Republican base convinced that global warming is a fraud perpetrated by scientists.

“In 1986, Gingrich backed amnesty for illegal aliens and, as former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has gleefully pointed out, Gingrich was one of the many Republicans who expressed support for an individual mandate to buy health insurance before that idea was adopted by Obama.

“Gingrich, who recently converted to Catholicism and says he’s pro-life, didn’t do much for the pro- life cause in the 1990s when he was the second-most-powerful person in Washington. He did not defund Planned Parenthood or pass the human-life amendment. In a high-profile Republican primary in a New York special election in 2009, he endorsed the pro-choice candidate before she dropped out of the race.

“Influence Peddling in Gingrich’s post- congressional life: For more than a decade he has exploited his insider credentials to embed himself in the interlocking and lucrative system of special interests and influence peddling. For one paying client, Gingrich said that Medicare could save more than $33 billion a year if it were to encourage patients to sign ‘advance directives’ to limit end-of-life care, a policy that Sarah Palin has since relabeled ‘death panels.’ As historian Gingrich tries to explain away his work for Freddie Mac without actually disclosing what he did, he risks digging himself deeper into the Washington muck that the Tea Party abhors.

“Gingrich has so many missteps to explain, he has set up a website featuring his own negatives (well, some of them) and respective explanations. Lots of luck there. It took a surge in the polls for his daughter to explain that Gingrich’s visit to his wife’s hospital bedside as she recovered from cancer surgery was not, as widely reported, to tell her that he wanted a divorce. He just wanted to visit.

“For Republicans, Gingrich’s rise and eventual collapse may prove more embarrassing than the boom-and-bust cycles of previous candidates who claimed to be the One Who Can Stop Romney from gaining the nomination. Conservatives have to forgo so many principles — three marriages? — to elevate Newt, that there’s almost nothing left.”

I had a subscriber quit last week over her feelings that I was being “too hard on Gingrich.” In reality, I haven’t even begun to tell of the skeletons in this man’s closets. Some are too unsavory to tell in detail, but here’s an edited version from the 1995 Vanity Faire article about Gingrich:

“In the spring of 1977, [Anne Manning, who admitted to a relationship with Gingrich that started during his 1976 campaign] was in Washington to attend a census-bureaus workshop when Gingrich took her to dinner at a Vietnamese restaurant. He met her back at her modest hotel room. ‘We had [a form of sex without getting in bed],’ she says. ‘He prefers that… because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’ Indeed, before Gingrich left that evening, she says, he threatened her: ‘If you ever tell anybody about this, I’ll say you’re lying.’” During that same period one of Newt Gingrich’s neighbors Kip Carter, who lived a few doors down from the couple, saw Gingrich have an aberrational form of sex with one of his house guest’s wives in the car. Carter described Gingrich’s reaction upon discovery as a boyish smirk. That’s what kind of amoral man this is.

[Updated May 2010] Joel Skousen: Analysis of Strategic Threats in the Current Decade — The Big Picture!

By

On November 24, 2011

In America's Getting Jacked!, Bomb Bomb America?, China, Globalism—One-World Gov't, Joel Skousen, Media Bias Exposed, Real History, Real Reason for U.S. Wars = NWO!, Russia, The End of America?, Timing Predictions, War

Videos and more articles on this important subject are linked at the bottom.

– –

From: World Affairs Brief

Analysis of Strategic Threats
In the Current Decade
(2010-2020)
Updated May 2010

By Joel M. Skousen

Editor, World Affairs Brief

INTRODUCTION

Strategic threats are carefully planned threats by predator nations or groups that transcend their own normal sphere of influence and threaten the entire world with conquest and/or control.

In this analysis I will discuss three current strategic world powers, which constitute a premeditated threat to world liberty, and the complex tactical maneuvers between them as they position themselves for the coming, inevitable conflict. Two of these world powers are nations–Russia and China–and the third is a transnational conspiracy of power by a combination of individuals in the West attempting to maneuver the world into a New World Order (NWO) of global control, euphemistically masquerading as a “global democracy.” I will refer to the latter as Western globalists.

All less powerful nations in the world fall under the influence of one of these three powers, either as direct allies, client states for the purchase of arms, and/or diplomatic allies working in collusion to further strategic goals of global hegemony.

There is one further complicating factor, however. The Western globalists are divided into two main factions: a US/British faction firmly in control of the financial means of the NWO, and a European faction of hard-core leftists, secretly aligned with Moscow, which controls the majority of votes in the General Assembly of the UN. I will attempt to describe each of the three power centers, their allies, and what I believe their individual strategy involves.

Read More

[video] Joel Skousen: War is Tool of Choice to Usher in One World Currency — “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran” Why Now?

By

On November 5, 2011

In Bomb-Bomb-Bomb Iran, Israel (anti-Logos), Joel Skousen, War

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmi47_qnHrE]Joel Skousen: War is Tool of Choice to Usher in One World Currency 1/3

Uploaded by on Nov 3, 2011

Alex hosts a power-packed 27 hour long money-bomb presentation today with guests, Joel Skousen.
IRAQ WITHDRAWAL, LOOPHOLES AND ALL, MAY NOT BE PERMANENT
This week, after months of trying to convince the Iraqi government to let US troops stay, Obama suddenly announced that the conflict is over and that the US is withdrawing all military personnel from Iraq. Neither is technically true, and the way is being paved for a return at the slightest provocation, which may well be the long-anticipated strike on Iran by Israel.
http://www.joelskousen.com/

http://www.infowars.com/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKDafmKtM4Y]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMntkS_cI0I]

Related:

[Updated May 2010] Joel Skousen: Analysis of Strategic Threats in the Current Decade — The Big Picture!

Ron Paul: Leaving Iraq? — The current agreement was set up by the previous administration to expire at the end of 2011. Apparently the Iraqis refused to allow continued immunity from prosecution for our forces for any crimes our soldiers might commit on Iraqi soil.

[ audio ] Joel Skousen on ‘Coast’ with Excellent Interviewer John B. Wells: What’s Really Going On?!!

Joel Skousen: “I’m not predicting an economic collapse, but a downward spiral that will keep going. But they’ll milk it along, keep people basically fat, dumb and happy until the surprise war comes.”

Joel Skousen Sit-down Interview: How the World Works — A primer on how even well meaning people are coopted by globalists to do their bidding — what we need to know

Joel Skousen Sit-down Interview: How the World Works, Part 2 — Election 2012 – Deception & War — How the globalists manipulate conservatives to support candidates they control

[65-minute audio – EXCELLENT!] Joel Skousen on ‘Coast to Coast AM’ 8/2/11 with George Noory: The coming attack by Russia and China — “Once the government starts to warn us that Russia and China is a threat, it will be too late. Mark my words.”

Joel Skousen: US INTEL: RUSSIA AND CHINA GREATEST THREATS

Skousen: U.S. Intentionally Vulnerable to Nuclear Attack from China/Russia

Joel Skousen: TAIWAN AGAIN DENIED ADVANCED WEAPONS — Why, unless you want her to remain vulnerable? And why continue to treat nuclear armed North Korea with kid gloves while preparing to attack Iran which is far less a threat? “Something doesn’t make sense, and that’s always a sign of a hidden agenda.”

Joel Skousen reviews EMP attack scenario book, “When the Lights Went Out” by Jack Monnett: A solid wake up call for those who continue to think America is not at risk — It would probably take about 6 nuclear explosions spaced carefully over the nation…

Joel Skousen reviews EMP attack scenario book, “When the Lights Went Out” by Jack Monnett: A solid wake up call for those who continue to think America is not at risk — It would probably take about 6 nuclear explosions spaced carefully over the nation…

By

On October 4, 2011

In Bomb Bomb America?, Bomb-Bomb-Bomb Iran, China, Electromagnetic Pulse – EMP, Joel Skousen, Russia, The End of America?, Timing Predictions

From:

World Affairs Brief, September 30, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

[…]

IS THE PROGNOSIS FOR AMERICA TERMINAL?

[…]

The other book I reviewed is Jack Monnett’s coming novel “When the Lights Went Out” about normal people confronting the social unrest caused by the collapse of the electrical grid by a nuclear EMP strike by Iran. It’s a following to his books on Awakening to our Awful Situation.

Monnett’s social breakdown scenario begins more realistically by an enemy’s EMP strike that takes down the national electric grid. My only disagreement with this scenario is that current research indicates it would probably take about 6 nuclear explosions spaced carefully over the nation to have this kind of devastating effect. Secondly, Iran would not be likely to have this capability compared to Russia and China. Nevertheless, it doesn’t really matter how it happens, Monnett does a good job of presenting a variety of scenarios that we will surely face someday.

Monnett focuses on the possible effects of an EMP strike on the national and local level, and his story is a solid wake up call for those who continue to think America is not at risk. His novel is set in a small Utah community so you get a unique look at how a community with a majority of preparedness oriented Mormons deals with hostile intruders as well as helping out those not of their faith that are unprepared. Overall it is an interesting view of foreshadowed events. It should appear on Amazon.com mid next week.

Related:

My EMP Dream (10/23/08): All Cars Suddenly Stopped From Electromagnetic Pulse Weapon?

Our senators traitors? Senate dumps strategy to prevent EMP damage

A shot across the bow: Missile expert says southern California projectile was a foreign-made cruise or ICBM missile launched from a submarine

Wayne Madsen: China Fired Missile Seen In Southern California

China Builds Secret Nuclear Submarine Base in South China Sea

Coincidence “Missile” Fired Off California Coast On Same Day That Chinese Sub Surprised US Carrier Group

One EMP nuke could take down the entire U.S. power grid. Study estimates 90% of all Americans dead within a year

EMP Defense Council Inaugurated to Prepare the U.S. for a Nuclear EMP Strike or a Solar Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) “which have a high probability of occurring within the next 2-5 years” and would take out most of the electrical grid, medical devices, computer systems, the internet, all vehicles, consumer electronics, home appliances, satellites, airborne planes, etc.

Forecasters keep eye on looming ‘Solar Max’

[2012?] Likelihood of a SOLAR FLARE taking out our entire power grid — NO ELECTRICITY; NO WATER; NO HEAT for MANY MONTHS! ALASKA would be especially vulnerable. “If people in a community JOIN TOGETHER…”

After America Went Down Music: Our Demise Theme [Barber: “Adagio for Strings”] ||| WWWIII ||| The World Cheers Dance Mix [Dj Tiesto]

[ audio & text ] Joel Skousen with Dr. Stanley Monteith: SIGNS OF ECONOMIC COLLAPSE: IF, WHEN AND HOW BAD?

By

On September 30, 2011

In $Money$ ToBeFree, Dr. Stanley Monteith, Joel Skousen, Timing Predictions

Want to really know what is going on?

Listen to these two massively experienced gentlemen:

* * *

Analyst Joel Skousen
“Fair and balanced” — truly!
.

Real-historian Dr. Stan
“A national treasure!”

* * *

From Joel Skousen’s
World Affairs Brief

This week in the World Affairs Brief:
SIGNS OF ECONOMIC COLLAPSE: IF, WHEN AND HOW BAD?
When big insider banks like Goldman Sachs start shorting the markets in a big way, and advise their high roller clients via private letter to do the same, you can bet the market s are going to take a beating in October. Puts shorting the S&P 500 are at a record high for October which indicates that a lot of big money is predicting a huge fall in global stocks soon. Certainly, the fundamentals concur that stocks are overpriced and that interest rates are artificially low compared to real inflation. Are we on the cusp of a major depression? Let’s see. You can request a one-time free sample of the briefs by sending an email to editor@worldaffairsbrief.com.
Also:
Reshuffling the Republican Candidates�Again
Soviet Threat Imaginary?
Is the Prognosis for America Terminal?
More…
Subscribe now to read the rest of this week’s brief and all archives!
The World Affairs Brief is a weekly news analysis service dedicated to providing an understanding of the hidden agendas behind the actions of world leaders and other powerful individuals who influence government from behind the scenes. Although the World Affairs Brief is provided to subscribers only, you can read samples of Mr. Skousen’s unique analysis in the archives section. The following daily news items are provided as a sampling of the crucial issues that Mr. Skousen may analyze in this week’s briefing.

* * *

Date: 09-29-11
Hour: 1
3:00: Joel Skousen – World Affairs Brief
Hour: 2
4:00: Melody Cedarstrom – Sound Financial Discussion
Hour: 3
8:00: Suzanne DeKock – Weight Control
Hour: 4
9:00: Lynn Marzulli – The Bible & Today’s Events
Date: 09-28-11

* * *

World Affairs Brief, September 30, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

SIGNS OF ECONOMIC COLLAPSE: IF, WHEN AND HOW BAD?

When big insider banks like Goldman Sachs start shorting the markets in a big way, and advise their high roller clients via private letter to do the same, you can bet the market s are going to take a beating in October. Puts shorting the S&P 500 are at a record high for October which indicates that a lot of big money is predicting a huge fall in global stocks soon. Certainly, the fundamentals concur that stocks are overpriced and that interest rates are artificially low compared to real inflation. Are we on the cusp of a major depression? Let’s see.

The deepest and least solvable crisis is, of course, the collapsing dominoes from sovereign debt. Every nation on earth, except for a few whose abundant oil income exceeds expenditures, is heavily overextended and none can or will pay back the huge sovereign debt they have accumulated. At least a half dozen countries require quarterly bailouts from other nations in order to pay back debt issues as they come due. Ukraine is the latest country to engage in funny accounting to fund their latest debt payment. Next time they too will need a bailout.

The Wall Street Journal reports on a copy they received of Goldman’s pessimistic letter to its biggest clients: “In a 54-page report sent to hundreds of Goldman’s institutional clients dated Aug. 16, Alan Brazil–a Goldman strategist who sits on the firm’s trading desk–argued that as much as $1 trillion in capital may be needed to shore up European banks; that small businesses in the U.S., a past driver of job production, are still languishing; and that China’s growth may not be sustainable.” Others are warning about a Chinese crash as well.

Michael Snyder reacts to that by saying that “Goldman Sachs is doing it again. Goldman is telling the public that everything is going to be just fine, but meanwhile they are advising their top clients to bet on a huge financial collapse [that’s a bit of an exaggeration. Goldman is preparing for a major financial crisis, not a collapse].

“Perhaps most startling of all is what the report has to say about the debt problems of the United States and Europe. ‘Solving a debt problem with more debt has not solved the underlying problem. In the US, Treasury debt growth financed the US consumer but has not had enough of an impact on job growth. Can the US continue to depreciate the world’s base currency? [Sounds like Goldman is listening to Ron Paul while repudiating him politically].’

“The report also goes into great detail about the financial crisis in Europe. Brazil writes about how the euro is headed for trouble and about how dozens of financial institutions in Europe could potentially be in danger of collapse [a threat which the PTB intend to use to pressure EU voters into giving more power to the ECB to issue Euro-wide Bonds].

“The following is how Business Insider summarized the advice that Brazil gave in the report regarding how to make money off of the impending collapse in Europe….

* Buy a six-month put option on the Euro versus the Swiss Franc, thus betting the Euro will drop against the Franc (the Franc being the currency that an official Goldman report recently referred to as the most overvalued in the world)
* Buy a five-year credit default swap on an index of European corporate debt.

“This is a bet that some of these companies will default, and your insurance policy, the CDS, will pay off [even though backed by nothing except promises to pay]. This is so typical of Goldman Sachs. They will say one thing publicly and then turn around and do the total opposite privately.”

Snyder concludes by saying what increasing numbers of commentators on the Right are saying: “There is a tremendous amount of fear in the global financial community right now [true]. As I wrote about the other day, the financial world is about to hit the panic button. Things could start falling apart at any time [depends on what he means by falling apart–a total collapse is not going to happen by economic means alone]. Most of these big banks will not admit how bad things are publicly, but privately there is a whole lot of freaking out going on [true only as to whether or not the FED is going to keep bailing them out. The banks are now totally dependent on external forces].”

For example a lot of hedge fund managers are set to lose their jobs. Some of the largest hedge funds are down 25% for the year. Today, according to the Wall Street Journal, “marks a deadline for investors in many hedge funds with monthly and quarterly liquidity to say they want their capital back.” Most of them are indicating they want to cash out rather than roll over into another hedge.

That’s the same reason Greece needs quarterly bailouts–because most investors don’t want to renew their investments in Greek bonds at any interest rate. Who would blame them? Greece simply doesn’t have the money to pay off these maturing bond issues and never will. In order to avoid establishing a precedent of default, the ECB is desperate to keep engineering short term bailouts until the European PTB can engineer a change in EU rules to allow the entire Union to create bonds guaranteed by all.

However, that plan suffered a major setback this week as the German constitutional court ruled this week that “no further fiscal powers may be surrendered to Europe without a new constitution and a popular referendum.”

But all this isn’t stopping the globalists in Europe from wringing as much money from their current powers to bail out other bankrupt nations. They will take it to the maximum. Thursday, the German lower house, the Bundestag, passed a bill to strengthen a bailout fund intended to help European countries deal with their debts. Stocks, looking for any justification for optimism, surged upward briefly.

As the Market Oracle of UK said, “It gives the EFSF [European Financial Stability Facility] carte blanche to carry out measures to save the euro, the insolvent countries and banks. The passage of legislation by Germany, which has already been passed by the Bundesrat (Senate) would leave Germany with no more say on the use or increase in funding just to save the euro, Greece and the other five countries, which is an impossible task at a cost of $4 to $6 trillion. All control passes to the EFSF and the ECB.” –another loss of sovereignty for Germans. More money for the EFSF solves the current liquidity crisis, but they won’t fix the solvency crisis.

This only settled the markets for a day. Today stocks dropped again with news that all these bailouts were adding to EU inflation. These short term fixes all have market consequences. European globalists realize that the semi-solvent nations in Europe are in no mood to go the next step–giving the ECB powers to issue EU-wide bonds–for which they will be liable, and so an even deeper crisis will be needed to drive them into giving the EU new powers.

This may well be the reason we are seeing the markets set up for short selling in October. Somebody obviously has given the word that a major market selloff is going to happen. That means it may be planned. If it goes deep enough, it may well be the crisis sufficient to drive European voters into accepting more EU powers to “fix” the problem with a new EU treaty.

Notice that US leaders (Obama and Treasury Sec. Geithner) are criticizing Europe for not taking dramatic steps and for moving too slowly. In reality, they know that Europe doesn’t have the same dramatic powers of the FED–so the criticism is offensive to European leaders. Its real purpose, of course, is to prepare the way for US-style solutions (more bailouts through bonding) when the crisis hits.

What does this mean for those in the United States? A big drop in the stock market does NOT mean that the economy will fully collapse. I think it will be a serious dip but not a permanent one. Obama has been sending out proposal after proposal to increase government stimulus in jobs and housing. Even go-along Republican leaders like John Boehner can’t go along because all conservative eyes are on the debt problem we face. This coming crisis may change that.

I can see a massive shakeout in the stock market (a big crisis) suddenly turning public opinion around and inducing them to believe government fear mongers that “we’ve got to inject more money into the economy” lest it collapse–the false solution. Why else would Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner suddenly stop talking recovery and concentrate on dire warnings? I think they are setting us up for a crisis–not because they don’t have the power to inject more money and forestall it, but because they need something to stop the rising sentiment against the FED and deficit spending.

If they let the crisis go on long enough, it will doom Obama’s chances of reelection. But, if it is sufficiently sharp, Congress may relent early and agree to hand out more stimulus jobs and checks. Obama will then look like he “saved us” from collapse.

Investment guru Doug Casey is pessimistic: “With the exception of Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, the potential Republican candidates absolutely make my skin crawl. So, no, there is no help on the horizon. The U.S. government is spending about $1.5 trillion more this year than it takes in, and it is not going to cut that. In fact, foolish spending to bail things out will increase. And, worse than that, the Fed has artificially suppressed interest rates for three years. Interest accounts for roughly 2% of $15 trillion official national debt, or $300 billion per year. As interest rates inevitably rise, that interest amount will grow. At 12% – and I’m afraid they’ll have to go even higher than that – it would add another $1.5 trillion just in interest payments.

“I absolutely see no way out without a collapse of the U.S. currency and a total reordering of the U.S. economy.” Once again, the big question is when: now, later, or a lot later? All of those on the “collapse now” side of the debate don’t understand the powers of the conspiracy that controls our government.”

If they let the economy go down another notch and keep it there for the next couple of years, it means they intend to elect a controlled Republican to complete the manipulation of conservatives. We are at the point in this nation where everything Obama does will be met with conservative opposition, which is good. But if a false conservative leader gets in office and proposes something similar with a different name, most will be fooled and jump on board.

That is why the PTB seem determined to suppress Ron Paul’s candidacy and promote other controlled Republicans who are promoting some of Paul’s fiscal arguments against the FED but have no intention of following through. Only Ron Paul can be trusted to act with courage and not compromise.

[…]

Related:

Chuck Baldwin: Economic Bad Times Just Beginning — “In a couple of years, these could be the ‘good old days’”

Joel Skousen: TAIWAN AGAIN DENIED ADVANCED WEAPONS — Why, unless you want her to remain vulnerable? And why continue to treat nuclear armed North Korea with kid gloves while preparing to attack Iran which is far less a threat? “Something doesn’t make sense, and that’s always a sign of a hidden agenda.”

By

On September 24, 2011

In China, Joel Skousen, Timing Predictions, War

World Affairs Brief, September 23, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

THIS WEEK’S ANALYSIS:
Why a Palestinian State won’t Bring Peace
Bernanke’s Operation Twist and the Demise of Confidence in the FED
Taiwan Again Denied Advanced Weapons
More Covert War Via Drones
Iraq Drifting Toward Dictatorship Again
Can Ron Paul Ever be President?
Beware of Benjamin Fulford Claims

[…]

TAIWAN AGAIN DENIED ADVANCED WEAPONS
As Peter Lee of Asia Times writes, “There is a good reason for politicians to support United States arms sales to Taiwan. It’s good politics.” Except when you are a globalist and have a vested interest in making sure China isn’t challenged in its quest to take on the West.

Every time the US even thinks about upgrading Taiwan’s ability to defend itself against Chinese aggression, China has a fit. It threatens rash consequences and currently has the ability to make things difficult financially for both the US and Europe.

Even Taiwan has learned to Kow Tow to China in order to survive a few years longer. But you can only convince your people for so long that China is our friend. Eventually, they see the handwriting on the wall. As Jens Kastner reported in Asia Times Online on June 22, “President Ma Ying-jyeou has made his stated eagerness to purchase 66 F-16 fighters (and dispel concerns that he cares more about closer ties with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) than the security of Taiwan) a cornerstone of his campaign for re-election in January 2012.”

But the Taiwanese play both sides of the dragon just like the US, trying to buy more time. It’s a losing battle. China is going to strike someday and capture the entire far East, not just Taiwan. Those who convince themselves that trade will keep China in check are fooling themselves. Australia is selling China most of its natural resources, and in the process make her a tempting candidate for occupation in the next war. I think China will occupy New Zealand as well. All of you thinking about retreating down under should keep this in mind.

It is my theory that World War Three will be triggered by a North Korean attack on the South and quickly followed by a Chinese attack on Taiwan. The US will not be able to react to both in time. The globalists know this and are knowingly allowing the advantage to accrue to China and her puppet ally. Otherwise why continue to treat nuclear armed North Korea with kid gloves while preparing to attack Iran which is far less a threat? Why continue to deny arms to Taiwan unless you want her to remain vulnerable? Something doesn’t make sense, and that’s always a sign of a hidden agenda.

[…]

[What’s-Going-On? AUDIO & TEXT] Joel Skousen on Radio Liberty 8/11/11: World Affairs Brief Weekly Update — 9/11 COMMEMORATION: MAKING THE OFFICIAL VERSION PERMANENT — Some of the latest and best evidence that the official story is not true. What we have allowed to happen to this nation is absolutely shameful. We have betrayed our founding fathers and we have cast aside many of our liberties and freedoms because we are so afraid…

By

On September 14, 2011

In 9-11 TRUTH, Dr. Stanley Monteith, Joel Skousen, Media Bias Exposed, Naked Body Scanners, Police State, The End of America?, The Soul of America, Why we're getting jacked

Want to really know what is going on?

Listen to these two massively experienced gentlemen:

* * *

Analyst Joel Skousen
“Fair and balanced” — truly!
.

Real-historian Dr. Stan
“A national treasure!”

* * *

From Joel Skousen’s
World Affairs Brief

This week in the World Affairs Brief:
9/11 COMMEMORATION: MAKING THE OFFICIAL VERSION PERMANENT
In this first half of September Americans are being subjected to the largest propaganda campaign in decades, seeking to make permanent in the American psyche the official version of 9/11 and specifically that the attack more infamous than Pearl Harbor was the work of a lone cadre of terrorists from the Middle East, with virtually no foreknowledge, direction, financing or coordination with dark side elements of the US government. The evidence has been building for years that demonstrates this simply wasn’t true. This week, I’ll present some of the latest and best evidence. You can request a one-time free sample of the briefs by sending an email to editor@worldaffairsbrief.com.
Also:
Republican Debate: Manipulation Doesn’t Always Work
Wesley Clark Revealed Conspiracy to Go to War
Obama Justice Dept Enforcing Bad Law
More…
Subscribe now to read the rest of this week’s brief and all archives!
The World Affairs Brief is a weekly news analysis service dedicated to providing an understanding of the hidden agendas behind the actions of world leaders and other powerful individuals who influence government from behind the scenes. Although the World Affairs Brief is provided to subscribers only, you can read samples of Mr. Skousen’s unique analysis in the archives section. The following daily news items are provided as a sampling of the crucial issues that Mr. Skousen may analyze in this week’s briefing.

* * *

Audio from Dr. Stanley Monteith’s
Radio Liberty archives

Date: 09-08-11
Hour: 1
3:00: William H. Kennedy – Sex Scandal & Satanic Crime
Hour: 2
4:00: Joel Skousen – World Affairs Brief
Hour: 3
8:00: Dr. Michael Brown – A Queer Thing Happened To America
Hour: 4
9:00: Danielle Lindler – Forestry in CA Excessively Regulated
Date: 09-07-11

* * *

World Affairs Brief, September 9, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

[…]

9/11 COMMEMORATION: MAKING THE OFFICIAL VERSION PERMANENT

In this first half of September Americans are being subjected to the largest propaganda campaign in decades, seeking to make permanent in the American psyche the official version of 9/11 and specifically that the attack more infamous than Pearl Harbor was the work of a lone cadre of terrorists from the Middle East, with virtually no foreknowledge, direction, financing or coordination with dark side elements of the US government. The evidence has been building for years that demonstrates this simply wasn’t true. This week, I’ll present some of the latest and best evidence.

We are required to relive over and over again the superficial happenings of that day and be regaled with repetitive human interest stories of heroes, victims and their families or whether or not people “lost faith at ground zero.” The media show contains no references to the fact that almost a third of Americans distrust or disbelieve the official version.

That is why the mass of evidence linking government foreknowledge and planning to the placement of explosives in the buildings, and the massive subsequent cover-up must never be discussed. “9/11 Truthers” are to be evaded and never allowed to make their case in the mainstream news no matter that many of them are respected architects, engineers, scientists and pilots. Instead, the official version must be drummed into people so that future generations will react with extreme prejudice and disbelief at the mere hint of conspiracy facts or theory.

While I don’t have the space go through all the evidence of government coverup and involvement in 9/11 again, the most dramatic evidence comes from the explosives demolition of WTC building 7. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have produced a couple of videos that will convince almost all but the most hardened skeptics. The first is a must see, the second gives an even wider spectrum of the experts who agree that only controlled demolition explains the uniform fall of this building. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw
and http://911expertsspeakout.org/

The demolition of WTC buildings 1 and 2, hit by airplanes, was done by a more sophisticated form of controlled demolition using sequential timers set off by human beings who could observe where the aircraft struck. Both buildings showed the same crucial signs of demolition during the fall: no resistance from the floors below, sounds of explosions triggering the fall, and multiple explosions going off on the way down so as to make it appear as if the top were crushing each floor below.

This is done using explosives set every few floors, triggered sequentially to match the speed of the fall as it is descending–not hard to do, just more high-tech. In fact, the height of the Twin Towers required this kind of demolition. Had they done a normal demolition but using cutting charges only at the base columns the tall narrow tower would surely have tipped over during the fall and caused wider damage. One can even observe the antenna array on top of the north building descending slightly before the building itself begins to fall–a sign that the central core columns had been compromised–an area not capable of being damaged directly by the plane. In fact, they were compromised down in the basement. These columns at the base were too massive for conventional cutting charges. Someone with access to the building cut a hole into the hollow core and loaded it with thermite–capable of melting any metal with white hot heat once ignited. The collapse of the central core was probably the sign to the demolition crew to trigger the rest of the charges in the sequential collapse.

With any government coverup, there is always more evidence surfacing in later years, just as it did in the Kennedy Assassination. The media must then mobilize to explain it away or debunk the new evidence that points to government involvement. Here’s an excerpt from a recent NY Times article that contains a lot of disinformation, typical of the mainstream media when they pretend to reveal new light on an old coverup [my comments in brackets].

Read More

[What’s-going-on AUDIO & TEXT] Joel Skousen on Radio Liberty 8/11/11: World Affairs Brief Weekly Update

By

On August 17, 2011

In Barack Obama, Dr. Stanley Monteith, Joel Skousen

Want to really know what is going on?

Listen to these two massively experienced gentlemen.

* * *

Analyst Joel Skousen
“Fair and balanced” — truly!
.

Real-historian Dr. Stan
“A national treasure!”

* * *

From Joel Skousen’s
World Affairs Brief

This week in the World Affairs Brief:
MARKETS: DEAD CAT BOUNCE OR MANIPULATION?
The Dow Jones Industrial Average declined just over 1000 points this past week, and bounced back 420 on Thursday. Toward the bottom of the slide we observed a couple of strong efforts by the Plunge Protection Team to halt the slide with massive injections of free money provided by the FED. Were these sudden reversals the proverbial Dead Cat Bounce, legitimate buys, or something else? The superficial reasons news analysts give for a market’s up or down movement are never real. Manipulation is always the primary stimulus, and the herd mentality does the rest. The establishment is desperate to shift the blame away from the FED and onto Standard and Poor’s downgrading of US bonds to AA+, but the downgrade was inevitable anyway. Perhaps this minor downgrade could be viewed as a carefully crafted means of getting US investors used to the fact of a slow US decline that will continue for many years and allow profit taking along the way for insiders. You can request a one-time free sample of the briefs by sending an email to editor@worldaffairsbrief.com.
Also:
More Evidence that Osama bin Laden’s Death was Falsified
Rick Perry: We Don’t Need Another George W. Bush
London Riots and British Moral Corruption
More…
Subscribe now to read the rest of this week’s brief and all archives!
The World Affairs Brief is a weekly news analysis service dedicated to providing an understanding of the hidden agendas behind the actions of world leaders and other powerful individuals who influence government from behind the scenes. Although the World Affairs Brief is provided to subscribers only, you can read samples of Mr. Skousen’s unique analysis in the archives section. The following daily news items are provided as a sampling of the crucial issues that Mr. Skousen may analyze in this week’s briefing.

* * *

Audio from Dr. Stanley Monteith’s
Radio Liberty archives

Date: 08-11-11
Hour: 1
3:00: Joel Skousen – World Affairs Brief
Hour: 2
4:00: Russ Dizdar – Black Awakening
Hour: 3
8:00: Dr. Russell Blaylock – Curcumin: It Fights Tumors
Hour: 4
9:00: Arnold Mann – Killing America
Date: 08-10-11

* * *

World Affairs Brief, Aug 12, 2011 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World. Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com)

[…]

MORE EVIDENCE THAT OSAMA BIN LADEN’S DEATH WAS FALSIFIED
CT Campbell provided a short review of the implausible US version of events: “A review of the problems with the story is simply incredible. The lack of any tangible evidence, the massive changes to the official story that came out in the days immediately following the raid all add up to something being very wrong. No Shootout, no wives used as human shields, no wives or children taken into custody have been produced, no video of the raid, the White House did not watch the raid live as originally indicated. Now, as many predicted, the people we are told took part in the raid are all gone as a result of a recent helicopter crash. We were then told the UBL [Usama Bin Laden] body was immediately buried at sea and we have almost instantaneous DNA results that it was him.. No pictures of UBL’s body are released, under the excuse they would instill hatred for America. Not only do we see no UBL body, we see no captive wives or children, we have no seal team members to give their accounts in disguises to conceal their identity and never will after the recent helicopter crash in Afghanistan. In the days that follow, we do get some photos of the people we are told were killed inside the residence.”

Now there exists much more specific witness testimony that directly contradicts the US version of events. Paul Craig Roberts brought to the attention of the world an important Pakistani National TV interview with Muhammad Bashir, who lives next door to the alleged compound of Osama bin Laden.

“In Bashir’s account, every member of the landing party and anyone brought from the house died when the helicopter exploded on lift-off. Here are the key points Bashir made in the interview[all key statements put in chronological order and edited for brevity]:

Muhammad Bashir: The events that happened are thus; we were awake, we were not asleep.
Reporter: Where were you standing when this happened?
Muhammad Bashir: Inside the house, on top of the roof, I was not in the house, just on top of the (flat) roof, lying down on the roof, lying and watching this and what was happening.
A Helicopter came, and circled and dropped some people there… after that, the helicopter returned and went back.

Reporter: How many people were they?
Muhammad Bashir: They were ten, twelve people. After that it left and for approximately 20 minutes, there behind us, on those mountains, it kept going around, the top of the mountains.
After 20 minutes, it returned. When it returned, at that time there were TWO more helicopters arrived but didn’t land. One came from the West and one came from the North.

Reporter: There was only ONE helicopter?
Muhammad Bashir: Only ONE helicopter, that dropped its passengers…. The people who were dropped from the craft… That walkway…that…where our gates are…they banged them hard…and shouted…don’t come out…don’t do this, don’t do that, if you come out you will be shot..we will do this, we will do that, all the people who were dropped, all of them spoke Pashtu (Afgahni Language) – Pashtun!

Reporter: Who were these people?
Muhammad Bashir: This I do not know! Those who were dropped from the craft (helicopter), those people.
Reporter: somebody else told me — that they spoke Pashtu.
Muhammad Bashir: They WERE Pashtun! we do not know if they were working for the Americans, we do not know if they were working for Pakistan, we do not know if they were army people or civilian, what people, BUT they SPOKE PASHTU!, [Later Bashir hypothesizes that they could be Americans speaking Pashtu: “agents can speak all sorts of languages. It could be that it is the American army and they could speak Pashtu and the people would think that it is our own people.”] The SAME [helo] returned to pick the people and there was an explosion within it. ONE helicopter landed down here, the second helicopter came from above and went towards Mansera. It did not land. No second helicopter landed! When it [the first helo] approached for landing, there was an explosion within it and there was fire within it, immediately, we came out… the helicopter was on fire, it was burning. They are saying we killed Osama here. After that, they picked him up and took him away. – how did they do this? This, what we are thinking [since witnesses saw the only Helo that landed explode and burn!].

Reporter: How did you get inside? (the compound)
Muhammad Bashir: the gate was open, when there was fire, the gate was open [doesn’t sound like a secure compound for Osama].

Reporter: You came from upstairs to downstairs?
Muhammad Bashir: I came down, from my own house into the gulley [Gulley is (in Urdu) a sidewalk or pavement between two houses], I didn’t go alone inside the other house, 200 other people went inside! Everybody saw it!
Reporter: All 200 saw the dead bodies?
Muhammad Bashir: Everybody saw this. Whoever went inside they saw everything!

Reporter: In the helicopter… you saw dead people?
Muhammad Bashir: We saw dead people… This, we could not count, within the compound there was fire. The gate was open, we entered the gate, at that time the Army had not arrived. When the helicopter exploded, it scattered everywhere, one piece fell over there, one fell here, one here, a lot of pieces fell in the gulley outside, they reached up to the gulley and our house and also some pieces managed to reach onto my roof. so, the area of the open space there (in front of the house) is about four Kanal in size. It is a very large compound. You cannot see all of it from one location. After that, about twenty minutes later the Army arrived, the police arrived. They moved all of us back… when the army arrived, they moved all the people back. Move aside, move aside! So we moved aside. Then they closed the area down.

Reporter: Tell me; two helicopters came, lifted and took the rest of the people?
Muhammad Bashir: No — they did not take the rest of the people, because they did not even land, One came from the West and it left towards the North, the one that came from the North, left towards the South. They did not land!

Reporter: where was your cousin [who reportedly grew vegetables inside the compound]?
Muhammad Bashir: My cousin was at that time in the house.
Reporter: Did he go with you?
Muhammad Bashir: He was with me, but I did not notice when he was picked up.
Reporter: Has he returned yet?
Muhammad Bashir: Yes, he has returned. They picked him up and took him away.
Reporter: What is he saying?
Muhammad Bashir: I have not met him yet, he is at home they will not let him come out, we are not allowed to visit him, they will not let him come out. [End]

Paul Craig Roberts comments: “Bashir’s cousin is the person who, according to the reporter had a vegetable garden inside the wall of the alleged bin Laden compound. Is it likely that with a hunted and dangerous person hiding within, locals would be permitted to have vegetable gardens inside the compound?

“Readers can arrive at their own conclusions. It seems clear that under intense pressure and serious threats from the US government, the Pakistani government fell in line with the US government’s claim that a commando raid had killed bin Laden and all had returned safely, and that the TV news organization also got the message to get in line.

“It is likely that the many witnesses who observed the dead from the helicopter crash have been warned to keep quiet. However, a news organization, should one be so inclined, could certainly interview Bashir and the 200 others who saw the dead bodies…. I am confident that no news organization believes that it could confront such an important US national myth in this way. OBL’s death will remain one of those many ‘truths’ that rest on nothing but the government’s word.”

I find particularly disturbing Bashir’s comments about the inserted team speaking fluent Pashtu. Navy Seals are not linguists, as agents may be. They may be trained with a few words or phrases but hardly enough to pass off as native speakers to another native. The whole story about this being a CIA operation which was secret from the Pakistani army is blown wide open by this testimony. It is obvious that a lot of people in Abbottabad and in the Pakistani army know that the US story is totally fabricated–but they are being silenced.

Is There a Link to Recent Deaths of the Same Navy Seal Team? There are some strange contradictions in the highly publicized crash of an Army CH-47 Chinook helicopter in Afghanistan that supposedly included the very members of Seal Team 6 that allegedly captured and killed Osama bin Laden. How convenient.

1) If, as Mr. Bashir has testified, no Navy SEALs survived the special ops helo crash in Abbottabad, the government would need to falsify their deaths later in order to be able to explain to the Seal Team families why their hero husbands were never coming home.

2) It would also mean that Obama’s visit to Fort Campbell, Ky did not occur in front of the actual Seal Team Six, but their larger unit. The fact that Obama showed up with cameras rolling at the return of the bodies from the recent crash indicates that this is a continuation of the big lie.

3) Seal Team Six has its own special ops stealth helicopters and doesn’t normally fly on Army choppers. Why was this SEAL Team inserted onto an Army reserve transport helicopter and mixed with other military operations?

4). The US government claims it has killed the two who shot down the CH-47. I’d like to know just how you could know that unless you were controlling that shoot down operation. That shows that either they are lying or complicity. Either one is bad.

5) The government is already changing its story about who was on the doomed helicopter. According to CNN, “The Pentagon will put the death toll of Navy Seals in last weekend’s downing of a helicopter in Afghanistan at 17, [instead of 22]. Officials say further information that has come in also indicates that not all of the SEALs were assigned to a top-secret Naval unit as they originally said. [Only] 15 were SEALs belonging to the top-secret unit that conducted the raid on Osama Bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan. Two others were SEALs assigned to a regular Naval special operations unit. Five additional Navy personnel were so-called conventional forces with particular specialties who regularly worked with the SEALs. One official said that included a dog handler and some communications specialists. The other eight U.S. troops killed were three Air Force forward air controllers and five Army helicopter crew members. Multiple military officials had said for days there were 22 SEALs among the dead, and all were members of the same overall unit that killed Bin Laden.”

Let me tell you as a former military pilot that there is written manifest for every flight containing the names of every person on board when setting out from a regular base of operations. There is no way the military could have been “confused” about who was on board. Someone is scrambling to coordinate whoever is supposed to be dead from those who are not dead.

Here’s a partial analysis from Infowars.com: “The government admits that a super secret helicopter did crash during the OBL raid but says no one died; our intel is different. We predicted that the spin doctors would stage a crash or when a real crash took place that they would say the SEALs died then. This is a old trick that governments all over the world have been caught pulling in the past.

“Mainstream sources are seizing upon claims that the Taliban took credit for downing the helicopter, but that means nothing. Media instantly ran reports that al Qaeda was responsible for the bombing & shootings in Norway; moreover, anyone on a message board can make such claims.”

CT Campbell concludes, “We may never know the true story. If I were to guess, someone got off a lucky shot against the helicopter or there was an accidental explosion of ordinance onboard. Since this whole thing IMO was designed to boost Obama’s declining ratings and status, they could not come out with the truth that it had ended in a colossal mess. The recent crash of the helicopter in Afghanistan may have been staged to provide a cover story and give closure and release of bodies for people killed months ago. It might also have been used to eliminate any witnesses who survived the debacle.”

Naturally, the government has poured on the propaganda about why this terrible crash should not deter our resolve to stay in Afghanistan. Pepe Escobar noted that “After the Wardak hit, new Pentagon chief Leon Panetta came up with the usual ‘stay the course’ in Afghanistan speech while corporate media regurgitated that ‘all foreign combat troops are scheduled to leave by the end of 2014’ – when everyone knows the Pentagon will never roll over, die and accept that kind of exit.

“What Wardak will do is to bolster the Pentagon’s case that the government in Kabul is mightily unprepared to maintain security across the country – no matter the fact that the majority of Afghans want foreigners out, for good. While the White House/Pentagon are singing their remixed version of The Clash’s ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go’, all the Taliban have to do is wait and see, in silence. They know that Kabul taking over national security will only bolster their strategic position.”

[65-minute audio – EXCELLENT!] Joel Skousen on ‘Coast to Coast AM’ 8/2/11 with George Noory: The coming attack by Russia and China — “Once the government starts to warn us that Russia and China is a threat, it will be too late. Mark my words.”

By

On August 10, 2011

In 'THEY' couldn't be that EVIL??, America's Getting Jacked!, Bomb Bomb America?, China, Electromagnetic Pulse – EMP, Globalism—One-World Gov't, Inflation$$$$$$, Joel Skousen, Ron Paul, Russia, The End of America?, Timing Predictions

From: ToBeFree

The economic downturn will slowly continue until the coming nuclear attack by Russia, aided by China, perhaps 10 years out.

Our leaders are leaving us totally vulnerable. The only thing they are doing is building bomb shelters for themselves.

How can this be? There is a dark, spiritual dimension behind the plan to bring America to its knees. This is way bigger than one man, or even a group of men, as this has gone on for centuries.

From: Coast to Coast Am

World Affairs / Conscious Evolution

Date: 08-02-11
Host: George Noory
Guests: Joel Skousen, Barbara Marx Hubbard

In the first half of the show, political scientist and expert in relocation for personal security, Joel Skousen, gave a US & world affairs update. He argued that the US Congress shouldn’t have voted for the debt ceiling agreement– it would have forced the government to start to stay within their means. There was no real threat of a default, and the US govt. actually had enough income to make its payments, he said. “You can’t solve the debt problem by taking on more debt…there is no political will…to seriously cut benefits,” he added.

Skousen believes the Russians will eventually (10 years or more from now) attack the United States with a nuclear first strike, and the Chinese will back them. This war will allow US leaders to declare all debts gone, he predicted. But, “once the government starts to warn us that Russia and China is a threat, it will be too late. Mark my words,” he declared. The first strike would involve 3,000 warheads, hitting the major American military bases, yet the effects of nuclear winter wouldn’t be as bad as thought, with 80% of the population surviving– especially if they have some fallout protection, he noted. Skousen has a new edition out of his book Strategic Relocation: North American Guide to Safe Places. …

Starts at minute 11[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0bKzsztPQU]Coast To Coast AM – 2.8.2011 – 1/4 – World Affairs / Conscious Evolution

Uploaded by on Aug 3, 2011

MP3 http://www.4shared.com/file/Fc7iFGb9/Coast_To_Coast_AM_-_282011_-_W.html
Guests: Joel Skousen, Barbara Marx Hubbard …

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NtIF3kc54c]

Related:

Skousen: U.S. Intentionally Vulnerable to Nuclear Attack from China/Russia

Henry Gruver’s Vision of America being invaded by Russia

All 100 of my Joel Skousen posts in reverse chronological order

Page 15 of 19

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén