Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
March 18, 2002
"In the 1960's, the elite media invented second-wave feminism as part of the elite agenda to dismantle civilization and create a New World Order."
Since writing these words last week, I have discovered that before she became a feminist leader, Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA spying on Marxist students in Europe and disrupting their meetings. She became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA.
Steinem has tried to suppress this information, unearthed in the 1970's by a radical feminist group called "Red Stockings." In 1979, Steinem and her powerful CIA-connected friends, Katharine Graham of the Washington Post and Ford Foundation President Franklin Thomas prevented Random House from publishing it in "Feminist Revolution." Nevertheless the story appeared in the "Village Voice" on May 21, 1979.
Steinem has always pretended that she had been a student radical. "When I was in college, it was the McCarthy era," she told Susan Mitchell in 1997, "and that made me a Marxist." (Icons, Saints and Divas: Intimate Conversations with Women who Changed the World 1997. p 130) Her bio-blurb in June 1973 MS. Magazine states: "Gloria Steinem has been a freelance writer all her professional life. Ms magazine is her first full-time salaried job."
Not true. Raised in an impoverished, dysfunctional family in Toledo Ohio, Steinem somehow managed to attend elite Smith College, Betty Friedan's alma mater. After graduating in 1955, Steinem received a "Chester Bowles Student Fellowship" to study in India. Curiously, an Internet search reveals that this fellowship has no existence apart from Gloria Steinem. No one else has received it.
In 1958, Steinem was recruited by CIA's Cord Meyers to direct an "informal group of activists" called the "Independent Research Service." This was part of Meyer's "Congress for Cultural Freedom," which created magazines like "Encounter" and "Partisan Review" to promote a left-liberal chic to oppose Marxism. Steinem, attended Communist-sponsored youth festivals in Europe, published a newspaper, reported on other participants, and helped to provoke riots.
One of Steinem's CIA colleagues was Clay Felker. In the early 1960's, he became an editor at Esquire and published articles by Steinem which established her as a leading voice for women's lib. In 1968, as publisher of New York Magazine, he hired her as a contributing editor, and then editor of Ms. Magazine in 1971. Warner Communications put up almost all the money although it only took 25% of the stock. Ms. Magazine's first publisher was Elizabeth Forsling Harris, a CIA-connected PR executive who planned John Kennedy's Dallas motorcade route. Despite its anti establishment image, MS magazine attracted advertising from the cream of corporate America. It published ads for ITT at the same time as women political prisoners in Chile were being tortured by Pinochet, after a coup inspired by the US conglomerate and the CIA.
Steinem's personal relationships also belie her anti establishment pretensions. She had a nine-year relationship with Stanley Pottinger, a Nixon-Ford assistant attorney general, credited with stalling FBI investigations into the assassinations of Martin Luther King, and the ex-Chilean Foreign Minister Orlando Latelier. In the 1980's, she dated Henry Kissinger. For more details, see San Francisco researcher Dave Emory.
Our main misconception about the CIA is that it serves US interests. In fact, it has always been the instrument of a dynastic international banking and oil elite (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan) coordinated by the Royal Institute for Internal Affairs in London and their US branch, the Council for Foreign Relations. It was established and peopled by blue bloods from the New York banking establishment and graduates of Yale University's secret pagan "Skull and Bones" society. Our current President, his father and grandfather fit this profile.
The agenda of this international cabal is to degrade the institutions and values of the United States in order to integrate it into a global state that it will direct through the United Nations. In its 1947 Founding Charter, the CIA is prohibited from engaging in domestic activities. However this has never stopped it from waging a psychological war on the American people. The domestic counterpart of the "Congress for Cultural Freedom" was the "American Committee for Cultural Freedom." Using foundations as conduits, the CIA controlled intellectual discourse in the 1950's and 1960's, and I believe continues to do so today. In "The Cultural Cold War," Francis Stonor Saunders estimates that a thousand books were produced under the imprint of a variety of commercial and university presses, with covert subsidies.
The CIA's "Project Mockingbird" involved the direct infiltration of the corporate media, a process that often included direct takeover of major news outlets. "By the early 1950's," writes Deborah Davis, in her book "Katherine the Great," the CIA owned respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communication vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all." In 1982 the CIA admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field. Philip Graham, publisher of the Washington Post, who ran the operation until his "suicide" in 1963, boasted that "you could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple of hundred dollars a month."
I was born in 1949. Idealists in my parent's generation were disillusioned when the Communist dream of universal brotherhood turned out to be a shill for a brutal despotism. My own generation may discover that our best instincts have also been manipulated and exploited. There is evidence that the 60's drug counter culture, the civil rights movement, and anti-war movement, like feminism, were CIA directed. For example, the CIA has admitted setting up the (National Student Association as a front in 1947 http://www.cia-on-campus.org/nsa/nsa2.html). In the early 1950's the NSA opposed the attempts of the House Un American Activities Committee to root out Communist spies. According to Phil Agee Jr., NSA officers participated in the activities of SNCC, the militant civil rights group, and Students for a Democratic Society, a radical peace group.
According to Mark Riebling, the CIA also may have used Timothy Leary. Certainly the agency distributed LSD to Leary and other opinion makers in the 1960s. Leary made a generation of Americans turn away from active participation in society and seek fulfillment "within." In another example of the CIA's use of drugs to interfere in domestic politics, Gary Webb describes how in the 1980's, the CIA flooded Black ghettos with cocaine.
I won't attempt to analyze the CIA's motivation except to suggest what they have in common: They demoralized, alienated and divided Americans. The elite operates by fostering division and conflict in the world. Thus, we don't realize who the real enemy is. For the same reason, the CIA and elite foundations also fund the diversity and multicultural movements.
Feminism has done the most damage. There is no more fundamental yet delicate relationship in society than male and female. On it depends the family, the red blood cell of society. Nobody with the interests of society at heart would try to divide men and women. Yet the lie that men have exploited women has become the official orthodoxy.
Man loves woman. His first instinct is to nurture ("husband") and see her thrive. When a woman is happy, she is beautiful. Sure, some men are abusive. But the vast majority have supported and guided their families for millennium.
Feminists relentlessly advance the idea that our inherent male and female characteristics, crucial to our development as human beings, are mere "stereotypes." This is a vicious calumny on all heterosexuals, 95% of the population. Talk about hate! Yet it is taught to children in elementary schools! It is echoed in the media. Lesbians like Rosie O'Donnell are advanced as role models.
All of this is calculated to create personal confusion and sow chaos among heterosexuals. As a result, millions of American males are emasculated and divorced from their relationship to family (the world and the future.) The American woman has been hoodwinked into investing herself in a mundane career instead of the timeless love of her husband and children. Many women have become temperamentally unfit to be wives and mothers. People, who are isolated and alone, stunted and love-starved, are easy to fool and manipulate. Without the healthy influence of two loving parents, so are their children.
Feminism is a grotesque fraud perpetrated on society by its governing elite. It is designed to weaken the American social and cultural fabric in order to introduce a friendly fascist New World Order. Its advocates are sanctimonious charlatans who have grown rich and powerful from it. They include a whole class of liars and moral cripples who work for the elite in various capacities: government, education and the media. These imposters ought to be exposed and ridiculed.
Women's oppression is a lie. Sex roles were never as rigid as feminists would have us believe. My mother had a successful business in the 1950's importing watchstraps from Switzerland. When my father's income increased, she was content to quit and concentrate on the children. Women were free to pursue careers if they wanted to. The difference was that their role as wife and mother was understood, and socially validated, as it should be.
Until Gloria Steinem and the CIA came along.
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Friday, April 13, 2007
Is the tv show 24 propaganda? you decide
Fox Show "24": Torture on TV
By Jon Wiener, TheNation.com. Posted January 15, 2007.
With at least one big torture scene in every episode and steadily increasing ratings, TV show "24" is more convincing than the White House at making the case for torture. Tools
"24" is back on Fox TV -- the hit show starring Kiefer Sutherland, which premiered Sunday night, once again features at least one big torture scene in every episode -- the kind of torture the Bush White House says is necessary to protect us from you-know-who.
The show is much more convincing than the White House at making the case for torture; its ratings have gone steadily up over the last five years, while Bush's ratings have gone steadily down.
In "24," Sutherland plays special agent Jack Bauer, head of the Counter Terrorism Unit. He fights some of his biggest battles not with the dark-skinned enemies trying to nuke L.A., but rather with the light-skinned do-gooders who think the head of the Counter Terrorism Unit should follow the rules.
Back in season four, for example, the bumbling bureaucrats released a captured terrorist before he could be tortured -- because a lawyer for "Amnesty Global" showed up whining about the Geneva Conventions. Jack had to quit the Counter Terrorist Unit and become a private citizen in order to break the suspect's fingers.
It's especially unfortunate to see Kiefer Sutherland play the world's most popular torturer -- because his father, Donald Sutherland, has been a prominent antiwar activist since Vietnam days and starred in some great films critiquing fascist politics, including "MASH" and Bertolucci's "1900" -- and also because Kiefer's grandfather, Tommy Douglas, was Canada's first socialist premier, and was recently voted "the greatest Canadian of all time" -- because he introduced universal public health care to Canada. The grandson meanwhile is being paid $10 million a season by Rupert Murdoch to shoot kneecaps, chop off hands, and bite his enemies to death (Sunday's special thrill).
The show's connection to the Bush White House and the conservative establishment became explicit last June, when Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff appeared alongside the show's producers and three cast members at an event sponsored by the Heritage Foundation to discuss "The public image of US terrorism policy." The discussion was moderated by Rush Limbaugh. The C-SPAN store sells a DVD of the event--price reduced from $60 to $29.95. Sunday night's two-hour premiere again argued not just that torture is necessary but that it works -- and it's also really exciting to watch. The show as usual made the "ticking time bomb" case for torture: we need to torture a suspect, or else thousands, or millions, will die in the next hour.
It's the same case made by Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, who proposed that judges ought to issue torture warrants in the "rare 'ticking bomb' case," and by University of Chicago law professor and federal judge Richard Posner, who has written, "If torture is the only means of obtaining the information necessary to prevent the detonation of a nuclear bomb in Times Square, torture should be used." He added that "no one who doubts that this is the case should be in a position of responsibility."
Thanks to "24," tens of millions of TV viewers know exactly what Dershowitz and Posner are talking about. As Richard Kim pointed out in The Nation in 2005, those are the cases where "the stakes are dire, the information perfect and the authorities omniscient." Of course that's a fantasy of total knowledge and power, and of course the U.S. has never had a real "ticking time bomb" case -- but Jack Bauer faces one every Sunday night on Fox.
By Jon Wiener, TheNation.com. Posted January 15, 2007.
With at least one big torture scene in every episode and steadily increasing ratings, TV show "24" is more convincing than the White House at making the case for torture. Tools
"24" is back on Fox TV -- the hit show starring Kiefer Sutherland, which premiered Sunday night, once again features at least one big torture scene in every episode -- the kind of torture the Bush White House says is necessary to protect us from you-know-who.
The show is much more convincing than the White House at making the case for torture; its ratings have gone steadily up over the last five years, while Bush's ratings have gone steadily down.
In "24," Sutherland plays special agent Jack Bauer, head of the Counter Terrorism Unit. He fights some of his biggest battles not with the dark-skinned enemies trying to nuke L.A., but rather with the light-skinned do-gooders who think the head of the Counter Terrorism Unit should follow the rules.
Back in season four, for example, the bumbling bureaucrats released a captured terrorist before he could be tortured -- because a lawyer for "Amnesty Global" showed up whining about the Geneva Conventions. Jack had to quit the Counter Terrorist Unit and become a private citizen in order to break the suspect's fingers.
It's especially unfortunate to see Kiefer Sutherland play the world's most popular torturer -- because his father, Donald Sutherland, has been a prominent antiwar activist since Vietnam days and starred in some great films critiquing fascist politics, including "MASH" and Bertolucci's "1900" -- and also because Kiefer's grandfather, Tommy Douglas, was Canada's first socialist premier, and was recently voted "the greatest Canadian of all time" -- because he introduced universal public health care to Canada. The grandson meanwhile is being paid $10 million a season by Rupert Murdoch to shoot kneecaps, chop off hands, and bite his enemies to death (Sunday's special thrill).
The show's connection to the Bush White House and the conservative establishment became explicit last June, when Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff appeared alongside the show's producers and three cast members at an event sponsored by the Heritage Foundation to discuss "The public image of US terrorism policy." The discussion was moderated by Rush Limbaugh. The C-SPAN store sells a DVD of the event--price reduced from $60 to $29.95. Sunday night's two-hour premiere again argued not just that torture is necessary but that it works -- and it's also really exciting to watch. The show as usual made the "ticking time bomb" case for torture: we need to torture a suspect, or else thousands, or millions, will die in the next hour.
It's the same case made by Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, who proposed that judges ought to issue torture warrants in the "rare 'ticking bomb' case," and by University of Chicago law professor and federal judge Richard Posner, who has written, "If torture is the only means of obtaining the information necessary to prevent the detonation of a nuclear bomb in Times Square, torture should be used." He added that "no one who doubts that this is the case should be in a position of responsibility."
Thanks to "24," tens of millions of TV viewers know exactly what Dershowitz and Posner are talking about. As Richard Kim pointed out in The Nation in 2005, those are the cases where "the stakes are dire, the information perfect and the authorities omniscient." Of course that's a fantasy of total knowledge and power, and of course the U.S. has never had a real "ticking time bomb" case -- but Jack Bauer faces one every Sunday night on Fox.
Cartoon Network Contains 'New World Order' Propaganda
(article and video http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/281205cartoonnetwork.htm
Prison Planet | December 28 2005
This is a clip from a show recently broadcast on Cartoon Network.
It contains two references to the 'New World Order' even though it is totally out of context and has no reason for being included.
Time and time again we hear 'New World Order' included in children's programming, sitcoms like Friends and numerous other popular TV shows.
Why is it included? Obviously not every example is part of a secret conspiracy.
Nevertheless, in some instances it is clearly an example of the elite dropping their 'gang sign' as a form of communication and as a way to externalize the hierarchy.
Others suggest it is just an arrogant Illuminati laughing in our faces.
Watch the clip and decide for yourself
Prison Planet | December 28 2005
This is a clip from a show recently broadcast on Cartoon Network.
It contains two references to the 'New World Order' even though it is totally out of context and has no reason for being included.
Time and time again we hear 'New World Order' included in children's programming, sitcoms like Friends and numerous other popular TV shows.
Why is it included? Obviously not every example is part of a secret conspiracy.
Nevertheless, in some instances it is clearly an example of the elite dropping their 'gang sign' as a form of communication and as a way to externalize the hierarchy.
Others suggest it is just an arrogant Illuminati laughing in our faces.
Watch the clip and decide for yourself
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Child sex book given out at U.N. summit
Child sex book given out at U.N. summit
Washington Times 05/10/02: George Archibald
Original Link: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020510-25256488.htm
A UNICEF-funded book being passed out at the United Nations Child Summit encourages children to engage in sexual activities with other minors and with homosexuals and animals.
As the delegations to the summit remain deadlocked on abortion, international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that support the U.S. delegation's anti-abortion stance circulated copies of pages from a UNICEF-funded book given to delegates from Latin America that promotes sexual activity and abortion among teens in their countries.
"Reproductive health includes the following components: Counseling on sexuality, pregnancy, methods of contraception, abortion, infertility, infections and diseases," says the Spanish-language book, whose title translates to "Theoretic Elements for Working with Mothers and Pregnant Teens."
An accompanying workshop book produced by the U.N. Children's Fund (UNICEF) tells Latin American mothers and teens: "Situations in which you can obtain sexual pleasure: 1. Masturbation. 2. Sexual relations with a partner — whether heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. 3. A sexual response that is directed toward inanimate objects, animals, minors, non-consenting persons."
The book, which was distributed by the Mexican government with U.N. funding, suggests lesbian sex as an acceptable alternative for girls.
"Sexual relations with a partner: Here we should insist there is no ideal or perfect relations between two or several people," the book says. "The one that gives us the most satisfaction and that which is adopted to our way of being and the style of life we have chosen. This is why we encounter many differences among women. Some women like to have relations with men. And others with another woman."
UNICEF spokesman Alfred Ironside acknowledged U.N. funding for the book, but said it was produced by the Mexican government in 1999 and pulled from circulation "when the content was more carefully reviewed."
Mr. Ironside said he did not know how many of the books were circulated. "A very small number were produced — fewer than a thousand," he said. "It was pulled out of circulation when the content was more carefully reviewed."
"That book was a product of the Mexican government, supported by UNICEF financially as part of UNICEF's support to the Mexican government," Mr. Ironside said.
"We do everything we do in full agreement with the governments we support. We do not operate independently," he said.
He said the book was "intended as a training manual for people working with adolescent women to prevent teen pregnancy. That publication was a compilation of articles by different contributors and has a very clear disclaimer in the front that the views of the writers do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations."
The workshop book is being passed out by anti-abortion NGOs to persuade delegates from the large Latin American bloc of countries called the Rio Group to support the U.S. proposal to remove ambiguous language from the child-summit action document, which has been used in the past by U.N. agencies to promote abortion.
Delegations to the U.N. Child Summit remained deadlocked yesterday in closed-door negotiations over abortion and other hot-button issues that have held up final agreement on a U.N. action agenda to protect the world's children.
The U.S. delegation, praised by pro-family groups for standing firm to ensure the agenda does not sanction continued U.N. promotion of abortions, was attacked by NGO critics for a second day at an afternoon briefing, NGO members at the meeting said.
Douglas Sylva, an official with the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, called the briefing "an NGO feeding frenzy," in which the United States was attacked for its position on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; arms sales to allies; the Bush administration's support of capital punishment; and U.S. failure to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.
"The fact that the United States is the only country besides Somalia that has not ratified [the] child's rights [convention] is shocking," said Paula Daeppen, director in Zurich for the Federation of American Women's Clubs Overseas.
"We're supposed to be a moral leader of the world and child friendly," she said.
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, Texas Democrat, told the meeting she applauded the administration's work to protect children from pornography, exploitation and "child soldiering." But she said she disagreed with the U.S. delegation on some issues.
"There needs to be flexibility on life," she said — an apparent reference to the administration's strong anti-abortion stance. A person close to the congresswoman, who asked to remain anonymous, said her remarks were intended to urge "more flexibility on family planning."
Abortion is not mentioned directly in the draft child-summit document, but UNICEF, which organized the 187-country special session of the General Assembly, and the U.N. Fund for Population Activities, interpret the ambiguous phrase "reproductive health services" to include abortion.
A senior Canadian negotiator told delegates in earlier preparatory meetings that the term includes abortion, prompting the Bush administration to start pushing for the alternate term "reproductive health care."
European countries, with the exception of Spain, along with Canada, Japan and New Zealand oppose the U.S. position. Muslim nations and some African countries also support the United States.
The Rio Group, whose delegations say their predominantly Catholic populations don't condone abortion, said there is no danger the term "reproductive health services" will be used to promote abortions in Latin America.
Washington Times 05/10/02: George Archibald
Original Link: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020510-25256488.htm
A UNICEF-funded book being passed out at the United Nations Child Summit encourages children to engage in sexual activities with other minors and with homosexuals and animals.
As the delegations to the summit remain deadlocked on abortion, international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that support the U.S. delegation's anti-abortion stance circulated copies of pages from a UNICEF-funded book given to delegates from Latin America that promotes sexual activity and abortion among teens in their countries.
"Reproductive health includes the following components: Counseling on sexuality, pregnancy, methods of contraception, abortion, infertility, infections and diseases," says the Spanish-language book, whose title translates to "Theoretic Elements for Working with Mothers and Pregnant Teens."
An accompanying workshop book produced by the U.N. Children's Fund (UNICEF) tells Latin American mothers and teens: "Situations in which you can obtain sexual pleasure: 1. Masturbation. 2. Sexual relations with a partner — whether heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. 3. A sexual response that is directed toward inanimate objects, animals, minors, non-consenting persons."
The book, which was distributed by the Mexican government with U.N. funding, suggests lesbian sex as an acceptable alternative for girls.
"Sexual relations with a partner: Here we should insist there is no ideal or perfect relations between two or several people," the book says. "The one that gives us the most satisfaction and that which is adopted to our way of being and the style of life we have chosen. This is why we encounter many differences among women. Some women like to have relations with men. And others with another woman."
UNICEF spokesman Alfred Ironside acknowledged U.N. funding for the book, but said it was produced by the Mexican government in 1999 and pulled from circulation "when the content was more carefully reviewed."
Mr. Ironside said he did not know how many of the books were circulated. "A very small number were produced — fewer than a thousand," he said. "It was pulled out of circulation when the content was more carefully reviewed."
"That book was a product of the Mexican government, supported by UNICEF financially as part of UNICEF's support to the Mexican government," Mr. Ironside said.
"We do everything we do in full agreement with the governments we support. We do not operate independently," he said.
He said the book was "intended as a training manual for people working with adolescent women to prevent teen pregnancy. That publication was a compilation of articles by different contributors and has a very clear disclaimer in the front that the views of the writers do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations."
The workshop book is being passed out by anti-abortion NGOs to persuade delegates from the large Latin American bloc of countries called the Rio Group to support the U.S. proposal to remove ambiguous language from the child-summit action document, which has been used in the past by U.N. agencies to promote abortion.
Delegations to the U.N. Child Summit remained deadlocked yesterday in closed-door negotiations over abortion and other hot-button issues that have held up final agreement on a U.N. action agenda to protect the world's children.
The U.S. delegation, praised by pro-family groups for standing firm to ensure the agenda does not sanction continued U.N. promotion of abortions, was attacked by NGO critics for a second day at an afternoon briefing, NGO members at the meeting said.
Douglas Sylva, an official with the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, called the briefing "an NGO feeding frenzy," in which the United States was attacked for its position on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; arms sales to allies; the Bush administration's support of capital punishment; and U.S. failure to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.
"The fact that the United States is the only country besides Somalia that has not ratified [the] child's rights [convention] is shocking," said Paula Daeppen, director in Zurich for the Federation of American Women's Clubs Overseas.
"We're supposed to be a moral leader of the world and child friendly," she said.
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, Texas Democrat, told the meeting she applauded the administration's work to protect children from pornography, exploitation and "child soldiering." But she said she disagreed with the U.S. delegation on some issues.
"There needs to be flexibility on life," she said — an apparent reference to the administration's strong anti-abortion stance. A person close to the congresswoman, who asked to remain anonymous, said her remarks were intended to urge "more flexibility on family planning."
Abortion is not mentioned directly in the draft child-summit document, but UNICEF, which organized the 187-country special session of the General Assembly, and the U.N. Fund for Population Activities, interpret the ambiguous phrase "reproductive health services" to include abortion.
A senior Canadian negotiator told delegates in earlier preparatory meetings that the term includes abortion, prompting the Bush administration to start pushing for the alternate term "reproductive health care."
European countries, with the exception of Spain, along with Canada, Japan and New Zealand oppose the U.S. position. Muslim nations and some African countries also support the United States.
The Rio Group, whose delegations say their predominantly Catholic populations don't condone abortion, said there is no danger the term "reproductive health services" will be used to promote abortions in Latin America.
Global warming and the UN
The Creeping Fascism of Global Warming Hysteria
Man-made orthodoxy is a dogma of coercion, bias, and junk science
Prison Planet | February 13, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson
The hoax of the doctrine of man-made global warming that is being foisted upon the world by decree, and the junk science that is manipulated to support it, represents a creeping fascism whose agenda to stifle open debate betrays the fact that climate change hysteria is a farce intended to crush freedoms and further centralize global power.
In an interview with a Czech newspaper , Vaclav Klaus, the President of the Czech Republic blamed the "whip of political correctness" for preventing more scientists and statesmen from going public with their skepticism on man-made global warming. This is precisely what we have arrived at, in a bizarre vacuum of common sense and without any attribution, the establishment and the controlled left have managed to squash reasoned two-sided debate about global warming by coating their argument with the nebulous claim that expressing disagreement is somehow bigoted, backward and even racist.
TOOLS:
Printer Friendly Version
The very fact that the man-made advocates have to introduce such a far distant concept as race into a debate about scientific climate change makes it self-evident that their argument is inherently weak and vulnerable.
In an article we published in November about global warming being primarily caused by the sun, we commented somewhat tongue in cheek that people who express doubts about global warming would soon be compared to holocaust deniers by the media and other self-appointed cultural kingpins who demand total adherence to orthodox religion style beliefs about climate change.
Here's what we wrote :
The assertion that global warming is man made is so oppressively enforced upon popular opinion, especially in Europe, that expressing a scintilla of doubt is akin to holocaust denial in some cases. Such is the insipid brainwashing that has taken place via television, newspapers and exalted talking heads - global warming skeptics are forced to wear the metaphoric yellow star and only discuss their doubts in hushed tones and conciliatory frameworks, or be cat-called, harangued and jeered by an army of do-gooders who righteously believe they are rescuing mother earth by recycling a wine bottle or putting their paper in a separate trash can.
It's not longer a joke.
The Boston Globe's Ellen Goodman wrote an op-ed last week denouncing anyone who dares dissent against the God-like authoritative status of the IPCC UN report on climate change.
I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.
This assault betrays what's at the heart of the global warming agenda - a cadre of control freaks who can't respond to the overwhelming evidence that the Sun and other long term natural cycles are responsible for climate change and thus have to resort to vile propagandistic personality attacks to sway the court of public opinion.
During a debate on the BBC's Question Time program, a panelist's appeal for viewers to simply look at both sides of the argument and consider other causes besides the man-made explanation was met with boos and cat-calls from the audience and the speaker was shouted down. It's now treated as sacrilegious to even question the force fed dogma that leads the automatons to endlessly repeat what has been brainwashed into them by the establishment media like a broken record.
"We can't afford to have this debate," they scream, arguing that the end is nigh and unbelievers need to be metaphorically burned at the stake of public opinion in the interests of human survival.
But for those with memories and the nerve to actually think for themselves, the climate doomsayers have been proven wrong throughout the decades. In the late 60's and early 70's, the in-vogue hysteria about climate change and how it spelled the end for humanity as we know it revolved around the concept of global cooling . Again, this arose out of a misunderstanding of long term temperature fluctuations and the fact that the earth was at the end of the cycle of the Little Ice Age .
Writer John Bender has done an excellent job of compiling quotes from environmental "authorities" of past decades who told us that the sky was falling yet have been completely discredited with hindsight. Keep these dire proclamations in mind when you hear yet another "repeater" regurgitate the brainwashing that he or she has been indoctrinated with by the establishment.
The continued rapid cooling of the earth since WWII is in accord with the increase in global air pollution associated with industrialization, mechanization, urbanization and exploding population. -- Reid Bryson, "Global Ecology; Readings towards a rational strategy for Man", (1971)
The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer -- Paul Ehrlich - The Population Bomb (1968)
I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 -- Paul Ehrlich in (1969)
In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish. -- Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day (1970)
Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion -- Paul Ehrlich in (1976)
This [cooling] trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century -- Peter Gwynne, Newsweek 1976
There are ominous signs that the earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production - with serious political implications for just about every nation on earth. The drop in food production could begin quite soon... The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologist are hard-pressed to keep up with it. -- Newsweek, April 28, (1975)
This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000. -- Lowell Ponte "The Cooling", 1976
If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder by the year 2000...This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age. -- Kenneth E.F. Watt on air pollution and global cooling, Earth Day (1970)
The IPCC is a political body, not a scientific organization, therefore its proclamation is purely intended at achieving a political agenda. The document they released on February 2 that was devotedly afforded days of intense coverage by the compliant establishment media was a political manifesto based on a scientific undertaking that has not even been completed. How empirical is a "scientific experiment" whose conclusions are announced before tests have even been completed? The document immediately states that the "scientific" research is being edited to conform to the already released political summary.
“Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter,” states the brief.
The U.N. has confidently announced "case closed" on man-made global warming because they are editing their own uncompleted report to mirror their pre-conceived conclusion. Hardly "independent" is it?
The IPCC report was piggybacked onto a bandwagon of public relations stunts that had nothing to do with the evidence behind global warming but were enough to leave an impression in the mind of the casual viewer that the man-made explanation was a global consensus. These included the Eiffel Tower's lights being turned off for 5 minutes and a ludicrous incident in which British primate expert Jane Goodall imitated the wild call of a tropical chimpanzee.
Czech President Klaus stated, "Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment."
Man-made advocates go to great lengths to highlight the fact that transnational oil giants such as Exxon-Mobil offer thousands of dollars for reports aimed at disproving the UN theory, claiming this taints any opposing viewpoint as biased, and yet conveniently ignore the fact that it was the U.N. itself and Ted Turner, a man-made devotee and advocate of drastic population reduction to save the planet, who gifted the organization $1 Billion which in part funded the IPCC report. Is that not biased? Is that not a example of scientists being lavishly bankrolled to produce evidence that fits a pre-conceived outcome? Is the fact that a carbon tax fueled by fear of climate change that will go directly to assorted U.N. agencies itself a commentary on the U.N.'s role on hyping man-made global warming?
In addition, Greenpeace are recruiting "global warming field organizer's" whose job it is to lobby members of Congress to push the agenda for man-made global warming. So if you thought your donation was going to help save whales or protect the rainforest you're sorely mistaken - it's partly funding a PR assault that will eventually orbit right back to you in the form of a draconian carbon emissions tax that will do nothing to prevent global warming but will fill the pockets of global government and the U.N.
Not all scientists were prepared to sacrifice their impartiality to be in on the scam. Dr. Chris Landsea resigned from the IPCC in his own words because, “I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.”
Landsea is one of many climate experts, meteorologists, geologists and others who have braved the scorn of the flat-earthers to point out that man-made advocates have utilized myopic and blinkered scientific trickery to make their case.
Timothy Ball, Chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, recently penned an outstanding piece in which he detailed how the illusion is being played out and how skeptics of the farce are increasingly being made pariahs simply for having an opposing view. Ball puts it better than I ever could so I make no apologies for quoting his article at length.
Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was one of the first Canadian Ph.Ds. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.
Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.
No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don't pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?
Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species," wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.
I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on.
Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling.
No doubt passive acceptance yields less stress, fewer personal attacks and makes career progress easier. What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.
No one disagrees with the notion that global warming is occurring, but to discount the fact that it has anything to do with that giant flaming ball of fire in our sky that we can barely look at without being blinded is ignorance unparalleled.
How do we square the fact that almost every planet in our solar system is simultaneously undergoing temperature change and volatile weather patterns? Does this not suggest that global warming is a natural cycle as a result of the evolving nature of the sun and other celestial phenomena? Can Al Gore fill me in on this one?
Mars, Pluto, Jupiter, Saturn, Triton and numerous other nooks and crannies throughout the solar system are experiencing warming trends and volatile weather patterns. How many SUV's are there on Jupiter?
The earth and its celestial counterparts are getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time in the past 1,000 years , according to a study undertaken by the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany.
In addition, cosmic rays from exploding stars have now been found to contribute substantially to cloud formation and the greenhouse effect as the London Times reported yesterday.
The simple fact is that throughout the ages the earth has swung wildly between a warm, wet, stable climate, to a cold, dry and windy one - long before the first fossil fuel was burned. The changes we are now witnessing are a walk in the park compared to the battering that our rugged planet has taken in the past.
This is not a defense of the oil cartels or the Neo-Con wreckers, who would have every motivation to ignore global warming whether it is man-made or not.
Nor is it a blanket denial of the fact that the earth is getting very gradually hotter, but how do we reconcile global warming taking place at the farthest reaches of the solar system with the contention that it is caused by human activity? Have our exhaust fumes left earth's atmosphere and slipped through a black hole to Triton?
Countless other heroes of science have put their reputation and careers on the line in the name of truth to expose the man-made fraud and challenge the creeping fascism being engendered by means of using political correctness to hijack the debate. They have bucked the orthodoxy and risked being stripped of their credentials, as the Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist would have it. Here are several insightful statements from these brave individuals.
I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can't find them. Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab. The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.
ABC-TV Meteorologist James Spann.
"It's not 2,500 people offering their consensus, I participated in that. Each person who is an author writes one or two pages in conjunction with someone else. They travel around the world several times a year for several years to write it and the summary for policymakers has the input of about 13 of the scientists, but ultimately, it is written by representatives of governments, of environmental organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, and industrial organizations, each seeking their own benefit."
MIT's Professor of Atmospheric Science Dr. Richard Lindzen on the IPCC report.
"Climate keeps changing all the time. The fact that climate changes is not in itself a threat."
Dr. S. Fred Singer, Atmospheric Physicist at George Mason University.
Man-made global warming feeds into humanity's arrogant self-importance in thinking that it has become the master and therefore the decider of the earth's destiny. On an individual level, it also helps a person stroke their ego and feel good about themselves for recycling a few beer cans or wine bottles in the belief that they're saving the planet, and also gives them the excuse to exercise their judgment against anyone who doesn't do likewise.
Fearmongering about an imminent climate doomsday also hogs news coverage and important environmental issues like GM food, mad scientist chimera cloning and the usurpation and abuse of corporations like Monsanto flies under the radar.
Global warming is cited as an excuse to meter out further control and surveillance over our daily lives, RFID chips on our trash cans, GPS satellite tracking and taxation by the mile, as well as a global tax at the gas pump.
The extremist wing of the environmentalist movement, characterized by people like Dr. Erik Pianka , advocate the mass culling of humanity via plagues and state sanctioned bio-terrorism, in order to "save" the earth from the disease of humanity. Nazi-like genocidal population control measures and the environmental establishment have always held a close alliance.
The world is laboring under enforced adherence to a program of mass deception while scientists who attempt to blow the whistle on the fraud are silenced, tarred, ridiculed and fired. The biased control freaks at the United Nations and their intellectually spayed cheerleaders, whose goal it is to use the hysteria of climate change to impose draconian control measures on society and centralize world power, have declared "case closed" on the man-made origins of global warming. However, their foolish attempts to zealously mute mere expression of an opposing view betray the inherent flaws of their own mantra and will ultimately lead to its downfall.
Man-made orthodoxy is a dogma of coercion, bias, and junk science
Prison Planet | February 13, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson
The hoax of the doctrine of man-made global warming that is being foisted upon the world by decree, and the junk science that is manipulated to support it, represents a creeping fascism whose agenda to stifle open debate betrays the fact that climate change hysteria is a farce intended to crush freedoms and further centralize global power.
In an interview with a Czech newspaper , Vaclav Klaus, the President of the Czech Republic blamed the "whip of political correctness" for preventing more scientists and statesmen from going public with their skepticism on man-made global warming. This is precisely what we have arrived at, in a bizarre vacuum of common sense and without any attribution, the establishment and the controlled left have managed to squash reasoned two-sided debate about global warming by coating their argument with the nebulous claim that expressing disagreement is somehow bigoted, backward and even racist.
TOOLS:
Printer Friendly Version
The very fact that the man-made advocates have to introduce such a far distant concept as race into a debate about scientific climate change makes it self-evident that their argument is inherently weak and vulnerable.
In an article we published in November about global warming being primarily caused by the sun, we commented somewhat tongue in cheek that people who express doubts about global warming would soon be compared to holocaust deniers by the media and other self-appointed cultural kingpins who demand total adherence to orthodox religion style beliefs about climate change.
Here's what we wrote :
The assertion that global warming is man made is so oppressively enforced upon popular opinion, especially in Europe, that expressing a scintilla of doubt is akin to holocaust denial in some cases. Such is the insipid brainwashing that has taken place via television, newspapers and exalted talking heads - global warming skeptics are forced to wear the metaphoric yellow star and only discuss their doubts in hushed tones and conciliatory frameworks, or be cat-called, harangued and jeered by an army of do-gooders who righteously believe they are rescuing mother earth by recycling a wine bottle or putting their paper in a separate trash can.
It's not longer a joke.
The Boston Globe's Ellen Goodman wrote an op-ed last week denouncing anyone who dares dissent against the God-like authoritative status of the IPCC UN report on climate change.
I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.
This assault betrays what's at the heart of the global warming agenda - a cadre of control freaks who can't respond to the overwhelming evidence that the Sun and other long term natural cycles are responsible for climate change and thus have to resort to vile propagandistic personality attacks to sway the court of public opinion.
During a debate on the BBC's Question Time program, a panelist's appeal for viewers to simply look at both sides of the argument and consider other causes besides the man-made explanation was met with boos and cat-calls from the audience and the speaker was shouted down. It's now treated as sacrilegious to even question the force fed dogma that leads the automatons to endlessly repeat what has been brainwashed into them by the establishment media like a broken record.
"We can't afford to have this debate," they scream, arguing that the end is nigh and unbelievers need to be metaphorically burned at the stake of public opinion in the interests of human survival.
But for those with memories and the nerve to actually think for themselves, the climate doomsayers have been proven wrong throughout the decades. In the late 60's and early 70's, the in-vogue hysteria about climate change and how it spelled the end for humanity as we know it revolved around the concept of global cooling . Again, this arose out of a misunderstanding of long term temperature fluctuations and the fact that the earth was at the end of the cycle of the Little Ice Age .
Writer John Bender has done an excellent job of compiling quotes from environmental "authorities" of past decades who told us that the sky was falling yet have been completely discredited with hindsight. Keep these dire proclamations in mind when you hear yet another "repeater" regurgitate the brainwashing that he or she has been indoctrinated with by the establishment.
The continued rapid cooling of the earth since WWII is in accord with the increase in global air pollution associated with industrialization, mechanization, urbanization and exploding population. -- Reid Bryson, "Global Ecology; Readings towards a rational strategy for Man", (1971)
The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer -- Paul Ehrlich - The Population Bomb (1968)
I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 -- Paul Ehrlich in (1969)
In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish. -- Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day (1970)
Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion -- Paul Ehrlich in (1976)
This [cooling] trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century -- Peter Gwynne, Newsweek 1976
There are ominous signs that the earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production - with serious political implications for just about every nation on earth. The drop in food production could begin quite soon... The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologist are hard-pressed to keep up with it. -- Newsweek, April 28, (1975)
This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000. -- Lowell Ponte "The Cooling", 1976
If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder by the year 2000...This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age. -- Kenneth E.F. Watt on air pollution and global cooling, Earth Day (1970)
The IPCC is a political body, not a scientific organization, therefore its proclamation is purely intended at achieving a political agenda. The document they released on February 2 that was devotedly afforded days of intense coverage by the compliant establishment media was a political manifesto based on a scientific undertaking that has not even been completed. How empirical is a "scientific experiment" whose conclusions are announced before tests have even been completed? The document immediately states that the "scientific" research is being edited to conform to the already released political summary.
“Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter,” states the brief.
The U.N. has confidently announced "case closed" on man-made global warming because they are editing their own uncompleted report to mirror their pre-conceived conclusion. Hardly "independent" is it?
The IPCC report was piggybacked onto a bandwagon of public relations stunts that had nothing to do with the evidence behind global warming but were enough to leave an impression in the mind of the casual viewer that the man-made explanation was a global consensus. These included the Eiffel Tower's lights being turned off for 5 minutes and a ludicrous incident in which British primate expert Jane Goodall imitated the wild call of a tropical chimpanzee.
Czech President Klaus stated, "Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment."
Man-made advocates go to great lengths to highlight the fact that transnational oil giants such as Exxon-Mobil offer thousands of dollars for reports aimed at disproving the UN theory, claiming this taints any opposing viewpoint as biased, and yet conveniently ignore the fact that it was the U.N. itself and Ted Turner, a man-made devotee and advocate of drastic population reduction to save the planet, who gifted the organization $1 Billion which in part funded the IPCC report. Is that not biased? Is that not a example of scientists being lavishly bankrolled to produce evidence that fits a pre-conceived outcome? Is the fact that a carbon tax fueled by fear of climate change that will go directly to assorted U.N. agencies itself a commentary on the U.N.'s role on hyping man-made global warming?
In addition, Greenpeace are recruiting "global warming field organizer's" whose job it is to lobby members of Congress to push the agenda for man-made global warming. So if you thought your donation was going to help save whales or protect the rainforest you're sorely mistaken - it's partly funding a PR assault that will eventually orbit right back to you in the form of a draconian carbon emissions tax that will do nothing to prevent global warming but will fill the pockets of global government and the U.N.
Not all scientists were prepared to sacrifice their impartiality to be in on the scam. Dr. Chris Landsea resigned from the IPCC in his own words because, “I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.”
Landsea is one of many climate experts, meteorologists, geologists and others who have braved the scorn of the flat-earthers to point out that man-made advocates have utilized myopic and blinkered scientific trickery to make their case.
Timothy Ball, Chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, recently penned an outstanding piece in which he detailed how the illusion is being played out and how skeptics of the farce are increasingly being made pariahs simply for having an opposing view. Ball puts it better than I ever could so I make no apologies for quoting his article at length.
Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was one of the first Canadian Ph.Ds. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.
Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.
No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don't pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?
Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species," wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.
I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on.
Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling.
No doubt passive acceptance yields less stress, fewer personal attacks and makes career progress easier. What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.
No one disagrees with the notion that global warming is occurring, but to discount the fact that it has anything to do with that giant flaming ball of fire in our sky that we can barely look at without being blinded is ignorance unparalleled.
How do we square the fact that almost every planet in our solar system is simultaneously undergoing temperature change and volatile weather patterns? Does this not suggest that global warming is a natural cycle as a result of the evolving nature of the sun and other celestial phenomena? Can Al Gore fill me in on this one?
Mars, Pluto, Jupiter, Saturn, Triton and numerous other nooks and crannies throughout the solar system are experiencing warming trends and volatile weather patterns. How many SUV's are there on Jupiter?
The earth and its celestial counterparts are getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time in the past 1,000 years , according to a study undertaken by the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany.
In addition, cosmic rays from exploding stars have now been found to contribute substantially to cloud formation and the greenhouse effect as the London Times reported yesterday.
The simple fact is that throughout the ages the earth has swung wildly between a warm, wet, stable climate, to a cold, dry and windy one - long before the first fossil fuel was burned. The changes we are now witnessing are a walk in the park compared to the battering that our rugged planet has taken in the past.
This is not a defense of the oil cartels or the Neo-Con wreckers, who would have every motivation to ignore global warming whether it is man-made or not.
Nor is it a blanket denial of the fact that the earth is getting very gradually hotter, but how do we reconcile global warming taking place at the farthest reaches of the solar system with the contention that it is caused by human activity? Have our exhaust fumes left earth's atmosphere and slipped through a black hole to Triton?
Countless other heroes of science have put their reputation and careers on the line in the name of truth to expose the man-made fraud and challenge the creeping fascism being engendered by means of using political correctness to hijack the debate. They have bucked the orthodoxy and risked being stripped of their credentials, as the Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist would have it. Here are several insightful statements from these brave individuals.
I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can't find them. Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab. The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.
ABC-TV Meteorologist James Spann.
"It's not 2,500 people offering their consensus, I participated in that. Each person who is an author writes one or two pages in conjunction with someone else. They travel around the world several times a year for several years to write it and the summary for policymakers has the input of about 13 of the scientists, but ultimately, it is written by representatives of governments, of environmental organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, and industrial organizations, each seeking their own benefit."
MIT's Professor of Atmospheric Science Dr. Richard Lindzen on the IPCC report.
"Climate keeps changing all the time. The fact that climate changes is not in itself a threat."
Dr. S. Fred Singer, Atmospheric Physicist at George Mason University.
Man-made global warming feeds into humanity's arrogant self-importance in thinking that it has become the master and therefore the decider of the earth's destiny. On an individual level, it also helps a person stroke their ego and feel good about themselves for recycling a few beer cans or wine bottles in the belief that they're saving the planet, and also gives them the excuse to exercise their judgment against anyone who doesn't do likewise.
Fearmongering about an imminent climate doomsday also hogs news coverage and important environmental issues like GM food, mad scientist chimera cloning and the usurpation and abuse of corporations like Monsanto flies under the radar.
Global warming is cited as an excuse to meter out further control and surveillance over our daily lives, RFID chips on our trash cans, GPS satellite tracking and taxation by the mile, as well as a global tax at the gas pump.
The extremist wing of the environmentalist movement, characterized by people like Dr. Erik Pianka , advocate the mass culling of humanity via plagues and state sanctioned bio-terrorism, in order to "save" the earth from the disease of humanity. Nazi-like genocidal population control measures and the environmental establishment have always held a close alliance.
The world is laboring under enforced adherence to a program of mass deception while scientists who attempt to blow the whistle on the fraud are silenced, tarred, ridiculed and fired. The biased control freaks at the United Nations and their intellectually spayed cheerleaders, whose goal it is to use the hysteria of climate change to impose draconian control measures on society and centralize world power, have declared "case closed" on the man-made origins of global warming. However, their foolish attempts to zealously mute mere expression of an opposing view betray the inherent flaws of their own mantra and will ultimately lead to its downfall.
ufo invasion?
Counterfeit Foe - The Ultimate Hegelian Dialectic
Paul Joseph Watson
If you haven't recognised the following fact then I suggest you do a little research and deal with it. Government's, ruling oligarchies, dictatorships subtle and overt,
Slip of the Tongue
Henry Kissinger, a member of the Bilderberg Group, CFR and Trilateral Commission raised suspicions that the New World Order would play the fake 'alien card' in the future when he made the following statement at the 1991 Bilderberger conference held in Evians, France:
"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops
entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Years previous to this however, the premise of an ET menace that would bind civilization into accepting a one world government was raised, on more than one occasion, by President Ronald Reagan.
Ronald Reagan's Universal Enemy
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, was conceived in the Nixon administration. The Carter administration further developed the program but it didn't really get teeth until Reagan stepped into office. From 1982-84 Colonel Oliver North assisted FEMA in drafting its civil defence preparations. Details of these plans emerged during the 1987 Iran-Contra scandal. They included executive orders providing for suspension of the constitution, the imposition of martial law, internment camps, and the turning over of government to the president and FEMA in the event of a national crisis.
In April 1984, President Reagan signed Presidential Directive Number 54 that allowed FEMA to engage in a secret national "readiness exercise" under the code name of REX 84. The exercise was to test FEMA’s readiness to assume military authority in the event of a "State of Domestic National Emergency" concurrent with the launching of a direct United States military operation in Central America. This much desired emergency never came, despite several provocations.
Reagan was instrumental in creating the framework for a police state. However, one could never be realized without the added ingredient of a hostile universal threat.
This potential (as in potential to be created) threat was identified by Reagan on no less than four public occasions. On September 21st, 1987, Reagan told the United Nations General Assembly:
"In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world." [Click here for an MP3 sample]
Reagan repeated these sentiments to reporters as he left the White House for Chicago on May 5th, 1988:
"But, I've often wondered what if all of us in the world discovered that we were threatened by an outer--a power from another planet. Wouldn't we all of a sudden find that we didn't have any differences between us at all, we were all human beings, citizens of the world and wouldn't we come together to fight that particular threat?"
We have to recall that Reagan was the ultimate puppet for the New World Order, especially after he was kept under wraps by way of the assassination attempt on his life. Who was writing the autocue and for what purpose? Was this to further condition Americans of the reality of a future manufactured alien threat?
Cosmic deception: Let the citizen be aware
Dr. Steven Greer is the director of the Disclosure Project, a nonprofit research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems. In a June 2002 article he warns of how a phoney UFO invasion would be presented to the public so they would willingly sacrifice their liberty and rally round the government in opposition to the nefarious ET's. Greer describes the ultimate trump card - a hoaxed threat from space:
"Since 1992 I have seen this script unveiled to me by at least a dozen well-placed insiders. Of course, initially I laughed, thinking this just too absurd and far-fetched. Dr. Rosin gave her testimony to the Disclosure Project before 9/11. And yet others told me explicitly that things that looked like UFOs but that are built and under the control of deeply secretive 'black' projects, were being used to simulate - hoax - ET-appearing events, including some abductions and cattle mutilations, to sow the early seeds of cultural fear regarding life in outer space. Like the movie Independence Day, an attempt to unite the world through militarism would unfold using ET as the new cosmic scapegoat (think Jews during the Third Reich).
After a period of terrorism - a period during which the detonation of nuclear devices will be threatened and possibly actuated, thus justifying expanding the weaponization of space - an effort will ramp up to present the public with information about a threat from outer space. Not just asteroids hitting the Earth, but other threats. An extraterrestrial threat. I write this now because I have recently been contacted by several highly placed media and intelligence sources that have made it clear to me that hoaxed events and story-lines are imminent that will attempt to further ramp up the fear machine regarding UFOs and ETs. After all, to have an enemy, you must make the people hate and fear a person, a group of people, or in this case an entire category of beings.
This hogwash, already the stuff of countless books, videos, movies, documentaries and the like, will attempt to glom onto the facts, evidence and first-hand insider testimony of The Disclosure Project, and on its coattails, deliver to the world the cosmic deception that falsely portrays ETs as a threat from space. Do not be deceived. By commingling fact with fiction, and by hoaxing UFO events that can look terrifying, the Plan is to eventually create a new, sustainable, off-planet enemy. And who will be the wiser?"
Greer is an expert in his field and far from seeking to debunk the UFO phenomenon; he has devoted his life to gathering the most credible observers and scientific data to prove actual ET contact, and not elite-sponsored psy-ops fakery. We need to heed his warning and look a little deeper.
On the record: military-industrial psy-ops has considered such programs before
Let's delve into the evidence of how technological deception has been considered before, as a means of misleading populations. The Kennedy era, anti-Castro covert action plan Operation Mongoose was designed to destabilize Cuban society and turn it against Fidel Castro. Under the umbrella of this strategy was a program dubbed 'Elimination by Illumination.' It is found in the Congressional Record, in "Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders, Interim Report of the Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities," November 20, 1975. The plan was developed by an American Intelligence military psy-op specialist named Edward Lansdale.
The operation was to have an American Submarine surface inside Havana harbor at night and project a movie of a Jesus-like figure on the underside of the low-lying clouds that form over the harbor at night. A plane with muffled motors was to have circled just above the clouds while another operative with a loudspeaker exhorted the Cubans below to overthrow "Godless Communism."
The plan was never put into action but was seriously considered and, as stated, remains in the Congressional Record to this day.
An almost exact replica of this proposal came to light in a June 2000 Sydney Morning Herald report.
In 1991 during the Gulf War, top brass of the US Air Force drew up plans to project a giant holographic image of Allah over Baghdad. The scale of the project dictated a mirror several kilometres across up in space. However, a more practical method was suggested. When warm air lies on top of cold air, the difference in density is enough to bend
light. At higher altitudes, a mirage can make whole landscapes appear in the sky. An artificial mirage could in theory be made by heating the atmosphere with radio waves or microwaves. The USAF then had the problem of making the image appear to speak. They postulated, "a pulse stream, an internal acoustic field of 5-15KHz can be created which is audible. Thus it may be possible to 'talk' to adversaries in a way which would be most disturbing to them."
The plan was abandoned when it was realized that images of Allah are forbidden in Islam. The Iraqi's wouldn't know what they were looking at. Also, the practical difficulties in microwave transmission were described as formidable. A consistent and believable method of voice projection was considered highly improbable. However, a cursory look at existing US patents suggests such technology was easily procurable:
3,629,521 – Hearing Systems, Jan. 8, 1970
3,766,331 – Hearing Aid for Producing Sensations in the Brain, Nov. 24,1971
4,858,612 – Hearing Device, Dec. 1983
5,159,703 – Silent Subliminal Presentation System, Dec. 28, 1989
Going back to the Sydney Morning Herald piece, technologies perfect for staging a UFO threat are described:
"The military certainly appears to believe in the potential use of holograms. A USAF think-tank has devised uses ranging from deceptive holographic imaging to the Star Trek-sounding distortion field projector. These are
It won't take an Independence Day style show to convince people of this new alien threat. If 'official sources' say there is a threat and present limited evidence, the people will still lap it up. You'll either be with the government or with the aliens.
Just glance back to the information regarding heating the atmosphere to produce an artificial mirage. Such an application is entirely plausible using HAARP technology. Is this a facet of HAARP's agenda currently being conducted in Alaska?
To act as an atmospheric conduit when it's time for those phoney ET's to appear? Certainly this would fit the bill of Project ARM, a subsidiary of HAARP. ARM (Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program) utilizes a sophisticated array of lasers and microwave devices, surrounded by so-called RASS units that will send sound waves booming skyward over huge outdoor loudspeakers for at least ten minutes every hour. A draft DOE Environmental Assessment, issued December 1996, conceded that the units could generate sound loud enough to be heard as far away as 2,000 meters (6,900 feet). Furthermore, ARM employs laser-radar units known as LIDAR.
Steven Spielberg - the Bilderberg Group's Culture Change Agent
Every year since 1954, the secretive Bilderberg Group (named after the hotel they first met in the Netherlands), comprising elite powerbrokers from Europe and North America, has met to discuss, and influence, the changing global, political, economic and social landscape. Dotted amongst the usual suspects of Rockefeller, Kissinger and Soros etc. we see the presence of renowned Hollywood filmmaker Steven Spielberg. Spielberg attended the 1999 Bilderberg meeting held at Sintra, Portugal. What business does Spielberg, a chieftain of the 'entertainment' industry have secretly mingling with international bankers, military intelligence and world political leaders?
Since the 1970's, Spielberg has directed or produced seven of the top twenty grossing films of all time. Throughout his career we see an obsession with the alien/UFO/space theme. From the 1977 Close Encounters of the Third Kind to ET in 1982, to Deep Impact in 1998. All depict an invasion from outer space. Even the movie Jaws is littered with shooting stars and strange lights in the sky.
In February 1997 a leading light in the British film industry leaked the story that Spielberg and executives of his company DreamWorks had secretly met with senior Pentagon officials in Los Angeles. The officials told Spielberg to "stop everything" and produce a movie whose subject matter involved meteors and/or comets. One year later Deep Impact was in the can. The film describes a comet hurtling towards earth and the fight for who has the privilege of access to an underground bunker.
Who were these Pentagon officials and why were they so eager for Bilderberg asset Spielberg to produce a movie about a threat from outer space?
Commencing in December 2002, the SciFi Channel will screen Taken, Spielberg's 20 hour mini-series focusing on alien abduction. The cost of this production was a staggering $120 million - making it the most expensive mini-series in television history. You'd think Spielberg would by now have tired of the genre, but his elite controllers are really zealous to implant this alien paradigm in the minds of the masses.
Furthermore, Ray Santilli's infamous 1995 'Alien Autopsy' footage now widely accepted as a hoax can again be traced back to Spielberg. The film became all the rage in the international UFO community, with half the specialised publications featuring Santilli's alien corpse on their front covers. However, Santilli now appears to be just the front man for the real owner of the film. Santilli admitted in a BBC interview that the money behind the film came from Germany. French network TF1 subsequently reported that the film originated from an individual by the name of 'Herr Volker Spielberg.' TF1 tried to track this man down but he proved elusive.
Spielberg is clearly a tool of the elite. His work in Hollywood propagates the reality of an alien presence that has been imbedded in the body politic. This has been a success. Recent Roper polls tell us that 80% of the American population believe in UFO's.
In conclusion, consider the comments of UFO researcher Jacques Vallee:
"When I met Stephen Spielberg, I argued with him that the subject [of UFOs] was even more interesting if it wasn't extraterrestrials. If it was real, physical, but not ET. So he said, 'You're probably right, but that's not what the public is expecting - this is Hollywood and I want to give people something that's close to what they expect.'"
Why are the Rockefellers funding the UFO movement?
The Rockefeller family played pivotal roles in establishing the quasi-secret globalist Bilderberg, CFR, and Trilateral Commission groups. They represent the apex of elite monopoly capitalism. The Rockefellers have a penchant for controlling so-called radical 'anti-establishment' minorities.
Thirty years ago when the radical student movement was gaining momentum in North America, the Rockefeller dynasty was surprisingly quick to offer funds. A student leader James Simon Kunen, in his book entitled The Strawberry Incident, tells about the 1968 Students for a Democratic Society convention in which, "men from Business International Roundtables,... tried to buy up a few radicals. These men are the world's industrialists and they convene to decide how our lives are going to go. They offered to finance our demonstrations in Chicago. We were also offered ESSO (Rockefeller) money."
The Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver warned that the mega rich were buying themselves a revolution. He wrote:
"There is a danger to the healthy development of the American Revolution in the fact that often revolutions are manipulated by the ruling class to appear to be a bigger threat than they really are."
Consider this comment by Frank Capell in the U.S. Review of the News:
"Of course, we know that these radical students are not going to take over the government. What they are going to do is provide the excuse for the government to take over the people, by passing more and more repressive laws to 'keep things under control'."
In March 1993 Laurance Rockefeller, assisted by former naval intelligence officer Cdr Scott Jones met with then President Bill Clinton's Science Adviser Dr. John Gibbons and presented an ominous sounding 'Matrix of UFO Belief' study. On the weekend of 19-20th
August 1995 Rockefeller met with Clinton himself at his Wyoming Ranch to further discuss the UFO issue.
On December 18th, 1995, the New York Daily News reported that billionaire Laurance Rockefeller was funding a 150 page UFO report entitled 'The Best Available Evidence' which would subsequently be sent to Bill Clinton and other world leaders. The report was distributed widely, but Rockefeller received no response. The reasons are two-fold. Either Rockefeller wasn't in the loop about the fact that the UFO issue had been co-opted as a psy-op tool or the report was actually a cover for a sensitive briefing on the development of this very same psychological operation.
Rockefeller has also channelled money into the research of Dr. John Mack, the Harvard psychiatrist who has written several books claiming the validity of the alien abduction phenomenon. From 1993-95 Rockefeller's 'donation' was estimated to be $500,000 in total.
Rockefeller paid for at least two meeting sessions of the Starlight Coalition, a group said to be made up of former intelligence officers and military men interested in UFOs. At one time Rockefeller funded a plan to establish contact with aliens, not using the SETI method (by radio
telescope), but by signalling them with banks of powerful halogen lamps. In May 1999 the BBC reported that Rockefeller was funding the UK's largest ever scientific study of crop circles, often linked to UFO activity by researchers. Rockefeller has also funded numerous new age groups seeking to usher in a 'spiritual transformation' and new ways of thinking. His money also percolates through the environmental movement, which is controlled at the top and used by the elite to foster neo-feudalism and continental land grabs.
The Counterfeit Foe
Just take a look at history. The most successful way of legitimizing what would otherwise be a clear abuse of power is to create monsters in the minds of the public. They will always choose the lesser of two evils. There is clearly a program afoot to present a hoaxed and hostile alien presence as real. Let's take a look at two examples of how the litmus test for this deception was carried out.
Obviously, a well known example is Orson Welles' staged and updated dramatization of H.G. Well's The War of the Worlds. On October 30, 1938 CBS Radio was broadcasting the music of Ramon Raquello and his orchestra live from the Meridian Room at the Park Plaza in New York City. Suddenly a reporter from Intercontinental Radio News interrupted the broadcast to deliver an important announcement. Astronomers had just detected enormous blue flames shooting up from the surface of Mars.
The broadcast returned to the music of Ramon Raquello, but soon it was interrupted again with more news. Now a strange meteor had fallen to earth, impacting violently on a farm near Grovers Mill, New Jersey. A reporter was soon on hand to describe the eerie scene around the meteor crater, and the broadcast now switched over to continuous coverage of this rapidly unfolding event.
To the dismay of the terrified audience listening to the broadcast, the events around the Grovers Mill meteor crater rapidly escalated from the merely strange to the positively ominous. It turned out that the meteor was not a meteor. It was, in fact, some kind of spaceship from which a tentacled creature, presumably a Martian, soon emerged and blasted the on-lookers with a deadly heat-ray. Homes were evacuated and a state of martial law was declared. [Real Player file of original broadcast]
Original estimates depicted a reaction of total panic amongst one million of the six million listeners. Although this was later scaled down, hundreds of thousands of people thought the play was real, despite announcements before, during and after the show indicating that it was just a dramatization. People stocked up cars, stashed food, drove hundreds of miles to loved ones.
Obviously, people are (a little) more sophisticated today. However, so is the psy-op intelligence and technology to believably hoax a hostile alien threat. The War of the Worlds broadcast was unlikely to have been a vast conspiracy to test the psychosomatic reaction of the American people to a
hoaxed alien invasion. However, in hindsight it proved to be a very useful case study.
Our second example is a Walt Disney telecast on the weekend of March 18-19 1995. The documentary featured another elite operative, CEO Michael Eisner, and announced that intelligent contact with alien beings had occurred. The show presented a history of UFO sightings and crashed saucers. Eisner uttered the telling line:
"For governments determined to maintain their authority, extra-terrestrial contact is pure dynamite."
The broadcast was unannounced and was patently a test as to how the public would react to the declaration of an off-planet threat.
We have been and are being conditioned. It's no strange coincidence that top lieutenants of the Trilateral Commission like Laurance Rockefeller and Bilderberg placemen like Steven Spielberg are funding and fomenting this alien paradigm. That is not to say the entire UFO research field is controlled, but the stranglehold at the top represents elite manipulation and social steering. The technology to pull off this hoax is in place, the historical precedents are documented. It will only take one declaration from the President, one staged attack on a US city, to convince the people of a universal threat. Only a centralized one world government will be able to protect us.
The ultimate Hegelian Dialectic has been carefully constructed. Upon the conclusion of the war on terrorism, the counterfeit foe awaits.
Paul Joseph Watson
If you haven't recognised the following fact then I suggest you do a little research and deal with it. Government's, ruling oligarchies, dictatorships subtle and overt,
Slip of the Tongue
Henry Kissinger, a member of the Bilderberg Group, CFR and Trilateral Commission raised suspicions that the New World Order would play the fake 'alien card' in the future when he made the following statement at the 1991 Bilderberger conference held in Evians, France:
"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops
entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Years previous to this however, the premise of an ET menace that would bind civilization into accepting a one world government was raised, on more than one occasion, by President Ronald Reagan.
Ronald Reagan's Universal Enemy
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, was conceived in the Nixon administration. The Carter administration further developed the program but it didn't really get teeth until Reagan stepped into office. From 1982-84 Colonel Oliver North assisted FEMA in drafting its civil defence preparations. Details of these plans emerged during the 1987 Iran-Contra scandal. They included executive orders providing for suspension of the constitution, the imposition of martial law, internment camps, and the turning over of government to the president and FEMA in the event of a national crisis.
In April 1984, President Reagan signed Presidential Directive Number 54 that allowed FEMA to engage in a secret national "readiness exercise" under the code name of REX 84. The exercise was to test FEMA’s readiness to assume military authority in the event of a "State of Domestic National Emergency" concurrent with the launching of a direct United States military operation in Central America. This much desired emergency never came, despite several provocations.
Reagan was instrumental in creating the framework for a police state. However, one could never be realized without the added ingredient of a hostile universal threat.
This potential (as in potential to be created) threat was identified by Reagan on no less than four public occasions. On September 21st, 1987, Reagan told the United Nations General Assembly:
"In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world." [Click here for an MP3 sample]
Reagan repeated these sentiments to reporters as he left the White House for Chicago on May 5th, 1988:
"But, I've often wondered what if all of us in the world discovered that we were threatened by an outer--a power from another planet. Wouldn't we all of a sudden find that we didn't have any differences between us at all, we were all human beings, citizens of the world and wouldn't we come together to fight that particular threat?"
We have to recall that Reagan was the ultimate puppet for the New World Order, especially after he was kept under wraps by way of the assassination attempt on his life. Who was writing the autocue and for what purpose? Was this to further condition Americans of the reality of a future manufactured alien threat?
Cosmic deception: Let the citizen be aware
Dr. Steven Greer is the director of the Disclosure Project, a nonprofit research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems. In a June 2002 article he warns of how a phoney UFO invasion would be presented to the public so they would willingly sacrifice their liberty and rally round the government in opposition to the nefarious ET's. Greer describes the ultimate trump card - a hoaxed threat from space:
"Since 1992 I have seen this script unveiled to me by at least a dozen well-placed insiders. Of course, initially I laughed, thinking this just too absurd and far-fetched. Dr. Rosin gave her testimony to the Disclosure Project before 9/11. And yet others told me explicitly that things that looked like UFOs but that are built and under the control of deeply secretive 'black' projects, were being used to simulate - hoax - ET-appearing events, including some abductions and cattle mutilations, to sow the early seeds of cultural fear regarding life in outer space. Like the movie Independence Day, an attempt to unite the world through militarism would unfold using ET as the new cosmic scapegoat (think Jews during the Third Reich).
After a period of terrorism - a period during which the detonation of nuclear devices will be threatened and possibly actuated, thus justifying expanding the weaponization of space - an effort will ramp up to present the public with information about a threat from outer space. Not just asteroids hitting the Earth, but other threats. An extraterrestrial threat. I write this now because I have recently been contacted by several highly placed media and intelligence sources that have made it clear to me that hoaxed events and story-lines are imminent that will attempt to further ramp up the fear machine regarding UFOs and ETs. After all, to have an enemy, you must make the people hate and fear a person, a group of people, or in this case an entire category of beings.
This hogwash, already the stuff of countless books, videos, movies, documentaries and the like, will attempt to glom onto the facts, evidence and first-hand insider testimony of The Disclosure Project, and on its coattails, deliver to the world the cosmic deception that falsely portrays ETs as a threat from space. Do not be deceived. By commingling fact with fiction, and by hoaxing UFO events that can look terrifying, the Plan is to eventually create a new, sustainable, off-planet enemy. And who will be the wiser?"
Greer is an expert in his field and far from seeking to debunk the UFO phenomenon; he has devoted his life to gathering the most credible observers and scientific data to prove actual ET contact, and not elite-sponsored psy-ops fakery. We need to heed his warning and look a little deeper.
On the record: military-industrial psy-ops has considered such programs before
Let's delve into the evidence of how technological deception has been considered before, as a means of misleading populations. The Kennedy era, anti-Castro covert action plan Operation Mongoose was designed to destabilize Cuban society and turn it against Fidel Castro. Under the umbrella of this strategy was a program dubbed 'Elimination by Illumination.' It is found in the Congressional Record, in "Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders, Interim Report of the Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities," November 20, 1975. The plan was developed by an American Intelligence military psy-op specialist named Edward Lansdale.
The operation was to have an American Submarine surface inside Havana harbor at night and project a movie of a Jesus-like figure on the underside of the low-lying clouds that form over the harbor at night. A plane with muffled motors was to have circled just above the clouds while another operative with a loudspeaker exhorted the Cubans below to overthrow "Godless Communism."
The plan was never put into action but was seriously considered and, as stated, remains in the Congressional Record to this day.
An almost exact replica of this proposal came to light in a June 2000 Sydney Morning Herald report.
In 1991 during the Gulf War, top brass of the US Air Force drew up plans to project a giant holographic image of Allah over Baghdad. The scale of the project dictated a mirror several kilometres across up in space. However, a more practical method was suggested. When warm air lies on top of cold air, the difference in density is enough to bend
light. At higher altitudes, a mirage can make whole landscapes appear in the sky. An artificial mirage could in theory be made by heating the atmosphere with radio waves or microwaves. The USAF then had the problem of making the image appear to speak. They postulated, "a pulse stream, an internal acoustic field of 5-15KHz can be created which is audible. Thus it may be possible to 'talk' to adversaries in a way which would be most disturbing to them."
The plan was abandoned when it was realized that images of Allah are forbidden in Islam. The Iraqi's wouldn't know what they were looking at. Also, the practical difficulties in microwave transmission were described as formidable. A consistent and believable method of voice projection was considered highly improbable. However, a cursory look at existing US patents suggests such technology was easily procurable:
3,629,521 – Hearing Systems, Jan. 8, 1970
3,766,331 – Hearing Aid for Producing Sensations in the Brain, Nov. 24,1971
4,858,612 – Hearing Device, Dec. 1983
5,159,703 – Silent Subliminal Presentation System, Dec. 28, 1989
Going back to the Sydney Morning Herald piece, technologies perfect for staging a UFO threat are described:
"The military certainly appears to believe in the potential use of holograms. A USAF think-tank has devised uses ranging from deceptive holographic imaging to the Star Trek-sounding distortion field projector. These are
It won't take an Independence Day style show to convince people of this new alien threat. If 'official sources' say there is a threat and present limited evidence, the people will still lap it up. You'll either be with the government or with the aliens.
Just glance back to the information regarding heating the atmosphere to produce an artificial mirage. Such an application is entirely plausible using HAARP technology. Is this a facet of HAARP's agenda currently being conducted in Alaska?
To act as an atmospheric conduit when it's time for those phoney ET's to appear? Certainly this would fit the bill of Project ARM, a subsidiary of HAARP. ARM (Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program) utilizes a sophisticated array of lasers and microwave devices, surrounded by so-called RASS units that will send sound waves booming skyward over huge outdoor loudspeakers for at least ten minutes every hour. A draft DOE Environmental Assessment, issued December 1996, conceded that the units could generate sound loud enough to be heard as far away as 2,000 meters (6,900 feet). Furthermore, ARM employs laser-radar units known as LIDAR.
Steven Spielberg - the Bilderberg Group's Culture Change Agent
Every year since 1954, the secretive Bilderberg Group (named after the hotel they first met in the Netherlands), comprising elite powerbrokers from Europe and North America, has met to discuss, and influence, the changing global, political, economic and social landscape. Dotted amongst the usual suspects of Rockefeller, Kissinger and Soros etc. we see the presence of renowned Hollywood filmmaker Steven Spielberg. Spielberg attended the 1999 Bilderberg meeting held at Sintra, Portugal. What business does Spielberg, a chieftain of the 'entertainment' industry have secretly mingling with international bankers, military intelligence and world political leaders?
Since the 1970's, Spielberg has directed or produced seven of the top twenty grossing films of all time. Throughout his career we see an obsession with the alien/UFO/space theme. From the 1977 Close Encounters of the Third Kind to ET in 1982, to Deep Impact in 1998. All depict an invasion from outer space. Even the movie Jaws is littered with shooting stars and strange lights in the sky.
In February 1997 a leading light in the British film industry leaked the story that Spielberg and executives of his company DreamWorks had secretly met with senior Pentagon officials in Los Angeles. The officials told Spielberg to "stop everything" and produce a movie whose subject matter involved meteors and/or comets. One year later Deep Impact was in the can. The film describes a comet hurtling towards earth and the fight for who has the privilege of access to an underground bunker.
Who were these Pentagon officials and why were they so eager for Bilderberg asset Spielberg to produce a movie about a threat from outer space?
Commencing in December 2002, the SciFi Channel will screen Taken, Spielberg's 20 hour mini-series focusing on alien abduction. The cost of this production was a staggering $120 million - making it the most expensive mini-series in television history. You'd think Spielberg would by now have tired of the genre, but his elite controllers are really zealous to implant this alien paradigm in the minds of the masses.
Furthermore, Ray Santilli's infamous 1995 'Alien Autopsy' footage now widely accepted as a hoax can again be traced back to Spielberg. The film became all the rage in the international UFO community, with half the specialised publications featuring Santilli's alien corpse on their front covers. However, Santilli now appears to be just the front man for the real owner of the film. Santilli admitted in a BBC interview that the money behind the film came from Germany. French network TF1 subsequently reported that the film originated from an individual by the name of 'Herr Volker Spielberg.' TF1 tried to track this man down but he proved elusive.
Spielberg is clearly a tool of the elite. His work in Hollywood propagates the reality of an alien presence that has been imbedded in the body politic. This has been a success. Recent Roper polls tell us that 80% of the American population believe in UFO's.
In conclusion, consider the comments of UFO researcher Jacques Vallee:
"When I met Stephen Spielberg, I argued with him that the subject [of UFOs] was even more interesting if it wasn't extraterrestrials. If it was real, physical, but not ET. So he said, 'You're probably right, but that's not what the public is expecting - this is Hollywood and I want to give people something that's close to what they expect.'"
Why are the Rockefellers funding the UFO movement?
The Rockefeller family played pivotal roles in establishing the quasi-secret globalist Bilderberg, CFR, and Trilateral Commission groups. They represent the apex of elite monopoly capitalism. The Rockefellers have a penchant for controlling so-called radical 'anti-establishment' minorities.
Thirty years ago when the radical student movement was gaining momentum in North America, the Rockefeller dynasty was surprisingly quick to offer funds. A student leader James Simon Kunen, in his book entitled The Strawberry Incident, tells about the 1968 Students for a Democratic Society convention in which, "men from Business International Roundtables,... tried to buy up a few radicals. These men are the world's industrialists and they convene to decide how our lives are going to go. They offered to finance our demonstrations in Chicago. We were also offered ESSO (Rockefeller) money."
The Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver warned that the mega rich were buying themselves a revolution. He wrote:
"There is a danger to the healthy development of the American Revolution in the fact that often revolutions are manipulated by the ruling class to appear to be a bigger threat than they really are."
Consider this comment by Frank Capell in the U.S. Review of the News:
"Of course, we know that these radical students are not going to take over the government. What they are going to do is provide the excuse for the government to take over the people, by passing more and more repressive laws to 'keep things under control'."
In March 1993 Laurance Rockefeller, assisted by former naval intelligence officer Cdr Scott Jones met with then President Bill Clinton's Science Adviser Dr. John Gibbons and presented an ominous sounding 'Matrix of UFO Belief' study. On the weekend of 19-20th
August 1995 Rockefeller met with Clinton himself at his Wyoming Ranch to further discuss the UFO issue.
On December 18th, 1995, the New York Daily News reported that billionaire Laurance Rockefeller was funding a 150 page UFO report entitled 'The Best Available Evidence' which would subsequently be sent to Bill Clinton and other world leaders. The report was distributed widely, but Rockefeller received no response. The reasons are two-fold. Either Rockefeller wasn't in the loop about the fact that the UFO issue had been co-opted as a psy-op tool or the report was actually a cover for a sensitive briefing on the development of this very same psychological operation.
Rockefeller has also channelled money into the research of Dr. John Mack, the Harvard psychiatrist who has written several books claiming the validity of the alien abduction phenomenon. From 1993-95 Rockefeller's 'donation' was estimated to be $500,000 in total.
Rockefeller paid for at least two meeting sessions of the Starlight Coalition, a group said to be made up of former intelligence officers and military men interested in UFOs. At one time Rockefeller funded a plan to establish contact with aliens, not using the SETI method (by radio
telescope), but by signalling them with banks of powerful halogen lamps. In May 1999 the BBC reported that Rockefeller was funding the UK's largest ever scientific study of crop circles, often linked to UFO activity by researchers. Rockefeller has also funded numerous new age groups seeking to usher in a 'spiritual transformation' and new ways of thinking. His money also percolates through the environmental movement, which is controlled at the top and used by the elite to foster neo-feudalism and continental land grabs.
The Counterfeit Foe
Just take a look at history. The most successful way of legitimizing what would otherwise be a clear abuse of power is to create monsters in the minds of the public. They will always choose the lesser of two evils. There is clearly a program afoot to present a hoaxed and hostile alien presence as real. Let's take a look at two examples of how the litmus test for this deception was carried out.
Obviously, a well known example is Orson Welles' staged and updated dramatization of H.G. Well's The War of the Worlds. On October 30, 1938 CBS Radio was broadcasting the music of Ramon Raquello and his orchestra live from the Meridian Room at the Park Plaza in New York City. Suddenly a reporter from Intercontinental Radio News interrupted the broadcast to deliver an important announcement. Astronomers had just detected enormous blue flames shooting up from the surface of Mars.
The broadcast returned to the music of Ramon Raquello, but soon it was interrupted again with more news. Now a strange meteor had fallen to earth, impacting violently on a farm near Grovers Mill, New Jersey. A reporter was soon on hand to describe the eerie scene around the meteor crater, and the broadcast now switched over to continuous coverage of this rapidly unfolding event.
To the dismay of the terrified audience listening to the broadcast, the events around the Grovers Mill meteor crater rapidly escalated from the merely strange to the positively ominous. It turned out that the meteor was not a meteor. It was, in fact, some kind of spaceship from which a tentacled creature, presumably a Martian, soon emerged and blasted the on-lookers with a deadly heat-ray. Homes were evacuated and a state of martial law was declared. [Real Player file of original broadcast]
Original estimates depicted a reaction of total panic amongst one million of the six million listeners. Although this was later scaled down, hundreds of thousands of people thought the play was real, despite announcements before, during and after the show indicating that it was just a dramatization. People stocked up cars, stashed food, drove hundreds of miles to loved ones.
Obviously, people are (a little) more sophisticated today. However, so is the psy-op intelligence and technology to believably hoax a hostile alien threat. The War of the Worlds broadcast was unlikely to have been a vast conspiracy to test the psychosomatic reaction of the American people to a
hoaxed alien invasion. However, in hindsight it proved to be a very useful case study.
Our second example is a Walt Disney telecast on the weekend of March 18-19 1995. The documentary featured another elite operative, CEO Michael Eisner, and announced that intelligent contact with alien beings had occurred. The show presented a history of UFO sightings and crashed saucers. Eisner uttered the telling line:
"For governments determined to maintain their authority, extra-terrestrial contact is pure dynamite."
The broadcast was unannounced and was patently a test as to how the public would react to the declaration of an off-planet threat.
We have been and are being conditioned. It's no strange coincidence that top lieutenants of the Trilateral Commission like Laurance Rockefeller and Bilderberg placemen like Steven Spielberg are funding and fomenting this alien paradigm. That is not to say the entire UFO research field is controlled, but the stranglehold at the top represents elite manipulation and social steering. The technology to pull off this hoax is in place, the historical precedents are documented. It will only take one declaration from the President, one staged attack on a US city, to convince the people of a universal threat. Only a centralized one world government will be able to protect us.
The ultimate Hegelian Dialectic has been carefully constructed. Upon the conclusion of the war on terrorism, the counterfeit foe awaits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
