Archive for the 1 Category

Farage Attacks Bilderberg EU President As “Quiet Assassin” Of Nation States

Posted in 1 on February 26, 2010 by truthwillrise

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, February 25, 2010

Farage Attacks Bilderberg EU President As Quiet Assassin Of Nation States  250210top2

Courageous British MEP Nigel Farage savaged Bilderberg member and global governance proponent Herman van Rompuy during a speech in front of the EU parliament, labeling the EU President “the quiet assassin of European nation states,” while van Rompuy sat and squirmed.

UK Independence Party leader Farage took the opportunity of van Rompuy’s first appearance in Parliament to harangue the EU President for his open contempt for national sovereignty.

Van Rompuy announced 2009 as the “first year of global governance” when he was appointed to be President back in November, just days after he called for a Europe-wide tax that would be paid directly to Brussels at a Bilderberg Group dinner in Brussels on November 15th.

Van Rompuy, addressing the EU Parliament in French, repeated the call for global governance during his speech yesterday.

“It is thanks to the EU that the G20 was born; We took the initiative to create this embryo of world governance,” stated the unelected EU President.

Farage said van Rompuy had “the charisma of a damp rag and the appearance of a low grade bank clerk” before outing him as the perfect figurehead for EU authoritarianism.

“The question that I want to ask and that we are all going to ask is: who are you? I had never heard of you; nobody in Europe had ever heard of you. I would like to ask you, Mr President: who voted for you? And what mechanism – I know democracy is not popular with you lot – what mechanism do the peoples of Europe have to remove you? Is this European democracy?” asked Farage.

“Sir, you have no legitimacy in this job at all, and I can say with confidence that I can speak on behalf of the majority of the British people in saying: we do not know you, we do not want you, and the sooner you are put out to grass, the better,” said Farage as he was heckled by other Parliament members.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Farage labeled van Rompuy “capable, competent, and dangerous,” before continuing, “I have no doubt that it is your intention to be the quiet assassin of European democracy and of the European nation states. You appear to have a loathing for the very concept of the existence of nation states; perhaps that is because you come from Belgium, which of course is pretty much a non-country.

Farage now faces an official reprimand next week from Jerzy Buzek, the Parliament President, and Socialist leaders, furious that Farage has found an avenue through which to repeatedly highlight dictatorial nature of the EU, are calling for his resignation.

However, despite the corporate media attacking Farage for his “rude” personal attack on van Rompuy, similar rhetoric was not directed towards EU members who have called Farage a Nazi or a “monkey in a tree,” revealing a clear double standard where critics of the EU are made examples of while proponents are protected.

As we previously reported, shortly after the announcement of van Rompuy as EU President, Farage made headlines when he exposed the fact that the EU is an authoritarian dictatorship ruled by unelected bureaucrats to the detriment of national sovereignty.

Farage slammed the EU for its aggressive and dictatorial tactics, stating, “It’s taken you eight and a half years of bullying, of lying, of ignoring democratic referendums to get this treaty through (referring to the Lisbon Treaty)”.

During the same speech, Farage identified van Rompuy as little more than a puppet for the real EU power base headed by “post-industrial revolution” advocate and European Commission President, Manuel Barroso.

As we have highlighted in the past, despite accusations by EU Parliamentarians that Farage is “opening the door to fascism” by merely being critical of the EU, in actual fact Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.

This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which was forced through in Ireland last year despite the population having already rejected it in a previous national referendum.

Watch the clip below.

Advertisements

SMS service banned in occupied Kashmir

Posted in 1 on February 11, 2010 by truthwillrise

Pakistan Times Jammu & Kashmir Desk

SRINAGAR (IHK): In occupied Kashmir, the authorities have banned the Short Messaging Service (SMS) to prevent people from exchanging information about the March towards the United Nations Observers Office at Sonawar in Srinagar on Monday, reports KMS.

One of the service providers – Valley Media Service – (VMS) told newsmen that the ban was imposed without any prior information. Our incoming and outgoing SMS are barred, said owner of the VMS, Jasim Rasool.

According to another report, in Srinagar, Indian police raided and sealed the APHC headquarters at Rajbagh and arrested several Hurriyet leaders and activists to thwart the March towards the United Nations Observers Office on Monday.

The authorities have declared curfew in Srinagar and blocked all roads leading to the city.

The APHC Chairman, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq had announced a March towards the UN Office at Sonawar against the continued gross human rights violations and killing of innocent civilians by Indian troops and police in the occupied territory.

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Agha Hassan Al-Moosvi, Mukhtar Ahmad Waza and other Hurriyet leaders and activists were placed under house arrest. The APHC spokesman said that police was raiding different places in the city and had arrested at least 60 Hurriyet leaders and activists to thwart the March.

Veteran Kashmiri Hurriyet leader Syed Ali Gilani while supporting the UN office march call, said that he would support any programme, which favoured the people of Kashmir. Whosoever is against the occupation, we are with him. We will support any programme, which is in the interest of sacrifices of the Kashmiri people, Gilani told KMS over phone from New Delhi.

Welcoming statement of Syed Ali Gilani, the APHC Chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said; We will be happy if pro-freedom people join the programme. It is not an agenda of a group or a party. We all should come together and see how we can counter the aggression.”

Asked what will be Hurriyet’s next programme in case authorities stopped the march, he said; Despite arrests and crackdown we will attempt to present a memorandum to the UN office. And in case we were not allowed, we will chalk out next programme.

Mirwaiz said that there was dire need to chalk out a new strategy to counter Indian state terrorism. Our kids are being killed. We have to chalk out new strategy. There is martial law like situation in Kashmir, he said, adding; The government of India and authorities in occupied Kashmir are pushing the people to wall. There will be more reaction if civilian killings do not stop.

// //

Kucinich Resolution to End the War

Posted in 1 with tags , , on December 10, 2009 by truthwillrise

Dennis Kucinich
December 10, 2009

Dennis Kucinich.

featured stories   Kucinich Resolution to End the War  
  Dennis Kucinich
   
 
   

 

Congressman Dennis Kucinich is circulating two “privileged resolutions” to trigger votes to end the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Congressman Kucinich, in a written release, earlier today stated:

“Today, I will begin circulating two privileged resolutions which will trigger debate and votes on a timely withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

“Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States makes it Congress’ responsibility to determine whether or not we go to war or stay at war. Consistent with Article I, Section 8, the privileged resolutions will involve the War Powers Resolution of 1973. I ask for your support of these resolutions, which will be introduced in the House in January.”

“Yesterday, with the U.S. Secretary of Defense at his side, the President of Afghanistan declared that his country’s security forces will need financial and training assistance from the United States for the next 15-20 years.”

“We cannot afford these wars. We cannot afford the loss of lives. We cannot afford the cost to taxpayers. We cannot afford to fail to exercise our constitutional right to end the wars.”

“Please sign onto the privileged resolutions to end the wars and to bring our troops home.”

“Stand up for our troops. Stand up for the truth. Stand up for the Constitution and Congress’ responsibility.”

Putting Obama on Hold, in a Hint of Who’s Boss

Posted in 1 with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on December 5, 2009 by truthwillrise

By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN

Published: December 14, 2009

President Obama didn’t exactly look thrilled as he stared at the Polycom speakerphone in front of him. “Well, I appreciate you guys calling in,” he began the meeting at the White House with Wall Street’s top brass on Monday.
He was, of course, referring to the three conspicuously absent attendees who were being piped in by telephone: Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs; John J. Mack, chairman of Morgan Stanley; and Richard D. Parsons, chairman of Citigroup.

Their excuse? “Inclement weather,” according to the White House. More precisely, fog delayed flights into Reagan National Airport. (In the “no good deed goes unpunished” category, the absent bankers were at least self-aware enough to try to fly commercial.)

That awkward moment on speakerphone in the White House, for better or worse, spoke volumes about how the balance of power between Wall Street and Washington has shifted again, back in Wall Street’s favor.

Now that Citigroup has given back its bailout money — and Wells Fargo announced late on Monday that it would, too — whatever leverage Washington had over the financial services industry seems to be quickly eroding.
Executive compensation, leverage limits and lending standards were all issues that Washington said it planned to change — and when the taxpayers were the shareholders of these firms, it probably could have done so. But now the White House has been left in the position of extending invitations, rather than exercising its clout. And in the figurative and literal sense, it is getting stood up.
Those who attended the meeting — Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan flew down on a private jet and didn’t take any heat for it — seemed to talk a good game, but even President Obama acknowledged they might have been just toying with him.

“The problem is there’s a big gap between what I’m hearing here in the White House and the activities of lobbyists on behalf of these institutions or associations of which they’re a member up on Capitol Hill,” he said after the discussion.
Are we making too much of this meeting and its grounded attendees?

The meeting was always just going to be political theater. Wall Street bankers were supposed to play their part on the public stage in Washington, and submit to a scolding from the president about bonuses and the need to start lending more to help get the economy moving.

But inevitably public perception will issue its harsh ruling, and it goes something like this: If the meeting were really that important to Mr. Blankfein, Mr. Mack and Mr. Parsons, they would have found a way to get there.

They would have left the night before, or they would have flown out at the crack of dawn, or better yet, taken Amtrak (I called customer service, and the Acela was running only a couple of minutes late).

In fairness, there is little question that they wanted to be there and seemed genuinely disappointed they couldn’t make it. (You could hear it in Mr. Mack and Mr. Blankfein’s voice when they got on the call. “Mr. President, we’re upset we’re not able to be there, but we’re on line with you now,” Mr. Mack said. “It’s certainly not for a lack of effort,” Mr. Blankfein quickly followed up.)

But this missed meeting clearly didn’t help their case.
After all, they sure hoofed it down there last year, when Henry M. Paulson Jr. ordered them to meet him in Washington with less than 24 hours of notice. Most of them got there early, and went home with $10 billion to $25 billion of taxpayer money.

Upon hearing the news Monday morning of the airplane delays, Mark Haines, an anchor at CNBC, went on the air and, in a Howard Beale moment, said what many Americans were probably thinking: “These guys are such little girls! Give me a break. What a bunch of wimps! Thanks for all that taxpayer money … and, ah, gee, there are delays at the airport!”

But extra effort may have been a lot to ask given the blasting headwinds they were flying into down in Washington.

President Obama’s “60 Minutes” interview Sunday night eviscerating Wall Street laid down the not-so-welcome mat. “I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat-cat bankers,” he said.

Inside the Obama administration, there were bruised feelings about the need for a conference call to have a meeting.
“It was pretty nervy,” one staff member told me.
That’s not to say that Mr. Blankfein, Mr. Mack and Mr. Parsons have not been trying to be constructive.
Mr. Mack has been particularly outspoken about the need for serious financial reform on Wall Street. Mr. Parsons, too, has been trying to act as a liaison with Washington and has not pushed back on legislation.

And Mr. Blankfein, who is under perhaps the hottest spotlight, has been saying many of the right things, though he probably can’t say enough of them at the moment.
But as President Obama has said, it is not what those leaders say to him that really matters.

“The way I see it, having recovered with the help of the American government and the American taxpayers, our banks now have a greater obligation to the goal of a wider recovery, a more stable system, and more broadly shared prosperity,” Mr. Obama said.

There’s an expression that many bankers already know, and might want to keep in mind if they are summoned to Washington again. The saying is often trotted out on Wall Street when people need to be reminded of the importance of getting on a plane and seeing a client: “You can’t fax a handshake.”

Common Sense 2009

Posted in 1 with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 11, 2009 by truthwillrise

Larry Flynt

The Huffington Post
August 20, 2009

The American government — which we once called our government — has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called “economic royalists,” who choose our elected officials — indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.

Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.” They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.

featured stories   Common Sense 2009  
  rockfeller
   
 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment’s hesitation, they took our money — yours and mine — to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don’t care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as “useless eaters.”

But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?

“A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street.”

“And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis — the Great Depression — was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy.”

This is nonsense.

The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did — knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) — was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.

Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight — and we’ve all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.

Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.

 

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

Obama’s failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.

Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Read Rockefeller’s words again. He actually admits to working against the “best interests of the United States.”

Need more? Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.” They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.

Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn’t enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.

The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here’s what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father’s conquered.”

We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists’ attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays’ Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America’s farmers.

Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks’ predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Perhaps it’s time to consider that option once again.

I’m calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.

Let’s set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn’t effective — if the politicians ignore us — we do it again. And again. And again.

The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It’s time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.

Man steals dead brother’s identity

Posted in 1, Identity Theft, Legal, News with tags , , , , , on August 10, 2009 by truthwillrise

Criminal record kept him from finding
work

Updated: Friday, 07 Aug 2009, 11:21 PM EDT
Published : Friday, 07 Aug 2009, 10:55 PM EDT

ROCKFORD, Mich. (WOOD) – Errol Copeland of Rockford was sentenced to 60 days in jail after pleading guilty to identity theft in both Kent and Montcalm Counties.

Copeland has a criminal record stemming from a breaking and entering conviction in Kalamazoo county in 1988.

24 Hour News 8 is told that conviction led to problems finding work, so he took the name of his brother Erin who died as an infant.

Neighbors say Copeland mostly kept to himself.

The Greenville Daily News reports he was arrested when he was pulled over by a police officer who knew Copeland’s name was Errol from their days at school.

That officer noticed his license had a different name on it.

Copeland is being allowed to wait until September to begin serving his jail sentence.

 For more information on identity theft, please log on to http://www.prepaidlegal.com/idt/bking62 or call Brandon King at 1-866-510-7907.

Government Fines & Harassment For People Who Refuse To Answer Intrusive Survey Questions

Posted in 1 on August 5, 2009 by truthwillrise

Three million Americans are being forced to answer intrusive questions about their private lives under threat of home visits and fines by the government in the guise of The American Community Survey.

The survey, which is sent to 3 million random homes each year, is in addition to the census but demands far more invasive information from citizens, such as how many times they have been married, if they have a toilet that flushes, and how much is left outstanding on their mortgage.

According to one North Texas resident, “The questionnaire also wants answers about where she works, how much money she makes, and what time she leaves for work each day – the hour and minute! “I thought it was intrusive. I don’t have a high regard for the federal government collecting this information anyway,” the woman told CBS 11 News. “You don’t know what they’re going to do with it.”

 

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

“Why do they need to know this? They don’t, in my opinion,” the woman said, before further stating that she thinks the personal questions are un-American. “Do they really need to know if we have a mortgage and whether this house is free and clear? That’s intrusive.”

The U.S. Census Bureau claims the survey helps them “determine where to locate services and allocate resources.”

If the person refuses to respond to the the survey or merely skips one question, then the Census Bureau promises that they will be fined and harassed until they do, a process that includes telephone calls and home visits.

However, it’s all hot air as no one has ever been charged with a crime for refusing to answer the ACS survey, and indeed several members of Congress have denounced the invasive questions as a violation of the Right to Financial Privacy Act.

On its very face, this is also a flagrant violation of the 5th amendment. Any census form that goes beyond asking how many people live in the residence is a violation of the 5th amendment, and court cases have established this, yet the census becomes more and more invasive each time.

Despite the fact that refusal to respond to the survey carries no ultimate penalty, the vast majority of the millions who receive it will doubtless comply in the face of threats of harassment and fines.

Objections to the invasive information being demanded by the government in the form of the survey arrive on the back of similar concerns about the 2010 census itself, particularly how census workers are using GPS to electronically tag every home in America.

In February, the Obama administration moved control of the census out of the Department of Commerce and into the White House, a tactic slammed as a trick by Democrats to keep their majorities in Congress.