Strict Standards: Only variables should be passed by reference in /home/frene605/public_html/presscore.ca/nbg/fp-includes/core/core.fpdb.class.php on line 302
FlatPress

Obama_strikes_liberty.jpg

Benjamin Franklin, in his speech at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention (September 17, 1787), said: “…I think a General Government [is] necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well administered; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism as other forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other”.

Democracy is a form of government in which power is held directly or indirectly by citizens under a free electoral system. Even though there is no universally accepted definition of ‘democracy’, there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes. The first principle is that all members of the society (citizens) have equal access to power and the second that all members (citizens) enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties. Many people view and interpret “democracy” as political pluralism, equality before the law, the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances, due process, civil liberties, human rights, and elements of civil society outside the government. However, if any democracy is not carefully legislated to avoid an uneven distribution of political power with balances, such as the separation of powers, then a branch of the system of rule could accumulate power and become harmful to the democracy itself.

President Obama’s plan to save failing U.S. automakers marked a major step across the line that separates a democratic government from despotism.

His announcement Monday of a new position on bailing out Detroit went beyond a desire to be sure tax dollars were not wasted in bailing out struggling companies. It put the Obama administration squarely in the position of adopting a form of government by a single authority, in which government officials, not business executives or the free market, decided what kinds of products a company would make and how it would chart its future. Obama has now declared the he alone wields all the power and authority embodying the state, and everyone else is a subsidiary person.

The notion that it was the president, not car company executives, who would pick such a course drew immediate criticism, especially from conservatives. “When did the president become an expert in strategic corporate management?” said Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee. “The federal government is famous for its mismanagement, yet this administration continues to demonstrate its certainty that Washington always knows best.”

Sen. Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, called it a “power grab” that “should send a chill through those who believe in free enterprise.”

And Rush Limbaugh declared in his daily radio broadcast, “There’s always been a line, ladies and gentlemen, over which no president would cross with respect to the distinction between the public and private sectors. Obama has now crossed that line where there is no limit to government’s destruction of private activity or control over it.”

Nevertheless, the White House was admittedly wading into politically challenging waters Monday. Administration officials sought to downplay the notion of an Obama-led takeover of the auto industry.

Looks like Obama has adopted the Bush “I am the decider” power grab. At least with Bush no one took him seriously, because Bush was just a babbling idiot. But with Obama’s self-proclaimed Messiah complex his actions are very threatening. His words implies that he has assumed absolute political power - the Despot. In modern usage, the term “dictator” is generally used to describe a leader who holds and/or abuses an extraordinary amount of personal power, especially the power to make laws without effective restraint by a legislative assembly. Modern dictators have usually come to power in times of emergency. Some dictators, most notably Adolf Hitler in Germany, achieved office as head of government by legal means. However, once he was elected in office, Hitler gained additional extraordinary powers. Many dictators create a cult of personality and have come to favor increasingly grandiloquent titles and honours for themselves. Once a leader assumes dictatorial authority over the nation other actions quickly follow: suspension of elections and of civil liberties; proclamation of a state of emergency; rule by decree; and repression of political opponents without abiding by rule of law procedures. Looks like Obama has completed stage 1. What will follow? I’m betting its going to be a “proclamation of a state of emergency” followed by declaring martial law. Aren’t you glad you took the Obama bait - CHANGE - hook, line and sinker.

barack-signs-bill.jpg
Obama gladly signs bank campaign donors reimbursement check (bill)

A substantial portion of Obama Stimulus bill is being used to pay American banks, including Goldman Sachs, Merill Lynch, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wachovia, Morgan Stanley, AIG International, and JP Morgan.

The newly elected US president owes Wall Street bankers a debt of gratitude for generous campaign donations as he ponders how to cope with a financial crisis that poses tough challenges over government aid and regulation for the banking industry.

Staff at banks, Silicon Valley technology companies and universities topped the list of contributors to Barack Obama’s record fundraising treasure chest of $640m.

Goldman Sachs was linked to more donations than any other company as its employees and their families provided $955,473 to the successful Democratic candidate’s fundraising machine.

People associated with JP Morgan provided $646,058 and donors linked to Citigroup gave $653,468 according to figures culled from public disclosures. Three of Citigroup’s 15 directors — Time Warner Chairman Richard Parsons, Xerox CEO Anne Mulcahy, and former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin - are also members of Obama’s transition economic advisory board.

Some such contributions are motivated purely by personal ideology. But experts say that other donors have specific concerns in mind.

“Bankers certainly want to be well represented at the table as the government hands out rescue funds and decides how to regulate the industry going forward,” said Massie Ritsch, a spokesman for the Centre for Responsive Politics that compiled the figures.

Pressing political concerns on Wall Street include the future of tax breaks for private equity firms and hedge funds. Congress has been considering ending a loophole that allows top earners to classify their earnings as lowly rated capital gains, rather than as direct income.

Top fundraisers for Obama included the chairman of Swiss bank UBS’s American arm, Robert Wolf, who generated more than $500,000 for the campaign. Bankers typically gave far more to Obama than to his rival, John McCain. Those linked to Goldman Sachs, for example, only gave $228,695 to the Republican. A Goldman Sachs spokeswoman declined to comment.

On Silicon Valley, people linked to Microsoft and Google contributed a combined $1.4m to Obama’s campaign while McCain, a self-confessed technophobe who does not use email, secured virtually nothing from this potentially reach seam of funding. The Los Angeles Times reported that the Republican received just $20,000 from Google staff.

Obama has been a firm supporter of “net neutrality” which would force internet service providers to give equal access to the web, rather than prioritising certain websites or charging content providers for prominent access to users.

The fundraising figures point to Obama’s unusual success, for a Democratic candidate, in appealing to America’s wealthiest voters in spite of a pledge to raise taxes for those earning more than $250,000 per year.

The following recipients of President Obama’s trickle-down-to-my-donors bailout plan rank among his top 20 contributors to his 2008 presidential election campaign, according to Open Secrets:

Goldman Sachs: $955,473
Citigroup: $653,468
JP Morgan Chase & Co.: $646,058
Morgan Stanley: $485,823

Three other banks that were significant contributors to Obama received money through AIG:

Bank of America: $274,493
Wachovia: $214,151
AIG: $112,170

Lehman Brothers, which did not survive long enough to join the list of banks leaching off the work of the American taxpayer, also gave the Obama campaign $276,088.

Individuals identifying themselves as working for the banks above gave Barack Obama’s presidential campaign $3,617,724. In other words, more than 3.6 million reasons for the president to help focus the media’s glare on the relatively minuscule $165 million in AIG executive bonuses, and away from their $43.5 billion portion of $100 billion of taxpayer dollars the administration, by design or incompetence, filtered to other banks through AIG.

In receiving $43.5 billion for their investment of just over $3.3 million, it looks like the banks that gambled on Wall Street certainly got their money’s worth out of their investment in Barack Obama.

And those executive bonuses which Obama is now complaining about? It was inserted into the Spendulus - an exemption which allow executive bonuses provided they were contracted prior to the Spendulus was passed.

stick-up.jpg
How the US negotiates peace. If a gun is pointed at you what would you do - let them kill you or defend yourself?

The definition of terrorism is:
1. League of Nations Convention (1937): “All criminal acts directed against a State and intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons or a group of persons or the general public”.
2. UN Resolution language (1999):”1. Strongly condemns all acts, methods and practices of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, wherever and by whomsoever committed; 2. Reiterates that criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other nature that may be invoked to justify them”.

The US government does not recognize the legitimate use of violence by civilians against the US invader in the occupied countries of Afghanistan and Iraq and would, thus labels all resistance movements as terrorist groups. Others make a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence. The US government has labeled all resistance to their unlawful and unprovoked attacks and occupation as enemy or unlawful combatants. Ultimately, the distinction is political. In November 2004, a United Nations Security Council report described terrorism as any act “intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act. The US government War on Terror is a play on words as the US is engaging in wars of terror against all those who oppose US takeover of their natural resources - in this cases natural gas pipeline in Afghanistan and oil in Iraq. “U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) defined terrorism as: “The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” It is ironic that the US Department of Defense has defined the actions their government has taken against the people of the United States, the people of Afghanistan, and Iraq and threats against Iran as terrorism.

As far as the US government is concerned everyone who opposes them are “terrorist” yet the victims of the US aggression are actually “freedom fighters”, defending their country and fellow countrymen from the unlawful, unjustified and unprovoked attack by the criminals in control of the US government.

Key criteria that define the current US government as terrorists;

Violence – According to Walter Laqueur of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “the only general characteristic of terrorism generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence.” - Shock and awe was used by the Bush White House when they launched their cowardly and unprovoked attack against the innocent people of Afghanistan and Iraq. The US attacks were pure acts of violence against the civilian population of Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush and Cheney committed terrorist acts against the people of Afghanistan and Iraq. Neither Afghanistan or Iraq had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. No hijackers were from either of those 2 countries. No foreign war planes attacked, bombed, or invaded the US on 9/11. No diplomat from either countries made any threats against the US or ordered the attacks against the US yet the US immediately made plans to violently attack them. Both Afghanistan and Iraq are victims of terrorism, wars of aggression, war crimes, crimes against peace and crimes against humanity, perpetrated by the US government. Both countries are victims of the US violent unprovoked attacks that destroyed their country’s and slaughtered millions of their “civilian” population.

Psychological impact and fear – Terrorist attacks are carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact. Each act of terrorism is a “performance,” devised to have an impact on many large audiences. Terrorists also attack national symbols to show their power and to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to. This may negatively affect a government’s legitimacy, while increasing the legitimacy of the given terrorist organization and/or ideology behind a terrorist act. The US government put on quite a “performance” with their terrorist attack against their own country on September 11, 2001. Immediately the US government took control of the media in order to maximize the psychological impact and hyped the fear in the US public. Bush and Cheney carefully chose the World Trade Centers for they were a national symbol of the US financial power. Bush and Cheney are the real terrorists. Government documents revealed that the Patriot Act was drawn up even before the attacks of September 11, 2001 giving evidence of the attacks being premeditated.

Perpetrated for a political goal – Something all terrorist attacks have in common is their perpetration for a political purpose. Terrorism is a political tactic. Rebuilding America Defense detailed the Bush White House political goal even before they stole the White House in the 2000 presidential election. The US Constitution clearly stated that “only” the House of Representatives can decide by vote when a tie occurs in a presidential election yet the George W Bush had his brother decide for the entire nation - through the ruling of one unelected state judge (judge was appointed by Jeb Bush). Rebuilding America Defense is a terrorist doctrine that laid out the entire political goal of the Bush administration.

http://www.newameric … AmericasDefenses.pdf

Deliberate targeting of non-combatants – It is commonly held that the distinctive nature of terrorism lies in its intentional and specific selection of civilians as direct targets. Specifically, the criminal intent is shown when babies, children, mothers, and the elderly are murdered, or injured, and put in harm’s way. Much of the time, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific “symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings” that tie into a specific view of the world that the terrorist possess. Their suffering accomplishes the terrorists’ goals of instilling fear, getting a message out to an audience, or otherwise accomplishing their often radical religious and political ends. When the US government began their war of terror they immediately planned for and launched attacks against civilians. Shock and awe was a deliberate attack against civilians. The US government murdered over 1 million Iraqi civilians by the time George W Bush declared mission accomplished. Even to this day there are daily reports of US military strikes that kill civilians not any opposing army, navy or air force. The US government sees all those who resist their unlawful occupation as a threat to their goals in Iraq and Afghanistan. Every day the US military is ordered on another mission their mission is always against civilians. They murder the innocent civilians as a warning to every one else who would dare to come forward and oppose the illegal occupation of their country. They murder innocent civilians including women and children to invoke perpetual fear in the general population.

Disguise – Terrorists almost invariably pretend to be non-combatants, hide among non-combatants, fight from in the midst of non-combatants, and when they can, strive to mislead and provoke the government soldiers into attacking the wrong people, that the government may be blamed for it. The Bush White House brain washed the US public into believing that they attacked and now occupy other countries to protect the US and the people. They are falsely portraying themselves to be the good guys. The US Congress has known that Bush and Cheney mislead them yet they never even attempted to impeach them and remove them from office. If you and I were to take the list of hijackers as evidence then the Bush government attacked the wrong country and are killing the wrong people because according to the US White House the mastermind behind 9/11 is a Saudi billionaire with ties to the Saudi royal family and the majority of hijackers were Saudi. Their presented evidence declares that Saudi Arabia attacked the US not Afghanistan or Iraq or Iran. The Bush White House evidence clearly lays blame for the killing of US citizens on September 11, 2001 on Saudi Arabia yet they chose to attack 2 innocent countries. The 9/11 Commission Report was commissioned by the White House to hide and cover up the facts that Saudi Arabia helped the Bush administration attack the US.

Unlawfulness or illegitimacy – Some official (notably government) definitions of terrorism add a criterion of illegitimacy or unlawfulness to distinguish between actions authorized by a “legitimate” government (and thus “lawful”) and those of other actors, including individuals and small groups. Using this criterion, actions that would otherwise qualify as terrorism would not be considered terrorism if they were government sanctioned - state terrorism. “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” This is exemplified when a group that uses irregular military methods is an ally of a State against a mutual enemy, but later falls out with the State and starts to use the same methods against its former ally. A perfect example is the cozy relationship between the US and Iraq’s Saddam Hussein. Saddam fought a proxy war for the US against Iran. Donald Rumsfeld was special envoy to Saddam and he personally hand delivered the Bell helicopters that Saddam used to drop the US made and delivered chemical bombs on Iran and the Kurds who tried to assassinate Saddam. Every day Bush and Cheney declare they were right and had the right to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. They both keep saying the World is behind them - that their unlawful attacks against innocent states is legitimate. To them torturing is legal because they sanctioned it. Both keep on citing executive privilege whenever another major war crime is uncovered that they ordered. Reality is that the attacks against the US on September 11, 2001, against Afghanistan and Iraq are all state sponsored terrorism - all committed by this US government.

The government in the U.S. must be cleansed of corruption and restored to conformity with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights: a restoration of the American Republic. The “anti-terrorist” legislation of October 2001 (and that of April 1995 and Britain’s Terrorism Act of 2000), intended to facilitate government surveillance and control of the people so as to stifle free speech and dissent, must be repealed.

The Bill of Rights is a literal and absolute document. The First Amendment doesn’t say you have a right to speak out unless the government has a ‘compelling interest’ in censoring the Internet. The Second Amendment doesn’t say you have the right to keep and bear arms until some madman plants a bomb. The Fourth Amendment doesn’t say you have a right to be secure from search and seizure unless some FBI agent thinks you fit the profile of a terrorist. The government has no right to interfere with any of these freedoms under any circumstances.

“Those who think that the description of the U.S.A. as “a terrorist state” is too extreme should inform themselves of the nature of the American CIA, which is an international terrorist organization. The CIA implements the policies of the President of the United States. The CIA carries out unofficial U.S. government policy. This means that the United States is a terrorist state.

On October 12th, 2001, a couple of days after the bombing of Afghanistan started, George W. Bush publicly announced to the Afghan people that we will continue to bomb you, unless your leadership turns over to us the people who we suspect of carrying out crimes, although we refuse to give you any evidence. Bush’s threats of continued violence against the Afghan people is a textbook illustration of international terrorism, by the US official definition. That is the use of the threat of force or violence, in this case extreme violence, to obtain political ends through intimidation, fear and so on. That’s the official definition, a textbook illustration of it.

Three weeks later, by the end of October, the war aims changed. British Defense Minister, Sir Admiral Boyce informed the Afghan population that we will continue to bomb you until you change your leadership. Well, that’s an even more dramatic illustration of international terrorism.” — Noam Chomsky

In September 2002 the United States began threatening to bomb Iraq (no doubt killing many thousands of civilians and destroying much of the civilian infrastructure as it did in 1991) unless its leader resigns his position or the people of Iraq somehow manage to remove him (and allow a regime to be installed which is acceptable to Washington). Is it not glaringly obvious that the U.S.A. is a terrorist state?

binLaden-Brzezinski.jpg
Fmr. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski with Osama bin Laden, circa 1979.

Fmr. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, known for his hardline policies on the Soviet Union, initiated in 1979 a campaign supporting mujaheddin (later renamed al Qaeda) in Pakistan and Afghanistan, which were run by Pakistani security services with financial support from the CIA and Britain’s MI6. This policy had the explicit aim of promoting radical Islamist and anti-Communist forces to overthrow the secular communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan government in Afghanistan, which had been destabilized by coup attempts against Hafizullah Amin, the power struggle within the Soviet-supported parcham faction of the PDPA and a subsequent Soviet military intervention.

Years later, in a 1997 CNN/National Security Archive interview, Brzezinski detailed the strategy taken by the Carter administration against the Soviets in 1979:

We immediately launched a twofold process when we heard that the Soviets had entered Afghanistan. The first involved direct reactions and sanctions focused on the Soviet Union, and both the State Department and the National Security Council prepared long lists of sanctions to be adopted, of steps to be taken to increase the international costs to the Soviet Union of their actions. And the second course of action led to my going to Pakistan a month or so after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, for the purpose of coordinating with the Pakistanis a joint response, the purpose of which would be to make the Soviets bleed for as much and as long as is possible; and we engaged in that effort in a collaborative sense with the Saudis, the Egyptians, the British, the Chinese, and we started providing weapons to the Mujaheddin, from various sources again—for example, some Soviet arms from the Egyptians and the Chinese. We even got Soviet arms from the Czechoslovak communist government, since it was obviously susceptible to material incentives; and at some point we started buying arms for the Mujaheddin from the Soviet army in Afghanistan, because that army was increasingly corrupt.

Milt Bearden wrote in The Main Enemy that Brzezinski, in 1980, secured an agreement from the Saudi king to match American contributions to the Afghan effort (of forming al Qaeda) dollar for dollar and that Bill Casey would keep that agreement going through the Reagan administration.

In 1998, Brzezinski was interviewed by the French newspaper Nouvel Observateur on the topic of Afghanistan. He revealed that CIA support for the mujaheddin had started before the 1979 Soviet invasion, knowingly increasing the probability of a Soviet invasion. Brzezinski saw the invasion as an opportunity to embroil the Soviet Union in a bloody conflict comparable to America’s experience in Vietnam. He referred to this as the “Afghan Trap” and viewed the end of the Soviet empire as worth the cost of strengthening militant Islamic groups.

He went on to say in that interview, “What is most important to the history of the world? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?” When the interviewer questioned him about Islamic fundamentalism representing a world menace, Brzezinski said, “Nonsense!”

In his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski says that assistance to the Afghan resistance was a tactic designed to bog down the Soviet army while the United States built up a deterrent military force in the Persian Gulf to prevent Soviet political or military penetration farther south.

In the mid 1980 the US, wishing to increase its regional influence, worked with the Saudis to import an army of Saudis, Egyptians, and others into Afghanistan. The Saudis chose a member of a wealthy construction family with close royal family ties - Osama bin Laden - to lead the effort . Many of the men bin Laden recruited were connected to the Muslim Brotherhood, a regional fundamentalist group. bin Laden’s newly constructed army (shortly thereafter known as al Qaeda) successfully fought to settle Afghanistan in favor of an Afghan fundamentalist group, the Taliban. The US paid the Al Qaeda army to fight the US battles against all those who oppose the US plans for the region. With the formation of al Qaeda, with US money, the war on terror is the US war “of” terror. The US is using their own covert army to wage a fabricated threat of war against the US in order for the US government to implement US policy in the region. Public record prove that bin Laden was hand picked by Saudi Arabia and the US to form al Qaeda to orchestrate a fabricated war of terror against the US and the World.

Clinton uses US formed al Qaeda as excuse for attempted 1993 World Trade Center gold heist

February 26, 1993 at 12:17 PM - Clinton failed attempt to steal $millions with bombing of World trade Center. A Ryder truck filled with 1,500 pounds (680 kg) of explosives was planted and detonated in the underground garage of the North Tower, opening a 100 foot (30 m) hole through 5 sublevels of concrete leaving six people dead and 50,000 other workers and visitors gasping for air in the shafts of the 110 story towers. One of the world’s largest gold depositories was stored underneath the World Trade Center, owned by a group of commercial banks. The 1993 bomb was detonated next to the vault, but it withstood the explosion, as did the towers. $650 million in gold and silver was being kept in a special vault four floors beneath Four World Trade Center before 9/11. On Nov. 1, 2001 Mayor Rudolph Giuliani announced that “more than $230 million” worth of gold and silver bars that had been stored in a bomb-proof vault had been recovered. Where Clinton didn’t succeed Bush did because $millions are unaccounted for even after finding the vaults in tact after the US Air Force fuel tanker plane attack and controlled demolition of the World Trade Center Towers on September 11, 2001.

gold.jpg
New York fiefighter walks through undamagaed gold vault holding over $1 billion. Vault withstood demolition of World Trade Center. Firefighters ordered out after this picture was taken.

An article in the Times Online gives the following rundown of precious metals that were being stored in the WTC vault belonging to Comex.

* Comex metals trading - 3,800 gold bars weighing 12 tonnes and worth more than $100 million
* Comex clients - 800,000 ounces of gold with a value of about $220 million
* Comex clients - 102 million ounces of silver, worth $430 million
* Bank of Nova Scotia - $200 million of gold

Motive for US attacking their own country on September 11, 2001

1995 Unocal, seeking to build a pipeline across Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan (for delivery to energy hungry Asia via the Pakistani Arabian Sea coast), signed an agreement with Turkmenistan for natural gas purchasing rights for transport through a proposed pipeline Unocal also signed an agreement with Turkmenistan for an oil pipeline along the same route.

Aug. 13, 1996 Unocal and Delta Oil Co. of Saudi Arabia signed a memorandum of understanding with Russia’s Gazprom and Turkmenistan’s Turkmenrusgaz to build a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan via Afghanistan.

October 1997 Unocal and other oil companies formed Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) in preparation for building the trans-Afghanistan pipeline.

1997 US Congress under clinton passed a resolution declaring the Caspian and Caucasus region to be a “zone of vital American interests”.

December 1997 Unocal invited Taliban representatives to their corporate headquarters in Sugarland, TX. to discuss the pipeline project. They were thereafter invited to Washington for meetings with Clinton Administration officials.

January 1998 Unocal agreement signed between Pakistan, Turkmenistan, and the Taliban to arrange funding of the gas pipeline project, with Unocal also considering a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-Arabian Sea coast oil pipeline.

1998 VP Dick Cheney, then CEO of the giant oil services company, Halliburton, stated: “I cannot think of a time when we have had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian.”

Preparing for 9/11

February 28, 1998 Unocal VP International Relations addressed US House of Representatives clearly stating that the Taliban government should be removed and replaced by a government acceptable to his company. He argued that creation of a 42 inch oil pipeline across Afghanistan would yield a Western profit increase of 500% by 2015. http://www.ringnebul … ony_USHouse_1998.htm

August 7, 1998 US terrorism army in Afghanistan, al Qaeda, ordered to bomb two US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

August 20, 1998 Clinton ordered a 75-80 cruise missile attacks on Afghanistan and Sudan targets.

Nov. 1998 The Trade and Development Agency commissioned Enron to perform a feasibility study an east-to-west route, crossing the Caspian Mountains and terminating in Turkey along the Mediterranean. (The route was considered impractical as it would cost an estimated $1 billion more than a route through Afghanistan.)

December 1998 Unocal issued a statement that it had withdrawn from the pipeline project on 12/4/98, noting “business reasons.”

April 30, 1999 Excluding US interests, Afghanistan, Pakistan, & Turkmenistan reactivated the pipeline project.

July 4, 1999 An executive order (13129) was issued by Clinton, freezing US held Taliban assets, & prohibiting trade plus other transactions. Move was taken by Clinton because Taliban were negotiating pipeline deals directly with Pakistan and Turkmenistan without the US.

US starts using their al Qaeda army leader bin Laden as scapegoat for their planned 9/11 attacks

October 15, 1999 Under pressure from the Clinton administration UN Security Council Resolution 1267 imposed sanctions on the Taliban, demanding that the Taliban “turn over the terrorist Usama Bin Laden without further delay…”

October 12, 2000 Clinton orders attack on The USS Cole in the Yemeni port of Aden. Fear and hatred campaign is launched against US formed al Qaeda

Bush administration gearing up for September 11, 2001 attacks

January - Feb 2001 Upon “taking” office, the Bush administration immediately engaged in active negotiations with Taliban representatives with meetings in Washington, DC, Berlin, and Islamabad. During this time the Taliban government hired Laila Helms, niece of former CIA director Richard Helms, as their go-between in negotiations with the US government.

Bush (oil) administration includes:

* Dick Cheney, VP: Until 2000 - President of Halliburton (in position to build the Afghan pipeline).
* Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor: 1991-2000 - Manager of Chevron Oil, and Kazakhstan go-between.
* Donald Evans, Sec. Commerce: former CEO, Tom Brown, Inc. (a $1.2 billion oil company).
* Gale Norton, Sec. Interior: former national chairwoman of the Coalition of Republican Environmental Advocates - funded by, among others, BP Amoco.
* Spencer Abraham, Sec. Energy: Up through his failed bid for senatorial reelection in the 2000, he received more oil and gas industry money than all but three other senators (January 1997 through July 2000) (30).
* Thomas White, Secretary of the Army: former Vice Chairman of Enron and a large shareholder of that company’s stock.

US attack on Afghanistan begins before 9/11

May 15, 2001 Regarding the placement of the Unocal Pipeline, a US Official delivered this ultimatum to the Taliban (via the Pakistani delegation acting as their interlocutors): “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.”

July 2001 Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July (34a) that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

August 2, 2001 Last meeting with the Taliban (5 weeks before the 9/11/01 attack). Christina Rocca, in charge of Central Asian affairs for US government, met with the Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan (Abdul Salam Zaeef) in Islamabad, at which time Taliban representatives were reminded that the US had provided monetary relief assistance.

Augist 22, 2001 John O’Neill - Deputy director FBI, established national expert on the al-Qaeda network and in charge of that investigation, resigned in protest over the Bush Administration’s obstruction of those investigations. (New Yorker 1/14/02 )

August 23, 2001 John O’Neill accepts position as chief of security, World Trade Center buildings. Electronic security for the World Trade Center was provided by Securacom (now Stratesec), a company initially founded with Kuwaiti capital. Marvin P. Bush, President George W. Bush’s youngest brother served as a Securicom/Stratesec board member from 1993 through 2000.

Bush orders Air Force tanker planes painted to look like AA airlines to fly into World Center Buildings

September 11, 2001 George W Bush orders converted US Air Force fuel tanker planes to fly into World Trade Center Towers. The White House will blame their attack on their own country on US Saudi formed al Qaeda. Inadvertently declaring fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. John O’Neill, WTC security chief, and former deputy director of the FBI, where he headed investigation of the US link to al-Qaeda, was murdered before those buildings were demolished by explosives laid when Marvin P. Bush was head of security for the World Trade Center buildings.

October 7, 2001 Military operations with aerial bombardment began in Afghanistan targetting all those who could give evidence that the US government planned for and executed the attacks of September 11, 2001. US attacks innocent country to kill all potential witnesses- all members of their US terrorist army al Qaeda.

Jan. 29, 2002 CNN reported: “President Bush personally asked Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle Tuesday to limit the congressional investigation into the events of 9/11/01”

May 30, 2002 Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkmenistan agreed to construct a gas pipeline to the subcontinent. US military coup replaces Taliban with Afghan Opium drug warlord Hamid Karzai who had formerly functioned as a Unocal Corporation consultant. Afghanistan pipeline now again under US control.

November 2004 The annual US Government estimate for opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan was released: approximately 206,700 hectares of poppy were grown in 2004, representing a 239% increase in production over 2003 estimates. March 2001 both the UN and the US drug Enforcement Agency went to Afghanistan an confirmed that the Taliban government had completely wiped out the Opium drug trade as per UN aggreement for international Aid. When Bush took office there was no Opium to be found in Afghanistan but in 2004 there was now 206,700 hectares of Opium growing.

George HW Bush, Bill Clinton and George W Bush connection

The 3 Stooges - Then 41st President George HW Bush worked with Saudi Arabia to form al Qaeda, former President Bill Clinton intimately worked with al Qaeda and the Taliban to negotiate building of pipeline then turned on them when Afghanistan wanted control over the pipeline, and lastly drunken coward and idiot George W Bush was dumb enough to order the attacks against his own country and blame it on US created al Qaeda.

stooge n. In experimental methodology, another name for a confederate.

confederate n. A person taking part in a conspiracy. In research methodology, an accomplice of the experimenter in research involving deception, pretending to be an experimental participant or subject, along with the real participants, but actually playing out an assigned role.

eviction.jpg

Obama has only been president of the United States for a little over 2 months and the only thing that he has shown that he is good at is spending money - actually throwing away money. The US economic crisis is a result of bad debt - uncontrolled spending by the US banks but especially by the US government. Obama was elected to office only because he sold himself as a man of change. In his inauguration speech he arrogantly declared that the US was waiting for him and his government. He declared that only he could bring about the change that the US so desperately needed. The majority of people who voted for him voted for him because he made a promise to end Bush’s wars. Obama has failed at brining about that promise. In fact Obama has ordered more US soldiers to Afghanistan to fight a war that even his own military staff has declared cannot be won. Everyone expected Obama to announce an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Obama has failed to deliver what the voters expected and wanted from him.

Obama declared that only he can bring about change. Only he has the plan that will work to end the US economic crisis. Obama has failed miserably at handling the finances of the US. He has failed because not only has he spent more money in just 60 days than Bush spent in a 4 year term, the money he’s spent is literally gone - no return for the $trillion so-called investments that will end the US economic crisis, no accounting of who was paid what amount, no receipt for what the US taxpayers got in return for Obama’s spending spree . Obama has not only commited the US people to paying more taxes he has commited the US taxpayers to paying for his lavish $trillion gifts to bank CEOs for generations to come. Obama has used up all of the taxpayers’ dividends and without their knowing he has also spent their pensions and 401ks.

President Barack Obama’s budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than four times the deficits of Republican George W. Bush’s presidency, congressional auditors have stated.

The new Congressional Budget Office figures offered a far more dire outlook for Obama’s budget than the new administration predicted just last month — a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It’s a prospect even the president’s own budget director called unsustainable. In his White House run, Obama assailed the economic policies of his predecessor, but the eye-popping deficit numbers threaten to swamp his ambitious agenda of overhauling health care, exploring new energy sources and enacting scores of domestic programs.

The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his Democratic allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or else pare back his agenda.

By Congressional Budget Office’s calculation, Obama’s budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019.

“This report should serve as the wake-up call this administration needs,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. “We simply cannot continue to mortgage our children and grandchildren’s future to pay for bigger and more costly government.” But Obama insisted that his agenda is still on track.

The worsening economy is a direct result of the even deeper fiscal mess implemented by Obama. The deficit for the current budget year, which began Oct. 1, will top $1.8 trillion, $93 billion more than foreseen by the White House. That would equal 13 percent of GDP, a level not seen since World War II. The 2009 deficit, fueled by the $700 billion Wall Street bonuses and diving tax revenues stemming from Obama worsening the recession, is four times the previous $459 billion record set just last year. Obama’s budget plan taxes, spends and borrows too much.

“What we will not cut are investments that will lead to real growth and prosperity over the long term,” Obama said. “That’s why our budget makes a historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform. That’s why it enhances America’s competitiveness by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and building a clean energy economy.”

Bush spent a total of about $21 trillion dollars over 8 years. According to a report Obama’s total spending after his first 50 days in office- $2.29 trillion That equals out to be: $45.8 billion a day for every single day Obama has been in office or $1.908 billion an hour for every single hour Obama has been in office.

The Federal Government’s flood of red ink hit another high-water mark as the Treasury Department quietly reported that the National Debt hit $11-trillion for the first time ever. To be exact, the Debt now stands at $11,033,157,578,669.78. Divide it by the U.S. population and it comes up to over $36,000 in debt for every man, woman and child among us.

And the government is running up mountains of debt with increasing speed. It took just over 5 ½ months for Uncle Sam to go another trillion dollars deeper in debt since hitting $10-trillion last September 30th. It’s the fastest jump in U.S. history. The hundreds of billions of dollars being spent as part of the federal bailout of the financial markets is a leading factor in the rapid increase. Over $400-billion in debt has been accrued in the 57 days since President Obama took office.

And the federal budget he unveiled last month projects even faster increases in the National Debt. It’ll hit $12.7-trillion by the end of the fiscal year on September 30th. The Administration’s four year estimate shows that by the end of September 2012, the Debt will have soared to $16.2-trillion – which amounts to nearly 100% of the projected Gross Domestic Product that year.

The U.S. is running up so much debt so quickly, some investors are worried. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, who says his country has about a trillion dollars invested in U.S. Treasury notes, said he wanted a guarantee. President Obama said Wen’s got nothing to worry about. “Not just the Chinese government, but every investor, can have absolute confidence in the soundness of investments in the United States,” Obama.

That’s because the U.S. government’s power to tax stands behind all of its debt. If Uncle Sam ever needs a bailout, then as now, taxpayers get nailed. It took the U.S. government 191 years – from 1791 until 1982 – to run up its first trillion dollars in debt. The second and third trillions got on the scoreboard much more quickly – each in just four years.

By the time George W. Bush was inaugurated in 2001, the National Debt stood at $5.7-trillion. He ran up more debt faster than nearly all of his predecessors combined: just under $4.9-trillion.

The National Debt stood at $10.6-trillon on the day Barack Obama took office. But if his budget projections are accurate, he’ll run up nearly as much government debt in four years as President Bush did in eight.

Obama’s budget will make history. If he is allowed to proceed with his out-of-control spending the US taxpayers will be forced into bankruptcy because they won’t be able to sustain the tax burden put on them by Obama’s own personal agenda. Obama is a resounding failure. Real growth and prosperity can never be achieved by recklessly throwing the US taxpayers money as bonuses for already filthy rich bankers. Real growth and prosperity can never be achieved if the nation cannot afford the price tag of Obama’s personal investments plans. Real growth and prosperity can never be achieved if you don’t fix the root of the US economic crisis - uncontrolled spending on gifts for bankers and sustaining Obama’s big government . Real growth and prosperity can only be achieved if you stop spending money the country doesn’t have. Stop stealing the pension funds of the US taxpayers. Stop pouring taxpayers money into wars that are already long lost - in an interview Obama declared that the war in Afghanistan was lost and opened the door to a reconciliation process in which the American military would reach out to moderate elements of the Taliban,. Real growth and prosperity can only be achieved if you stop living like a king and start acting like a real leader.