Archive for May, 2011

We must remember why … a Lie … is still a Lie!

Monday, May 30th, 2011

Saturday, May 28, 2011

The Fake ICC and the Globalist Strategy of Tension

The global elite’s vast resources, derived from their control of
a fiat currency system, enables them to create convincing facades
like the ICC to further perpetuate their illegitimate, criminal agenda.
Pictured above is the ICC headquarters, as impressive architecturally
as it is illegitimate in any sense of natural legality.

Fake globalist-funded court using fake evidence from fake globalist-funded NGOs.

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Bangkok, Thailand May 28, 2011 – Russia’s President Medvedev, according to the Australian, has “endorsed calls for Colonel Gaddafi to leave office and offered to help to negotiate his exit. ” It is a move that has “surprised and delighted” both London and Washington after Russia’s initial protest against the extralegal military action that was executed upon an Iraq War-style pack of lies.

This apparent backpedaling by Russia coincides with increased bombardments of Libya’s capital of Tripoli and calls by France and Britain to send in helicopter gunships in an effort to increase the level of murder and mayhem in order to force the Libyan government to meet “concessions.” The contrived globalist International Criminal Court (ICC), has also attempted to place pressure upon Libya through an “arrest warrant” targeting Qaddafi.

An Entirely Fake Court

The “arrest warrant” issued by the ICC is based on evidence acquired from “30 missions to 11 States, and through interviews with a large number of persons, including key insiders and eyewitnesses.” The ICC itself notes that the “unprecedented cooperation” it has received has come from “States and organizations, none of which are currently working in Libya.” Undeterred by their admittedly tenuous investigation, they go on to provide an enumerated list of their “evidence.”

A look over this “evidence” presented by the “Office of the Prosecutor” reveals an amateurish, almost desperate attempt aimed at the Libyan leader. The entire basis of the “Prosecutor’s” case is built upon reports taken from BBC, AlJazeera, the London Guardian, New York Times, the US State Department’s Broadcasting Board of Governors-run Voice of America, the globalist-funded Human Rights Rights Watch, and the National Endowment for Democracy and Tides Foundation-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), among many, many others.

Perhaps depending entirely on their self-appointed authority, slick logo, tall headquarters, and official looking website, the ICC hopes no one actually looks at the “evidence” or realizes that the same corporate-financier interests are the driving forces behind both the fake ICC and the fake NGOs and corporate-funded media organizations that have supplied it with “evidence.” It should be noted that even the BBC, along with AlJazeera and many other corporate-funded media organizations have conceded, albeit buried deeply within their reports on both Libya and Syria, that their sources cannot be verified as it is based on 2nd information conveyed via “activist groups.” It should also be noted that the “Arab Spring’s” opposition and these “activist groups” are also globalist-funded.

The International Criminal Court itself claims to be, “an independent, permanent court that investigates and prosecutes persons accused of the most serious crimes of international concern, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.” A visit to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) site reveals just who is behind the ICC, who is actively promoting it and networking with the ICC’s various NGO partners, and the fact that all involved boast the same financial and political supporters.

The CICC claims to include, “2,500 civil society organizations in 150 different countries working in partnership to strengthen international cooperation with the ICC; ensure that the Court is fair, effective and independent; make justice both visible and universal; and advance stronger national laws that deliver justice to victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.” The CICC however, also is “deeply appreciative of the generous support” provided by the European Union, the Ford Foundation, the Fortune 500-lined John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and Humanity United.

Humanity United in turn boast partnerships with the globalist co-conspirators of BBC World Service Trust, NED/Open Society/US State Department-funded Benetech, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and the NED-funded Solidarity Center which mobilized Egypt’s labor unions just as the US-stoked unrest began to falter. These “generous supporters” are literally the same organizations that have built up the very “civil society organizations” the CICC is “working in partnership” with.

In other words, fake globalist-funded civil society organizations form a fake globalist-funded coalition, which in turn are supplying a fake globalist-funded court with evidence to further what is entirely a self-serving, politically motivated agenda using “humanity” as a mere and increasingly flimsy pretense. It is an entire network contrived out of thin air with fiat currency, and lent legitimacy by the myriad of corporate-financier owned media operations, such as BBC, AlJazeera, CNN, Fox News, VOA, and the myriad of other “sources” cited by the ICC’s “Prosecutor’s Office” in regards to Libya.

Indeed, the “International Criminal Court” is entirely fake, created by perhaps the most egregious criminals ever to have walked the earth, not to ensure “justice” in any sense we are familiar with, but to augment the self-proclaimed authority and legitimacy the global elite insist we are all beholden to. We are not beholden to it, not by any stretch of the imagination, nor are we beholden to any other contrivance operating in the name of “international arbiter.” We have our local, state/provincial governments, within the nation-state. What appears beyond the nation-state are self-serving, multi-national corporate-financier conglomerations that transcend boarders, usurp national sovereignty and authority, and betray any sense of our innate, inalienable individual sovereignty by insisting their “international institutions” supersede all that falls

beneath them.

Climbing out of the Globalist Strategy of Tension

Sovereignty and indeed the future of free humanity depends on our individual reassertion of our rights and responsibilities to sustain ourselves, our communities, our states/provinces, and our nation-states. We cannot depend on the Russians or the Chinese to act as the counterbalance to the global-elite because the Russians and the Chinese, through their participation in the IMF, the United Nations, and even the International Criminal Court – all entirely contrived by the global elite – for whatever reason, have fallen directly into a “strategy of tension.” Russia’s latest flip-flop regarding Libya defies the hopes of those who saw the nation as a dependable counterbalance. Russia’s actions now serve to grant the globalist-praising, terrorist usurpers of Libya’s rebellion an entire nation to despoil on behalf of Washington and London – perhaps even Moscow now, based on some behind-the-scenes deal.

By participating in these illegitimate “international institutions” the nation-states we live under are granting the transnational elite legitimacy they would otherwise not have. It is impossible to discern whether the Russians or Chinese are participating in such farcical “international institutions” as part of a Machiavellian strategy, hidden complicity to an emerging global government, or for short-sighted, self-serving interests.

What we can be sure of is our own commitment to our own interests and agenda on a local, county, and state/provincial level. Thus, we the people, be we Americans, Russians, or Chinese, must ourselves act as the counterbalance to the global-elite’s unwarranted influence. Balking the Anglo-American corporate-financier oligarchs does not guarantee other oligarchs will not rise and take their place elsewhere. Only by committing to a new paradigm of local sovereignty, where state/provincial, and national power is beholden to self-sufficient people on a local level instead of multi-national corporations on a global level, do we end entirely the threat of any sort of global-elite lording over us.

Sun Tzu in the “Art of War” once said, “therefore the clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy’s will to be imposed on him.” The ideal scenario for the globalists is for us to continue responding to their provocations on their terms. And whether we agree or disagree with their agenda, as long as we use their contrived institutions to contest them – we continue granting them more legitimacy regardless of the outcome of our protests. This is the ultimate strategy of tension, playing out daily on a global level, ensnaring well-intentioned but ignorant servants of the globalist agenda, as well as informed proponents of freedom and sovereignty alike.

By turning our backs entirely on the global-elite’s institutions, their ploys, their causes, their wars, and their false political dichotomies, and instead imposing our own will, on a local level, cutting off entirely the source of the global-elite’s power (our complicity), we force them to react to the imposition of our own will. The Tenth Amendment movement is the very embodiment of this in modern day practice, with the “Food Sovereignty” movement and now Texas’ battle against the TSA’s usurpation of state and local law enforcement in their airports taking the front line. Regular Americans from across the country are leaving the corporate-pundit guided debates and taking action, guided not by some political agenda, but rather their own innate sovereignty.

It starts with something as simple as planting your own garden, the piecemeal boycotting and replacement of all multi-national corporations, participation in our local government and the growing alternative media, and it results in the seizure of the unwarranted influence that has allowed a group of criminal international bankers to contrive their own international army, an international court, and the ability to wage war against entire nation-states with absolute impunity.

For ways to battle the globalists by achieving self-sufficiency and freedom through independence please read on:
Destroying the Globalists
Self-Sufficiency
Alternative Economics

The Lost Key to Real Revolution
Boycott the Globalists
Naming Names: Your Real Government

Tony Cartalucci’s articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at
Land Destroyer Report.

To trust Justice … in Denver …

Saturday, May 28th, 2011

Race To Justice Denver Statement

Thank you for supporting our Race To Justice by signing our petition calling on the Mayor-Elect to make this his administration’s top priority.

(If you haven’t yet signed the petition, you can do so by clicking here.)

The following groups and individuals have already signed on to the statement below:

Greater Metro Denver Ministerial Alliance * Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition * Denver Branch NAACP * Colorado Progressive Coalition * Colorado Progressive Action * 9to5 Working Women of Colorado *  Art Way *  Progress Now Colorado * COLOR: Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity & Reproductive Rights * Escuela Tlatelolco * Nita Gonzales * Colorado Prison Law Project

————–

We the undersigned condemn the decision of Denver’s Manager of Safety, Charlie Garcia, that five Denver Sheriff Deputies will receive no punishment for the Coroner‐verified homicide of Rev. Marvin Booker while in custody, because the deputies violated no policy.
A man is dead; a son, a brother, a friend is never coming back, and there is no punishment for those who took his life? Simply because of the blue uniform they wear to work?
We are outraged.
As Denver residents of all backgrounds, representing a broad cross‐section of this community, we believe our law enforcement agencies should protect the public, build strong relationships with the neighborhoods they serve, and be accountable to the residents of this city. Instead, Denver is plagued by decades of law enforcement abuse, from racial profiling to brutality to sexual assault to homicide. Although these troubling occurrences are often reported as isolated events, we know our public safety agencies have created a culture of abuse and we can no longer survive the status quo.
We are uncompromising.
A minor policy change, a single community meeting, or any other token effort to mitigate our concerns will not satisfy us. Denver needs and deserves a radical overhaul of our public safety agencies; one that rebuilds community trust, prioritizes transparency and accountability, and creates an atmosphere where abuse is never tolerated. We have come together to honor the memory of all those who have been victimized by the very public “servants” we should all trust, and we will not back down.

We are organized.

The Public Safety Manager’s decision in the homicide of Rev. Marvin Booker may have been the catalyst for our coming together, but we know that there is one person who we will now look to show the leadership that can change the dynamic ‐‐ our next mayor.
Enough is enough.
In signing this letter, we give notice to the Mayor‐Elect that we have seized the authority to recast the landscape of policing in this city. Our expectation is that our efforts will begin with him and it will happen in a meeting we demand take place in the days immediately following the election.
We sign this statement because we expect the Mayor‐elect to prioritize this issue and to join with us to develop an authentically community‐driven process that revolutionizes law enforcement practices in Denver and turns a culture of fear and isolation into one of safety and collaboration.

Return to the Race for Justice main page

He barks … but knows his leash.

Wednesday, May 25th, 2011

Obama Genuflects To AIPAC

By Stephen Lendman
5-24-11

Edward Said once called AIPAC “the most powerful and feared lobby in Washington.”

For years, it’s “drawn on a well-organized, well-connected, highly visible, successful,

and wealthy Jewish population,” subverting potential opposition.

As a result, fear and respect “for AIPAC (exists) all over the country, but especially in

Washington, where in a matter of hours, almost the entire Senate can be marshaled

into signing a letter to the president on Israel’s behalf. Who is going to oppose AIPAC

and continue to have a career in Congress, or” to represent the Palestinian cause

“when nothing concrete can be offered by that cause to anyone who stands up to

AIPAC?”

Deferentially, each year, US politicians, including presidents, flock to its annual

conference, paying homage to Israel and its influence.

Calling itself “America’s Pro-Israel Lobby,” it’s represented Israeli interests since

founded in 1953, then incorporated in 1963 as a division of the American Zionist

Council (AZC), its precursor.

Exempted from registering as a foreign agent, it’s had virtual fifth column veto

power over war and peace, trade and investment, multi-billion dollar arms sales,

and all Middle East policies affecting Israel under Democrat and Republican

administrations alike.

In March 2001, discussing the power of American Zionist organizations,

Edward Said said:

“I find it absolutely astonishing, given that Palestinian policy has been essentially

to throw our fate as a people in the lap of the United States without any strategic

awareness of how US policy is in effect dominated, if not completely controlled, by

a small minority of people whose views about the Middle East are in some way

more extreme than even those of the Israeli Likud.”

In fact, Zionist discourse in America reflects power, “and Arabs….are the objects of

power – despised objects at that….To submit supinely to a Zionist-controlled (US)

Middle East policy….will neither bring stability (for Israelis or Palestinians) nor e

quality and justice in the US.”

As a result, today’s status is what Said called “untrammelled immorality,” a shocking

disregard for the most basic sense of fairness – unrecognized, undiscussed and

spurned in political and major media discourse. Instead, they focus solely on the

interests of a rogue Israeli state – occupying, persecuting, and immiserating millions

of Palestinians whose only offense is not being Jewish.

No wonder Obama’s May 22 AIPAC speech affirmed rock solid support for a “strong

and secure Israel,” leaving Palestinians entirely out of his equation, despite paying

disingenuous lip service to their interests.

No wonder also that an official AIPAC statement expressed gratitude for his

assurance that Washington doesn’t expect Israel to withdraw to June 1967 borders,

besides explicitly calling Hamas a terrorist organization, ignoring its January 2006

electoral victory as Palestine’s legitimate government.

Obama also ignored:

— the Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid

(the Apartheid Convention), defined by the Rome Statute to include murder,

extermination, enslavement, torture, arbitrary arrest, illegal imprisonment, denial

of the right to life and liberty, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and other

abusive acts imposed by one group on another;

— Israel’s abhorrence of peace and repeated international law violations;

— its decades of lawless occupation, aggression, and collective punishment;

— Palestinians denied free movement, expression and right of assembly;

— explicit recognition of Palestinian self-determination under provisions of the

December 1960 UN General Assembly Declaration on the Granting of Independence

to Colonial Countries and Peoples, and all other UN resolutions affirming it;

— the universally recognized right of return;

— Jerusalem as Palestine’s legitimate capital;

— Israel’s illegal July 1980 East Jerusalem annexation despite SC Resolution 478 a month later declaring the Jerusalem Law null and void and requiring its immediate rescinding;

— Israel’s Separation Wall on stolen Palestinian land, ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice;

— Palestinians denied access to their own land, air space, coastal waters, and control of their borders;

— extreme poverty, unemployment, exploitation and depravation;

— daily violence against defense civilians, including children;

— targeted assassinations and other killings;

— mass arrests, detentions and torture;

— illegal home demolitions;

— apartheid settlements for Jews only, numbering 500,000 in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, illegally transferred to Occupied Palestine;

— around half of the West Bank and East Jerusalem off limits to Palestinians, according to UN estimates, as well as denying them access to their own resources; and

— since June 2007, Gaza’s suffocating siege, condemning nearly 1.7 million Palestinians to slow-motion genocide after Israel illegally declared it a “hostile entity,” denying nonviolent civilians access to enough food, healthcare, fuel, electricity, and other essential needs.

Conditions in Besieged Gaza

The Gisha Legal Center for Freedom of Movement “promotes rights guaranteed by international and Israeli law.” In May 2011, it published a “Gaza Cheat Sheet” account of what Gazans endure daily out of sight and mind in Washington and other Western capitals.

As a result, Israel created a humanitarian crisis, requiring aid for over 70% of Gazans. Moreover, Cast Lead destruction remains rubble. Vital needs go unmet. Around 95% of Gaza’s industrial enterprises were impacted, suspended, closed, damaged or destroyed. The remaining 5% operate at from 20 to 50% of capacity. Lost jobs haven’t been regained.

Aside from Gaza’s tunnel economy to Egypt, vulnerable to Israeli bombing, Kerem Shalom is the sole crossing point to Israel for the limited amount of aid let in.

Excluded are goods and materials called dual use, basic construction materials like cement, steel and gravel (except for small amounts), spare parts, and other vital supplies to rebuild what Cast Lead destroyed. Overall, a small fraction of what entered freely pre-June 2007 gets in now.

Moreover, exports are largely banned, except for occasional small amounts of strawberries, flowers, peppers and tomatoes to European markets. On average, it’s about two truckloads a day compared to 400 or more in 2005.

In addition, travel between Gaza and the West Bank is extremely limited via Erez crossing to Israel and Rafah to Egypt. In fact, only “exceptional humanitarian cases” are allowed with an emphasis on medical emergencies, and not many of them.

Travel to other areas is only possible through Egypt, with very rare exceptions. By controlling Palestine’s population registry, Israel has decision-making power over passports, required to exit through Rafah. Since Mubarak’s ouster, only about 300 a day now cross.

As a result, students can’t study abroad. Families are divided, and commerce can’t operate freely. Further, Israel prohibits access to and from Gaza by air or sea. Fishing is allowed only up to three nautical miles offshore, excluding most Gazan waters from use. In fact, under Oslo, 20 nautical miles were established.

In addition, a 300 – 1,500 meter no-go “buffer zone” exists along Israel’s separating border fence, placing 17% of Gaza off limits and 35% of its arable land. Farmers daring to work it risk being shot and killed.

For many years, in fact, travel between the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem was highly restricted, preventing most Palestinians from doing it, let alone having access outside the Territories. In large measure, occupation, especially for Gaza, has meant imprisonment, unable to move freely as international law permits.

Moreover, the international community bears direct responsibility for letting Israel perpetuate this crisis by not imposing boycotts, divestments, sanctions and isolation until it ends.

In fact, the 2009 Lisbon Treaty affirms fundamental freedoms, peace, democracy, human rights and dignity, justice, equality, the rule of law, security, tolerance, solidarity, mutual respect among peoples, the rights of the child, strict adherence to the UN Charter and international law, environmental protection, sustainable development, conflict prevention, and combatting social exclusion and discrimination.

Western nations literally let Israel get away with murder by spurning these principles.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.

The Devil took Congress … last week …

Tuesday, May 17th, 2011

Did you hear about this?

Literally in a midnight session last week, the House Armed Services Committee tucked a dangerous provision into the huge Defense authorization bill. With it, Congress took one more step towards passing a law for endless worldwide war. The new law would use American military forces against terrorism suspects everywhere and anywhere.

If you didn’t hear about this provision, you’re not alone.

It was added to the bill by Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), and it could become the single biggest ceding of unchecked war authority to the executive branch in modern American history.

Outrageously, there have been no hearings on the worldwide war legislation, nor has its necessity been explained by Rep. Buck McKeon or anyone else in Congress.

A House vote could come as early as next week. Tell your representative: Oppose any law for a new worldwide war without end. (Do not forward: This link will open a page with your information already filled in.)

Unlike the legislation that authorized the Afghanistan War and the pursuit of Osama bin Laden, the proposed new and expanded law to go to war does not even require a specific threat of harm to the United States.

In fact, the proposed authorization would allow war wherever there are terrorism suspects in any country around the world without an expiration date, geographical boundaries, or connection to the 9/11 attacks or any other specific harm or threat to the United States.

Please take action right now. Tell your representative: Oppose any law for a new worldwide war without end.

It’s outrageous that, just as the majority of Americans eagerly await the ramping down of our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Congress is acting under the cover of darkness to pass a new law for a worldwide war.

Make it clear that we won’t stand still for Congress triggering a worldwide war without end. Contact your representative right now.

Thank you for standing with us.

Sincerely,

Laura W. Murphy
Director, ACLU Washington Legislative Office

This is Africa’s fight for Self Determination

Sunday, May 15th, 2011

Thanks to Global Research and Peter Dale Scott

The Libyan War, American Power and the Decline of the Petrodollar System

by Prof. Peter Dale Scott

Global Research, April 29, 2011

The Asia-Pacific Journal

Email this article to a friend

Print this article

3diggsdigg 909Share

The present NATO campaign against Gaddafi in Libya has given rise to great confusion, both among those waging this ineffective campaign, and among those observing it. Many whose opinions I normally respect see this as a necessary war against a villain – though some choose to see Gaddafi as the villain, and others point to Obama.

My own take on this war, on the other hand, is that it is both ill-conceived and dangerous  — a threat to the interests of Libyans, Americans, the Middle East and conceivably the entire world. Beneath the professed concern about the safety of Libyan civilians lies a deeper concern that is barely acknowledged: the West’s defense of the present global petrodollar economy, now in decline..

The confusion in Washington, matched by the absence of discussion of an overriding strategic motive for American involvement, is symptomatic of the fact that the American century is ending, and ending in a way that is both predictable in the long run, and simultaneously erratic and out of control in its details.

Confusion in Washington and in NATO

With respect to Libya’s upheaval itself, opinions in Washington range from that of John McCain, who has allegedly called on NATO to provide “every apparent means of assistance, minus ground troops,” in overthrowing Gaddafi,1 to Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, who has expressed deep concern about even passing out arms to a group of fighters we do not know well.2

We have seen the same confusion throughout the Middle East. In Egypt a coalition of non-governmental elements helped prepare for the nonviolent revolution in that country, while former US Ambassador Frank Wisner, Jr., flew to Egypt to persuade Mubarak to cling to power. Meanwhile in countries that used to be of major interest to the US, like Jordan and Yemen, it is hard to discern any coherent American policy at all.

In NATO too there is confusion that occasionally threatens to break into open discord. Of the 28 NATO members, only 14 are involved at all in the Libyan campaign, and only six are involved in the air war. Of these only three countries –the U.S., Britain, and France, are offering tactical air support to the rebels on the ground. When many NATO countries froze the bank accounts of Gaddafi and his immediate supporters, the US, in an unpublicized and dubious move, froze the entire $30 billion of Libyan government funds to which it has access. (Of this, more later.) Germany, the most powerful NATO nation after America, abstained on the UN Security Council resolution; and its foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, has since said, “We will not see a military solution, but a political solution.”3

Such chaos would have been unthinkable in the high period of US dominance. Obama appears paralyzed by the gap between his declared objective – the removal of Gaddafi from power – and the means available to him, given the nation’s costly involvement in two wars, and his domestic priorities.

To understand America’s and NATO’s confusion over Libya, one must look at other phenomena:

• Standard & Poor’s warning of an imminent downgrade of the U.S. credit rating

• the unprecedented rise in the price of gold to over $1500 an ounce

• the gridlock in American politics over federal and state deficits and what to do about them

In the midst of the Libyan challenge to what remains of American hegemony, and in part as a direct consequence of America’s confused strategy in Libya, the price of oil has hit $112 a barrel. This price increase threatens to slow or even reverse America’s faltering economic recovery, and demonstrates one of the many ways in which the Libyan war is not serving American national interests.

Confusion about Libya has been evident in Washington from the outset, particularly since Secretary of State Clinton advocated a no-fly policy, President Obama said he wanted it as an option, and Secretary of Defense Gates warned against it.4 The result has been a series of interim measures, during which Obama has justified a limited U.S. response by pointing to America’s demanding commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yet with a stalemate prevailing in Libya itself, a series of further gradual escalations are being contemplated, from the provision of arms, funds, and advisers to the rebels, to the introduction of mercenaries or even foreign troops. The American scenario begins to look more and morelike Vietnam, where the war also began modestly with the introduction of covert operators followed by military advisers.

I have to confess that on March 17 I myself was of two minds about UN Security Council 1973, which ostensibly established a no-fly zone in Libya for the protection of civilians. But since then it has become apparent that the threat to rebels from Gaddafi’s troops and rhetoric was in fact far less than was perceived at the time. To quote Prof. Alan J. Kuperman,

. . . President Barack Obama grossly exaggerated the humanitarian threat to justify military action in Libya. The president claimed that intervention was necessary to prevent a “bloodbath’’ in Benghazi, Libya’s second-largest city and last rebel stronghold. But Human Rights Watch has released data on Misurata, the next-biggest city in Libya and scene of protracted fighting, revealing that Moammar Khadafy is not deliberately massacring civilians but rather narrowly targeting the armed rebels who fight against his government. Misurata’s population is roughly 400,000. In nearly two months of war, only 257 people — including combatants — have died there. Of the 949 wounded, only 22 — less than 3 percent — are women…. Nor did Khadafy ever threaten civilian massacre in Benghazi, as Obama alleged. The “no mercy’’ warning, of March 17, targeted rebels only, as reported by The New York Times, which noted that Libya’s leader promised amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away.’’ Khadafy even offered the rebels an escape route and open border to Egypt, to avoid a fight “to the bitter end.’’5

The record of ongoing US military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan suggests that we should expect a heavy human toll if the current stalemate in Libya either continues or escalates further.

The Role in this War of Oil and Financial Interests

In American War Machine, I wrote how

By a seemingly inevitable dialectic,… prosperity in some major states fostered expansion, and expansion in dominant states created increasing income disparity.6 In this process the dominant state itself was changed, as its public services were progressively impoverished, in order to strengthen security arrangements benefiting a few while oppressing many.7

Thus, for many years the foreign affairs of England in Asia came to be conducted in large part by the East India Company…. Similarly, the American company Aramco, representing a consortium of the oil majors Esso, Mobil, Socal, and Texaco, conducted its own foreign policy in Arabia, with private connections to the CIA and FBI.8

In this way Britain and America inherited policies that, when adopted by the metropolitan states, became inimical to public order and safety.9

In the final stages of hegemonic power, one sees more and more naked intervention for narrow interests, abandoning earlier efforts towards creating stable international institutions. Consider the role of the conspiratorial Jameson Raid into the South African Boer Republic in late 1895, a raid, devised to further the economic interests of Cecil Rhodes, which helped to induce Britain’s Second Boer War.10 Or consider the Anglo-French conspiracy with Israel in 1956, in an absurd vain attempt to retain control of the Suez Canal.

Then consider the lobbying efforts of the oil majors as factors in the U.S. war in Vietnam (1961), Afghanistan (2001), and Iraq (2003).11 Although the role of oil companies in America’s Libyan involvement remains obscure, it is a virtual certainty that Cheney’s Energy Task Force Meetings discussed not just Iraq’s but Libya’s under-explored oil reserves, estimated to be around 41 billion barrels, or about a third of Iraq’s.12

Afterwards some in Washington expected a swift victory in Iraq would be followed by similar US attacks on Libya and Iran. General Wesley Clark told Amy Goodman on Democracy Now four years ago that soon after 9/11 a general in the Pentagon informed him that several countries would be attacked by the U.S. military. The list included Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.13 In May of 2003 John Gibson, chief executive of Halliburton’s Energy Service Group, told International Oil Daily in an interview, “”We hope Iraq will be the first domino and that Libya and Iran will follow. We don’t like being kept out of markets because it gives our competitors an unfair advantage,”14

It is also a matter of public record that the UN no-fly resolution 1973 of March 17 followed shortly on Gaddafi’s public threat of March 2 to throw western oil companies out of Libya, and his invitation on March 14 to Chinese, Russian, and Indian firms to produce Libyan oil in their place.15 Significantly China, Russia, and India (joined by their BRICS ally Brazil), all abstained on UN Resolution 1973.

The issue of oil is closely intertwined with that of the dollar, because the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency depends largely on OPEC’s decision to denominate the dollar as the currency for OPEC oil purchases. Today’s petrodollar economy dates back to two secret agreements with the Saudisin the 1970s for the recycling of petrodollars back into the US economy. The first of these deals assured a special and on-going Saudi stake in the health of the US dollar; the second secured continuing Saudi support for the pricing of all OPEC oil in dollars. These two deals assured that the US economy would not be impoverished by OPEC oil price hikes. Since then the heaviest burden has been borne instead by the economies of less developed countries, who need to purchase dollars for their oil supplies.16

As  Ellen Brown has pointed out, first Iraq and then Libya decided to challenge the petrodollar system and stop selling all their oil for dollars, shortly before each country was attacked.

Kenneth Schortgen Jr., writing  on Examiner.com, noted that “[s]ix months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept Euros instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar..”

According to a Russian article titled “Bombing of Lybia – Punishment for Qaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar,” Qaddafi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar. Qaddafi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency. … The initiative was viewed negatively by the USA and the European Union, with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind; but Qaddafi continued his push for the creation of a united Africa.

And that brings us back to the puzzle of the Libyan central bank. In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:

One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned…. Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.17

Libya not only has oil. According to the IMF, its central bank has nearly 144 tons of gold in its vaults. With that sort of asset base, who needs the BIS [Bank of International Settlements], the IMF and their rules.18

Gaddafi’s recent proposal to introduce a gold dinar for Africa revives the notion of an Islamic gold dinar floated in 2003 by Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, as well as by some Islamist movements.19 The notion, which contravenes IMF rules and is designed to bypass them, has had trouble getting started. But today the countries stocking more and more gold rather than dollars include not just Libya and Iran, but also China, Russia, and India.20

The Stake of France in Terminating Gaddafi’s African Initiatives

The initiative for the air attacks appears to have come initially from France, with early support from Britain. If Qaddafi were to succeed in creating an African Union backed by Libya’s currency and gold reserves, France, still the predominant economic power in most of its former Central African colonies, would be the chief loser. Indeed, a report from Dennis Kucinich in America has corroborated the claim of Franco Bechis in Italy, transmitted by VoltaireNet in France, that “plans to spark the Benghazi rebellion were initiated by French intelligence services in November 2010.”21

If the idea to attack Libya originated with France, Obama moved swiftly to support French plans to frustrate Gaddafi’s African initiative with his unilateral declaration of a national emergency in order to freeze all of the Bank of Libya’s $30 billion of funds to which America had access. (This was misleadingly reported in the U.S. press as a freeze of the funds of “Colonel Qaddafi, his children and family, and senior members of the Libyan government.”22 But in fact the second section of Obama’s decree explicitly targeted “All property and interests… of the Government of Libya, its agencies, instrumentalities, and controlled entities, and the Central Bank of Libya.”23) While the U.S. has actively used financial weapons in recent years, the $30-billion seizure, “the largest amount ever to be frozen by a U.S. sanctions order,” had one precedent, the arguably illegal and certainly conspiratorial seizure of Iranian assets in 1979 on behalf of the threatened Chase Manhattan Bank.24

The consequences of the $30-billion freeze for Africa, as well as for Libya, have been spelled out by an African observer:

The US$30 billion frozen by Mr Obama belong to the Libyan Central Bank and had been earmarked as the Libyan contribution to three key projects which would add the finishing touches to the African federation – the African Investment Bank in Syrte, Libya, the establishment in 2011 of the African Monetary Fund to be based in Yaounde with a US$42 billion capital fund and the Abuja-based African Central Bank in Nigeria which when it starts printing African money will ring the death knell for the CFA franc through which Paris has been able to maintain its hold on some African countries for the last fifty years. It is easy to understand the French wrath against Gaddafi.25

This same observer spells out her reasons for believing that Gaddafi’s plans for Africa have been more benign than the West’s:

It began in 1992, when 45 African nations established RASCOM (Regional African Satellite Communication Organization) so that Africa would have its own satellite and slash communication costs in the continent. This was a time when phone calls to and from Africa were the most expensive in the world because of the annual US$500 million fee pocketed by Europe for the use of its satellites like Intelsat for phone conversations, including those within the same country.

An African satellite only cost a onetime payment of US$400 million and the continent no longer had to pay a US$500 million annual lease. Which banker wouldn’t finance such a project? But the problem remained – how can slaves, seeking to free themselves from their master’s exploitation ask the master’s help to achieve that freedom? Not surprisingly, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the USA, Europe only made vague promises for 14 years. Gaddafi put an end to these futile pleas to the western ‘benefactors’ with their exorbitant interest rates. The Libyan guide put US$300 million on the table; the African Development Bank added US$50 million more and the West African Development Bank a further US$27 million – and that’s how Africa got its first communications satellite on 26 December 2007.26

I am not in a position to corroborate all of her claims. But, for these and other reasons, I am persuaded that western actions in Libya have been designed to frustrate Gaddafi’s plans for an authentically post-colonial Africa, not just his threatened actions against the rebels in Benghazi.

Conclusion

I conclude from all this confusion and misrepresentation that America is losing its ability to enforce and maintain peace, either by itself or with its nominal allies. I would submit that, if only to stabilize and reduce oil prices, it is in America’s best interest now to join with Ban Ki-Moon and the Pope in pressing for an immediate cease-fire in Libya. Negotiating a cease-fire will certainly present problems, but the probable alternative to ending this conflict is the nightmare of watching it inexorably escalate.America has  been there before with tragic consequences. We do not want to see similar casualties incurred for the sake of anunjust petrodollar system whose days may be numbered anyway.

At stake is not just America’s relation to Libya, but to China. The whole of Africa is an area where the west and the BRIC countries will both be investing. A resource-hungry China alone is expected to invest on a scale of $50 billion a year by 2015, a figure (funded by America’s trade deficit with China) which the West cannot match.27 Whether east and west can coexist peacefully in Africa in the future will depend on the west’s learning to accept a gradual diminution of its influence there, without resorting to deceitful stratagems (reminiscent of the Anglo-French Suez stratagem of 1956) in order to maintain it.

Previous transitions of global dominance have been marked by wars, by revolutions, or by both together. The final emergence through two World Wars of American hegemony over British hegemony was a transition between two powers that were essentially allied, and culturally close. The whole world has an immense stake in ensuring that the difficult transition to a post-US hegemonic order will be achieved as peacefully as possible.

Peter Dale Scott, a former Canadian diplomat and English Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author of Drugs Oil and War, The Road to 9/11, The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War. His most recent book is American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection and the Road to Afghanistan. He is currently Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). This article is published in partnership with the Asia Pacific Journal.

His website, which contains a wealth of his writings, is here.

Notes

1 “McCain calls for stronger NATO campaign,” monstersandcritics.com, April 22, 2011, link.

2 Ed Hornick, “Arming Libyan Rebels: Should U.S. Do It?” CNN, March 31, 2011.

3 “Countries Agree to Try to Transfer Some of Qaddafi’s Assets to Libyan Rebels,” New York Times, April 13, 2011, link.

4 “President Obama Wants Options as Pentagon Issues Warnings About Libyan No-Fly Zone,” ABC News, March 3, 2011, link. Earlier, on February 25, Gates warned that the U.S. should avoid future land wars like those it has fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, but should not forget the difficult lessons it has learned from those conflicts.

“In my opinion, any future Defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should ‘have his head examined,’ as General MacArthur so delicately put it,” Gates said in a speech to cadets at West Point” (Los Angeles Times, February 25, 2011, link).

5 Alan J. Kuperman, “False Pretense for War in Libya?” Boston Globe, April 14, 2011.

6 America’s income disparity, as measured by its Gini coefficient, is now among the highest in the world, along with Brazil, Mexico, and China. See Phillips, Wealth and Democracy, 38, 103; Greg Palast, Armed Madhouse (New York: Dutton, 2006), 159.

7 This is the subject of my book The Road to 9/11, 4–9.

8 Anthony Cave Brown, Oil, God, and Gold (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999), 213.

9 Peter Dale Scott, American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010), 32. One could cite also the experience of the French Third Republic and the Banque de l’Indochine or the Netherlands and the Dutch East India Company.

10 Elizabeth Longford, Jameson’s Raid: The Prelude to the Boer War (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1982); The Jameson Raid: a centennial retrospective (Houghton, South Africa: Brenthurst Press, 1996).

11 Wikileak documents from October and November 2002 reveal that Washington was making deals with oil companies prior to the Iraq invasion, and that the British government lobbied on behalf of BP’s being included in the deals (Paul Bignell, “Secret memos expose link between oil firms and invasion of Iraq,” Independent (London), April 19, 2011).

12 Reuters, March 23, 2011.

13 Saman Mohammadi, “The Humanitarian Empire May Strike Syria Next, Followed By Lebanon And Iran,” OpEdNews.com, March 31, 2011.

14 “Halliburton Eager for Work Across the Mideast,” International Oil Daily, May 7, 2003.

15 “Gaddafi offers Libyan oil production to India, Russia, China,” Agence France-Presse, March 14, 2011, link.

16 Peter Dale Scott, “Bush’s Deep Reasons for War on Iraq: Oil, Petrodollars, and the OPEC Euro Question”; Peter Dale Scott, Drugs, Oil, and War (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003), 41-42: “From these developments emerged the twin phenomena, underlying 9/11, of triumphalist US unilateralism on the one hand, and global third-world indebtedness on the other. The secret deals increased US-Saudi interdependence at the expense of the international comity which had been the base for US prosperity since World War II.” Cf. Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), 37.

17 “Globalists Target 100% State Owned Central Bank of Libya.”   Link.

18 Ellen Brown, “Libya: All About Oil, or All About Banking,” Reader Supported News, April 15, 2011.

19 Peter Dale Scott, “Bush’s Deep Reasons for War on Iraq: Oil, Petrodollars, and the OPEC Euro Question”; citing “Islamic Gold Dinar Will Minimize Dependency on US Dollar,” Malaysian Times, April 19, 2003.

20 “Gold key to financing Gaddafi struggle,” Financial Times, March 21, 2011, link.

21 Franco Bechis, “French plans to topple Gaddafi on track since last November,” VoltaireNet, March 25, 2011. Cf. Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, “November 2010 War Games: ‘Southern Mistral’ Air Attack against Dictatorship in a Fictitious Country called ‘Southland,’” Global Research, April 15, 2011, link; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, March 19, 2011.

22 New York Times, February 27, 2011.

23 Executive Order of February 25, 2011, citing International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, seizes all Libyan Govt assets, February 25, 2011, link. The authority granted to the President by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act “may only be exercised to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat with respect to which a national emergency has been declared for purposes of this chapter and may not be exercised for any other purpose” (50 U.S.C. 1701).

24 “Billions Of Libyan Assets Frozen,” Tropic Post, March 8, 2011, link (“largest amount”); Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007), 80-89 (Iranian assets).

25 “Letter from an African Woman, Not Libyan, On Qaddafi Contribution to Continent-wide African Progress , Oggetto: ASSOCIAZIONE CASA AFRICA LA LIBIA DI GHEDDAFI HA OFFERTO A TUTTA L’AFRICA LA PRIMA RIVOLUZIONE DEI TEMPI MODERNI,” Vermont Commons, April 21, 2011, link. Cf. Manlio Dinucci, “Financial Heist of the Century: Confiscating Libya’s Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWF),” Global Research, April 24, 2011, link.

26 Ibid. Cf. “The Inauguration of the African Satellite Control Center,” Libya Times, September 28, 2009, link; Jean-Paul Pougala, “The lies behind the West’s war on Libya,” Pambazuka.org, April 14, 2011.

27 Leslie Hook, “China’s future in Africa, after Libya,” blogs.ft.com, March 4, 2011 ($50 billion). The U.S trade deficit with China in 2010 was $273 billion.

The 3 so-called “democracies” pulled off the

Sunday, May 15th, 2011

Financial Heist of the Century: Confiscating

Libya’s Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWF)

by Manlio Dinucci


THANKS TO

Global Research, April 24, 2011

Il Manifesto (translated from Italian) – 2011-04-22

Email this article to a friend

Print this article

0diggsdigg 713Share

The objective of the war against Libya is not just its oil reserves (now estimated at 60 billion barrels), which are the greatest in Africa and whose extraction costs are among the lowest in the world, nor the natural gas reserves of which are estimated at about 1,500 billion cubic meters. In the crosshairs of “willing” of the operation “Unified Protector” there are sovereign wealth funds, capital that the Libyan state has invested abroad.

The Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) manages sovereign wealth funds estimated at about $70 billion U.S., rising to more than $150 billion if you include foreign investments of the Central Bank and other bodies. But it might be more. Even if they are lower than those of Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, Libyan sovereign wealth funds have been characterized by their rapid growth. When LIA was established in 2006, it had $40 billion at its disposal. In just five years, LIA has invested over one hundred companies in North Africa, Asia, Europe, the U.S. and South America: holding, banking, real estate, industries, oil companies and others.

In Italy, the main Libyan investments are those in UniCredit Bank (of which LIA and the Libyan Central Bank hold 7.5 percent), Finmeccanica (2 percent) and ENI (1 percent), these and other investments (including 7.5 percent of the Juventus Football Club) have a significance not as much economically (they amount to some $5.4 billion) as politically.

Libya, after Washington removed it from the blacklist of “rogue states,” has sought to carve out a space at the international level focusing on “diplomacy of sovereign wealth funds.” Once the U.S. and the EU lifted the embargo in 2004 and the big oil companies returned to the country, Tripoli was able to maintain a trade surplus of about $30 billion per year which was used largely to make foreign investments. The management of sovereign funds has however created a new mechanism of power and corruption in the hands of ministers and senior officials, which probably in part escaped the control of the Gadhafi himself: This is confirmed by the fact that, in 2009, he proposed that the 30 billion in oil revenues go “directly to the Libyan people.” This aggravated the fractures within the Libyan government.

U.S. and European ruling circles focused on these funds, so that before carrying out a military attack on Libya to get their hands on its energy wealth, they took over the Libyan sovereign wealth funds. Facilitating this operation is the representative of the Libyan Investment Authority, Mohamed Layas himself: as revealed in a cable published by WikiLeaks. On January 20 Layas informed the U.S. ambassador in Tripoli that LIA had deposited $32 billion in U.S. banks. Five weeks later, on February 28, the U.S. Treasury “froze” these accounts. According to official statements, this is “the largest sum ever blocked in the United States,” which Washington held “in trust for the future of Libya.” It will in fact serve as an injection of capital into the U.S. economy, which is more and more in debt. A few days later, the EU “froze” around 45 billion Euros of Libyan funds.

The assault on the Libyan sovereign wealth funds will have a particularly strong impact in Africa. There, the Libyan Arab African Investment Company had invested in over 25 countries, 22 of them in sub-Saharan Africa, and was planning to increase the investments over the next five years, especially in mining, manufacturing, tourism and telecommunications. The Libyan investments have been crucial in the implementation of the first telecommunications satellite Rascom (Regional African Satellite Communications Organization), which entered into orbit in August 2010, allowing African countries to begin to become independent from the U.S. and European satellite networks, with an annual savings of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Even more important were the Libyan investment in the implementation of three financial institutions launched by the African Union: the African Investment Bank, based in Tripoli, the African Monetary Fund, based in Yaoundé (Cameroon), the African Central Bank, with Based in Abuja (Nigeria). The development of these bodies would enable African countries to escape the control of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, tools of neo-colonial domination, and would mark the end of the CFA franc, the currency that 14 former French colonies are forced to use. Freezing Libyan funds deals a strong blow to the entire project. The weapons used by “the willing” are not only those in the military action called “Unified Protector.”

Il Manifesto, April 22, 2011

Translated from Italian by John Catalinotto

Where the Power lies …

Saturday, May 14th, 2011

The Truth is … ???

By W J Anthony

You and I may be regular readers of commentaries by writers from investment firms, that assume the credibility or expertise in knowing market conditions and tendencies that could suggest success or failure for investors in the profit dividends paid to stock investments in foreign corporations or in money market funds or in countless, other ways to spend and gain or lose money.

One report in particular, among many, predicted an eventual failure of the US dollar as the world currency and the rising and possible soaring success in buying silver and gold, but especially silver.  Silver, they said, gained greater proportional profit than gold during the present time and during WW2 and a few other eras in history.  Almost the next day, that investment report suffered when silver suffered a surprising drop in value – gold did also,

Then, I discovered a startling report by a website, which I have never found reason to ignore or oppose in the many times that I read it on the Internet.  It revealed that many experts fumbled or covered-up why and when recent banking systems collapsed.

The video link below tells the story.  If the major media would be honest, this report should be their top story.  The Congress should be honest and prove or disprove what the report reveals:  “where the real power lies”.  Don’t expect Glen Beck or O’Reilly to truthfully deal with these facts.

Click the link below, choose “banking malfeasance”, which will bring you to the video: “banking goes better with coke”.

http://www.realecontv.com/

Is Congress ready to Sign ?

Wednesday, May 11th, 2011

Our Blank Check to HELL on Earth !

The time is now to restore respect for the Constitution. Tell Congress that a blank check on war isn’t just unnecessary — it’s truly dangerous.

They have to be kidding. Congress is about to vote on worldwide war authority. This was long on the Bush administration’s wish list. Now, a few top congressional insiders see an opportunity to sneak it in to a “must pass” piece of legislation: the Defense Authorization bill.

This expanded war authority would give the president — any president — the power to use military force, whenever and however he or she sees fit. It would essentially declare a worldwide war without end.

It is shocking that Congress is entertaining such legislation at a time when many are looking to see an end to escalating conflict and abuses of power in the name of fighting terrorism.

Tell your representative to oppose any new and expanded war authority that would give the president unfettered powers to involve the United States in more military conflicts without any checks or balances.

This new legislation could commit the United States to a worldwide war without clear enemies, without any geographical boundaries, and without any boundary relating to time or specific objective to be achieved.

Unlike the legislation that authorized the Afghanistan War and the pursuit of Osama bin Laden, the proposed new and expanded authorization to go to war does not require a specific threat of harm to the United States.

With the bill moving through the House this week and a potential vote later this month, we must make our opposition known today. Tell Congress that a blank check on war isn’t just unnecessary — it’s truly dangerous.

This greater war authority first surfaced when George Bush was president. With your help, we opposed it then. And we’re opposing the more expansive version of it circulating in Congress right now — because no president should have the power to single-handedly commit America to war without any checks or balances.

The time is now to restore respect for the Constitution. We must put an end to the notion that we can’t be safe without sacrificing our freedom.

Don’t let Congress give the executive branch a virtual blank check when it comes to committing our country to armed conflict. Oppose the new worldwide war authority.

Thank you for standing with us.

Sincerely,

Laura W. Murphy
Director, ACLU Washington Legislative Office

P.S. Without any opposition, this proposal could pass unnoticed. That’s why we need your help today.

© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004

J P Morgan’s Greed deprived You of …

Tuesday, May 10th, 2011
Home » Latest news, Technology » The 1931 Pierce-Arrow electric motor car that got its energy from thin air.

The 1931 Pierce-Arrow electric motor car that got its energy from thin air.

Posted by PC Latest news, Technology Monday, December 13th, 2010
Nikola Tesla powered this all steel frame and body 1931 Pierce-Arrow with electrical energy that was harnessed from thin air. Not a drop of gasoline or diesel fuel was used. In fact the internal combustion engine was completely removed. No battery banks were used either. This vehicle was driven to speeds of 90 miles per hour with no fossil fuel and just a single 12 volt battery. This infinite and free energy source produces absolutely zero emissions.

Dallas Morning News
The Electric Auto that almost triumphed: Power Source of ‘31 car still a mystery
by A.C. Greene,
January 24th, 1931

It is a mystery car once demonstrated by Nikola Tesla, developer of alternating current, that might have made electrics triumphant.

Supported by the Pierce-Arrow Co. and Westinghouse in 1931, he took the gasoline engine from a new Pierce-Arrow and replaced it with an 80-horsepower alternating-current electric motor with no external power source. From the electric motor trailed two very thick cables, which connected with the dashboard. In addition, there was an ordinary 12-volt storage battery. (”There was a 12-volt Willard battery installed in the car, but it was for the lights only and much too small to run the car. In any case.”) The motor was rated at 80 horsepower. Maximum rotor speed was stated to be 30 turns per second (1800 rpm). A 6-foot vertical antenna rod was fitted into the rear section of the car.

At the appointed time, Nikola Tesla arrived from New York City and inspected the Pierce-Arrow automobile. He then went to a local radio store and purchased a handful of tubes (12 radio vacuum tubes), wires and assorted resistors. A box measuring 24 inches long, 12 inches wide and 6 inches high was assembled housing the circuit. The “power receiver” was then placed into the dashboard of the car and its wires connected to the antenna and to the air-cooled, brushless motor. Two rods 1/4” in diameter stuck out of the box about 3” in length. Tesla began making adjustments on the “power receiver”

Mr. Tesla got into the driver’s seat, pushed the two rods in and stated, “We now have power”. He put the car into gear and it moved forward! This vehicle, powered by an A.C. motor, was driven to speeds of 90 m.p.h. and performed better than any internal combustion engine of its day! One week was spent testing the vehicle. Several newspapers in Buffalo reported this test. When asked where the power came from, Tesla replied, “From the ethers all around us”. (Ethers is Electromagnetic radiation. Radio waves is electromagnetic radiation which has the lowest frequency, the longest wavelength, and is produced by charged particles moving back and forth) Several people suggested that Tesla was mad and somehow in league with sinister forces of the universe. He became incensed, removed his mysterious box from the vehicle and returned to his laboratory in New York City. His secret died with him!

Or did it?

How did ethers power the vehicle? The owner of FuelReducer and editor of this website, Paul W Kincaid, has been trying to answer that question since 2005, when he first read about it in an old magazine he found in a neighbor’s barn. According to data from the 5 years of investigation there is one very plausible explanation as to how ethers powered the car. Research data indicates that Tesla’s mystery box was nothing more than a simple regenerative vacuum tube radio wave receiver. A type of electronic instrument that receives radio frequencies from thin air and amplifies the received weak radio signal. This simple receiver makes use of vacuum tubes, resistors and wires (the exact same electronic components used by Tesla) to increase the power and/or amplitude of a signal. The main component of Tesla’s “Power Receiver” is the vacuum tube – also called a valve amplifier. The simplest valve amplifier was invented by John Ambrose Fleming while working for the Marconi Company in London in 1904 and named the diode, as it had two electrodes. The diode conducted electricity in one direction only and was used as a radio detector and a rectifier. The diode was most likely used as an instrument to convert AC (alternating current is when the movement of electric charge periodically reverses direction) of RF to DC (direct current is the flow of electric charge is only in one direction) In 1906 Lee De Forest added a third electrode and invented the first electronic amplifying device, the triode, which he named the Audion. This additional control grid modulates the current that flows between cathode and anode.

Tesla used valve amplifiers to increase the power or amplitude of the ordinary radio waves that were received by the 6-foot vertical antenna rod that was fitted into the rear section of the car. An antenna is a transducer that transmits or receives electromagnetic waves. In other words, Tesla used the antenna mounted on the rear of the car to convert the freely available electromagnetic waves called radio waves into electrical current.

Tesla bought vacuum tube diodes which are vacuum tubes (valve amplifiers) with two electrodes; a plate and a cathode. A diode is a two-terminal electronic component that conducts electric current in only one direction while blocking current in the opposite direction (the reverse direction). Thus, the diode can be thought of as an electronic version of a check valve. This unidirectional behavior is called rectification, and is used to convert alternating current (AC or the power that comes from your home’s electrical outlets) to direct current (DC or the power from a battery). AC power circuit is a sine wave. Audio and radio signals carried on electrical wires (such as an antenna) are also examples of alternating current.

Tesla used the vacuum tubes, wires and assorted resistors to build a radio wave receiver/amplifier 24 inches long, 12 inches wide and 6 inches high, with a pair of 3-inch rods 1/4” in diameter sticking out. The pair of rods that Tesla pushed in were used to close (complete) the circuit – like an on/off switch. The rod ends were most likely the positive and negative leads (connections) between the car antenna and and the radio wave receiver/amplifier. By pushing them into the box containing the radio wave receiver/amplifier the connection was completed allowing the radio waves that were received from the air by the antenna to flow through the receiver/amplifier to the electric motor. This is like you would do when you plugged an electric guitar into an amplifier. Like the electric guitar amplifier the signal generated by striking a cord (string) of a guitar would travel from the guitar through the wire connecting the guitar to the amplifier and into the amplifier where the barely audible tone would then be amplified. An electric guitar without an amplifier is essential an air guitar until it is plugged into an amplifier. The amplifier amplifies the sound wave generated by striking the strings of the electric guitar. That is basically how Tesla was able to amplify and convert the invisible electromagnetic radiation called radio waves into electricity to power the AC motor in the 1931 Pierce-Arrow. The word electricity comes from the fact that current is nothing more than electrons moving along a conductor, like an antenna, that have been harnessed for energy. Tesla used an antenna (an electrical conductor) and an amplifier to harness and then amplify energy.

Why hasn’t anyone revealed this 80 year old secret? Because Tesla built a free energy device. A device that would threaten the oil industry, the nuclear energy industry and the hydro electric power monopoly. A device that would bankrupt every oil refinery in the World. A device that would literally put an end to Global warming. Disease and illnesses caused by pollution from oil and gas products would simply disappear. If Tesla’s invention was put into mass production the World would never have been involved in wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan, the Exxon Mobil and BP oil spills would never have occurred, and millions of people would still be alive and very healthy today.

Short URL: http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=91

Posted by PC on Dec 13 2010. Filed under Latest news, Technology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

“Liar, Liar! … House On Fire!” … ?

Thursday, May 5th, 2011

Top Government Insider: Bin Laden Died In 2001, 9/11 False Flag Attack

by Paul Joseph Watson

Global Research, May 4, 2011

Infowars.com

Email this article to a friend

Print this article

0digg 1750Share

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations Steve R. Pieczenik says he is prepared to tell a federal grand jury the name of a top general who told him directly 9/11 was a false flag attack

Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.

Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

Recruited by Lawrence Eagleburger as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Management, Pieczenik went on to develop, “the basic tenets for psychological warfare, counter terrorism, strategy and tactics for transcultural negotiations for the US State Department, military and intelligence communities and other agencies of the US Government,” while also developing foundational strategies for hostage rescue that were later employed around the world.

Pieczenik also served as a senior policy planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker and worked on George W. Bush’s election campaign against Al Gore. His record underscores the fact that he is one of the most deeply connected men in intelligence circles over the past three decades plus.

The character of Jack Ryan, who appears in many Tom Clancy novels and was also played by Harrison Ford in the popular 1992 movie Patriot Games, is also based on Steve Pieczenik.

Back in April 2002, over nine years ago, Pieczenik told the Alex Jones Show that Bin Laden had already been “dead for months,” and that the government was waiting for the most politically expedient time to roll out his corpse. Pieczenik would be in a position to know, having personally met Bin Laden and worked with him during the proxy war against the Soviets in Afghanistan back in the early 80′s.

Pieczenik said that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001, “Not because special forces had killed him, but because as a physician I had known that the CIA physicians had treated him and it was on the intelligence roster that he had marfan syndrome,” adding that the US government knew Bin Laden was dead before they invaded Afghanistan.

Marfan syndrome is a degenerative genetic disease for which there is no permanent cure. The illness severely shortens the life span of the sufferer.

“He died of marfan syndrome, Bush junior knew about it, the intelligence community knew about it,” said Pieczenik, noting how CIA physicians had visited Bin Laden in July 2001 at the American Hospital in Dubai.

“He was already very sick from marfan syndrome and he was already dying, so nobody had to kill him,” added Pieczenik, stating that Bin Laden died shortly after 9/11 in his Tora Bora cave complex.

“Did the intelligence community or the CIA doctor up this situation, the answer is yes, categorically yes,” said Pieczenik, referring to Sunday’s claim that Bin Laden was killed at his compound in Pakistan, adding, “This whole scenario where you see a bunch of people sitting there looking at a screen and they look as if they’re intense, that’s nonsense,” referring to the images released by the White House which claim to show Biden, Obama and Hillary Clinton watching the operation to kill Bin Laden live on a television screen.

“It’s a total make-up, make believe, we’re in an American theater of the absurd….why are we doing this again….nine years ago this man was already dead….why does the government repeatedly have to lie to the American people,” asked Pieczenik.http://www.efoodsdirect.com/AdAdmin/abmc.aspx?b=35&z=11

“Osama Bin Laden was totally dead, so there’s no way they could have attacked or confronted or killed Osama Bin laden,” said Pieczenik, joking that the only way it could have happened was if special forces had attacked a mortuary.

Pieczenik said that the decision to launch the hoax now was made because Obama had reached a low with plummeting approval ratings and the fact that the birther issue was blowing up in his face.

“He had to prove that he was more than American….he had to be aggressive,” said Pieczenik, adding that the farce was also a way of isolating Pakistan as a retaliation for intense opposition to the Predator drone program, which has killed hundreds of Pakistanis.

“This is orchestrated, I mean when you have people sitting around and watching a sitcom, basically the operations center of the White House, and you have a president coming out almost zombie-like telling you they just killed Osama Bin Laden who was already dead nine years ago,” said Pieczenik, calling the episode, “the greatest falsehood I’ve ever heard, I mean it was absurd.”

Dismissing the government’s account of the assassination of Bin Laden as a “sick joke” on the American people, Pieczenik said, “They are so desperate to make Obama viable, to negate the fact that he may not have been born here, any questions about his background, any irregularities about his background, to make him look assertive….to re-elect this president so the American public can be duped once again.”

Pieczenik’s assertion that Bin Laden died almost ten years ago is echoed by numerous intelligence professionals as well as heads of state across the world.

Bin Laden, “Was used in the same way that 9/11 was used to mobilize the emotions and feelings of the American people in order to go to a war that had to be justified through a narrative that Bush junior created and Cheney created about the world of terrorism,” stated Pieczenik.

During his interview with the Alex Jones Show yesterday, Pieczenik also asserted he was directly told by a prominent general that 9/11 was a stand down and a false flag operation, and that he is prepared to go to a grand jury to reveal the general’s name.

“They ran the attacks,” said Pieczenik, naming Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Elliott Abrams, and Condoleezza Rice amongst others as having been directly involved.

“It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open,” said Pieczenik, adding that he was “furious” and “knew it had happened”.

“I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public,” he added.

Pieczenik re-iterated that he was perfectly willing to reveal the name of the general who told him 9/11 was an inside job in a federal court, “so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd.”

Pieczenik explained that he was not a liberal, a conservative or a tea party member, merely an American who is deeply concerned about the direction in which his country is heading.

Watch the full interview with Dr. Pieczenik below:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/top-terrorist-hunter-for-u-s-government-wolfowitz-general-told-me-911-was-false-flag.html

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.


Read about Osama Bin Laden in Michel Chossudovsky’s international best-seller

Order Directly from Global Research

America’s “War on Terrorism”
by Michel
Chossudovsky
also available in pdf format