Tag Archives: Financial

Obama Prepares for Dictatorship

10 Aug



The heightened activity in the aftermath of the Norway terror attack indicates the kind of atmosphere where Obama would attempt a dictatorial coup. Everything we do in the coming period will be done to consolidate the forces to prevent that by removing Obama from office without any doubts or second-guesses.


Those who supported Obama’s fascist coup, have committed high treason. As of today, the House has conceded its legally mandated power to a Hitler dictatorship. Our last and final defense against this coup, is full and total commitment to the sudden restoration of Glass-Steagall.


The means Obama used to ram through the “deficit bill”, the Budget Control Act, is parallel to the process by which Hitler established his dictatorship. Is this the past repeating itself? No – today it is much worse.


More info on these topics

The Standard and Poor’s (S&P) Debt Downgrade: What It Means

Bankers Launch Next Leg Of Planned Economic Collapse

T.E.A. Party Terrorists

Council Of 13 To Rule America: Wake Up

Obama sets up facist dictatorship in America with debt deal

Busting Posse Comitatus: Military Cops Arrest Civilians in Florida City


T.E.A. Party Terrorists

10 Aug

T.E.A. Party Terrorists


By Bill Wavering, on August 2nd, 2011Intellectual Conservative

The paradigm is the same. Only the lexicon has changed.

While everyone else has been following the debt ceiling debate in Washington. I knew how it was going to turn out almost before it started. I was certain we would end up with some version of Wimpy’s “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.” phrase from the old Popeye the Sailor cartoons: And that’s exactly what we ended up with.

The President got his $2.4 trillion spending increase to carry him to 2013: And there’s no denying that is exactly what this raising of the debt ceiling means. Literally every administration official has repeated this line. The translation is that this administration means to cozy up to that new limit sometime in the next sixteen months. So the real question is: Why even have a debt limit if we intend to blow through same said limit with malice of forethought?

I’ll not bother to comb through the details of this current piece of legislation as fellow  Intellectual Conservative author Steven Laib has done yeoman’s work in that regard. The only observation I’d like to leave with readers is that this turkey of a deal, oddly enough, all began with the two major parties playing the ideological equivalent of a game of chicken. Only in Washington could politicians begin with chicken and create turkey! It’s like a Republican saying; “I have a really crappy idea!” and then a Democrat retorts; “And I can make that idea even crappier!” complements to comedian Lewis Black.

Since I had already predicted the outcome of this debacle for myself; I decided to focus on the rhetoric being generated during this catastrophe. I don’t mind telling everyone that I wasn’t in the least bit disappointed.

It is, by now, conventional wisdom that the progressive left has been casting about looking for the ultimate pejorative with which to broad brush the T.E.A. Party. In 2009 then House Speaker Nancy ‘National Mama’ Pelosi described us as ‘astro-turf’ proving at once the Freudism that progressives will most readily accuse their ideological opponents of doing what they would be most willing to do themselves. Can anyone say Wisconsin?

While the paradigm has stayed mind-numbingly the same, the lexicon has been accelerating in tandem with the popularity of the T.E.A. Party.  The next phase was to invent the depreciatory title of ‘teabagger’.  Oh, did the left ever have a good time with that one!  For months you couldn’t turn on MSBC or HBO without Chris Matthews or Bill Maher treating us to endless renditions of oratory containing this invective.  For me, the most humorous aspect of all this was that it was so completely outside the experience of the very people they intended to incite with this language. They themselves were the only ones’, if you’ll excuse the phrase, that were intimate with the expression. I found myself ROTFLMAO each time I heard one of these smug pundits deliver this nostrum.

The next attempt was to paint the T.E.A. Party as inherently a group of violent racists. (Probably the most shopworn progressive accusation ever conceived.) This began as far back as March of 2010 when the aforementioned ‘National Mama’ Pelosi and her traitorous bunch of cohorts decided to deliberately traipse through a group of T.E.A. Party protestors in Washington in hopes of deliberately inciting somebody, anybody, to violence during the health care vote. African American Congressional Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) accused T.E.A. Party activists of spitting on him; although when asked to do so, he couldn’t produce any pictorial evidence of the event despite the plethora of cell-phone cameras and the prodigious amount of digital video recordings made by the MSM. To my knowledge, he’s never withdrawn the accusation despite the dearth of evidence to support his contention.  Interestingly enough, no evidence appeared even when Andrew Breitbart offered a significant reward for anyone bringing it forward.

Remember Joseph Stack? The progressive left combed exhaustively through his 34 paragraph ramblings in vain looking for a T.E.A. Party connection. The closest they could come was the declaration by Jonathan Capehart that he was; “…struck by how his alienation is similar to that we’re hearing from the extreme elements of the Tea Party movement.” A real reach indeed as I fail to recall exactly where in his diatribe Joseph Stack called for Washington to stop spending money they didn’t have. They likewise tried to connect Jared Lee Loughner; the person who shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, to the movement without success.

Now we’ve arrived at the current timeframe. During the just-ended debt ceiling battle in Washington we have one progressive pundit after another openly shaking their heads at T.E.A. Party Congressmen and Congresswomen because they just cannot wrap their ideology around the idea the representatives would;

A.   Come to Washington to actually represent the constituents that elected them. (Gasp!)

B.    Actually stand on a principle and not budge. (Double gasp!)

C.    Not be cajoled, threatened, nor browbeaten into selling out either A. or B.

Whatever is a progressive to do now? They certainly cannot belittle these people as so hopelessly out-of-touch that they actually hold to either a promise or principle. Such an allegation probably wouldn’t fool anyone and might even backfire among some of the more educated independents. They had to come up with something to allow them to continue to paint these citizen legislators, throwbacks to an earlier age, as extremists.

So, they label these persons as ‘unfit to govern a la Chris Van Hollen (Rep, D-Md.) who said as much. Or how about our Vice President Joe Biden; who said the T.E.A. Party representatives had; “…acted like terrorists.” MSNBC pundit Chris Matthews accused T.E.A. Party representatives of being the; “scary Wahhabis of American Government.” Or Bob Beckel who has been doing his level best to coin the phrase “T.E.A. Terrorist Party” on Fox News.

Such rhetoric is actually laughable when you consider the fact that these ad hominem attacks are all originating from people who cannot ever identify an ACTUAL terrorist as a terrorist. “The Palestinians are actually an oppressed people! The Taliban are actually freedom fighters! If we could just talk with al Qaeda, we could reach a mutual understanding.” Really?

I’m going to leave my progressive friends with a last thought. This one, boys and girls, is a freebie; it’s on the house. I don’t have any problem with sharing this insight with you as I am certain all ya’ll are too hubristic to take advice from anyone, let alone a T.E.A. Party Terrorist like me.

Each and every time one of your ilk gets in front of a camera and/or a microphone and wails, rends their garments, and declares that they are the only thing standing between the T.E.A. Party’s destruction of America and the sanity of progressivism we get a tingle up our leg!

The more shrill and outlandish the invective, the more certain we are that we’re having the proper effect. See, we broke the code long ago. We know that you reserve the most vicious of attacks for those persons or groups you most fear. This is exactly why all ya’ll loved John McCain so much in 2008. You wanted him as the Republican challenger because you knew that against him even the most vacuous progressive candidate; and let’s face it kids, no one was more vacuous than Barack Obama, could win the election.

You hate Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann. Why? Because they truly frighten you. Because they are independent women that have raised families and conquered political careers as well. Women whose names would be your rallying cry as to what true feminists could be if only they weren’t damn conservatives! Believe me: I’ll take the likes (and the looks) of a Sarah Palin or a Michele Bachmann over a Hillary Clinton or a Nancy Pelosi any day!

The more you caterwaul, scream, and threaten; the more successful we know we’ve become. Nothing motivates us more than to see a member of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party going absolutely apoplectic in public!

So keep up the vilification; please. The more you rant the more effective I promise we’ll grow to be. All ya’ll are done in 2012.

Ron Paul: “Crazy old man” or analytical clairvoyant?

10 Aug


Aaron Alghawi , Brazos County Conservative Examiner

Ron Paul: Crazy old man or analytical clairvoyant?  With GOP contenders battling it out for the chance to face President Barack Obama in 2012, the once “cult-following” of Texas Congressman Ron Paul has turned into a base large enough to consider him one of the frontrunners. Having a massive Facebook following, the second highest 2nd quarter funds raised after former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and recent poll victories such as the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll; Paul’s more than 30 year old message of individual liberty, sound money and free markets is resonating with an ever larger audience.

Of course with this popularity comes criticism. Too many Republican voters and self-described “Constitutional conservatives”—at least those I’ve come across—have been quick to describe the libertarian-minded congressman as “kooky” and a “crazy old man”. Their primary focus is on foreign policy but some on economics as well. Despite Paul’s fervent belief in Thomas Jefferson’s philosophy of avoiding “entangling alliances”, these conservatives often paint him as a “liberal”. Perhaps liberal in the classical sense like John Stuart Mill, but certainly not in the modern-day so-called liberalism of persons like President Obama, Ed Schultz, and Alan Colmes.

Many rumors are spread by the anti-Paul conservatives. Paul supporters are often referred to as “PaulBots”—ironically similar to author Jason Materra’s term “Obama Zombies” used in the book of the same name—although save for a few kooky and loud conspiracy theorists, Paul supporters tend to be better at justifying their support for the jolly old man than do the Obama Zombies. Paul is often mischaracterized as a bigot, even though there is no evidence to support this ad hominem attack.

But what the anti-Paul conservatives—usually of the interventionist line of foreign policy thinking that is commonly referred to as neoconservatism, though having its roots in Woodrow Wilson—fail to do is actually look at what Paul’s foreign policy positions are and have been and see if they have any connection to reality.  Paul’s years of studying the Austrian School of Economics have had a surprising effect on his analytical skills when it comes to foreign policy.

Recently, Ron Paul supporters posted a video to Youtube entitled “Ron Paul the Master”. It shows a collection of speeches and interviews in which Ron Paul makes some stunning predictions about our current economic woes and even international conflicts of the present. And he does this as far back as 2002. Of course no one gave him the time of day.

Let’s analyze one of these speeches, which begins at 3 minutes into the video and was presented before congress on April 24, 2002.

“Our government intervention in the economy and in the private affairs of citizens, and the internal affairs of foreign countries, leads to uncertainty and many unintended consequences. Here are some of the consequences about which we should be concerned.

The United States, with Tony Blair as head cheerleader, will attack Iraq without proper authority, and a major war, the largest since World War II, will result.

Major moves will be made by China, India, Russia, and Pakistan in Central Asia to take advantage of the chaos for the purpose of grabbing land, resources, and strategic advantages sought after for years.”

This is absolutely true. The chaos gave us many unexpected problems. Al Qaeda’s presence in Iraq grew after the invasion. And the country is now under Shiite control, moving it dangerously close to Iran. In 2002, Iran’s president was the more philosophically minded Mohammed Khatami…but now we have an anti-Semitic loudmoth, Ahmedinejad. Russia has moved into Iran to build an energy alliance. Vladimir Putin, and his cronies in Gazprom and Lukoil would love to gain control of the natural resources in Iran and Russia has been helping the Islamic Republic develop nuclear technology which US intelligence believes is being developed for destructive purposes. Let’s hope and pray they are wrong.

China and Pakistan have certainly taken advantage of the chaos. Not only is their alliance stronger, but the oil contracts in Iraq are going to—guess who—China! Kind of debunks the whole left-wing moonbattery that Iraq was “blood for oil”.

You can find more detail in these articles:




“Current Israeli-United States policies will solidify Arab Muslim nations, this will include those Muslim nations that in the past have fought against each other.

Some of our moderate Arab allies will be overthrown by Islamic fundamentalists.”

What exactly do you think the “Arab Spring” is? Peaceful democratic people overthrowing dictators? Not quite. The Muslim Brotherhood, a precursor to Hamas, has founded its own political party in Egypt; it is possible these theocrats will gain significant power in the new government. Let’s not forget that Libyan and Yemeni rebels have been linked to Al Qaeda. Just the other day the new Al Qaeda cheif Ayman Al-Zawahiri was lauding the rioters in Syria.

And certainly the dictators—such as Gaddafi and Mubarak—aren’t moderate in the eyes of their own people, but often American politicians have viewed them as such. Useful when we need them, disposable when we don’t as Mobutu Sese Seko and Saddam Hussein once were.

“Many American military personnel and civilians will be killed in the coming conflict.

The leaders of whichever side loses the war will be hauled into and tried before the International Criminal Court for war crimes. The United States will not officially lose the war, but neither will we win. Our military and political leaders will not be tried by the International Criminal Court”

This wasn’t entirely true, Saddam was tried by his own people. But did we really “win” the war. We turned the country over to the Shiite theocrats instead of secularists and now those people are getting close to Iran.

“An international dollar crisis will dramatically boost interest rates in the United States.”


Price inflation, with a major economic downturn, will decimate U.S. Federal Government finances, and exploding deficits and uncontrolled spending.”

Ah yes, remember when that Burger King value meal was around $3.

“Federal Reserve policy will continue at an expanding rate, with massive credit expansion, which will make the dollar crisis worse. Gold will be seen as an alternative to paper money as it returns to its historic role as money.”
Though Bernanke has kept interest rates low, there is the prospect of T-Bill interest rates going up with the forthcoming debt crisis. There has been a dollar devaluation of 40% against the Euro since this 2002 speech, nearly 14% since June 2010 alone according to an article in The Washington Post.

Quantitative easing most definitely contributed to the high gas prices we see today. If you think it was all the fault of this “Arab Spring”, take a look at the Commodity Price Index some time. This freshly “recycled” dough being put in the hands of speculators causes them to artificially drive up the price of oil and other commodities, some of which are being bought as a hedge against the falling dollar; quite the vicious cycle.

As for gold, when Congressman Paul gave this speech gold was roughly $300 per ounce and today it stands at more than $1615 per ounce; you can check out the historical data on gold prices here.

That’s a whopping 438% increase.

“Erosion of civil liberties here at home will continue as our government responds to political fear in dealing with the terrorist threat by making generous use of the powers obtained with the Patriot Act.

The Congress and the President will shift radically toward expanding the size and scope of the Federal Government. This will satisfy both the liberals and the conservatives.

Military and police powers will grow, satisfying the conservatives. The welfare state, both domestic and international, will expand, satisfying the liberals. Both sides will endorse military adventurism overseas.”

The president today has the power to order the assassination American citizens, as in the case of Anwar Al-Awlaki—traitorous as he may be, this is wrong. The Constitution has rules for punishing those who commit treason. But President Obama has ignored this and has ordered him to be killed if possible with drone strikes in Yemen.
The welfare state has expanded significantly. A new, unaffordable addition to Medicare under Bush 43 was passed. And we saw more than a trillion dollars of so called economic stimulus under Nancy Pelosi and the combined presidencies of Bush and Obama, that’s not even including Obama’s wasteful and unpopular health care overhaul. Not to mention billions of foreign aid to countries, some of which—such as Pakistan—are less than trustworthy.

“This is the most important of my predictions: Policy changes could prevent all of the previous predictions from occurring. Unfortunately, that will not occur. In due course, the Constitution will continue to be steadily undermined and the American Republic further weakened

During the next decade, the American people will become poorer and less free, while they become more dependent on the government for economic security.

The war will prove to be divisive, with emotions and hatred growing between the various factions and special interests that drive our policies in the Middle East.”

The middle east is on fire right now. The Israelis are more concerned for their security than ever before. Meanwhile the Saudi lobby pushes us to deal with Iran, with the hopes that they can beat the Islamic Republic in terms of spheres of influence in this theocratic mess of a region.

“Agitation from more class warfare will succeed in dividing us domestically, and believe it or not, I expect lobbyists will thrive more than ever during the dangerous period of chaos.”

This one is self evident. Class warfare is a weapon of distraction used by those who wish to expand the size of government while fat cats at firms such as General Electric, Goldman Sachs, and BP fatten their wallets thanks to government’s policy of picking winners and losers via loopholes and subsidies. The administration may talk the talk, but just take a look at Obama’s campaign contributions and how cozy he is with Jeffrey Immelt; how GE almost got away with paying no taxes, and how a former Goldman Sachs legal adviser with no judicial experience now sits on the Supreme Court.

In addition, a piece was posted two days later, here, containing more words than in the video, which appears as if it may have been cropped to save time. Some of the predictions in that post, such as a reinstatement of the draft did not come true (thank God), but there is one of note that have somewhat come to fruition

“Some European countries will clandestinely support the Muslim countries and their anti-Israel pursuits.”

If you go on YouTube and read the comments sections on almost any video relating to middle eastern politics, you will find that it is a cesspool of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric, and many of the people making these comments are living in Europe. You can take my word for it as a person of Middle Eastern descent who keeps up with these things, or you can check it out yourself. The barbaric theocrats of Hamas are given the benefit of the doubt by many YouTube in the UK, France, Germany and Greece, while the Israelis are fallaciously smeared as “genocidal” and heartless.

Ron Paul’s predictions show a deep understanding of not just economics, but human emotions in the geopolitical world. Those who dismiss him as a “nut” and on the fringe would be wise to thoroughly read this article before making such a judgment. The facts are on his side, and he truly does seem to know what he is talking about.

Dr. Paul concludes with:

“I have no timetable for these predictions, but just in case, keep them around and look at them in 5 to 10 years. Let us hope and pray that I am wrong on all accounts. If so, I will be very pleased.”

Well, 2012 will be ten years in. You weren’t wrong on all accounts Ron, in fact, you were right on a great many of them. We should all be most displeased that these predictions came true.

Continue reading on Examiner.com Ron Paul: “Crazy old man” or analytical clairvoyant? – Houston Brazos County Conservative | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/brazos-county-conservative-in-houston/ron-paul-crazy-old-man-or-analytical-clairvoyant#ixzz1TsE7vAaQ


10 Aug

by Ron Paul

One might think that the recent drama over the debt ceiling involves one side wanting to increase or maintain spending with the other side wanting to drastically cut spending, but that is far from the truth. In spite of the rhetoric being thrown around, the real debate is over how much government spending will increase.

No plan under serious consideration cuts spending in the way you and I think about it. Instead, the “cuts” being discussed are illusory, and are not cuts from current amounts being spent, but cuts in projected spending increases. This is akin to a family “saving” $100,000 in expenses by deciding not to buy a Lamborghini, and instead getting a fully loaded Mercedes, when really their budget dictates that they need to stick with their perfectly serviceable Honda. But this is the type of math Washington uses to mask the incriminating truth about their unrepentant plundering of the American people.


29 Jul

CBS News


President Obama on Tuesday said he cannot guarantee that retirees will receive their Social Security checks August 3 if Democrats and Republicans in Washington do not reach an agreement on reducing the deficit in the coming weeks.

“I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven’t resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley, according to excerpts released by CBS News.

The Obama administration and many economists have warned of economic catastrophe if the United States does not raise the amount it is legally allowed to borrow by August 2.

Lawmakers from both parties want to use the threat of that deadline to work out a broader package on long-term deficit reduction, with Republicans looking to cut trillions of dollars in federal spending, while Democrats are pushing for a more “balanced approach,” which would include both spending cuts and increased revenue through taxes.

The Debt Limit fight: A primer

Democratic and Republican lawmakers are expected to hold another round of negotiations with Mr. Obama at the White House Tuesday afternoon on long-term deficit reduction, though talks have yielded little results to date.

Mr. Obama told Pelley “this is not just a matter of Social Security checks. These are veterans checks, these are folks on disability and their checks. There are about 70 million checks that go out.”

More from the interview:

Mr. Obama’s comments followed remarks from the Senate’s top Republican, who said Tuesday that he did not see a way for Republicans and Democrats to come to agreement on meaningful deficit reduction as long as Mr. Obama remains in office.

“After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor.

Still, McConnell said Republicans would “do the responsible thing” to avoid default, suggesting that a deal on the debt ceiling could be reached without a “real” deficit reduction package.

“The president has presented us with three choices: smoke and mirrors, tax hikes, or default. Republicans choose none of the above. I had hoped to do good, but I refuse to do harm. So Republicans will choose a path that actually reflects the will of the people, which is to do the responsible thing and ensure that the government doesn’t default on its obligations,” he said.

Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3

Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3

Mr. Obama has repeatedly said he wants a deal that would allow the U.S. to avoid confronting the issue again until after the 2012 elections and vowed on Monday that he would “not sign a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day extension.”

“This the United States of America and, you know, we don’t manage our affairs in three-month increments. You know, we don’t risk U.S. default on our obligations because we can’t put politics aside,” Mr. Obama told reporters at the White House yesterday.


28 Jul


Residents must fight for land, libertyBy David Kempf
The Norman Transcript

NORMAN — The No. 1 thing our governments — at all levels — should be champions and guardians of is the liberty of the people they represent. Our history teaches us (if nothing else) that the world has included — and does include — countless thieving men and women whose sole motivation in life is to conquer other people and steal their substance, their land and, perhaps, their very lives.

Before the Norman City Council decides to abscond from the residents of Norman large parcels of land and proscribe further dictation on how they may use the land, they should explain in outstandingly unimpeachable detail exactly how the reduction in residents’ liberty is justified.

The self-evident statement is applicable to both the Storm Water Master Plan and the Land Use 2025 plan adopted in a previous year. City Hall has failed to do so for either one of these “plans.”

Even if the city of Norman has little or no respect for the liberty of deed holders in Oklahoma, they ought to — at least — have respect for the value and purpose of eminent-domain laws and compensate the deed holders for the land grab.

The city council is not honest and has no intentions of compensating anyone. Of course, they don’t have the money — who would voluntarily give it to them?

According to our resident expert (a scientific consensus of one), Lake Thunderbird is “on life support” because of “dangerously high levels of Chlorophyll-a” produced by algae living in the lake, “seven times more … than the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality allows,” and “can likely be attributed to phosphorus-based fertilizers, which are washed into Lake Thunderbird from Norman and parts of Moore and Oklahoma City when it rains.”

These are the arguments used to justify extracting from people the liberty to use the land for which they supposedly have the exclusive right to use by deed from the state. None of them have the merit to justify the absconding of liberty.

If Lake Thunderbird is on life support, who is providing it? God, perhaps? Why don’t you thank him, instead of trying to find ways to take over doing what he, apparently, likes doing? If you are not literal, what kind of literary device is this, and what kind of response is it supposed to engender? Fear? So you can save us by denying us our liberty?

Dangerously high levels? Has someone died? Is someone sick because of Chlorophyll-a? Is our treatment plant not adequate to treat the water? Is there no treatment for Chlorophyll-a? Is trampling all over liberty the only way to solve this problem?

Seven-times allowable? Are we breaking other laws by treating the water and using it? If so, should we not be challenging those laws, since the water is, apparently, drinkable? Are we mandated by the state or federal government to deny deed holder rights because of all that Chlorophyll-a? I don’t let my pet dog dictate to me what to do with and how to use my land. Am I supposed to let some algae do so, under order of a municipal government?

Can this likely be attributed to phosphorous-based fertilizer? What does that mean? Do you have some actual unimpeachable proof that it is caused by owners of deeds of lands (in the Norman area, in the watershed) pouring fertilizer out on their land? Is there any proof that such fertilizer didn’t originate solely from lands outside the city of Norman’s boundary, say Moore and Oklahoma City? Only unimpeachable proof could possibly be used to deny the people of any of their liberty, at least in a place where people value freedom.

Is there any unimpeachable proof the abundant Chlorophyll-a is the result of fertilizer runoff in the watershed? How is it that one year in the last 10 produced “acceptable” levels of Chlorophyll-a? Is it because no one spread fertilizer that year? Is there any other thing possible under the sun that could have caused it? Please answer this and all possible such questions before you forever deny me my liberty to use the land as I choose.

Are you not sick of needle-necked governments telling you what to eat for dinner, how to use your property, how to run your lives? Are you not tired of the “redistribution” of wealth that occurs when they forcibly take your substance to use for themselves or so they can give it to some unfortunate soul they deem more worthy of it than you? Are you not tired of their arrogance yet?

It appears the motivation behind the land grab comes from the United Nations, which would like to be the government for the entire inhabited world, by definition. The U.N. has spawned a group called the ICLEI, “Local Governments for Sustainability,” whose purpose is to infiltrate local municipalities like Norman and drown the residents into submission through taxes, code compliance and bureaucracy. A number of their stated goals are purely Marxist, and they are publicly calling for the more “radical” takeover of city agendas. The ICLEI has additionally spawned numerous local chapter organizations that adhere to their indoctrination process called “Agenda 21.” The ICLEI claims Norman as a member. A simple search engine query will take you to their home page.

The residents of Edmond recently found out their city government had been infiltrated by these communists and freedom haters who were set to subject the people to the U.N. global agenda. The residents of Edmond halted the progress in December 2010, and we in Norman can, too. We cannot only halt them, we can undo every bit of the damage they have done to our liberty so far. A complete review of the ICLEI’s one-world global agenda and method of operation, as well as a detailed review of all the acts over the last 25 years of our city council, would be in order.

I love Norman, and I love Oklahoma. I love the people of Oklahoma. I’m sure you do, too. Let’s not let them abscond with our liberty even one more time.

David Kempf is a son of God, Bible student, resident of and deed holder in Norman, practicing scientist, business owner and holder of a B.A. in Mathematics and an M.S. in Computer Science from the University of Oklahoma.

British Government Devised Propaganda Campaign To Downplay Fukushima

5 Jul

Just 48 hours after the onset of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, the British government devised a propaganda campaign to downplay the severity of the crisis, a talking point that was hastily parroted by leading global warming alarmist George Monbiot.

“Internal emails seen by the Guardian show how the business and energy departments worked closely behind the scenes with the multinational companies EDF Energy, Areva and Westinghouse to try to ensure the accident did not derail their plans for a new generation of nuclear stations in the UK,” reports Rob Edwards.

“We need to ensure the anti-nuclear chaps and chapesses do not gain ground on this. We need to occupy the territory and hold it. We really need to show the safety of nuclear,” wrote one official at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).

Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith labeled the complicity between the government and the nuclear industry in downplaying the crisis “appalling,” while Greenpeace’s Louise Hutchins said the emails provided evidence of “scandalous collusion”.

“Anti-nuclear people across Europe have wasted no time blurring this all into Chernobyl and the works,” said the BIS official in another email. “We need to quash any stories trying to compare this to Chernobyl.”

While this PR blitz was being coordinated, we now know that the Japanese government was deliberately lying about the severity of the radiation release from Fukushima in an effort to conceal the fact that the crisis was already on a par with Chernobyl.

Within just two weeks of the earthquake and tsunami that crippled the nuclear plant, the amount of radiation released from Fukushima already rivaled that of Chernobyl, the worst nuclear disaster up until that point.

Reactors number 1 was also in meltdown just hours into the disaster, but this was denied for months by the authorities.

The government’s public relations campaign to downplay the severity of the crisis was enthusiastically parroted by many quarters of the man-made global warming crowd, eager as they were to not let focus slip away from the deadly threat posed by the life-giving gas carbon dioxide, to the point where people like George Monbiot almost went so far as to characterize radiation as harmless and nutritious.

In the days and weeks after Fukushima, Monbiot, perhaps Britain’s foremost global warming alarmist, wrote a series of articles for the Guardian in which he made accusations that others had “wildly exaggerated the dangers of radioactive pollution”.

“As a result of the disaster at Fukushima, I am no longer nuclear-neutral. I now support the technology,” wrote Monbiot.

In response, nuclear expert Christopher Busby called Monbiot “criminally irresponsible” for encouraging his readers to ignore the threat posed by Fukushima radiation.

Monbiot’s rhetoric, in addition to the British government’s efforts to downplay the crisis, serve as a stark reminder that many leading environmentalists don’t give a damn about real threats to the environment, preferring instead to spend all their time obsessing about carbon dioxide emissions and thinking up new ways to exploit global warming fearmongering as a means of controlling every aspect of our lives.

This is an agenda enthusiastically pushed by the British government, which routinely works in consort with big think tanks to promote PR campaigns aimed at rescuing the anthropogenic climate change myth, about which Brits are becoming increasingly skeptical.

The most recent examples were the 10:10 campaign, which simulated executing children who refused to believe in man-made global warming, as well as the “Planned-opolis” scenario, which depicted a future totalitarian world of CO2 rationing, where big government on steroids would enforce a dictatorial eco-fascist nightmare.