The plan was to kill uncle Sam with paper all along!

The Biggest Ponzi Scheme In The History Of The World

Did you know that you are involved in the most massive Ponzi scheme that has ever existed?  To illustrate my point, allow me to tell you a little story.

Once upon a time, there was a man named Sam.  When he was younger, he had been a very principled young man that had worked incredibly hard and that had built a large number of tremendously successful businesses.  He became fabulously wealthy and he accumulated far more gold than anyone else on the planet.

But when he started to get a little older he forgot the values of his youth.  He started making really bad decisions and some of his relatives started to take advantage of him.  One particularly devious relative was a nephew named Fred.  One day Fred approached his uncle Sam with a scheme that his friends the bankers had come up with.  What happened next would change the course of Sam’s life forever.

Even though Sam was the wealthiest man in the world by far, Fred convinced Sam that he could have an even higher standard of living by going into a little bit of debt.  In exchange for IOUs issued by his uncle Sam, Fred would give him paper notes that he printed off on his printing press.  Since the paper notes would be backed by the goldthat Sam was holding, everyone would consider them to be valuable.  Sam could take those paper notes and spend them on whatever his heart desired.  Uncle Sam started to do this, and he started to become addicted to all of the nice things that those paper notes would buy him.

Fred took the IOUs that he received from his uncle and he auctioned them off to the bankers.  But there was a problem.  The IOUs issued by Uncle Sam had to be paid back with interest.  When the time came to pay back the IOUs, Uncle Sam could not afford to pay back the debts, pay the interest on those debts, and buy all of the nice things that he wanted.  So Uncle Sam issued even more IOUs than before so that he could get enough notes to pay off his debts.  As time rolled on, this pattern just kept on repeating.  Uncle Sam repeatedly paid off his old debts by taking out even larger new debts.

Meanwhile, since the notes that Uncle Sam was using were backed by gold, everyone else in the world decided to start using them to trade with one another.  This was greatly beneficial to Uncle Sam, because the rest of the world was glad to send him oil, homeelectronics, plastic trinkets and anything else that Uncle Sam wanted in exchange for his gold-backed notes.

Eventually, however, the rest of the world started to suspect that the number of gold-backed notes that Uncle Sam was issuing far exceeded the amount of gold that Uncle Sam actually had.  So the rest of the world started to trade in their notes for gold.

And by that time Uncle Sam definitely did not have enough gold to back up his notes.  Realizing that the scheme was starting to collapse, one day Uncle Sam announced that his notes would no longer be backed by gold.  But he insisted that the rest of the world should continue using his notes because he was the wealthiest man on the planet and everyone should just trust him.

And the rest of the world did continue to trust him, although it wasn’t the same as before.

As Uncle Sam got greedier and greedier, he started to issue IOUs and spend notes at a rate that nobody ever dreamed possible.  The great businesses that Uncle Sam had built when he was younger were starting to decline, and Uncle Sam started buying far more stuff from the rest of the world than they bought from him.  The rest of the world was still glad to take Uncle Sam’s notes because they used them to trade with one another, but they started accumulating far more notes than they actually needed.

Not sure exactly what to do with mountains of these notes, the rest of the world started to loan them back to Uncle Sam.  It eventually got to the point where Uncle Sam owedthe rest of the world trillions of these notes.  Even though the notes were losing value at a rate of close to 10 percent a year, Uncle Sam somehow convinced the rest of the world to loan him notes at an average rate of interest of less than 3 percent a year.

One day Uncle Sam woke up and realized that the amount of debt that he owed was now more than 5000 times larger than it was when Fred had first approached him with this ill-fated scheme.  Uncle Sam now owed more than 16 trillion notes to his creditors, and Uncle Sam had already made future financial commitments of 202 trillion notes that he would never be able to pay.  Meanwhile, the notes that Fred had been printing up for Uncle Sam were now worth less than 5 percent of their original value.  Uncle Sam was becoming concerned because some of his other relatives were warning that this whole scheme was about to collapse.

Sadly, Uncle Sam did not listen to them.  Uncle Sam knew that if he admitted how fraudulent the financial scheme was, the rest of the world would quit sending him all of the things that he needed in exchange for his notes and they would quit lending his notes back to him at super low interest rates.

And if the rest of the world lost confidence in his notes and quit using them, Uncle Sam knew that his standard of living would go way, way down.  That was something that Uncle Sam could not bear to have happen.

When a financial crisis almost caused the scheme to crash in 2008, a desperate Uncle Sam went to Fred and asked for help.  In response, Fred started printing up far more notes than ever before and started directly buying up large amounts of IOUs from Uncle Sam with the notes that he was creating out of thin air.  Fred hoped that the rest of the world would not notice what he was doing.

It seemed to work for a little while, but then an even worse financial crisis came along.  Once again, Uncle Sam started issuing massive amounts of new IOUs and Fred startedprinting up giant mountains of new notes to try to fix things, but their desperate attempts to keep the system going were to no avail.  The rest of the world started to realize that they had been sucked into a massive Ponzi scheme, and they lost confidence in the notes that Uncle Sam was using.  Suddenly nobody wanted to lend notes to Uncle Sam at super low interest rates anymore, and people started asking for far more notes in exchange for the things that Uncle Sam wanted.

Uncle Sam’s standard of living dropped dramatically.  Since he could no longer flood the world with his notes, Uncle Sam could not continue to consume far, far more wealth than he produced.  Uncle Sam sunk into a deep depression as he watched the scheme fall apart all around him.

Uncle Sam had once been the wealthiest man on the entire planet, but now he was a broke, tired old man that was absolutely drowning in debt.  Unfortunately, once he was down on his luck the rest of the world did not have any compassion for him.  In fact, much of the rest of the world celebrated the downfall of Uncle Sam.

All of this could have been avoided if Uncle Sam had never agreed to Fred’s crazy scheme.  And once Uncle Sam made the decision to stop backing his notes with gold, it was only a matter of time before the scheme was going to collapse.

Does this little story sound crazy to you?  It shouldn’t.  The truth is that you are involved in such a scheme right now.  In case you haven’t figured it out, “Uncle Sam” is the United States, the “notes” are U.S. dollars, and “Fred” is the Federal Reserve.

Please share this story with as many people as you can.  Our country is headed for complete and total financial disaster, and we need to get people educated about this while there is still time.

Read more at http://www.secretsofthefed.com/the-biggest-ponzi-scheme-in-the-history-of-the-world/#BK7WrYxZUjZv2iXX.99

Radical Islamist rebels, that Obama supports, kill Syrian boy over an innocent joke

Radical Islamist rebels were said to have committed 9/11 but Obama supports Radical Islamist rebels over the Syrian government. Does that make sense to anyone?

Mother of Syrian Boy Says Rebels Killed Son Over a Joke Mentioning Muhammad

Jun. 23, 2013 11:02am Sharona Schwartz

The mother of the 14-year-old Syrian boy shot dead by rebel fighters earlier this month says her son was killed for making a little joke that referred to the prophet Muhammad.

As TheBlaze – citing the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights – reported earlier this month, Mohammed Qataa was believed to have been killed after being overheard saying during an argument that “Even if the Prophet Muhammad comes down (from heaven), I will not become a believer” – words that were deemed by his killers to be blasphemous.

His mother Nadia Umm Fuad has now given an interview to The Telegraph, in which she shares details of the execution she witnessed, and reveals that her son was targeted by radical Islamist rebels over an innocent joke.

Various media report that the boy highlighted in the center is Mohammed Qataa (YouTube screenshot via Voice of Russia)

The Telegraph reports that Qataa was working in his family coffee stall in Aleppo when he made a fatal mistake:

Pressured by a customer to hand over a coffee on promise of payment, he shouted good-humouredly: “I wouldn’t give the Prophet Mohammed credit if he came here today.” He was overheard by two men on the opposite corner. Marching over, they whisked him away in a car, ignoring his protestations of his love for the Prophet and the objections of a militiaman from the Free Syrian Army nearby. Half an hour later, they returned. According to Mohammed’s younger brother and the neighbours, he was staggering and fell to his knees, and had clearly been beaten. A bag had been placed over his head.

“I heard them say, ‘People of Aleppo and people of Shaar! Anyone who curses God is given three days to repent. Anyone who curses the Prophet is killed immediately’,” Nadia Umm Fuad said.

Umm Fuad recounts that she was at home when her neighbors called for her to come down.

“I said to his father, they are going to shoot your son! Come! Come! Come! I was on the stairs when I heard the first shot. I was at the door when I heard the second shot,” Qataa’s mother says.

Her pleas to spare her son went unheeded: “I saw the third shot. I was shouting, ‘That’s haram, forbidden! Stop! Stop! You are killing a child.’ But they just gave me a dirty look and got into their car. As they went, they drove over my son’s arm, as he lay there dying,” she says.

The Obama administration earlier this month decided to provide military support to rebels fighting President Bashar Assad, after it said Syria had crossed a “red line” by using chemical weapons. But stories like the jihadi rebels killing 14-year-old Qataa over an apparent joke raises concern that extremist groups out of line with American values might end up getting their hands on American weapons.

As The Telegraph writes, “He has become a symbol of the fears many Syrians have for the future of a country where jihadists are vying with the regime for control.”

The paper also explains that though Al Qaeda-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra [the Al-Nusra Front] has been operating in Syria, it “is no longer the most militant group operating in Aleppo, strange though that sounds.”

And in fact, the Al-Nusra Front condemned Qataa’s killing and denied responsibility.

Extraordinary measures used to ensure Barak Hussein Obama Presidency—blackmailed even him too

Normally the ‘real rulers of this world’ choose a democrat and a republican and let them duke it out for the presidency, it doesn’t usually matter to them who wins since they control both parties but there was something about the installation of Barak Hussein Obama that was different, he was the chosen one!

I remember when he and Hillary were fighting it out. It was close but she had an ace up her sleeves—the super delegates, everyone was certain they would side with her.

Then she and Obama were whisked away secretly to the Bilderberg meeting one night. I remember because Obama left the press waiting on his campaign plane, waiting for him but he never showed up. They were in a tizzy about being stood up.

Immediately afterwards the worm turned, super delegate Ted Kennedy surprised everyone by throwing his support behind Obama…other super delegates followed suit and the rest is history!

One thing I surmise from this is that Obama was the perfect one to carry out their plans at this specific time. Was it because, as a Kenyan, he has no allegiance to America and could be pushed to accelerate the destruction of America with no hint of conscience at all.

Although It’s hard to think that there is someone more evil than the Bushes and the Clintons, maybe they set things up and Obama was brought in for the kill!

Bush-Era NSA Whistleblower Makes Most Explosive Allegations Yet About Extent of Gov’t Surveillance — and You Won’t Believe Who He Says They Spied On

Jun. 20, 2013 8:09pm Jason Howerton

Russ Tice (Wikipedia)

Russ Tice, a former intelligence analyst and Bush-era NSA whistleblower, claimed Wednesday that the intelligence community has ordered surveillance on a wide range of groups and individuals, including high-ranking military officials, lawmakers and diplomats.

He also made another stunning allegation. He says the NSA had ordered wiretaps on phones connected to then-Senate candidate Barack Obama back in 2004.

“They went after–and I know this because I had my hands literally on the paperwork for these sort of things–they went after high-ranking military officers; they went after members of Congress, both Senate and the House, especially on the intelligence committees and on the armed services committees and some of the–and judicial,” Tice told Peter B. Collins on Boiling Frog Post News.

He went on: “But they went after other ones, too. They went after lawyers and law firms. All kinds of–heaps of lawyers and law firms. They went after judges. One of the judges is now sitting on the Supreme Court that I had his wiretap information in my hand. Two are former FISA court judges. They went after State Department officials. They went after people in the executive service that were part of the White House–their own people.”

Then Tice dropped the bombshell about Obama.

“Here’s the big one,” he said. “[T]his was in summer of 2004, one of the papers that I held in my hand was to wiretap a bunch of numbers associated with a 40-something-year-old wannabe senator for Illinois. You wouldn’t happen to know where that guy lives right now would you? It’s a big white house in Washington, D.C. That’s who they went after, and that’s the president of the United States now.”

FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds and Tice agreed that such wide-ranging surveillance of officials could provide the intelligence agencies with unthinkable power to blackmail their opponents.

“I was worried that the intelligence community now has sway over what is going on,” Tice said.

Tice first blew the whistle on what he alleged was seriously unconstitutional domestic spying across multiple agencies in 2005. He later admitted he was the key source in a bombshell New York Times report that exposed the Bush administration’s use of warrantless wiretapping of international communications in the United States.

The Bush administration admitted to the wiretapping on a small scale but denied Tice’s claims that the tactic was likely being used to gather data on millions of Americans.

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden also claimed that as an analyst, he could wiretap the phones of anyone, including judges or the president of the United States if he had access to the right information.

Michael Hastings said the Obama administration is at war with the press, shortly thereafter he dies

LA Times Reports Hastings Was Going Into Hiding Before His Death

Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com June 22, 2013

Despite FBI assertions to the contrary, journalist Michael Hastings was under investigation by the agency. In an email sent out hours before his death, Hastings said his “close friends and associates” were being harassed by the FBI and he was going to “go off the radar for a bit,” in other words into hiding. The Los Angeles Times reported on the email on Friday.

At 2:32 into this video, Michael Hastings says the Obama administration is at war with the press.

“Perhaps if the authorities arrive” at the news website Buzzfeed, they “may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news-gathering practices or related journalism issues,” he wrote.

Buzzfeed editor Ben Smith added that Hastings had told friends and family “he was concerned that he was under investigation” for his journalism.

Wikileaks also confirmed that Hastings was under investigation by the FBI.

The establishment media is attempting to portray theories about the journalist’s death as unfounded and irresponsible conspiracies. “Since Hastings’ death early Tuesday, wild conspiracy theories have bloomed on the Internet, implying that he was murdered by powerful forces wanting to silence him,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported on Thursday, insinuating that Wikileaks is attempting to exploit the journalist’s death.

During a Reddit interview last year, Hastings said the military had repeatedly investigated him. “The Pentagon has launched three investigations into stories I’ve done over the past 18 months under the pretense of finding the wrongdoing we were exposing. But the investigations were really about creating a Pentagon approved official document to criticize journalism they don’t like,” he said.

Hastings also talked about government attempts to control the internet. “On the one hand, we’re already bombarded with so much government propaganda, it might be hard to notice,” he wrote. “But I think we’d definitely see a more direct targeting of certain communities within the U.S. with propaganda that was produced overseas. I think what we’d also see is all sorts of disturbing online and internet initiatives produced by the government. The Pentagon is already trying to do this.”

Prior to his death, Hastings was working on a story about Jill Kelly, the military socialite who received email messages from Paula Broadwell, the biographer who had an affair with former general and CIA director David Petraeus. Kelly believes the FBI leaked her name to the media to discredit her.

Earlier this month, Buzzfeed posted a final article by Hastings, “Why Do Democrats Love to Spy On Americans.”

As we noted on Thursday, Hastings was renowned for being “only interested in writing stories someone didn’t want him to write — often his subjects,” according to Buzzflash editor Ben Smith. “He knew that there are certain truths that nobody has an interest in speaking, ones that will make you both your subjects and their enemies uncomfortable. They’re stories that don’t get told because nobody in power has much of an interest in telling them.”

Related Articles

• Free Barrett Brown Offers Condolences for Hastings, Urges Immediate Investigation
• Autopsy declares “natural death” for man tasered 4 times by police
• Authorities, Media Dismiss Michael Hastings Assassination Claims
• Evidence Indicates Michael Hastings Was Assassinated
• Is Journalist Michael Hastings a Victim of Obama’s Assassination Policy?

This article was posted: Saturday, June 22, 2013 at 2:10 pm

More intrigue in the Michael Hastings car crash (assassination?) Researching story on Petraeus takedown

Witness recounts one-car crash that killed controversial reporter...

Journalist Michael Hastings in Vermont (Penguin/Rolling Stone)

A driver who witnessed the fiery crash that killed journalist Michael Hastings says the vehicle the 33-year-old was driving shook his car "like a freight truck" as it flew by early Tuesday morning in Los Angeles.

"Was stopped at a red light tonight when a pearl white Mercedes flew past," Michael Carter wrote on Facebook a few hours later. "It shook my car like a freight truck going by. Saw it burst into flames a quarter mile down the road when it hit a tree."

In a Facebook message to Yahoo News, Carter explained in detail what he saw:

I was stopped at the light at Santa Monica [Boulevard], headed south on Highland [Avenue]. I looked down to

• 'Several weeks' to determine cause of death...

Researching story on Petraeus takedown...

Michael Hastings researching Jill Kelley case before death

By Brian Bennett

June 20, 2013, 9:24 a.m.

WASHINGTON – During the weeks before he was killed in a car crash in Los Angeles, reporter Michael Hastings was researching a story about a privacy lawsuit brought by Florida socialite Jill Kelley against the Department of Defense and the FBI.

Hastings, 33, was scheduled to meet with a representative of Kelley next week in Los Angeles to discuss the case, according to a person close to Kelley. Hastings wrote for Rolling Stone and the website BuzzFeed.

Kelley alleges that military officials and the FBI leaked her name to the media to discredit her after she reported receiving a stream of emails that were traced to Paula Broadwell, a biographer of former CIA director David H. Petraeus, according to a lawsuit filed in Federal District Court in Washington, D.C., on June 3.

Petraeus resigned from the CIA after publicly admitting that he and Broadwell had carried on an extramarital affair.

FBI denies tailing reporter...

9/11 preview: FOX airs program plot - US Government hijacking and crashing plane into the WTC

The Lone Gunmen Pilot - 9/11 Predictive Programming

Uploaded on Nov 10, 2009

The pilot episode for the FOX series "The Lone Gunmen" Which first aired on March 4, 2001. The plot envisioned the US Government hijacking a plane and crashing it into the World Trade Center.

Reporter who interviewed Assange, brought down General McChrystal assassinated?

Michael Hastings OBVIOUSLY murdered by bomb on gas tank

Jimstonefreelance.com, June 19 2013

This report is now finished and VASTLY improved. Please re-copy and paste, after a LOT of analysis it's really damning

Permalink

"For all 3 of those normal reasons, which account for virtually all car fires in modern cars, the fire would have started in the engine compartment, progressed slowly, and scorched the hell out of the paint before ever reaching the gas tank. That clean paint is the be all tell all, Michael Hastings was murdered, and the rest is detail."

Video above is from: http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/06/19533-wikileaks-claims-war-journalist-michael-hastings-told-their-lawyers-hours-before-his-death-fbi-was-watching-him/

UPDATE: Accident scenes switched. They swapped cars and locations to hide explosive damage, PROOF IS BELOW

UPDATE: It seems to me that Hastings may have been dead, his car parked there, and then blown up with him in it. This is because the flames are way too fresh for the car to have been there long, there is no impact damage where the car "struck the tree" to cause a gas tank explosion, and there are no flames on the road behind the car to indicate it was blown up while it was moving.

This appears to be a classic mafia hit, where you are killed and then burned in a car to hide the evidence. In this case, they obviously used a bomb to blow the gas tank as evidenced by the fact that the rear portion of the car is blown open and shredded with the rest of the car nicely intact, read the initial analysis below. And obviously, there was no high speed crash as reported by the lie factory. I will be working on this throughout the day.

It was perfect to have this happen on a late late Tuesday night, the quietest night of the week, one so quiet that many restaurants will not open. This would have helped ensure a proper setup with few witnesses.

Take a look at the following screen capture of this "crash" and observe a few things:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. There is no impact damage to this car. The only damage there is BLOWN OUT in the back, not smashed in the front and it obviously missed the tree as it rolled to a stop. The front bumper is obscured by the tree, all the way to the tire, OOPS! .

2. This was a Mercedes, not a Pinto, which means it did not burst into flames on its own. One (seldom quoted) eyewitness said the car "exploded". Interesting stuff.

3. Here is where it starts to get REALLY damning - LOOK AT THE FRONT PASSENGER DOOR. The paint is PERFECT yet the entire car is ablaze. This means that whoever photographed this was on scene right away, with a camera ready to film this in the wee hours of the morning, and nail it before the fire scorched the paint. HMMMMMM . . . . . .

4. Unlike what the so called single "eyewitness" report says about a high speed crash, the car did not impact a tree. The car did not impact ANYTHING. Look at where the car stopped. The car went off the road at a few miles an hour and missed the tree as it rolled to a stop.

5. There is no damage to the front of the car, it has no frontal impact damage AT ALL, it is blown out in the back and not crunched in from the front. HOW ON EARTH DID THAT BLOWN OUT BACK END HAPPEN?

AND FINALLY, THE MOST DAMNING THING OF ALL -

Here we have a car FULLY, and I mean FULLY in flames, from front to back, with NO SCORCHED PAINT because the flame is too new, which means the flame went from the back of the car to the front of the car instantaneously, at the same time it breached the floor and engulfed the passenger compartment before it had a chance to scorch anything, which means ONE THING - A BOMB ON THE GAS TANK, and a PHOTOGRAPHER READY TO SNAP THE PHOTO VERY EARLY ON. Even rapid car fires take time to progress through the car, and totally scorch the paint as they progress. Only a bomb could have blown gas through the floor to the inside of the passenger compartment and under the car all the way to the front of the engine compartment and lit the whole thing up at once. That's the only explanation for the shiny paint while it sits completely engulfed in flames. That flame did not progress through that car, it was blown through it with force and the photographer was on the scene the moment it happened and bagged a perfect shot. I'd like to know how that happened - early morning walk?

I'd like to also mention something here - Sheriff Larry Dever was most likely killed by an ECM hack, because he was driving something big and needed a serious high speed accident. With me, when they tried, the incident was with a semi because I was driving a Geo Metro. And in the case of Michael Hastings, his car was such a safe one that you could not guarantee a death in an incident with a semi, and also could not guarantee a death in a high speed crash. I'd bet Hastings wore his seat belt all the time, and Dever did not, and the murderers would know these details before doing it. So to have Hastings definitely dead, kill him first, put him in his car, and blow the gas tank. It may have been possible to remote control the car to where it is with the engine computer via an ECU hack with the oh so convenient Federally mandated always on 3g cell connection to the heart of the car's control computer with Hastings dead the entire time, and just blow the bomb when the car was where they wanted it. Mercedes are extremely advanced, and it is possible Hasting's car was full drive by wire.

No matter how you slice this particular pie, a Mercedes is not just going to explode into flames without a little assistance. Car fires in new cars happen for three main reasons - running the engine out of oil, or running the engine out of coolant, or after an absolutely huge car mangling accident, having the hot side of the battery short out against the frame before it reaches the fuse panel. And for all 3 of those normal reasons, which account for virtually all car fires in modern cars, the fire would have started in the engine compartment, progressed slowly, and scorched the hell out of the paint before ever reaching the gas tank. That clean paint is the be all tell all, Michael Hastings was murdered, and the rest is detail.

Update: LOCATIONS CHANGED AND PHONY WRECK USED TO HIDE EXPLOSIVE DAMAGE FOR DAY TIME PHOTO OP

Here is what they want you to believe

But that is not consistent with this: And notice the trees.

All of these photos are from the same news video. One question - Why is there a sheet on the front of the car in the photo below? Why are the trees not the same as in the original photo above? Where is the blown out section at the rear of the car, which is CLEARLY visible in the original photo above?

The answer is obvious. THEY SWITCHED CARS AND LOCATIONS FOR THE DAY TIME PHOTO OP. Look at both of these pictures, you can clearly see the car is not the same. The location is not the same. On top of that, why is the car still there the NEXT DAY, 10 hours after the crash, when wrecks always get towed away within a couple hours, as soon as the flames are out? Why is the front end not mangled in the original photo, or even the tree for that matter?

For the day time photo op which should not have been possible anyway (it would have been towed long before) they used a different location with different trees, and interspersed the night time fire photos and the daytime shots with those of a different wreck to show pictures of a car that was not destroyed by a bomb. Just look and think, it is OBVIOUS.

This is so far out there that I had to double and triple confirm I did not screw this up, and indeed I did not, ALL of the photos are frame captures from the exact same news video. They TOTALLY blew it with this one.

This is as messed up as Woolwich.

A note to the setup crew: When you produce your garbage, it is going to be analyzed by a LOT of brilliant people, and if you are not careful your efforts won't cut it. I am ashamed of you, surely the old world Russia or maybe East Berlin would have done this A LOT BETTER.

A note to the world: Take a look at what is here, and remember this the next time you see a bunch of hype about what a great free country America is. They do this to journalists and whistleblowers here.

For those of you who do not know, Michael Hastings was the Rolling Stone reporter who interviewed Assange, brought down General McChrystal, and did several other high level exposures of government corruption.

Obama Database Has 'Information About Everything on Every Individual'

Wonder if Obama (POTUS) has access to the government snooping apparatus for his massive database…

I’ll bet that’s classified too but Maxine wasn’t leaking, she was bragging! What do you think they will use that database for?

This is what the KGB and the Stasi did with their government surveillance and extensive network of informants.

Rep. Maxine Waters: Obama Campaign Database Has 'Information About Everything on Every Individual'

June 10, 2013 - 12:40 PM

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) praised the database she said President Barack Obama created during his presidential campaigns as having "information about everything on every individual" during a Feb. 4 interview on TV One.

- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/video/washington/rep-maxine-waters-obama-campaign-database-has-information-about-everything-every#sthash.M4NRznE2.dpuf

The military-industrial complex: “Maybe Ike was right”, duh!

Maybe Ike was right

posted at 12:41 pm on June 11, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

It’s been a very long time since I read Dwight Eisenhower’s final presidential address to the nation, televised live on January 17, 1961 — two years before I was born.  Now it’s available on YouTube, based on a poor-quality Kinescope made at the time.  The speech became famous for its warning about the dangers to liberty posed by the “military-industrial complex,” which eventually became almost a cliché. Reading it now, it seems more like prophecy in more ways than one:

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. …

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system — ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

In my column for The Week, I compare Ike’s warning to what we know now about the NSA surveillance program.  In this case, the threat is the intelligence-industrial complex, and the manner in which we had already surrendered to it before the NSA took advantage of the complacency:

The shift predicted by Eisenhower, of course, did not happen in a vacuum. The Cold War held real dangers to America and Americans, and the age of terror does now. The 9/11 attacks shocked the U.S. badly enough to create a huge demand for more security. We passed the PATRIOT Act and amended the FISA law to allow our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to “connect the dots” before attacks took place, rather than seek evidence while the bodies were stacked afterward.

At the same time, we have culturally devalued privacy, in relationships with commercial as well as governmental entities. The internet companies involved provide the best evidence of this. US News‘ Robert Schlesinger argued that government surveillance on the internet followed corporate surveillance of Americans and others, a surveillance to which we acquiesced with hardly a murmur of protest. “It’s not a given that corporations must collect vast amounts of information from and about us,” Schlesinger writes. “But failing to do so wouldn’t be good for business.” …

This may be why polls don’t exactly show a high level of outrage over the NSA leaks. AWashington Post/Pew Center poll reported that a 56 percent majority of respondents supported the NSA survey of telecom metadata on phone calls, while only 41 percent objected. When it came to surveying internet content, a thin 52 percent majority opposed the NSA PRISM/BLARNEY effort if applied against Americans (a point which has yet to be clarified), but that 45 percent think the government should go further than it claims to do now to watch our online activities. For an electorate that has given up privacy for convenience to the commercial market, surrendering it to the government for security may be a smaller step than Eisenhower might have imagined.

The erosion of that “political and spiritual heritage” of liberty and limited government has other implications, too. Eisenhower presaged that the expansion of the government under pressure of the military-industrial complex would “endanger our liberties or democratic processes.” One cannot help but to draw connections to that expanding and intrusive government and its unaccountable bureaucracies and the targeting of political groups opposed to the current administration by the IRS, the disparate treatment by the EPA on FOIA requests depending on the politics of the requesters, and the overall lack of accountability from an administration whose best defense on these and other scandals has been ignorance of the abuses taking place on their watch. Even if these incidents come from nothing more than a government so large as to be unmanageable, Eisenhower’s admonitions are still prescient.

Glenn Reynolds warns today that this broad surrender on limited government allows for abuse of power and unchecked corruption on a scale Americans have never before seen:

But, in fact, there’s a common theme in all of these scandals: Abuse of power. And, what’s more, that abuse-of-power theme is what makes the NSA snooping story bigger than it otherwise would be. It all comes down to trust.

The justification for giving the government a lot of snooping power hangs on two key arguments: That snooping will make us safer and that the snooping power won’t be abused.

Has it made us safer? Anonymous government sources quoted in news reports say yes, but we know that all that snooping didn’t catch the Tsarnaev brothers before they bombed the Boston Marathon — even though they made extensive use of email and the Internet, and even though Russian security officials had warned us that they were a threat. The snooping didn’t catch Major Nidal Hasan before he perpetrated the Fort Hood Massacre, though he should have been spotted easily enough. It didn’t, apparently, warn us of the Benghazi attacks — though perhaps it explains how administration flacks were able to find and scapegoat a YouTube filmmaker so quickly . But in terms of keeping us safe, the snooping doesn’t look so great.

As for abuse, well, is it plausible to believe that a government that would abuse the powers of the IRS to attack political enemies, go after journalists who publish unflattering material or scapegoat a filmmaker in the hopes of providing political cover to an election-season claim that al-Qaeda was finished would have any qualms about misusing the massive power of government-run snooping and Big Data? What we’ve seen here is a pattern of abuse. There’s little reason to think that pattern will change, absent a change of administration — and, quite possibly, not even then. Sooner or later, power granted tends to become power abused. Then there’s the risk that information gathered might leak, of course, as recent events demonstrate.

Eisenhower tried to warn us fifty-two years ago about this very outcome.  Maybe it’s time to start listening.

Science fiction has become science fact: The rise of the machines

No, this isn’t about SkyNet and the machines aren’t joining forces against the humans but the humans are mastering machines in the art of war in a way we never imagined. Do you think India is alone in this?

What a boon for the ‘military industrialized complex’! Be afraid, be very very afraid. They come in all shapes and sizes from an insect to a submarine, maybe even smaller and maybe even larger!

If you are deemed an enemy of the State, with the global snooping capabilities of the government revealed recently and machine assassins in all shapes and sizes, we are in deep sh!t!

They even mention directed energy weapons ‘DEW’…can you say 9/11?

India developing robotic soldiers

Posted on June 10, 2013

samaylive.com | Jun 9, 2013

With futuristic warfare in mind, India is working to develop robotic soldiers as part of efforts to boost unmanned fighting capabilities, joining a select group of countries in this endeavour.

Under the project being undertaken by DRDO, robots would be developed with very high level of intelligence to enable them to differentiate between a threat and a friend.

These can then be deployed in difficult warfare zones, like the Line of Control (LoC), a step that would help avert the loss of human lives.

“We are going to work for robotic soldiers. We are going to look for very high level of intelligence in it than what we are talking today… It is a new programme and a number of labs are already working in a big way on robotics,” DRDO chief Avinash Chander told news agency in an interview.

The newly-appointed DRDO chief listed the project for development of robotic soldiers as one of his “priority thrust areas” saying that “unmanned warfare in land and air is the future of warfare. Initially the robotic soldier may be assisting the man.”

He said in the initial phase of the project, the robotic soldier would be required to be told by the human soldier to identify an enemy or a combatant but “slowly in due course of time, the robotic soldier would be at the front end and the human soldier would be assisting him.”

India developing robotic soldiers to replace humans in warfare:

Chander said the need for a robotic soldier is felt to save precious human lives and already robots are used in areas where humans do no want to venture such as defusing bombs or getting inside a high-radiation territory.

“Robotic soldier is one step further. It will have multiple technologies in terms of communication with team members, ability to recognise an enemy,” Chander said.

“Today, you have neural networks, whenever the soldier tells him (robotic soldier) that this is a human solider, he will derive his own logic as to what is the difference between him and others (civilians). That learning process will keep building up,” he said.

Asked if it would be capable of being deployed in areas such as the Line of Control, Chander said, “In due course of time but not before a decade in any way.”

He said many new technologies have to be developed such as “miniature communication, materials, cognitive technologies, self-learning processes and interaction with human.”

Chander said “already five to six countries are actively working. They have not yet developed it fully but they are in fairly advanced stages. This is one of my priority areas.”