Well it seems as if there has come a question into my credibility on the topics I have been discussing as of recently. I am simply a person that has taken the time to study in observance of the current events around us on a daily basis for the past 23 years. In the same manor some child prodigies take up ballet or piano I had a strong interest in global politics.
I can recall a time when I was on my way to school and had witnessed on live television the failure of NASA's Challenger mission and the emotion that came along with it. I can recall Reagonomics effect on already impoverished communities. I can recall the presidential debates my elders had no interest in watching that as a child, just as well as an interest to vote in elections they cared not to.
I am one of the victims. Just the same as billions of others like me. Your race or creed has no place here. In the hearts of the free our color knows no bounds. Our previous generation realized this very thing all to fall to struggle and forget that struggle must go on. The fight must continue as only meager concessions have been waged, driving us deeper into a systematic industrialized form of slavery. For every concession made on behalf of the government we have had to pay ten-fold. These people pop out of nowhere as representatives and people would like to question what I know. My statement to you all is that it's not so much that I know but more so that I pose the question. The evidence is the evidence. It is not my place to make a decision for you either way.
However when confronted with the truth there will be 98% of us that reject that truth and there will 2% of us that except that truth. Believe it or not our 2% will be stronger than the 98% percent although we are so heavily outnumbered. 98% of the people are fake, 2% are true. 1% look out for self and 1% look out for themselves and you. Whether family, friend, stranger, associate, to indiscretionary people you have met and not met. This universal rule stays the same.
I went to school averaging a 3.6 GPA, majored in Psychology in college since the local college in my area did not offer Public Relations as a major. I had to take classes geared toward PR to substitute for their lack thereof(psych, human relations, speech, PR). My Father wasn't fully involved at that time and my Mother had moved away not long before i graduated high school. She made too much money and claimed me on her taxes holding up the funding I needed for school. With the immediate need for a roof over my head being imminent, I attained a full time job and dropped out of school to maintain a one-bedroom apartment I was blessed with.
Where a lot of my peers had to learn at the pace of the teachers whose class they took. I actually had the advantage of going to the library all day everyday to soak up the plethora of knowledge available to me. I had acquired various jobs primarily sales positions and experienced my ups and downs like everyone else. Even at my worst I always represented the top 2% of my sales force in every company I was employed, creating a short track record for short term sustainable income. Growing up I have lived in the ghettos to the valleys, worked in every environment from restaurants to corporate offices overlooking the beach.
I literally began from the bottom, above where some people have the opportunity to start. I was resilient and worked very hard to seek higher business oriented goals and achieved them on many fronts in a relatively short period of time. In a span of a few years I had earned not only more money than I had earned in all my previous life but also more money than most people make in 5-10 years, legally. Not only specializing in consumer sales but business-to-business sales as well. Regardless of my professional resume in which of course there is plenty more. I am a person who is and has taken time to understand what is going on around us though constant study and research.
I have no religious belief, although I do believe in God and his power. I am completely bi-partisan in race, gender, creed, or political background. I stand for truth, honor and God's way. I simply pose the questions to spark the food for the brain that will seek the appropriate answers. The world is not truly ready for the beliefs that I have as of yet. When it seems as if they run from the truth every convenience they get. I am a sane man who lives vicariously through the hope of life and freedom for our children. A freedom falsely realized by previous generations that may be universal for future generations if we do our job now.
Our job is to become comfortable with the subjects and topics that are most uncomfortable for us. Our job is to lobby for the rights our fore fathers have died for. Our job is to be the smart, great people we can be without fear of repercussion. This is the time we learn what will hold value to us in the event there is no money. Do you know what you value? I know what I value. So before doubting the information you see, prove it wrong. Don't take just one story for it but look at it from all available perspectives. Be wise enough to understand if the multiple perspectives are really one of the same.
Feel free to contact me with anything you don't understand, before assuming it doesn't interest you or you simply just doubting my credibility on the matter. I will at anytime provide you with multiple sources to answer your multiple questions. So God bless and wake up!
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
The G-20 Summit is this week!
The G20 conference is this week. What does it mean to you? This is not only an annual meeting of the industrial powers of the world. It's more so an ongoing institution that confers on a regular basis. Consisting of the U.S., UK & EU, china, Australia, France, Germany, Russia, Japan, South Africa, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Italy, Mexico, India, Korea, Brazil, Argentina and Turkey. Since it's inception in 1999 there has been many disputes over it's overall intentions of globalization, stealing the spotlight for the previously targeted G7.
The difference between the two is as follows, with this description coming directly from the G20 web-site: The G-7 was established in 1976 as an informal forum of seven major industrial economies: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The G-7 conducts dialogue and seeks agreement on current economic issues on the basis of the comparable interests of those countries. The G-20 was established in 1999 and reflects the diverse interests of the systemically significant industrial and emerging-market economies. (see: About the G-20). It has a high degree of representativeness and legitimacy on account of its geographical composition (members are drawn from all continents) and its large share of global population (two-thirds) and world GNP (around 90 per cent). The G-20's broad representation of countries at different stages of development gives its consensus outcomes greater impact than those of the G-7.
In 1980 the G7 accounted for roughly 50% of the purchasing power parity valuation of the world's total GDP. With the rise in emerging market economies which are countries who once were insignificant in terms of global trade and total world output, the percentage of global GDP represented by the original g7 fell to 42% by 2005. As countries like China grew an outstanding 500% in that 25 year period from 3% to 15% of the global GDP. India rose from 3% to 6% with the remaining EME's (emerging market economies) growing 1% from 9% to 10%. Essentially saying that in a growing global economy growth these EME's have grown industrially to attain a larger share of the global market. In 25 years the total GDP had grown from $12.8 billion to a little over $61 billion annually between 1980-2005. So basically the inception of the G20 had been put in place to account for the rising representation of these EME's in the global market place and solidify a larger percentage of the total GDP by forging in depth marketing strategies with these emerging countries. Thus offsetting the 42% of the G7's GDP to represent over 85% of the globe's total GDP through this one group. Leaving it fairly obvious to see the advantage of them doing so, as larger market shares means a greater chance at changing or shaping International economic policies.
Groups such as these have always amounted a certain paranoia over concerned citizens fearful of globalization and bureaucratic policies. This past week has had an even greater effect as thousands poured into the streets throughout Western Europe in protest over the annual meeting of the G20. People are frustrated over a failing global economy in which the G20 represents almost 90% of its GDP, insufficient healthcare and environmental policies. With the global economy in such a bad state the turnout of protesters this past weekend has been unprecedented, expecting to rise in number throughout the week as world leaders converge to discuss these issues.
Rightfully so that these people protest. Upon researching the G20 web-site I had found that as group the G20 was fully aware of the harmful policies in the financial sector that has led to our recent economic downfall as early as 2006. The following excerpts have been taken directly from a PDF file on their web-site entitled, THE ROLE OF THE G-20 IN THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL ARCHITECTURE: "In response to the concern that international institutions have been insufficiently responsive to the changing structure of the global economy, the G-20 placed a priority on improving the legitimacy and credibility of the international financial institutions, especially the IMF."
The document further states , the growing economic weight of the EMEs is both a consequence and a driver of the globalisation of economic activity. As many people have noted, including the Lowy Institute, the world is becoming more integrated. There has been rapid expansion in cross-border economic activity in the past 25 years-including expanding trade, broad liberalisation and deregulation of domestic markets and institutions, growth of multinational enterprises and increasing mobility of people.
So right there they have basically just told us that they were aware of the effects of our recent growth and deregulation in advance, feeling the necessity to establish legitimacy of these practices. Naturally this document wasn't initially made readily available to the public, as most are not. However it is the aftermath of all this that seems to enrage people the most. Policy makers seem to always have the right answer until something goes wrong in our eyes and all of a sudden these same policy makers play ignorant to these happenings, claiming to have no knowledge of how these things came about.....funny!
Some major media outlets simply write the summit up as simply an annual meeting of world leaders to discuss economic issues and partnerships in an informal fashion. When in actuality as explained below that there is a lot more to it than that. None of it which do we need a college degree to understand either.
Each G-20 host year culminates in the meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, usually toward the end of the year. But there are also a number of supporting meetings during the host year. The critical point about the meeting structure for the G-20 is that discussions are underpinned by a strong analytical framework, thus ensuring they are of high quality. The framework is advanced through workshops (up to three per year), where the best thinkers from around the world address issues of importance to the G-20 with officials, and two deputies' meetings, which refine the policy issues to be discussed by Ministers and Governors. This means that Ministers and Governors are provided with contemporary analysis and insights, which better informs their consideration of policy challenges and solutions.
The G-20 has processes which ensure a smooth transfer of functions between host countries. The management of the G-20 is shared by a ‘troika’ of current, past and future chairs (currently Australia, China and South Africa). While the current chair country is ultimately responsible for the policy agenda and logistical preparations for its host year, the troika ensures continuity across host years by overseeing policy development and logistical preparations.
In addition to the management continuity provided by the troika, there is continuity in the policy themes discussed in each host year. Typically, a policy theme might be discussed over several years, providing many opportunities to get to grips with the various implications of that theme at a detailed level. An example is demographic change, which has been on the G-20 agenda since 2004. This issue has been considered from several angles, including the implications of ageing populations for domestic economic policy, the role of migration and migrant remittances from both a demographic and development perspective and, this year, the financial market implications of demographic change.
The meetings are relatively informal, with only small delegations allowed in the meeting room; deputies’ meetings are limited to a finance ministry and central bank representative and one senior official from each organisation; the G-20 meeting is limited to the minister, the governor and one senior official from each member country.
Through early engagement, we can influence the direction and progress of economic development and build closer linkages with important emerging market countries. This is where the G-20 can play a major role by giving a voice to these emerging economic powers and exposing them to the types of policies pursued by successful market economies.
I have argued that the G-20's structure and institutional features give it a unique degree of legitimacy and influence over the management of the global economy. In fact, the G-20 has already established a track record as an effective forum which promotes open and constructive dialogue that secures practical outcomes. To sum up, I believe the G-20 has a key role in shaping global economic policy.
In contrast to many of the more mature international forums, the G-20 brings together the key global economic players of the 21st century and is structured to encourage open and effective policy dialogue. The fact that its agenda can be shaped by, and the group chaired by, China, Australia, South Africa and a (yet to be determined) South American4 economy in a given four-year period is testament to the changing global and economic power distribution.
With all that said it would seem there is sufficient reason to believe there may be more to these informal meetings that meet the eye. All of which accumulated with the recent economy woes has prompted over 35,000 to protest in the streets of London, with Scotland Yard is expecting a greater challenge on Wednesday 1 April, dubbed "Financial Fools Day", with a series of protests aiming to cause disruption in the Square Mile and elsewhere. Milton McKenzie, 73, from Essex, had said: "How the hell can we have a situation here in Britain where we have people out of work and the bankers just cream it off and are helped by the government."
The director of the the Adam Smith Institute, Dr Eamonn Butler, said governments have caused the economic crisis. This nearly universal sentiment has taken root in other places as well. In Berlin, thousands of protesters have also taken to the streets with a message to the G20 leaders: "We won't pay for your crisis". Another march took place in the city of Frankfurt. The demonstrations attracted as many as 20,000 people. Banners accused the Germany government of being too willing to spend billions bailing out financial institutions and too slow to protect ordinary workers, the BBC's Steve Rosenberg said from Berlin. In Rome, protesters threw red paint, egg and smoke bombs at banks, insurance companies and estate agencies in their protest. Students and left-wing activists were among those who took part in the march, which organizers said had drawn around 6,000 people. In Vienna, at least 6,500 people, according to the police, marched to protest about the effects of globalisation.
Several hundred demonstrators turned out in Paris, where they erected and demolished a model of an island symbolizing a tax haven. Hundreds also attended an anti-globalization protest in Madrid. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, meanwhile, called for protesters to give governments a chance to tackle the economic crisis at a conference of center-left politicians in Chile. "I would hope that the protesters give us a chance, listen to what we have to say and hopefully we can make it clear to them that we're going to walk away from this G20 meeting with some concrete proposals," he said.
A group of fewer than 200 anarchists joined the march and were kept isolated and surrounded by police. Chants of "Burn the bankers!" were the closest anyone came to any show of aggression despite a heavy police presence and a few buildings along the route, including the Ritz Hotel, boarding up their windows. As protesters passed the gates of Downing Street, there were chants and shouts of "Enjoy the overtime".
Chris Knight, the anthropology professor suspended from the University of East London last week for suggesting that bankers might be lynched, was wandering the march alone. "I just met a copper and I said to him, 'Is this the revolution?' He said: 'No, this is the dry run, the revolution starts on Wednesday. Midweek is when we will really start to dance'."
There have been fears that banks and other financial institutions could be the focus for violent protests. A huge security operation is under way in the run-up to the G20 summit, at which world leaders will discuss the glooming global financial crisis and other issues.
A protester told the Observer he believed the protest marked "the start of a grassroots movement". He added: "This is a moment. This is the first time people have had a chance to come out on to the streets in a big way." Commander Simon O'Brien, one of the senior command team in charge of policing security, said: "It's fair to say that this [the march] is one of the largest, one of the most challenging and one of the most complicated operations we have delivered.
"G20 is attracting a significant amount of interest from protest groups. There is an almost unprecedented level of activity going on."
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who will host the G20 summit in East London, said over the weekend: "The action that is happening in London today I understand and will respond to it at the G20."
Claire Melamed of ActionAid said the organizers of the protests were delighted with the turnout. "We're really pleased. We are hearing every day about people losing jobs and not being able to feed their children as this economic crisis deepens. We want the G20 to listen to us - this began as a financial crisis and it's turning into a humanitarian one."
The previous march will be followed by a series of protests on Wednesday and Thursday by a variety of coalitions and groups campaigning on a range of subjects, from poverty, inequality and jobs to war, climate change and capitalism.
for more info on the role of the G20: http://www.g20.org/Documents/role_g20_global_fin_arch_091006.pdf
or http://www.g20.org
The difference between the two is as follows, with this description coming directly from the G20 web-site: The G-7 was established in 1976 as an informal forum of seven major industrial economies: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The G-7 conducts dialogue and seeks agreement on current economic issues on the basis of the comparable interests of those countries. The G-20 was established in 1999 and reflects the diverse interests of the systemically significant industrial and emerging-market economies. (see: About the G-20). It has a high degree of representativeness and legitimacy on account of its geographical composition (members are drawn from all continents) and its large share of global population (two-thirds) and world GNP (around 90 per cent). The G-20's broad representation of countries at different stages of development gives its consensus outcomes greater impact than those of the G-7.
In 1980 the G7 accounted for roughly 50% of the purchasing power parity valuation of the world's total GDP. With the rise in emerging market economies which are countries who once were insignificant in terms of global trade and total world output, the percentage of global GDP represented by the original g7 fell to 42% by 2005. As countries like China grew an outstanding 500% in that 25 year period from 3% to 15% of the global GDP. India rose from 3% to 6% with the remaining EME's (emerging market economies) growing 1% from 9% to 10%. Essentially saying that in a growing global economy growth these EME's have grown industrially to attain a larger share of the global market. In 25 years the total GDP had grown from $12.8 billion to a little over $61 billion annually between 1980-2005. So basically the inception of the G20 had been put in place to account for the rising representation of these EME's in the global market place and solidify a larger percentage of the total GDP by forging in depth marketing strategies with these emerging countries. Thus offsetting the 42% of the G7's GDP to represent over 85% of the globe's total GDP through this one group. Leaving it fairly obvious to see the advantage of them doing so, as larger market shares means a greater chance at changing or shaping International economic policies.
Groups such as these have always amounted a certain paranoia over concerned citizens fearful of globalization and bureaucratic policies. This past week has had an even greater effect as thousands poured into the streets throughout Western Europe in protest over the annual meeting of the G20. People are frustrated over a failing global economy in which the G20 represents almost 90% of its GDP, insufficient healthcare and environmental policies. With the global economy in such a bad state the turnout of protesters this past weekend has been unprecedented, expecting to rise in number throughout the week as world leaders converge to discuss these issues.
Rightfully so that these people protest. Upon researching the G20 web-site I had found that as group the G20 was fully aware of the harmful policies in the financial sector that has led to our recent economic downfall as early as 2006. The following excerpts have been taken directly from a PDF file on their web-site entitled, THE ROLE OF THE G-20 IN THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL ARCHITECTURE: "In response to the concern that international institutions have been insufficiently responsive to the changing structure of the global economy, the G-20 placed a priority on improving the legitimacy and credibility of the international financial institutions, especially the IMF."
The document further states , the growing economic weight of the EMEs is both a consequence and a driver of the globalisation of economic activity. As many people have noted, including the Lowy Institute, the world is becoming more integrated. There has been rapid expansion in cross-border economic activity in the past 25 years-including expanding trade, broad liberalisation and deregulation of domestic markets and institutions, growth of multinational enterprises and increasing mobility of people.
So right there they have basically just told us that they were aware of the effects of our recent growth and deregulation in advance, feeling the necessity to establish legitimacy of these practices. Naturally this document wasn't initially made readily available to the public, as most are not. However it is the aftermath of all this that seems to enrage people the most. Policy makers seem to always have the right answer until something goes wrong in our eyes and all of a sudden these same policy makers play ignorant to these happenings, claiming to have no knowledge of how these things came about.....funny!
Some major media outlets simply write the summit up as simply an annual meeting of world leaders to discuss economic issues and partnerships in an informal fashion. When in actuality as explained below that there is a lot more to it than that. None of it which do we need a college degree to understand either.
Each G-20 host year culminates in the meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, usually toward the end of the year. But there are also a number of supporting meetings during the host year. The critical point about the meeting structure for the G-20 is that discussions are underpinned by a strong analytical framework, thus ensuring they are of high quality. The framework is advanced through workshops (up to three per year), where the best thinkers from around the world address issues of importance to the G-20 with officials, and two deputies' meetings, which refine the policy issues to be discussed by Ministers and Governors. This means that Ministers and Governors are provided with contemporary analysis and insights, which better informs their consideration of policy challenges and solutions.
The G-20 has processes which ensure a smooth transfer of functions between host countries. The management of the G-20 is shared by a ‘troika’ of current, past and future chairs (currently Australia, China and South Africa). While the current chair country is ultimately responsible for the policy agenda and logistical preparations for its host year, the troika ensures continuity across host years by overseeing policy development and logistical preparations.
In addition to the management continuity provided by the troika, there is continuity in the policy themes discussed in each host year. Typically, a policy theme might be discussed over several years, providing many opportunities to get to grips with the various implications of that theme at a detailed level. An example is demographic change, which has been on the G-20 agenda since 2004. This issue has been considered from several angles, including the implications of ageing populations for domestic economic policy, the role of migration and migrant remittances from both a demographic and development perspective and, this year, the financial market implications of demographic change.
The meetings are relatively informal, with only small delegations allowed in the meeting room; deputies’ meetings are limited to a finance ministry and central bank representative and one senior official from each organisation; the G-20 meeting is limited to the minister, the governor and one senior official from each member country.
Through early engagement, we can influence the direction and progress of economic development and build closer linkages with important emerging market countries. This is where the G-20 can play a major role by giving a voice to these emerging economic powers and exposing them to the types of policies pursued by successful market economies.
I have argued that the G-20's structure and institutional features give it a unique degree of legitimacy and influence over the management of the global economy. In fact, the G-20 has already established a track record as an effective forum which promotes open and constructive dialogue that secures practical outcomes. To sum up, I believe the G-20 has a key role in shaping global economic policy.
In contrast to many of the more mature international forums, the G-20 brings together the key global economic players of the 21st century and is structured to encourage open and effective policy dialogue. The fact that its agenda can be shaped by, and the group chaired by, China, Australia, South Africa and a (yet to be determined) South American4 economy in a given four-year period is testament to the changing global and economic power distribution.
With all that said it would seem there is sufficient reason to believe there may be more to these informal meetings that meet the eye. All of which accumulated with the recent economy woes has prompted over 35,000 to protest in the streets of London, with Scotland Yard is expecting a greater challenge on Wednesday 1 April, dubbed "Financial Fools Day", with a series of protests aiming to cause disruption in the Square Mile and elsewhere. Milton McKenzie, 73, from Essex, had said: "How the hell can we have a situation here in Britain where we have people out of work and the bankers just cream it off and are helped by the government."
The director of the the Adam Smith Institute, Dr Eamonn Butler, said governments have caused the economic crisis. This nearly universal sentiment has taken root in other places as well. In Berlin, thousands of protesters have also taken to the streets with a message to the G20 leaders: "We won't pay for your crisis". Another march took place in the city of Frankfurt. The demonstrations attracted as many as 20,000 people. Banners accused the Germany government of being too willing to spend billions bailing out financial institutions and too slow to protect ordinary workers, the BBC's Steve Rosenberg said from Berlin. In Rome, protesters threw red paint, egg and smoke bombs at banks, insurance companies and estate agencies in their protest. Students and left-wing activists were among those who took part in the march, which organizers said had drawn around 6,000 people. In Vienna, at least 6,500 people, according to the police, marched to protest about the effects of globalisation.
Several hundred demonstrators turned out in Paris, where they erected and demolished a model of an island symbolizing a tax haven. Hundreds also attended an anti-globalization protest in Madrid. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, meanwhile, called for protesters to give governments a chance to tackle the economic crisis at a conference of center-left politicians in Chile. "I would hope that the protesters give us a chance, listen to what we have to say and hopefully we can make it clear to them that we're going to walk away from this G20 meeting with some concrete proposals," he said.
A group of fewer than 200 anarchists joined the march and were kept isolated and surrounded by police. Chants of "Burn the bankers!" were the closest anyone came to any show of aggression despite a heavy police presence and a few buildings along the route, including the Ritz Hotel, boarding up their windows. As protesters passed the gates of Downing Street, there were chants and shouts of "Enjoy the overtime".
Chris Knight, the anthropology professor suspended from the University of East London last week for suggesting that bankers might be lynched, was wandering the march alone. "I just met a copper and I said to him, 'Is this the revolution?' He said: 'No, this is the dry run, the revolution starts on Wednesday. Midweek is when we will really start to dance'."
There have been fears that banks and other financial institutions could be the focus for violent protests. A huge security operation is under way in the run-up to the G20 summit, at which world leaders will discuss the glooming global financial crisis and other issues.
A protester told the Observer he believed the protest marked "the start of a grassroots movement". He added: "This is a moment. This is the first time people have had a chance to come out on to the streets in a big way." Commander Simon O'Brien, one of the senior command team in charge of policing security, said: "It's fair to say that this [the march] is one of the largest, one of the most challenging and one of the most complicated operations we have delivered.
"G20 is attracting a significant amount of interest from protest groups. There is an almost unprecedented level of activity going on."
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who will host the G20 summit in East London, said over the weekend: "The action that is happening in London today I understand and will respond to it at the G20."
Claire Melamed of ActionAid said the organizers of the protests were delighted with the turnout. "We're really pleased. We are hearing every day about people losing jobs and not being able to feed their children as this economic crisis deepens. We want the G20 to listen to us - this began as a financial crisis and it's turning into a humanitarian one."
The previous march will be followed by a series of protests on Wednesday and Thursday by a variety of coalitions and groups campaigning on a range of subjects, from poverty, inequality and jobs to war, climate change and capitalism.
for more info on the role of the G20: http://www.g20.org/Documents/role_g20_global_fin_arch_091006.pdf
or http://www.g20.org
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
What happens if the nation bankrupts and who is responsible?
With any remote threat of a U.S. bankruptcy there will instant martial law. There will be a new form of government established continuing to run through the remaining reserve and it's own form of a bail out received from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). For those that thought we live in a police state now, you all have not seen nothing yet. For those aware of the Illuminati their primary power lies in the confusion and lack of attention the world places in their actions until it is too late. According to insiders who later rejected the secret society have stated that when the New World Order announces itself it's too late. That at that point it is too late. Too late to struggle, too late to protest, too late to fight. Well folks I urge you to listen, watch or get a transcript of George H. W. Bush's 1991 State of the Union Address which so coincidentally was September, 11 1991. An exact 10 years prior to the day of the September 11th attacks the first President Bush announced the New World Order.
Once again we have been so busy in our lives that we don't place these two situations together. When you mention these two in the same sentence people seem to dismiss the fact that there is any such thing as a real New World Order. Whether you choose to see it or not we are all in a regulated state. Not just by law but also media, health care, education, public services, religion, freedom to exercise constitutional rights.
These puppeteers pull the strings behind the curtain creating events for their amusement of shifting money, power and influence to forward their agenda. They ruthlessly and consistently play both sides of the coin one against the other, profiting from both sides either way. With the money to fund projects of enormous magnitudes, this money has been used to gain influence and leverage over whole nations it's leaders and it's citizens. you and I have never met these people in our lives and they have more influence on our daily living than our closest partner, friend or family member. They have influence over our television programming, wars we enter as well as others around the globe and their outcome, politics federal, local and global, pharmaceuticals, finances you name it the list goes on and on. With all of this money being circulated through an international banking system that they own.
So when everything hits the fan and you all wake up out of your slumber offended by the fact everything you believed to be freedom is no more, don't blame the political figures that live by the beliefs of the original constitution. There is nothing wrong with the constitution or those who truly believe in its premise. Instead focus on those who tend to want to restrict the freedoms the constitution allows regardless of their reason. Focus on the International bankers who profit and gather economical data from situations they created and manipulated. Don't look merely at the international banks alone, look at the banks and other institutions they own. You'll find that they own most major retail stores, oil companies, no-bid contract companies, commercial/non-commercial real estate among a host of other things.
Any money you place into their banking system is no longer yours it is theirs, and is subject to seizure or miscellaneous charges at any time for little or no reason. It's not that it really matters anyway because it just so happens these international bankers also own our Federal Reserve Bank which printed the money and loaned to us at interest anyhow. They charge you and me money to print some symbols on paper, call it money and the only thing that gives it value is the people who believes it's money and the amount in circulation. In the end real property will be confiscated, re-distributed and what we believe to be money will be transformed funds you can no longer touch but will be able to benefit from by way the credit your labor has earned on your RFID chip.
While Christians look for the "Mark of the Beast" that is it right there. The RFID chip is currently in use right now in pets, humans, passports and are actively marketed in news clips and online web-sites. the worst part about it is that the Illuminati will use our government to use a form of reverse psychology that has worked for them in the past in areas of passing gun and criminal legislation to usher in this technology. They are stellar at finding ways to make people request the very things that hurt themselves the most. Refuse this technology at any cost! No matter what you do, if you do nothing else in your life refuse this technology and understand why you should. All of this covered today is barely skinning the surface on the road to a better life for ourselves. You want freedom? Find out who these international bankers are for yourselves. Find out what they own, who they frequent with and who they have influence with. Connect them to the dots in your government and pin the dot on the donkey.
Once again we have been so busy in our lives that we don't place these two situations together. When you mention these two in the same sentence people seem to dismiss the fact that there is any such thing as a real New World Order. Whether you choose to see it or not we are all in a regulated state. Not just by law but also media, health care, education, public services, religion, freedom to exercise constitutional rights.
These puppeteers pull the strings behind the curtain creating events for their amusement of shifting money, power and influence to forward their agenda. They ruthlessly and consistently play both sides of the coin one against the other, profiting from both sides either way. With the money to fund projects of enormous magnitudes, this money has been used to gain influence and leverage over whole nations it's leaders and it's citizens. you and I have never met these people in our lives and they have more influence on our daily living than our closest partner, friend or family member. They have influence over our television programming, wars we enter as well as others around the globe and their outcome, politics federal, local and global, pharmaceuticals, finances you name it the list goes on and on. With all of this money being circulated through an international banking system that they own.
So when everything hits the fan and you all wake up out of your slumber offended by the fact everything you believed to be freedom is no more, don't blame the political figures that live by the beliefs of the original constitution. There is nothing wrong with the constitution or those who truly believe in its premise. Instead focus on those who tend to want to restrict the freedoms the constitution allows regardless of their reason. Focus on the International bankers who profit and gather economical data from situations they created and manipulated. Don't look merely at the international banks alone, look at the banks and other institutions they own. You'll find that they own most major retail stores, oil companies, no-bid contract companies, commercial/non-commercial real estate among a host of other things.
Any money you place into their banking system is no longer yours it is theirs, and is subject to seizure or miscellaneous charges at any time for little or no reason. It's not that it really matters anyway because it just so happens these international bankers also own our Federal Reserve Bank which printed the money and loaned to us at interest anyhow. They charge you and me money to print some symbols on paper, call it money and the only thing that gives it value is the people who believes it's money and the amount in circulation. In the end real property will be confiscated, re-distributed and what we believe to be money will be transformed funds you can no longer touch but will be able to benefit from by way the credit your labor has earned on your RFID chip.
While Christians look for the "Mark of the Beast" that is it right there. The RFID chip is currently in use right now in pets, humans, passports and are actively marketed in news clips and online web-sites. the worst part about it is that the Illuminati will use our government to use a form of reverse psychology that has worked for them in the past in areas of passing gun and criminal legislation to usher in this technology. They are stellar at finding ways to make people request the very things that hurt themselves the most. Refuse this technology at any cost! No matter what you do, if you do nothing else in your life refuse this technology and understand why you should. All of this covered today is barely skinning the surface on the road to a better life for ourselves. You want freedom? Find out who these international bankers are for yourselves. Find out what they own, who they frequent with and who they have influence with. Connect them to the dots in your government and pin the dot on the donkey.
For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
—David Rockefeller, "Memoirs" autobiography (2002, Random House publishers), page 405
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
What does the deficit mean to my life?
For those that don't believe, try me. There are things happening right now in your lives that affect directly and indirectly on a daily basis and this ever growing deficit is evidence of just one range of its capability. Unfortunately there are still some of us that don't fully even understand the implications of how the deficit affects them as individuals. So for those that don't understand I will break it down for you in only a way that main stream media will not give you.
The payments that the deficit will afford will have no choice but to be taken from publicly funded programs namely healthcare, education, social security among other social projects. In the event our GDP does not cover the costs of these programs and the deficit, these programs will be cut altogether to make the payment to the deficit. You can bet your bottom dollar law enforcement funding would sustain if not enlarge in the event of these times. When the GDP just barely covers the payment of the deficit, military, law enforcement and bureaucratic pockets it's a wrap. Our officials will publicly declare our once wealthy nation bankrupt.
The unraveling of all this can happen at any given time as we are already suffering the pre-stages of this chain of events. I don't think anyone envisioned government authorized tax-payer funded bailouts coming in a million years. Just the same way the public would like not to believe anyone capable of flying two planes into buildings or buildings falling that weren't hit by planes for that matter. Even with indisputable evidence the true verdict on 9/11 has yet to be served or investigated thoroughly. Whoever would of thought about a potential housing bust or the dot com bust of yester year? Who is forward thinking enough to foresee everything we deem valuable eventually becoming worthless? What will life be like then? In this very answer lies the importance of the national deficit in your life.
The payments that the deficit will afford will have no choice but to be taken from publicly funded programs namely healthcare, education, social security among other social projects. In the event our GDP does not cover the costs of these programs and the deficit, these programs will be cut altogether to make the payment to the deficit. You can bet your bottom dollar law enforcement funding would sustain if not enlarge in the event of these times. When the GDP just barely covers the payment of the deficit, military, law enforcement and bureaucratic pockets it's a wrap. Our officials will publicly declare our once wealthy nation bankrupt.
The unraveling of all this can happen at any given time as we are already suffering the pre-stages of this chain of events. I don't think anyone envisioned government authorized tax-payer funded bailouts coming in a million years. Just the same way the public would like not to believe anyone capable of flying two planes into buildings or buildings falling that weren't hit by planes for that matter. Even with indisputable evidence the true verdict on 9/11 has yet to be served or investigated thoroughly. Whoever would of thought about a potential housing bust or the dot com bust of yester year? Who is forward thinking enough to foresee everything we deem valuable eventually becoming worthless? What will life be like then? In this very answer lies the importance of the national deficit in your life.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Communication is key!
In my previous article I posed many questions referencing the necessity to open dialogue on issues uncomfortable for us to deal with. Of course nothing was solved over the weekend so in the meantime until things get solved one way or another I will advocate opening dialogue on every issue uncomfortable for most and unfamiliar for some. Whether it is enlightening in the end is purely up to you. In the least it will be informative and live as one more voice for truth in a corrupt society.
Until our people realize and understand that the powers behind the curtain do not want us to address these issues, which makes it that much more addressing I will continue to force us to address them. By means of peaceful thought provoking seeds in your brain. I will plant the seeds and attempt to nurture them as long as I can. In the end it will be up to those who care enough to stand alongside others of different views, creeds and beliefs. There is no vindication for those who died in trying to warn you if you don't wake up and listen.
There are more famous people than you may think that died to relay the happenings of today to you all in advance. JFK was killed not long after pleading to his country for help against secret societies that exist within all facets of our life. RFK was of course too assassinated for his intimate knowledge of his brother's death amongst several other possible reasons. MLK, & Malcolm X were assassinated for their influence with black people that often gained white sympathizers. The character of the Black Panther Party was assassinated and those left alive incarcerated as a result of their militant approach and effectively positive public programs that may gain them universal respect if allowed to evolve. In most of these cases these people or entities were ripped apart from the inside out versus vice-versa. Ultimately it has always been the same result either way in the end not only were their lives ripped apart but everyone who found inspiration in them as well.
There were whole belief systems that shattered in the hearts of millions. Many leaders who remained became so disenfranchised with fighting such an uphill battle alone thatit was more convenient they either fell into obsurity, or conformed. I was once under the belief these figures did so in forgetting that the struggle must go on and as I have gotten older I have grown to understand moreso that the horror made there decision seem just that much easier. It was basically conform or die with the treason at levels so high that it was nearly impossible to uncover who all was responsibly involved. What wasn't simply washed over was covered up as classified. The wise person would place money that the worst of atrocities have no personal implications or documentation to incriminate anyone political or military figure. As some people die it does seem odd that leaks of government intrusion seem to surface.....Hmmm. It's real funny how scapegoats are alot easier to use when they are dead.
With mainly only official information being relayed to our youth most of them are not aware of all aspects of the past, effectively providing an emotional disconnect as a result of watered down information. Who is our responsibility to ourselves or our children? Biblically speaking our children are the ones who pay for their parent's sins. Is it a sin to allow them to be misinformed? Or is it a sin to tell them things that terrible but true? To leave them confused and lost would seem to have a greater negative impact to any logical thinking person. I personally do not have children. However when I do it is my responsibility to inform them even it meant death. Whether we like to face the facts or not there are consequences for our selective ignorance.
For an advanced and so-called civilized civilization our communication skills are sub-primal at best, in some cases carnal. Essentially to get more graphic there are children that are better at being honest in communicating then adults and we wonder why they don't respect us in the end. What kind of example do we set when they learn we lay down on a regular basis in the face of struggle while we were simultaneously attacking them for character faults and things that didn't help them in terms of freedom and survival? It is 100% our moral obligation to stop turning the blind eye, address the issues that divide us, & effectively solve these issues. By not acting our age but being our age & adult enough to place our differences aside to simply communicate in search of truth and holding the right people accountable for making their lives so hard.
In the most recent Batman film entitled, "The Dark Knight" there was a very insiteful moral quote which the message is probrably over looked, yet definitley relevant to our current lives. When the character who started out as District Attorney Harvey Grant who later became the criminal Two-Face stated he did not want the Joker he wanted he people responsible for creating the Joker and letting him off the chain. As long as we point the finger at fellow citizens versus the circumstances that shape these individuals lives we are inevitably walking ourselves directly in the trap. For those that do not believe there is any such thing let's talk about it. Let's communicate in an open-minded manner and prove eachother wrong!
Until our people realize and understand that the powers behind the curtain do not want us to address these issues, which makes it that much more addressing I will continue to force us to address them. By means of peaceful thought provoking seeds in your brain. I will plant the seeds and attempt to nurture them as long as I can. In the end it will be up to those who care enough to stand alongside others of different views, creeds and beliefs. There is no vindication for those who died in trying to warn you if you don't wake up and listen.
There are more famous people than you may think that died to relay the happenings of today to you all in advance. JFK was killed not long after pleading to his country for help against secret societies that exist within all facets of our life. RFK was of course too assassinated for his intimate knowledge of his brother's death amongst several other possible reasons. MLK, & Malcolm X were assassinated for their influence with black people that often gained white sympathizers. The character of the Black Panther Party was assassinated and those left alive incarcerated as a result of their militant approach and effectively positive public programs that may gain them universal respect if allowed to evolve. In most of these cases these people or entities were ripped apart from the inside out versus vice-versa. Ultimately it has always been the same result either way in the end not only were their lives ripped apart but everyone who found inspiration in them as well.
There were whole belief systems that shattered in the hearts of millions. Many leaders who remained became so disenfranchised with fighting such an uphill battle alone thatit was more convenient they either fell into obsurity, or conformed. I was once under the belief these figures did so in forgetting that the struggle must go on and as I have gotten older I have grown to understand moreso that the horror made there decision seem just that much easier. It was basically conform or die with the treason at levels so high that it was nearly impossible to uncover who all was responsibly involved. What wasn't simply washed over was covered up as classified. The wise person would place money that the worst of atrocities have no personal implications or documentation to incriminate anyone political or military figure. As some people die it does seem odd that leaks of government intrusion seem to surface.....Hmmm. It's real funny how scapegoats are alot easier to use when they are dead.
With mainly only official information being relayed to our youth most of them are not aware of all aspects of the past, effectively providing an emotional disconnect as a result of watered down information. Who is our responsibility to ourselves or our children? Biblically speaking our children are the ones who pay for their parent's sins. Is it a sin to allow them to be misinformed? Or is it a sin to tell them things that terrible but true? To leave them confused and lost would seem to have a greater negative impact to any logical thinking person. I personally do not have children. However when I do it is my responsibility to inform them even it meant death. Whether we like to face the facts or not there are consequences for our selective ignorance.
For an advanced and so-called civilized civilization our communication skills are sub-primal at best, in some cases carnal. Essentially to get more graphic there are children that are better at being honest in communicating then adults and we wonder why they don't respect us in the end. What kind of example do we set when they learn we lay down on a regular basis in the face of struggle while we were simultaneously attacking them for character faults and things that didn't help them in terms of freedom and survival? It is 100% our moral obligation to stop turning the blind eye, address the issues that divide us, & effectively solve these issues. By not acting our age but being our age & adult enough to place our differences aside to simply communicate in search of truth and holding the right people accountable for making their lives so hard.
In the most recent Batman film entitled, "The Dark Knight" there was a very insiteful moral quote which the message is probrably over looked, yet definitley relevant to our current lives. When the character who started out as District Attorney Harvey Grant who later became the criminal Two-Face stated he did not want the Joker he wanted he people responsible for creating the Joker and letting him off the chain. As long as we point the finger at fellow citizens versus the circumstances that shape these individuals lives we are inevitably walking ourselves directly in the trap. For those that do not believe there is any such thing let's talk about it. Let's communicate in an open-minded manner and prove eachother wrong!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
