-Boy Scouts being trained by Homeland Security for ‘anti-terror’ operations.-

SEE ALSO:
*Why a pro-draft Chief of Staff is a big deal.
-”America’s Army” war recruitment tool video games going to US high schools.

The story didn’t surprise me when I seen this the other night, but I found these NYTimes photos mindblowing:

“Before it was more about the basics,” said Johnny Longoria, a Border Patrol agent here. “But now our emphasis is on terrorism, illegal entry, drugs and human smuggling.”

“Put him on his face and put a knee in his back,” a Border Patrol agent explained. “I guarantee that he’ll shut up.”

Ten minutes into arrant mayhem in this town near the Mexican border, and the gunman, a disgruntled Iraq war veteran, has already taken out two people, one slumped in his desk, the other covered in blood on the floor.

That said, the Explorers have faced problems over the years. There have been numerous cases over the last three decades in which police officers supervising Explorers have been charged, in civil and criminal cases, with sexually abusing them.

The law enforcement posts are restricted to those ages 14 to 21 who have a C average, but there seems to be some wiggle room. “I will take them at 13 and a half,” Deputy Lowenthal said. “I would rather take a kid than possibly lose a kid.”

Of course they make children being trained as domestic military officers as a good thing:

“This is about being a true-blooded American guy and girl,” said A. J. Lowenthal, a sheriff’s deputy here in Imperial County, whose life clock, he says, is set around the Explorers events he helps run. “It fits right in with the honor and bravery of the Boy Scouts.”

“Our end goal is to create more agents,” said April McKee, a senior Border Patrol agent and mentor at the session here.

They have 2,000 “law enforcement posts” nationwide, with 35,000 stooges.

Infowars:

Given recent concerns over the DHS definition of “right wing extremists” and the agency’s penchant to affiliate veterans, gun owners, Ron Paul supporters and even those who question the mainstream media with terrorists, one wonders exactly who the boy scouts are being trained to target.

The Explorer program also touches close to home with recent concerns regarding President Barack Obama’s promised “civilian national security force”.

-

In Nazi Germany, the Hitler Youth succeeded the Boy Scout movement. Hitler Youth training was militarized in comparison to the Boy Scout network, which was largely based around education. Boys aged fourteen and upwards, as well as a separate branch aged 10-14, were trained at preparatory schools to become future Nazi leaders. At its height in 1940, and after it had become mandatory to join, the Hitler Youth boasted no less than 8 million members.

Apparently in a shift away from the traditional Boy Scouts activities of sports, camping, survival skills and team leadership, the government is now training children “to confront terrorism, illegal immigration and escalating border violence” under the banner of the Explorers program, with the aid of military-style exercises aimed at subduing insurgents.

The 2007 film, “Riddles In Stone” sheds interesting light on the founder of the Boy Scouts of America.

MORE:

Boy Scouts Train to Become Homeland Gestapo

*Obama nominates AI pioneer as Pentagon Director of Defense Research & Engineering.

Obama, who likes to talk about innovation in technological revolutions, has nominated one Zachary Lemnios as DoD Director of Defense Research & Engineering. This guy helped setup DARPA’s IPTO to spearhead the type of AI you see in the movies. Danger Room has more details. In other recent Obama-DARPA news, they might be nominating one Regina Dugan as DARPA chief, although her story is far less interesting.She’s not an AI/AGI ‘pioneer’ as is Lemnios, but he’s her boss along with the rest of the DoD science R&D machinery:

SEE ALSO:

*Obama’s NBIC (nano-bio-info-cogno convergence) Agenda.

*Why a pro-draft Chief of Staff is a big deal.

Ignorance Is Futile:

Bush’s former Chief of Staff Andrew Card unwittingly explains why Obama’s CoS being a supporter of a “civilian national security force” might even be worse than Obama supporting it.

In an old Daily Show interview Andy Card explains how a CoS literally serves as the gate-keeper to what the president is told and who he talks to. Click for video. So what this means with Obama, in the sense that maybe the “civilian national security force” he mentioned isn’t an actual agenda, if it is his CoS’s agenda then he may help guide Obama’s perceptions into unwittingly but consciously entering into the same agenda.

Now with Obama’s CoS-elect, Rahm Emanuel, it turns out that that’s been his agenda for several years. In fact, that seems to be the sort of thing that has gotten him spots, in the past before Obama, on the news. Besides, Obama did explain that as an agenda, so even if some of the other cabinet members might be able to guide other perceptions from outside of the bubble, it’s irrelevant anyways.

So it’s as simple as that, just so long as you’re aware of the details in the other links in this post.

*Obama’s missile defense rhetoric.

To some, Obama appears to be anti missile “defense” at the moment …putting new people in charge of that program in the military …out-going general seemingly confrontational. Etc. Obama says he supports missile defense, but not if “unproven”. So some interpret that as if he doesn’t support it, that’s his way of taking a soft stance to sway republican voters, or something.

The Obama transition promptly issued a rebuttal: “President-elect Obama made no commitment on it. His position is as it was throughout the campaign — that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable.”

But I take it as his way of honestly supporting it, but talking soft so that he doesn’t sound like McCain (like pretty much everything else). So I guess we’ll see how he handles it…

In the meantime the out-going general is pointing out that Obama’s rhetoric seems tuned to year 2000 technical status (meaning it needed lots of work still), and that they’ve gotten it together. So he’s all over the transition team telling them how great the program is.

The anti-missile defense system — which preliminary tests have shown is capable of shooting down ballistic missiles — “is workable,” Obering, who heads the Missile Defense Agency, told reporters by teleconference.

“Our testing has shown not only can we hit a bullet with a bullet, we can hit a spot on a bullet with a bullet,” the lieutenant general added.

Meanwhile, Russia has threatened to attack Poland if the missile sites are built, and even placed nuclear attack on the table. Some people say screw Russia.

I ask you to think of a Godzilla type movie where there are mobs of people frantically running down the streets pulling out their hair in panic and terror. That’s how “Americans” would respond if Russia were building missile sites on the borders of Canada & Mexico.

Yet the missile interceptors wouldn’t stop much. And notions that Iran would even fire on Europe are mere paranoid speculation. Talk about ‘conspiracy theorists’, or are they? I say no.

It’s all about aggravating a New Cold War with Russia, China and whoever else wants to get in on it. The US is a permanent war economy, with imperial posture. The end of the original Cold War was in fact a bad thing for the Military Industrial Complex,  and the Ruling Elite disaster capitalists whose stock portfolios are tuned to reap the benefits of catastrophes and never ending wars. The war against “new Hitlers” (Saddam), and then the War on Terror were meant to fill a void.

The end of the Cold War created a vacuum that was filled immediately by Hussein, and then the other ‘new Hitler’ Milosevic. Problem was, those sorts of conflict don’t exactly cause a ‘need’ to have something like 800 military bases overseas, and a $500+ billion military budget. 9/11 was all too convenient in hammering a new never-ending war into the minds of the populace. But sure enough the missile defense New Cold War contingency also went into overdrive at this time. It wasn’t enough that the US had-has various military bases in a better part of the nations surrounding both China & Russia.

Now that people are waking up to the lunacy and absurdity of this notion of a ‘Global War on Terror’ being fantastical delusion at best (considering the fact that US bases protecting dictatorships in Muslim nations is what ultimately drives them to become terrorists), here comes the New Cold War to fill that void. But maybe Obama might surprise, you say? Not likely, he says he supports it (if “workable”) and the facilities in question aren’t even supposed to be fully operational until something like 2011. So even if the systems weren’t “workable” at the moment, in 2+ years times you should be able to count on that.

-Audio/Video of Obama’s Chief of Staff discussing the “civilian national security force”.

Newsbusters:

As a follow up to my previous post on the media blowing off President-elect Barack Obama’s conscription plan(which seems to be disappearing from the Obama transition team’s site among many other agenda items, as Newsbuster Tom Blumer has discovered), Naked Emperor News has found some interesting audio of Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s Chief of Staff appointee, talking to NY Daily News reporter Ben Smith in 2006 about his mandatory civil service plan.  The idea was detailed in Emanuel’s co-authored book, The Plan.

CLICK FOR VIDEO

*Obama’s NBIC (nano-bio-info-cogno convergence) Agenda.

http://change.gov/agenda/technology/:

“America risks being left behind in the global economy: Revolutionary advances in information technology, biotechnology, nanotechnology and other fields are reshaping the global economy. Without renewed efforts, the United States risks losing leadership in science, technology and innovation. ” LINK MIRROR

With all of his talk about “change”, is it only me who senses the irony here? The “Revolutionary” advances he’s talking about are Artificial General Intelligence (”information technology”), genetic engineering / synthetic biology & designer babies (”biotechnology”), and too much in terms of nanotechnology to sound-byte like the others. The “other fields” he mentioned is almost certainly the other field he didn’t mention, cognitive sciences.

What he’s likely referring to is “convergence”, and unlike Bush (who once made a similar statement) I get the feeling he understands these things with a far greater degree of clarity. This ‘convergence’ is the unifying merger of these sciences into a vast paradigm shifting new form of science / technology. It’s the fusion of these sciences into one. It’s really hard to even describe. It’s hard enough trying to describe the key component nanotechnology. I think its impossible to even conceptualize the world of nano without watching the following short video presentation:

A 482 page document, titled Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance, which is the outcome of a 2001 workshop by the National Science Foundation & Dept. of Commerce explains convergence this way:

The integration and synergy of the four technologies (nano-bio-info-cogno) originate from the nanoscale, where the building blocks of matter are established. This picture symbolizes the confluence of technologies that now offers the promise of improving human lives in many ways, and the realignment of traditional disciplinary boundaries that will be needed to realize this potential. New and more direct pathways towards human goals are envisioned in working habits, in economic activity, and in the humanities.

In the early decades of the twenty-first century, concentrated efforts can unify science based on unity in nature, thereby advancing the combination of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and new humane technologies based in cognitive science. With proper attention to ethical issues and societal needs, converging technologies could determine a tremendous improvement in human abilities, societal outcomes, the nations productivity, and the quality of life. This is a broad, cross-cutting, emerging and timely opportunity of interest to individuals, society and humanity in the long term.

The phrase convergent technologies refers to the synergistic combination of four major NBIC (Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno) provinces of science and technology, each of which is currently progressing at a rapid rate: (a) nanoscience and nanotechnology; (b) biotechnology and biomedicine, including genetic engineering; (c) information technology, including advanced computing and communications; (d) cognitive science, including cognitive neuroscience.

In short, the idea is to create an entire new realm of science, and therefore ‘life’, by unifying these key technology paradigms into one new format. It’s not merely to propose creating new lifeforms via genetic engineering, but rather create cyborgs at the cellular scale. Meaning each cell is in itself a biological nanobot cyborg that is alone artificially intelligent, yet are also meant to function collectively in many cases. Then these are to serve a wide array of uses from neural brain implants to ubiquitous intelligent panels and components on NASA spaceships.

The document mentioned is in effect perhaps the ultimate Transhumanism manifesto in existence, and the list of federal agencies and their collaborators in just that 2002 NBIC document is exhaustive:

White House, National Science Foundation, Department of Commerce, Newt Gingrich, NASA, National Institutes of Health, Hewlet Packard, Institute for Global Futures, National Science and Technology Councils Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science Engineering and Technology (NSET), IBM, Raytheon, Lucent, University of California, Stanford University, Sandia National Labs, Brandeis University, MIT, University of Washington, University of Strathclyde, Tissue Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, University of Louisville, NYU Medical School, University of Calgary, Duke University, University of Texas, UCSB, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Carnegie Melon University, Department of Defense, DARPA, Naval Research Laboratory, Defense For Research, New England Complex Systems Institute, University of Virginia, University of Maryland, Institute of Nanotechnology, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Commision on the Future of Aerospace, US Nuclear Regulatory Commision, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, The EPA, Department of Chemistry, Princeton Materials Institute …

One notable name from that list is Newt Gingrich. Newt did a key keynote presentation, and in it he refers to our current era in time as the “Age of Transitions”:

Figure A.2. The Age of Transitions.

We are starting to live through two patterns of change. The first is the enormous computer and communications revolution described above. The second, only now beginning to rise, is the combination of the nanotechnology-biology-information revolution. These two S curves will overlap. It is the overlapping period that we are just beginning to enter, and it is that period that I believe will be an Age of Transitions.

Focusing on computers and communications is only the first step toward understanding the Age of Transitions. While we are still in the early stages of the computer-communications pattern of change, we are already beginning to see a new, even more powerful pattern of change that will be built on a synergistic interaction between three different areas: the nano world, biology, and information.

The sciences have reached a watershed at which they must combine in order to advance most rapidly. The new renaissance must be based on a holistic view of science and technology that envisions new technical possibilities and focuses on people. The unification of science and technology can yield results over the next two decades on the basis of four key principles: material unity at the nanoscale, NBIC transforming tools, hierarchical systems, and improvement of human performance.

If anyone out there underestimates Newt Gingrich I highly recommend you read his lengthy contribution to that document. He goes on:

We are living through two tremendous patterns of scientific-technological change: an overlapping of a computer-communications revolution and a nanotechnology-biology-information revolution. Each alone would be powerful; combined, the two patterns guarantee that we will be in constant transition as one breakthrough or innovation follows another.

One last Newt quote:

Computing is a key element in this revolution.

And that brings us back to Obama, and his new friends at Google. Recent news has Obama popping up in my Google News Gadgets I normally use to monitor whenever Google or DARPA pop up in news articles with the term “artificial intelligence”. In particular interest is Obama’s alliance with Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google. It turns out that Eric not only endorsed Obama before his presidential victory, but he even went as far as to hit the campaign trail with him during the last month. See video here of Eric discussing his endorsement, and here where he was featured in Obama’s 30 minute infomercial. In the time since the election ended, he’s now one of Obama’s special economic advisers. Another Google name, in Obama’s transition team is Sonal Shah.

This is the trailer for my upcoming film, “an unholy alliance”, which chronicles the Google-NASA-DARPA alliance.

The Google-Obama alliance brings context to my assertions of Obama’s initial ‘revolutionary’ technologies statement when you consider the NASA-Google alliance which Google & NASA press releases described the partnership as being focused on “massively distributed computing” and “bio-info-nano convergence“.

Al Gore also comes to mind here considering he’s been on Google’s board of senior advisers since shortly after he “lost” the 2000 election when he also began his “Global Warming” ‘crusade’. Considering the above reasons alone I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if we soon hear of Gore becoming Obama’s new “Chief Technology Officer”.

While Obama has been somewhat sketchy about how he intends to deal with NASA funding matters, I think with my above elaborations his following quote on the subject gains new light:

“What direction do we take the space program in? Once we have a sense of what’s going to be most valuable for us in terms of gaining knowledge, then I think we’ll able to adjust the budget so that we’re going all out on what it is that we’ve decided to do.”

Back to Google, and that Converging Technologies doocument, I’d like to point out one more thing. In the same sense that Google’s cofounders want everybody to have Google enabled neural implants, the drafters of the NBIC document also envision what they call the “collective social system“.

-Obama’s Council on Foreign Relations crew.

Add these names to their list below:

William M. Daley – CFR – On Obama’s transitionary team. Daley currently serves on the Boards of Directors of Boeing, Merck & Co., Inc, Boston Properties, Inc., and Loyola University Chicago. In 1993, he served as special counsel to the President on issues relating to the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Michael Froman - CFR -  President and Chief Executive Officer of CitiInsurance and a Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is also on the advisory board for president-elect Barack Obama’s presidential transition team.

Michelle Obama – CFR – Link (then read the sites homepage).

Steve Watson
Infowars.net

Meet some of president elect Obama’s leading foreign and domestic policy advisers and likely administration members, every one of them a prominent member of the Council On Foreign Relations.

Will these people bring about “change” or will they continue to hold up the same entrenched system forged by the corporate elite for decades?

Susan E. Rice – Council on Foreign Relations, The Brookings Institution – Served as Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs under Clinton from 1997 to 2001. Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright is a longtime mentor and family friend to Rice. Critics charge that she is is ill disposed towards Europe, has little understanding of the Middle East and would essentially follow the same policies of Condoleeza Rice if appointed the next Secretary of State or the National Security Adviser.

Anthony Lake – CFR, PNAC – Bill Clinton’s first national security adviser, who was criticized for the administration’s failure to confront the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 and now acknowledges the inaction as a major mistake.

Zbigniew Brzezinski – CFR, Trilateral Commission – Brzezinski is widely seen as the man who created Al Qaeda, and was involved in the Carter Administration plan to give arms, funding and training to the mujahideen in Afghanistan.

Richard Clarke – CFR – Former chief counter-terrorism adviser on the U.S. National Security Council under Bush. Notoriously turned against the Bush administration after 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. Also advised Madeleine Albright during the Genocide in Rwanda.

Ivo Daalder – CFR, Brookings, PNAC – Co-authored a Washington Post op-ed with neocon Robert Kagan arguing that interventionism is a bipartisan affair that should be undertaken with the approval of our democratic allies.

Dennis Ross – CFR, Trilateral Commission, PNAC – Served as the director for policy planning in the State Department under President George H. W. Bush and special Middle East coordinator under President Bill Clinton. A noted supporter of the Iraq war, Ross is also a Foreign Affairs Analyst for the Fox News Channel.

Lawrence Korb – CFR, Brookings – Director of National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Has criticized manor of the invasion of Iraq but has detailed plans to increase the manpower of the United States Army to fight the war on terror and to “spread liberal democratic values throughout the Middle East”.

Bruce Reidel – CFR, Brookings – Former CIA analyst who wishes to expand the war on terror to fight Al Qaeda across the globe. Considered to be the reason behind Barack Obama’s Hawkish views on Pakistan and his Pro India leanings on Kashmir.

Stephen Flynn – CFR – Has been attributed with the idea for Obama’s much vaunted “Civilian Security Force”. Flynn has written: “The United States should roughly replicate the Federal Reserve model by creating a Federal Security Reserve System (FSRS) with a national board of governors, 10 regional Homeland Security Districts, and 92 local branches called Metropolitan Anti-Terrorism Committees. The objective of this system would be to develop self-funding mechanisms to more fully engage a broad cross-section of American society to protect the country’s critical foundations from the widespread disruption that would arise from a terrorist attack.”

Madeline Albright - CFR, Brookings – Currently serves on the Council on Foreign Relations Board of directors. Secretary of State and US Ambassador to the United Nations under Clinton. Did not take action against the genocide in Rwanda. Defended the sanctions against Iraq under Saddam Hussein. When asked by CBS’s 60 Minutes about the effects of sanctions: “We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” Albright replied: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.”

This is by no means an exhaustive list. Of course, had John McCain become president, being a member of the CFR himself, his administration would have been replete with CFR representatives also. Max Boot, Lawrence Eagleburger and Henry Kissinger, to name but a few, are all CFR members and were all advisors to the McCain campaign.

Please do your own research and add more names in the comments section of this report. It is important to document how these people are a part of the engine of global elitism and do not represent change. Only with this understanding will others wake up to the false left-right paradigm and be able to create the environment for real political change.

-Obama Website Scrubs Mandatory Community Service Call.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, November 10, 2008

Following a controversy over language that appeared on Barack Obama’s official website suggesting that Americans would be mandated to complete up to 100 hours of community service as part of a national service program, the original text has been memory-holed and replaced with a more sanitized version.

Despite numerous bloggers picking up on the switch, along with screenshots from before and after proving the language was changed, mesmerized Obama supporters are still claiming that that detractors had invented the language and that the website had not been altered.

The text from Obama’s change.gov website, which went online shortly after the election result, originally appeared as follows (emphasis mine).

Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year.

The text was changed at some point on Friday afternoon/evening to the following (emphasis mine).

Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free.

See the two different versions in the following screenshots (click for enlargements).

On a separate area of the website, the program was also described under the heading “Require 100 hours of service in college,” but this has also since disappeared.

Clearly, the use of the word “require” suggested that the program would be mandatory, stoking fears that such community service programs would be one aspect of Obama’s promised “civilian national security force” that is “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military.

“The language of requiring students to serve and the creation of a “Classroom Corps” sparked a surge of criticism from bloggers for bringing back memories of the much-publicized video of marching Obama youth and Obama’s “civilian national security force,” which the candidate said in July would be just as powerful and well-funded as the U.S. military,” reports World Net Daily.

“Gateway Pundit called Obama’s plan the “creation of his Marxist youth corps,” and DBKP commented, “‘Choosing’ to serve should be approved by parents – not required by the government. No amount of good intentions can sugar-coat words like ‘mandatory,’ ‘compulsory’ or ‘required.’”

The fact that the language has been sanitized suggests the people behind Obama’s transition to power were worried about elevating the controversy surrounding Obama’s “national civilian security force,” a wildly popular story on the Internet and blogs, but one that has received scant attention from the mainstream media.

Despite the documented fact that the text was altered on Friday, Obama kool-aid drinkers refuse to acknowledge it, claiming that bloggers simply made up the story and that the website was never changed.

“They are calling me — and all of you who have written about this so far — liars. Despite the facts of the screenshots. This is how far they are prepared to go,” writes one blogger, adding, “The highlighted text that was the subject of our previous article is just gone. Gone. Gone without explanation or acknowledgement. Furthermore one of their minions writes in a comment telling us that it was never there in the first place, that I misquoted it. Is it really going to be this easy to manipulate the truth, to manipulate us? Evidently they think so.”

A Newsvine blogger also described the efforts of Obama supporters to dismiss the story as a concocted hoax.

Fears of “youth brigades” or civilian stasi units increased following Obama’s appointment of Rahm Emanuel to chief-of staff.

In his book, “The Plan: Big Ideas for America,” Emanuel writes: “It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, all Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.”

The book also notes, “Some Republicans will squeal about individual freedom, ruling out any likelihood that they would let people opt out of universal citizen service.”

Emanuel is also an enthusiastic supporter of the United States Public Service Academy Act, a lobbying group founded in 2006 in order to promote the foundation of an American public service academy modeled on the military academies – a youth corps whose students would be trained in “civilian internship in the armed forces”.

-Obama appoints Google CEO as economic adviser.

SEE ALSO:
*Google’s A.I. quest to become God-On-Earth.
*Why I FEAR Obama like no other, like no other.
*An Inconvenient Truth on Al Gore: Google & NASA A.I.

The Hindu:

London, (PTI): US President-elect Barack Obama has appointed a 17-member high-level team of advisers including billionaire investor Warren Buffett and Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt to guide him in channelising the economy, a media report says.

“US President-elect Barack Obama has appointed a team of high-level advisers including billionaire investor Warren Buffett and Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt to guide his thoughts on the economy ahead of taking office on January 20,” the Telegraph report stated.

Looking back…

LA Times (UPDATED ENTRY):

In Washington, the firm spent $3 million on lobbying in the first nine months of 2008. Its stable of lobbyists includes Anthony Podesta’s firm, the Podesta Group. Podesta’s brother, John Podesta, has become one of Barack Obama’s top advisors.

Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Schmidt said his planned endorsement of the Illinois senator is a “natural evolution” from his role as an informal adviser to the Obama campaign. … Congress is considering measures that could have an adverse impact on Google’s business, including laws that could limit companies’ ability to deliver personally targeted online advertisements and rules that would allow telecommunications companies to charge different prices for different levels of Internet service. … Google employees have contributed $487,355 to Sen. Obama’s campaign and $20,600 to Sen. McCain’s as of Aug. 31. Mr. Schmidt hasn’t donated to either. … On Tuesday, the Google CEO will appear with Sen. Obama at a Florida event, where they will moderate a panel on the economy. Mr. Schmidt said it will be his “first time on the trail.” … In conversations with Obama campaign advisers, Mr. Schmidt said, he has advocated policies to improve and broaden technology’s reach, including federal research-and-development tax breaks and an increase in science scholarships and teachers. … Mr. Schmidt visited Obama’s Chicago headquarters earlier this year and met with its tech and new-media team. “Eric was like a celebrity coming through here,” said Joe Rospars, Sen. Obama’s 27-year-old new-media director.

Vally Wag:

In exchange for his late-to-the-party endorsement of Barack Obama, Google CEO Eric Schmidt got a spot on Obama’s prime-time infomercial last night. Note how Schmidt explains his decision, made only after Obama took a substantial lead in the polls: “When I read his economic plan and saw the people endorsing it, Warren Buffett, I thought, ‘This is the right plan for America.’” In other words, Schmidt didn’t endorse Obama until he saw it was popular with the right people, and might help Google get its search deal with Yahoo passed under an Obama administration. Brave! We still don’t think you’ll get that government job, Eric. CLICK FOR VIDEO

Financial Times:

Google may be among the top ten donors to Barack Obama’s presidential election campaign, but it has received around 10 times its contribution back from the Illinois senator in advertising on its properties in the first quarter.

Search Engine Watch:

Is there a line? I think there is, and Google CEO Eric Schmidt crossed it this week by heading out on the campaign trail with presidential candidate Barack Obama. … On one hand, Google needs a bigger voice in politics if they’re going to convince legislating bodies that they in no way have a monopoly and the world would be better off if everything could be Google-centric. … Sell me on change, sell me on better. You can also sell me on reform and realistic expectations. Please, please don’t tell me you’re on the road with perhaps the most charismatic political figure of our time not representing your company’s interests.

Network World:

While Gen. Colin Powell’s endorsement of Democratic presidential candidate Barak Obama received the lion’s share of the press this weekend, Obama racked up another endorsement almost as telling, that of Google CEO Eric Schmidt. The Wall St. Journal reports that Schmidt is personally endorsing Obama (Google itself remains “neutral”) and will be hitting the campaign trail with the candidate this week in Florida. The endorsement isn’t a huge surprise, as Schmidt has been advising Obama on technology policy, and specifically clean energy, for a while now. But the move has observers wondering: is Schmidt gunning for the CTO post in the Obama administration?

eWeek:

Google CEO Eric Schmidt is hitting the campaign trail with Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Search engine giant Google says Schmidt and Obama share similar views on technology, which makes me think Obama loves cloud computing, Web services, and the mobile and wireless Internet.

PC Magazine:

Google actually won this election. Every way you slice Obama’s tech policy, it is good news for Google. … I mean, come on. On Obama’s Web site, he actually mentions Google as a model, pledging to create “a Google-like search engine that will allow ordinary Americans to track federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and loans online.”

DSL Reports:

Business Week suggests that should Obama be elected President, TCP/IP co-creator and Google “Chief Technology Evangelist” Vint Cerf is on a short list to be the nation’s CT.

The Machinist:

Schmidt is the second high-ranking Googler to make such an endorsement, with Vint “I actually co-invented the Internet” Cerf making a similar endorsement last week

Huffington Post:

Google Inc. Chief Executive Eric Schmidt will hit the campaign trail this week on behalf of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, signaling Mr. Schmidt’s push for a greater voice in politics while giving the Obama campaign a boost from a highly desirable constituency.

Macworld:

A study by The Center for Responsive Politics shows that Silicon Valley-based companies backed Obama by a better than 5 to 1 ratio.

A CNBC report has some startling figures on the top companies in Silicon Valley. President Obama out performed John McCain to the tune of $1,437,719 to $267,041 in fundraising from employees at Silicon Valley companies. … Google was Obama’s single largest corporate donor, racking up $485,961 in donations compared to only $20,600 for McCain. … Yahoo also had a large gap in its support, its workers gave $100,276 to the Obama campaign, but only $4,050 to McCain.

Google Public Policy Blog:

Barack Obama added another “first” to his already notable list yesterday: he became the first U.S. presidential candidate — and, I’m guessing, the first high-level elected official in any country — to have a ready answer to a standard Google engineering interview question. Asked by Eric Schmidt about “the most efficient way to sort a million 32-bit integers,” Sen. Obama replied that “the bubble sort would be the wrong way to go.” Though some might view this as shameless pandering to the bucket-sorting community, others will see a bold pragmatism.

-Will Obama “Change” The Bush Police State Or Expand It?

Will liberals go back to sleep now the “messiah” has arrived?

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Now that Barack Obama has become the 44th President of the United States we offer a challenge – will those who elected him be able to progress past their fawning idolatry and actually pressure Obama to deliver on his mandate of “change,” or will the architecture of the Bush police state remain in place while the American empire expands?

Obama’s acceptance speech assertion that “change has come to America” is likely to signal the beginning and end of the “change” that millions of Americans naively thought they were voting for.

That’s it folks, the puppet has been rotated. Sorry to be so cynical, but the “change” you thought you were electing is already over and done with. The color of his skin matters about as much as whether he has an R or a D next to his name. The egregious spending will continue, government will balloon in size, American soldiers will be used as cannon fodder for more interventionist wars of the military-industrial complex, U.S. citizens will continue to have their phone calls tapped and their rights curtailed, and the Federal Reserve will continue to rule the financial system with an iron fist while the middle class is squeezed out of existence.

How can Obama claim that “change has come to America” when he hasn’t even set foot in the White House? What specifically has Obama promised to change beside his plan to redecorate the White House?

It seems that a lot of the truthers and activists, as well as the liberal left, seem to have forgotten that the responsibility to “change” America rests with the American people. As Gandhi said, we have to be the change we want to see in the world.

Obama is no messiah, he is a representative, a public servant, for those that elected him into office. Will those that voted for him in the name of changing eight years of Bush administration malfeasance hold his feet to the fire and demand the repeal of the American police state that Bush has crafted, or will they simply go back to sleep and consider their work done simply because another Democrat is in office?

The majority of liberals gleefully supported or simply ignored the bombing of Serbia and the genocidal sanctions against Iraq because of the cult of personality built up around Bill Clinton. Will Obama be another ideologue for the left to associate their power with or will they actually demand that he restore America to the Constitution? Will the left ninny and obsess about non-issues like gay marriage and welfare programs while allowing the Bush police state to remain in place?

Remember, the Democrats were handed the Congress and the Senate in 2006 with a mandate for change. What has changed since that time? Nothing whatsoever. American troops are still in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Patriot Act is still in place, phone calls are still being tapped and war criminals who committed impeachable offences still go free.

But in an attempt to avoid being labeled “right-wing racists” and all manner of spurious labels now being carelessly heaped upon anyone who doesn’t follow the herd and bow down at the feet of Lord Obama, we’re going to remain constructive and set Obama, and by extension those that voted for him, some challenges to bring real “change” to America and restore the country to the Constitution and the ideals of the Founders that Obama mentioned in his speech last night.

Let’s be generous and give Obama the whole four years of his initial term to make significant progress on the following issues. Here are some questions about “change” that we are going to be keeping track of until 2012.

- Will Obama repeal Patriot Acts I and II as well as reversing Bush’s signing statement and acknowledging the repeal of the John Warner Defense Authorization Act?

- Will Obama support Dennis Kucinich’s efforts to bring war crimes charges against Bush, Cheney and others for deceiving the country into a war or will he protect them against such charges like Nancy Pelosi has done?

- Will Obama bring war crimes charges against Bush, Cheney and others for authorizing torture and will the torture of suspects under U.S. detention, a complete violation of both the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions, cease under an Obama administration?

- Will Obama withdraw American troops from Iraq and Afghanistan without sending them away again to bomb another broken-backed third world country in the name of a UN-supported “humanitarian” war?

- Will Obama end the warrantless secret surveillance and phone-taps of American citizens?

- Will Obama follow through on his rhetorical support for the second amendment or will he seek to ban guns as he did in Illinois?

- Will Obama cease his support for the Bush-administration backed banker bailouts, hated by the majority of Americans, and target the real cause of the problem – the Federal Reserve – or will he continue to give taxpayers’ money to banks who are merely hoarding it all for themselves?

- Will Obama seek to continue the militarization of America and preparations for martial law through Northcom and the secret government or will he dismantle the police state that has been constructed over the last eight years by the Bush administration?

There can be no excuses – either Obama will be proven to be a liar or he will, backed by Democratic control of Congress and the Senate, follow through on his mandate for “change”.

People like Congressman Ron Paul are too long in the tooth and have watched too many political campaigns to glibly jump on the bandwagon of political platitudes.

Those caught up in Obama fever who would have otherwise voted for Ron Paul should heed the warnings of Dr. No.

As the coming of the new messiah drew closer, Paul had some sobering reminders for a CNN audience last night, pointing out that Obama will not cut spending, government will get bigger and more intrusive, foreign policy will remain the same and unpopular financial bailouts will continue.

We hope we are wrong, but forgive us for our cynicism, because whatever has emerged from the two-party monopoly in the past has always proven to be the problem – not the solution.

-Ron Paul Warns Of Great Shift Toward Global Government Under Obama.

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, Nov 6, 2008

Texas Congressman and 2008 presidential candidate Ron Paul has warned that the euphoria surrounding the election of Barack Obama combined with the overwhelming fear of major international crises could facilitate a cataclysmic shift toward a new world order.

Appearing live on the Alex Jones show earlier today, the Congressman spoke of a feeling of dread surrounding the change of guard both in the White House and on Capitol Hill:

“I do feel it but I don’t think it’s brand new, I didn’t wake up with it, I’ve had it for a while, I don’t think the election was a surprise, but the rhetoric is getting pretty strong and they are getting very bold.” he commented.

Speaking on the stage management of the election, and calling it a “huge distraction” from real issues, the Congressman outlined how both candidates were pre-positioned by the elite interests with the knowledge that either would satisfactorily serve their agenda:

“I think McCain was obviously a back up candidate in case something happened where Obama didn’t win, they’d have been satisfied with McCain, but they have been positioning Obama for a long long time.”

“This started even before he announced he was running. Anybody who would have gotten that much favorable coverage for so long, you know that the plans are laid for him to be the individual that’s going to be taking care of the corporate elite.” the Congressman continued.

Paul also warned that Democrats gains within the House and the Senate make for a particularly worrying situation of absolute power, similar to that held by the Republican party eight years ago.

“Just as a Republican Congress wouldn’t say boo to a Republican Congress, you know that the Democratic Congress is NEVER going to stand up.”

“I think it is very dangerous and the first year is going to be the most dangerous year.” Paul stated. “Just think of Bush’s first year, he also had the 9/11 thing that he could use to scare everybody to death. And Obama will use the financial crisis, which will get worse, and there will be more military skirmishes around the world.” Paul asserted.

The Congressman also warned that many Republican representatives may go along with Obama just to win favor with the electorate and be seen to follow popular opinion.

Commenting on the much touted “International crisis” that luminaries such as Colin Powell, Joe Biden and Zbigniew Brzezinski have all guaranteed will occur within weeks of Obama entering the White House, the Congressman stated that he believes it may be a catalyst for a shift toward world government:

“I think it’s going to be an announcement of a new monetary order, and they’ll probably make it sound very limited, they’re not going to say this is world government, even though it is if you control the world’s money and you control the military, which they do indirectly.”

“A world central bank, worldwide regulation and world control of the whole system, of all the commodities and all the natural resources, what else can you call it other than world government?”

“Obama wouldn’t be there if he didn’t toe the line, and when the meeting starts on November 15th for the new monetary system, this could be the beginning of the end of what’s left of our national sovereignty.” Paul said, also warning that the global media are already hailing Obama as the world’s leader.

With Obama having previously announced that he will shift military attention to Pakistan, the Congressman also warned that the president elect will, thanks to the previous administration, have the necessary precedent to escalate the war on terror:

“It’s the philosophy of the Bush doctrine, which was that we have the right to preemptively strike anybody and then he even expanded that recently by saying we don’t have to invade and conquer, but we have the right to go in and bomb anybody without their permission, and that’s why we go into Pakistan and Syria, which are acts of war. So they have the tools to do it and the sentiment and most Americans are oblivious to what is happening.”

Paul also suggested that any escalation could be facilitated by false flag events such as Gulf of Tonkin style incidents.

Urging listeners not to lose faith in the campaign for liberty and the quest to restore and the Republic, Ron Paul spoke of reason to look ahead:

“We have to look for sources of optimism… ultimately though all that happens to us is a result of philosophy and beliefs and convictions and that is where I think we have made some inroads. We have drawn attention to the importance of monetary policy, the importance of the central bank, the importance of how government causes so much problems, it’s just that we’re in the minority.” Paul said.

“We have to continue to do what we are doing, you are in the business of passing on and spreading information, that, to me, is most crucial, getting more people engaged, more people understanding what the issues are, nothing else is more important than that. Then when you see an opportunity we have to turn this into political action.” the Congressman concluded.

-Barack Obama: the Banker’s Choice.

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
November 5, 2008

As an example of the sort of “change” we are likely to see now that Obama has won the presidency, consider the man he is likely to select to run the Department of Banker Giveaways, formerly known as the Treasury Department: Gov. Jon Corzine, the former chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs and Bilderberg attendee. Corzine is on the “short list,” along with former Clintonites Lawrence Summers and Robert Rubin. Summers is a Bilderberg and Council on Foreign Relations member and Robert Rubin, director and senior counselor of Citigroup, was the fifth chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Bilderberg Society member.

READ IT

———-

ALSO:

-Obama’s First Appointment Is Son Of Zionist Terrorist.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, November 6, 2008

Rahm Emanuel’s father was member of militant terror group that bombed hotels, massacred villagers – Obama pick is keen supporter of lobbying group aimed at creating militarized youth brigades

President elect Barack Obama’s first appointment, Rahm Emanuel, who is set to become chief-of-staff, is the son of a member of the Zionist terrorist group Irgun, which was responsible for bombing hotels, marketplaces as well as the infamous Deir Yassin massacre, in which hundreds of Palestinian villagers were slaughtered.

Revelations about Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers, a Weather Underground domestic terrorist, which dogged him during the final weeks of the campaign trail, pale in significance to his selection of Emanuel, whose father, Rahm Emanuel, was an Irgun member.

Irgun has been labeled a terrorist organization by both The New York Times newspaper and by the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry.

Irgun was closely affiliated with the widely feared hardcore terrorist Stern Gang, an organization that carried out assassinations, train bombings and bombed police stations in an attempt to pave the way for unrestricted immigration of Jews into Palestine. Irgun operated in Palestine between 1931 and 1948.

Following the ideology of right-wing Revisionist Zionism, Irgun’s doctrine was that, “Every Jew had the right to enter Palestine; only active retaliation would deter the Arabs and the British; only Jewish armed force would ensure the Jewish state”.

This manifested itself by way of terror attacks such as the July 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which killed 91 people. In 2006, Israelis including former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun, attended a 60th anniversary celebration of the bombing organized by the Menachem Begin Centre.

Buses and marketplaces were also a target for Irgun, who were widely chastised for favoring attacks against civilian targets.

The widely condemned Deir Yassin massacre, which occurred in April 1948, involved Irgun working in consort with the Stern Gang and going house to house slaughtering Palestinian villagers. Eyewitness accounts of spies working for mainstream Jewish authorities, such as Meir Pa’il, reported Irgun members running around shooting civilians “full of lust for murder”.

“I saw the horrors that the fighters had created. I saw bodies of women and children, who were murdered in their houses in cold blood by gunfire, with no signs of battle and not as the result of blowing up the houses,” said eyewitness Eliahu Arbel.

“[One body was] a woman who must have been eight months pregnant,” noted Jacques de Reynier, a French-Swiss Representative of the International Red Cross, “He hit in the stomach, with powder burns on her dress indicating she’d been shot point-blank.”.

The son of a man who helped carry out this slaughter has now been selected by Obama to be his chief-of-staff. Cries of “sins of the father” lose their gusto when one considers the fact that, after the 1996 re-election of Bill Clinton, Rahm Emanuel “Was so angry at the president’s enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting ‘Dead! … Dead! … Dead!’ and plunging the knife into the table after every name.” Sounds like a nice guy.

Rahm Emanuel is also an enthusiastic supporter of the United States Public Service Academy Act, a lobbying group founded in 2006 in order to promote the foundation of an American public service academy modeled on the military academies – a youth corps whose students would be trained in “civilian internship in the armed forces”.

This rings the alarm bells when we recall Obama’s pledge to create a “civilian national security force” that is “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military.

A creepy You Tube video of a brown-shirt style Obama youth brigade chanting and marching military style emerged last month, raising fears about where the messianic cult-like status of Obama’s image could eventually lead.

-Pentagon ready to brief Obama immediately.

RAWSTORY:

The Pentagon said it was prepared to begin briefing the president-elect’s team immediately, stressing the importance of a smooth wartime transition, as the US voted for a new president Tuesday.

“If somebody were to show up here tomorrow, we would start working with them tomorrow,” said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman.

Changes of US administrations historically are periods of heightened risk, but wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and an ever present danger of attack by Al-Qaeda make an orderly transition crucial this year.

Whitman said Defense Secretary Robert Gates has undertaken “pretty unprecedented early preparations to minimize disruption while ensuring we provide the most comprehensive guidance possible.”

A Pentagon task force has identified and is highlighting the most important events, milestones and actions that the new administration will face in the first 90 days, he said.

Among them are troop rotations and the presentation of the 2010 defense budget, which is due to go to Congress in February, just weeks after the new president — Republican John McCain or Democrat Barack Obama — moves into the White House. The others were not disclosed.

“Obviously, they (the incoming administration) will give immediate attention to whatever it is they want to, whatever their priorities are,” Whitman said.

“But there are some things that in the natural course of this department have to be addressed, like the budget, or you’re not going to have money,” he said.

Work space and computers have been set aside in the Pentagon for as many as two dozen people assigned by the new president to manage the transition.

Transition team members must receive security clearances, but Whitman said that can be done quickly for at least small numbers of people that typically make up the initial teams.

There are at least 215 political appointees at the Pentagon who will be replaced in the transition.

About 50 are presidentially appointed positions that require Senate confirmation, which can move slowly.

Gates has polled members of the outgoing team to see who would be prepared to stay on in a new administration until their replacement can be confirmed.

A number of them have agreed to stay on, if asked, but other key positions are already vacant.

(VIDEO) Obama: The Revelation.

-Obama: Government Should “Change Behavior” by Raising Energy Bills.

NOTE: What he’s talking about constitutes ‘central economic planning’, which isn’t mere socialist, but instead is communist in nature. More evidence that Obama is what I’d call Neocommunist.

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
November 2, 2008

In the video here, taped in 2007, Barack Obama told public television in Iowa “it is undisputable that the climate is getting warmer” and the government should jack up energy bills up through “price signals” in order to force Americans to accept the globalist agenda. “I think it is important for us to send some price signals to change behavior. You know, if electricity goes up, people start becoming more mindful of their electricity bill,” Obama told Associated Press reporter Mike Glover.

Should we expect Obama to revise his contention about global warming now that all four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA’s GISS, UAH, RSS) have released data indicating that over the past year global temperatures have dropped precipitously? Will Obama now admit that solar activity is a much larger driver of climate change than selfish Americans driving SUVs or leaving the lights on?

No, because that does not jive with the austerity and impoverishment agenda of our rulers. “We must address the global climate crisis with a single voice, and impose rules that apply worldwide,” declared General Lord Guthrie, director of N.M. Rothschild & Sons, at a secretive Trilateral Commission meeting last year. Guthrie’s use of the word “impose” is not incidental. “We cannot address this crisis as 180 separate nation-states. We must act as a single world state.” In other words, the globalists plan to use the cooked up — or maybe it should be cooled down — climate ruse to usher in a one world government.

Both Obama and McCain are up to speed on the climate change agenda, although the globalists give Sarah Palin a failing grade. “John McCain has shown far more commitment to confronting climate change than Bush has, but his teaming up with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who doubts that climate change is man-made, should raise worries,” say Michael A. Levi and Scott G. Borgerson of the Council on Foreign Relations. “Palin should immediately and explicitly embrace McCain’s support for a mandatory cap-and-trade system.” A so-called “cap-and-trade system” is shorthand for globalism and world government, as the one-world planners demand a central authority in order to implement carbon trading and carbon taxes for a problem that does not exist.

For the globalists and their minions, climate change is an ideal tool for world government. For instance, Richard Haass, president of the CFR, stated in his article “State sovereignty must be altered in globalized era,” that a system of world government must be forced on the plebs and sovereignty eliminated in order to attack climate change. “Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function,” says Haass. “Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves.”

As Dr. Eric R. Pianka, professor at the University of Texas, has revealed, eugenics and population reduction play right into this scheme. “Because of the negative effects of overpopulation on the earth, Pianka proposed that the Ebola virus be used as a tool of population reduction. Pianka also praised China’s one child policy,” writes Daniel Taylor. “China was able to turn the corner and become the leading world super power because they have a police state and they are able to force people to stop re-producing,” Pianka added.

Obama, with his CFR connected wife, plays right into the concerted effort to impose a global system of domination and control. It begins with driving SUVs and leaving the lights on and ends with United Nations mandated “sustainable development,” a radical reduction in living standards, and eventually depopulation of the sort advocated by Pianka and his supporters.

*Killing Obama: Perhaps the U.S. should bomb itself.

Ignorance Is Futile:

Begin irresistible satire:

Today’s news includes a supposed Obama assassination plot by 2 right-wing skinheads. The ‘plot’ included killing some 88 people, and beheading 14 of them. In ‘our’ crazy U.S. worldview, these must be terrorists, meaning there is a terrorist minority and therefore ‘we’ should bomb ‘ourselves’. This should also include others states such as Israel and wherever else extremist minorities within the dominant race can be found scattered loosely within the population.

The logic is simple, albeit insane. In fact, following the logic guiding U.S. foreign policy, we should bomb ourselves simply because there might be people that might conduct ‘terrorist’ attacks. There’s a vast score of the populace out there of Christian Zionists and ’super-patriot’ racists who endorse a genocidal policy towards Muslims. There’s untold numbers of ultraconservative skinheads and others who might attack the local Black church house, as they’re fueled by a totalitarian ideology of hate. A bomb-wielding terrorist may lurk around the corner at your neighborhood abortion clinic. Environmentalist Democrats and Hippies could be spiking the trees in the local forest to dissuade lumberjacks with chainsaws. Some analysts estimate that 50% of the population could be bleeding heart Liberals. Last but not least, teenage high-schoolers might conspire a mass shooting at school, and the media and others indoctrinated into the all-threats-are-terrorists mindset might declare it terrorism.

Considering how BushCo. has been actively funding Islamic terrorists within Iran to overthrow their government, Bush and Cheney should, after issuing the full scale U.S. self-attack doctrine, of course, shoot themselves. If you look in the mirror while you do it it should make sense.

D.C. should be first on the list for U.S. aircraft carriers to launch their strikes. Aircraft carrier group commanders were unavailable for comment, as they’re all currently forward deployed ‘defending’ the U.S. mainland by patrolling the seas elsewhere around the globe. Jane’s Offense Quarterly suggested they could all meet and duke it out to the finish in the high seas, with the last ship standing getting the prize of retribution of launching full scale attacks on the domestic terrorists. A senior BushCo. official optimistically estimated that cluster bombings could result in 2 dead terrorists per housing project.

Then the military needs to attack its own installations. There’s no telling where the disparate shadowy terrorists might be hiding. The National Guard and domestic police forces will be working 24 hour shifts as they attack the citizenry, each other and themselves. A careful and comprehensive strategy must be drawn up to ensure that all of the potential terrorists are killed before their scorched-earth campaigns leave themselves dead and captured.

But what should you do while waiting for the Fed’s to street sweep and carpet bomb through your neighborhood? Immediately look outside in ones own bushes to be sure they’re not digging caves in your own backyard. Reinforce your doors and cover your windows with duct tape and tarps. Next set up surveillance cameras pointing out into your neighbors yards and into their windows. Build home made linesman’s phone receivers and climb your local telephone poles to gather intel on your local phones comms. Deploy 2 liter bombs in your own mailbox if you can’t find any solid leads on your neighbors. Since the U.S. government sponsors global terrorism, your own local mailman might be suspect, and they show up at your house. Prior reason aside, he might deliver an anthrax laced letter or mailbomb, which would obviously ‘connect’ him to terrorists. After you’ve covered all possible ends, take your own life, because one day you might become a terrorist too. Your reading of this might have you already on a terrorist watch list, so maybe you’ll get lucky and they’ll do it for you.

Perhaps first the death squads should come to my house with Raptor jets and Stealth Bombers overhead. After all, one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. My writing of a satire article that talks about self-destruction including bombings and killings could clearly be considered unpatriotic. I can handle that, just so long as the Raptors shoot each other down and the Stealth Bombers crash into each other afterward.

And while we all untimely detonate in anti-terrorist fervor, other nations should do the same. Take Israel, there are Zionist Jews who call for genocidal extermination of all Muslims. Rumor has it that the U.K. is already killing IRA freedom fighters, but it may prove difficult for convince the Royal Family to self-assassinate. Many other nations will be easy, as apparently many Islamic and even Hindu nations are already engaged in self-termination.

Welcome to Crazy World, but the irony is that even without such extreme self-inflicted pre-emptive warfare actions, we’re already in it as is. If only we could figure out how to bomb fear itself, but the only real way to do that is outlined above.

-The NSA classified a ‘public’ report on wiretaps

Newsweek:When Congress passed a landmark electronic-spying bill last summer, the measure included a key provision that ordered the inspectors general of U.S. intelligence agencies to produce the first-ever public report on President Bush’s warrantless-surveillance program.

The report isn’t due until next July-long after Bush leaves office. But when the inspectors general recently submitted their first “interim” report to Congress under the measure, it wasn’t made public. Instead, the brief document, written by CIA inspector general John Helgerson, was marked classified-a move that has drawn a stiff protest from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes.

In an Oct. 10 letter, Reyes complained to Helgerson (who is coordinating the review by 16 different inspectors general) for submitting a secret interim report when Congress envisioned a document that could be shared with the public. The letter essentially said, “Here’s what the law says, please explain why you’re not following the law,” Courtney Littig, a spokeswoman for the House Intelligence Committee, tells NEWSWEEK.

Reyes’s letter also included a request that the inspectors general issue a “preservation order” preventing White House or intelligence community officials from removing or destroying documents relating to the warrantless-surveillance program. With barely three months left in the administration, Reyes wanted to make sure that “they don’t destroy anything before they walk out the door,” Littig says.

The dispute might not seem entirely unexpected. A veil of super secrecy has surrounded the program since President Bush, in the weeks after 9/11, directed the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct surveillance of phone calls and e-mails of terror suspects inside the United States without judicial warrants. The little-noticed provision for a public inspectors-general report was crucial to gaining the support of some liberal Democrats—including Sen. Barack Obama—for last summer’s bill, which allowed a modified version of the program to continue.

At the time, Obama was attacked by liberal bloggers for reversing his position on one of the most controversial provisions in the bill: a section, strongly backed by the White House, that granted blanket immunity to telecommunications companies facing lawsuits for participating in what critics charged was an illegal program. But Obama pointed to the mandate for a public report as a reason he was finally prepared to back the measure—even though it would squash lawsuits that could have led to a public airing of the extent of warrantless spying conduct by the administration. “The Inspectors General report provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted,” Obama wrote in a statement posted on his Web site on July 3. “It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues.”

Asked for comment, Michael Ortiz, a spokesman for Obama, said: “Senator Obama continues to believe that the public deserves to know that there is accountability and oversight of the surveillance program and urges that a nonclassified report from the IG be made available to Congress.” But a U.S. intelligence community official, who asked not to be identified, talking about sensitive matters, insisted there was no intent on the part of Helgerson or the other inspectors general to ignore the congressional requirement for a public report on the surveillance program. The official said the National Security Agency—which conducted the warrantless surveillance—was still reviewing the material in the interim report in an effort to see what can be declassified. “This is simply the first step. The review is not over by any means,” the official said.

Sources familiar with the interim report said there is nothing all that sensitive about it. The document merely outlines the “scope” of the review that the inspectors general plan to conduct in preparation for the final report due next July.

As for the demands for a preservation order, the official said: “Directives have been issued to preserve records relating to this surveillance program. But, as Congress is aware, intelligence community inspectors general have clearly defined authorities. Those authorities don’t, as a rule, extend to giving orders to the White House.”

Littig says the intelligence committee has no evidence that documents about the surveillance program were being destroyed. But, she adds that given the tangled history of the program—and the limited disclosure provided to Congress over the years—”we’ve learned to be very specific.”

-Biden warns of new terror attacks after Obama is elected.

No One Has To Die Tomorrow (visit original post for included videos):

Joe Biden the seemingly clairvoyant senator from Delaware, and vice presidential nominee was out making predictions, again. The last time Joe was using his crystal ball was on September 10, 2001, one day prior to the 9/11 attacks.

He was at the national press club when he made an astounding prediction, that came true hours later. “We will have diverted all that money to address the least likely threat while the real threats come into this country in the hold of a ship, or the belly of a plane, or are smuggled into a city in the middle of the night in a vial in a backpack.”

Just this past Sunday, while out fundraising in Seattle Washington, Biden spoke about what he saw the future looking like, and this time he was much more precise. He offers a timeline, a JFK comparison, and a crisis.

“Mark my words…It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy…Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

He also offers four or five scenarios that, according to ABC news, include the middle east, Russia, a nuclear capable Pakistan, and of course Osama bin Laden. Biden wants to remind you that al Qaeda is everywhere, “and its real”! Still, all that fear mongering was not nearly as concerning as his warning of our civil unrest, here we are only offered a McGuffin – but what he is saying is chilling.

“we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”

“Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?’ We’re gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I’m asking you now, I’m asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you’re going to have to reinforce us.”

He is seriously asking us to just trust him, stick with us later no matter what, take whatever we give you, don’t question, “the one” because he will know better than you. He Promises that whatever is going to happen will probably make everyone so mad that the illusion may not hold; but look away, continue your quest for hope. Any type of event would be difficult to pull off, there is little trust for government in America right now, low approval ratings all around. In reality there will be no change from Obama, and at the very least, we will notice and six months into his presidency they will no longer be able to hide it.

“There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, ‘Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don’t know about that decision…Because if you think the decision is sound when they’re made, which I believe you will when they’re made, they’re not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they’re popular, they’re probably not sound.”

This is when they’ll begin to squeeze and we will not have any say because it is just too big for the non intellectuals to get,

“It’s so much more important than that. It’s so much more complicated than that. And Barack gets it.”

Biden is outlining some kind of event that may lead to a sick dictatorship, where the eroded Constitution will come in handy, as will the new laws that the bush presidency put on the books, like PDD 51.  We cannot just trust Biden, especially when he’s predicting an “international crisis” , Biden was linked closely to the financiers of the 9/11 attacks. In the days following 9/11, he met with Pakistani ISI General Mahmood Ahmed, the man who gave the order to get one hundred thousand dollars wired to Mohammed Atta.

Biden claims to have met with Ahmed to pepper him with threats, but has offered no reason why he let them  leave the US without any investigation at all. Although he has been confronted on these issues by the independent media, the main stream media has failed to cover this topic, and has been forgotten throughout his race towards victory.

We cannot forget, because warnings like the one he gave in the Emerald City on Sunday, must be drawn out and put on display. The line we are walking is fine, we are heading down an uncomfortable path. They have a grip on the children who will become men and woman during the Obama Regime. Children singing his praises, “we’re gonna change it, and rearrange it” . And young men dressing up in military gear, ripping out their individuality and self worth pledging to be – “because of Obama”.

Biden was speaking in riddles but it is not too hard to figure out that it doesn’t sound very good. Within a year we will be questioning President Barack Hussein Obama. Bush had a rough first few months too, 9/11 changed that. There appears to be a definite plan here, as well as a message:

America will be changing, and you’re not going to like it.

-

–

See Also:
Colin Powell: “There’s going to be a crisis come along on the 21st or 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.”

*Big UPDATE to my “Why I FEAR Obama” post.

With all of the attention to it lately (thanks Jeff) I figured I’d add in many things I’ve been wanting to. It has 16 new ‘isn’t because’ topic ‘questions’ bringing the total to about 48.