Monday, July 25, 2005

7/25/05 - 7/31/05

You have to agree that the housing market in the U.S. is ridiculous. The rate at which the prices have been increasing is disturbing. Time to invest and make some money right? What’s going to happen when the bubble bursts with all of these investors who will be left with nothing but a piece of property which they only have a small portion of equity in, and a huge debt which may be recalled by the banks? Can you say foreclosure?

Doomsday: The Final Months of the “Housing Bubble”
by Mike Whitney
July 27, 2005
“The worldwide rise in house prices is the biggest bubble in history. Prepare for the economic pain when it pops.”
-- The Economist

I sold my home three weeks ago anticipating what I believe will be “Economic Armageddon” in the United States. It wasn’t an easy thing to do. My wife and I have lived in the same home for 25 years, raised both of our children there, and owned the property outright without any loans or mortgage. The house was paid for in “sweat-equity”, that is, by wielding a shovel day in and day out in my one-man landscape business. I don’t say that for sympathy, but to illustrate that we played by the rules, worked hard, paid our taxes, and took advantage of the American dream of home ownership.
All that has changed.
I sold my home for one reason: George W. Bush. He and his protégé at the Federal Reserve have submerged the country into a morass of “unsustainable” debt, disrupted the nation’s economic equilibrium and thrust us towards fiscal disaster. They’ve also generated a humongous housing bubble through their irresponsible and self-serving manipulation of interest rates.
The facts are astonishing.
The current housing bubble is “larger than the global stock market bubble in the late 1990s (an increase over five years of 80% of GDP) or America's stock market bubble in the late 1920s (55% of GDP). In other words, it looks like the biggest bubble in history.” (The Economist, June 16, 2005)
The banks have lowered the standards for home loans to such an extent that the traditional loan of 20% down and a fixed interest rate is virtually a thing of the past. Instead, those conservative practices have been replaced with “creative financing” schemes that put the entire housing market at risk.
Consider this: In 2004 “one-fourth of all home-buyers -- including 42% of first-time buyers -- made no down payment.” (New York Times, July 7, 2005)
No down payment?!
Sorry, but if a buyer can’t come up with at least $5,000 dollars for a down payment, he shouldn’t qualify for a home loan.
Equally troubling is the fact that “nearly one third of all new mortgages this year call for interest-only payments (in California, it's almost half)” (NY Times) This tells us that a large number of new buyers can barely make their payments, but are gambling that their property value will go up enough to justify their investment. This is “equity roulette.” a shell game that anticipates that salaries will go up while interest rates stay low.
Is that a reasonable judgment?
No, Greenspan has said that he will continue to ratchet up interest rates to head off inflation. This means that an economic slowdown is a near certainty. Remember, “class-warrior” Alan Greenspan lowered the prime rate to a ridiculously low 1% in 2002 to keep the economy humming along while $300 billion was sluiced into Bush’s “preemptive” war in Iraq and while the tax cuts were siphoning the last borrowed farthing out of the public coffers. The Bush tax cuts transferred an average of $400 billion dollars per year into the pockets of America’s plutocrats. Now, the country is flat broke and Greenspan will have to “incrementally” raise rates to stabilize the sagging dollar. This means a sluggish economy for most of us and doomsday for over-extended homeowners.
Greenspan assumed he could carry out his plan without too much unnecessary carnage. Unfortunately, gluttonous mortgage lenders have lowered long-term loans while the prime rate continues to go up. The banks, it seems, are addicted to the “cash cow” of shaky lending and are providing even riskier loans to new applicants. This has upset the Fed master’s strategy for a “soft landing”, and Greenspan has begun feverishly issuing warnings about an inevitable “adjustment” when the market bogs down. The bottom line is that the housing bubble is getting bigger by the day and increasing the potential for catastrophe.
The current problem is compounded by the dramatic surge of speculation in the housing market. As The Economist says, “A study by the National Association of Realtors (NAR) found that 23% of all American houses bought in 2004 were for investment, not owner-occupation. Another 13% were bought as second homes. Investors are prepared to buy houses they will rent out at a loss; just because they think prices will keep rising -- the very definition of a financial bubble.”
What will happen to these “speculative” buyers when the market “flattens out” or the economy takes a sudden dip?
And, what will happen to the US economy when the jobs that depend on new home sales vanish overnight?
“Over the past four years, consumer spending and residential construction have together accounted for 90% of the total growth in GDP. And over two-fifths of all private sector jobs created since 2001 have been in housing-related sectors, such as construction, real estate and mortgage broking.” (The Economist)
“Two out of every five” private sector jobs are now entirely dependent on an industry that is built on pure quicksand.
So, why would banks foolishly loan money to people who can’t even scrap together a few thousand dollars for a down payment or who can scarcely meet their “interest-only” obligations?
The reason is simple: because they are not the ones taking the risk. Mortgage loans are acquired by investment banks and chopped up into various securities where they are sold in mutual funds, hedge funds and pension funds etc. To some extent, this takes the lenders off the hook, but it also means that the shock to the system will be much more widespread when the day of reckoning finally arrives. If we encounter a major glitch in the economy the shock waves will be felt throughout the world. “Investors now hold $4.6 trillion in mortgage backed securities. That’s more than the outstanding value of the US Treasuries.” (NY Times) Think about it.
Shaky lending, interest-only loans, no down payments, a US government that is $8 trillion in debt due to Washington’s profligate spending, and a “ticking-time bomb” of adjustable-rate mortgages that will reset within three years -- the table is set for a disaster of Biblical proportions. If we hit a bump in the economic road ahead (rising gas prices? recession?) the “Land of the free” will be knee deep in bankruptcies and foreclosures. We’ll all be fighting for a soft spot under the freeway onramp.
The fatuous Greenspan believes that all this can be avoided by regulating the money supply.
He’s dead wrong, and I bet my house on it.
Note, the current dilemma could have been avoided if Greenspan had incrementally raised rates as the bubble began to appear. Instead he lowered rates to facilitate Bush’s war in Iraq. It was purely a political decision that “postponed” the economic pain of the conflict and allowed the Bush administration to shift the cost of the war onto future generations.
Consider, also, how Greenspan paved the way for the budget-busting tax cuts (which he enthusiastically approved) and how they have increased America’s debt by $3 trillion. This is real money that American workers will eventually have to pay back in the form of taxes and a higher cost of living. This “class loyalty” is strikingly at odds with his philosophy as a young man when he said, “Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth.”
So it is. And the $3 trillion dollars that evaporated on Greenspan’s watch was in fact stolen from the American people while the Fed chief concealed the crime behind the smokescreen of low-interest rates. In the final analysis, Greenspan will be seen as a greater traitor than Bush.

The Jerusalem police are feeling the jitters. They know very well of the possibility of the unthinkable happening over there.

Jul. 27, 2005 3:17 | Updated Jul. 27, 2005 11:50
New security system for Temple Mount
Jerusalem police are planning to install a new, state-of-the-art security system in the coming days at the Temple Mount, in an effort to ward off any possible attack there by extremists.
The final approval for the security system would come soon, officials said Tuesday, with the multi-million shekel system expected to be in place around the time of the pullout from Gaza.
The decision comes in the wake of repeated warnings by Israeli security officials that Jewish extremists could attack the holy site to sabotage the pullout.
The threat of an attack by Jewish extremists on the Temple Mount is of great concern to Israeli security officials as Israel prepares to withdraw from Gaza, according to former Shin Bet head Avi Dichter.
Security officials refer to the possibility as the "doomsday scenario."
Some 700 officers, including undercover forces and regular, paramilitary and border police are regularly assigned to the Old City.
Several months ago, three Jews were questioned by police for allegedly planning to fire a missile at the Temple Mount, but charges were never filed against them since they changed their minds even before they were arrested.
After undergoing a tight security check, thousands of Jewish and Christian visitors peacefully tour the site on a daily basis

The highly regarded New England Journal of Medicine is also promoting the implanted microchip for the “benefit” of the public. They have published reports of people who have had no adverse effects. We’ll see about that.

Straight from the Shoulder (Verichip) - New England Journal of Medicine, July 2005
Straight from the Shoulder

John Halamka, M.D.
When I was a resident in emergency medicine, I spent many hours uncovering the identities of John Doe and Jane Doe patients who were unconscious, disoriented, or mute. I searched their belongings for receipts that included an address or scanned their clothing labels for a clue. Sometimes this worked. Often, hours or days passed before a family member was found who knew the patient's medical history and health care preferences. By that time, substantial worry had been endured, and often possibly unwanted medical interventions had occurred.
Today, I lead the information-technology efforts at an academic health center, and I have recently encountered an innovative use of technology that could minimize such difficulties. The Food and Drug Administration has approved an implantable device that can store the medical identifier of a patient. Last December, one of these chips was placed in my right upper arm. Implantation was virtually painless - a few milliliters of local anesthesia and the insertion of a device about as large as a grain of rice (see photograph). It sits in the posterior aspect of my right arm, between the elbow and the shoulder. The days after the implantation were uneventful: no pain, no infection, and no restriction of activities. Now, when a scanner is passed within 6 in. (15 cm) of my arm, my medical identifier is displayed on the screen of a radiofrequency-identification (RFID) reader, and any authorized health care worker can turn to a secure Web site hosted by the manufacturer and retrieve information about my identity and the name of my primary care physician, who can then provide details of my medical history.
The chip consists of several small components enclosed in an
unbreakable glass capsule that is partially surrounded by a coating that encourages body cells to adhere to the capsule and prevent it from moving. Although the device relies on the same technology that is used for implanted identification in animals, the frequencies used and the manufacturing standards are different. On the basis of experience with pets, the chips can be expected to last at least 10 years and probably much longer than the average human life span. They can safely undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The device does not generate harmful heat and will not be pulled from my body by an MRI magnet, nor will the magnetic field deactivate the chip. I have flown to several cities since the implantation and have not triggered airline security systems.
A handheld RFID reader scans the chip, which transmits to the reader my medical identifier, a 16-digit number. The chip does not contain demographic or medical data about me. No battery needs replacing. The chip is not an active RFID tag or global-positioning device transmitting information about my location. My identifier was set during the manufacturing process, and it cannot be altered externally.
The primary concern aroused by such technology is that of privacy. Some radiofrequency chips, such as those used at gasoline stations or in automobile-ignition keys, contain encrypted information about a user's account number or information needed to start the car. Chips approved for implantation in humans are not encrypted and thus can be read by many radiofrequency readers.
Since my chip contains only my medical identifier, unauthorized reading would not disclose health information. But nothing is simple. In the film Minority Report, Tom Cruise's character strolls by billboards at a shopping mall that change as he approaches in order to deliver customized advertising. Without any interest in who I am, a scanner in a mall could record my presence when I make a purchase and, on a later visit, display a personalized message on a large screen - "Hi, there! You were here three months ago and purchased a fountain pen. We're having a special on ink today; would you prefer blue or black?" Such "spam," generated by my chip, is a theoretical but possible violator of privacy. Today, no legislation would preclude the scanning of people for anonymous tracking, an activity analogous to what virus-like programs such as "spyware" and "adware" do when they infect our computers after we surf Internet sites. Such a concern is certainly real.
Although future chips may contain cryptographic identifiers that
prevent their disclosure to unauthorized readers, hackers are already at work bypassing chip security. This past January, industry experts announced that they had broken the encryption of the Mobil Speedpass and automobile-key security.1 Using an ordinary personal computer, they "bought" gasoline and started a car without needing the actual chip.Clearly, the technology will improve, but so will the ingenuity of hackers.
Currently, my identifier is listed as one of my medical-record numbers in the computer system of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, which has internal security controls. When a credentialed clinician enters the information read from my chip into the system and retrieves my medical history, that lookup is audited. Inappropriate peeks - which can be monitored by the patient as well as by our privacy officer - result in firing.
For some, implanted health care identifiers might quickly prove useful. For patients with Alzheimer's disease who wander away from home, an identifier that enables caregivers to identify nonverbal or confused patients and determine their health care preferences could be very desirable. However, inserting a chip into a patient who is incapable of giving consent raises ethical issues. Presumably, the patient would have to consent at an early stage of such a disease.
A few emergency departments now have RFID readers that can scan these chips. Since currently very few people (all of them healthy volunteers) have such chips implanted, it is too early to assume that the average caregiver's office will be capable of retrieving patients' information. The technology is not cheap: although the cost of implantation will vary from practice to practice, each chip costs $200 and a reader costs $650. But I believe that patients and their caregivers should discuss the risks and benefits of implanted tags in order to make an informed decision about their appropriateness.
After months of living with the device, I have had no side effects, no
pain, no change in muscle function, and no migration of the chip. I
have exposed myself to extremes of temperature, wind, water, and
several physical impacts while rock and ice climbing; the chip is
working fine. If I want to "upgrade" my chip - replace it with a
future version that uses more advanced and detailed industry standards or enhancements - removing it will require only minor surgery.
As I researched implantable identifiers, I found substantial
controversy about the notion of being "chipped." A Google search for "RFID implant" yields thousands of pages about Big Brother and 1984 as well as The X-Files and the idea of alien abduction. It is clear that there are philosophical consequences to having a lifelong implanted identifier. Friends and associates have commented that I am now "marked" and have lost my anonymity. Several colleagues find the notion of a device implanted under the skin to be dehumanizing. I have not investigated these or other moral, religious, or political implications of having an implanted identifier. I was chipped in order to evaluate the technologic, privacy-related, and medical issues as they affect the provision of patient care. On the basis of my unscientific study with a sample of one, I conclude that there may be appropriate uses, that there are privacy implications that must be accepted by the implantee, and that we need to establish standards that permit seamless, secure access to information.
Source Information
Dr. Halamka is the chief information officer at the CareGroup
Healthcare System and an emergency physician at the Beth Israel
Deaconess Medical Center, Boston.
1. Bono S, Green M, Stubblefield A, Rubin A, Juels A, Szydlo M.
Analysis of the Texas Instruments DST RFID. (Accessed June 30, 2005, at

The mother of all databases is a major component of the mother of all conspiracies.

The ID card and the ‘Mother of all Databases’
Peter Boyle
So what’s the fuss? Many of us carry in our wallet a Medicare card, a driver’s licence with photo, a bank card and a couple of maxed-out credit cards. So what’s one more little piece of plastic? The danger lies not in a card but in the mother of all databases that is behind a compulsory national ID card system.
In the wake of the London bombings, PM John Howard has floated introducing an Australian ID card. The Liberal-National Coalition opposed the ‘‘Australia Card’‘, which former PM Bob Hawke’s Labor government tried to introduce in the 1980s while tens of thousands of people demonstrated against it.
Howard then condemned it as an ‘‘intrusion of a draconian kind into the day-to-day lives of many people’‘. But now Howard and some of his ministers say it is time for a rethink.
‘‘The world is very, very different since then and maybe this is one of the things that is needed to be added to our armour’‘, said Howard before he flew off to the US to meet his best friend George Bush Jnr.
Queensland Labor Premier Peter Beattie rushed to support the introduction of an ID card. He told the ABC’s Insiders program of July 17, ‘‘The world has changed since the Australia Card debate took place in the Hawke days.
“We’ve had international terrorism; September 11 changed the world, frankly. In addition to that I think technology has changed. For example, people are used to using EFTPOS, ID is required to get any form of passport, you’ve got to prove it to open a bank card or get a bank account opened. I just think if we're going to deal with international terrorism ... we’ve got to have an ID system that actually works. In addition to that it will have other benefits as well.”
Federal Labor leader Kim Beazley brushed aside Howard’s comment as a “distraction” and “smokescreen” to cover the “bungling in the critical Immigration Department run by Ruddock and Vanstone”. But he hasn’t ruled out supporting an ID card.
Several Coalition politicians have expressed reservations and Chris Puplick, a former Liberal senator who served on the joint select committee on the Australia Card, and privacy commissioner of NSW from 1999 to 2003, has warned of this latest threat to civil liberties. (See )
“There are several new reasons that were not fully apparent 20 years ago, and these issues make me even more fearful of national ID systems”, he says.
“To be effective, cards would need biometric identification, and anyone familiar with the privacy issues arising from the genetic revolution would have cause for concern. Identity fraud has in recent years become a major area of criminal activity — a national ID card system will only help it flourish. The data-matching power of computers has grown exponentially, raising questions of profiling of individuals without their knowledge or consent. Hacking puts our ‘secure’ records at risk, even jury lists get into wrong hands.
“Should 20 million Australians have their liberties trashed so that we might — I repeat might — detect the two or three mad jihadists in our midst? Will files now be created on the basis that people belong to a certain religion, attend particular places of worship or hold specific political opinions?”
Won’t stop terrorism
The July 20 Sydney Morning Herald reported that Bruce Schneier, an internationally renowned security technologist, points out that a national ID card program will not help to combat terrorism because knowing who someone is and divining their intentions are two very different things.
He said national ID systems merely serve as a means of control for governments. In 2004, Privacy International published the findings of the only research ever conducted on the relationship between identity cards and terrorism.
It said: “The detailed analysis of information in the public domain in this study has produced no evidence to establish a connection between identity cards and successful anti-terrorism measures. Terrorists have traditionally moved across borders using tourist visas (such as those who were involved in the US terrorist attacks), or they are domicile and are equipped with legitimate identification cards (such as those who carried out the Madrid bombings) ...
“Of the 25 countries that have been most adversely affected by terrorism since 1986, eighty per cent have national identity cards, one third of which incorporate biometrics. This research was unable to uncover any instance where the presence of an identity card system in those countries was seen as a significant deterrent to terrorist activity.”
‘Smart’ cards
Meanwhile in Britain, PM Tony Blair’s Labour government is pushing through a multi-billion-pound national ID card scheme, despite significant opposition. Twenty Labour MPs voted against the bill in its second reading in the House of Commons on June 28, and it has been rejected by the Scottish National Parliament.
NO2ID, one of the groups campaigning against the British ID card, has a website that explains very clearly the dangers of such an ID system. While there are no details of the sort of ID card that the Howard government may bring in, the British ID card provides a glimpse of the sort of model the government bureaucrats in Canberra have been secretly developing.
According to the July 19 Australian a new Medicare card, to be distributed to 11 million Australians next year, could become the blueprint for a new national identity card. A leaked cabinet submission, prepared by the attorney-general’s department and obtained by the Australian, also shows it was considered as part of a broader anti-terrorism strategy.
The new Medicare “smart cards” could include a photograph of the holder on the front of the card, or stored on an embedded microchip, and its use may be expanded to become a “government services” card.
A microchip that can store a photograph can also store biometric measures of identity such as fingerprints, iris scans and signatures. Most ID card experts agree that without biometrics a card would be easy to forge.
Blair’s ID card proposal was first floated in 2003 as an “entitlement card” system; people in Britain would need to get one to access government services such as public health, education and welfare. Now it has evolved into a general ID card that proves “registrable facts” about individuals for purposes of “national security”, “the prevention or detection of crime”, “the enforcement of immigration controls”, “the enforcement of prohibitions on unauthorised working or employment” and “securing the efficient and effective provision of public services”.
The British ID card bill sets out more than 50 categories of information required for the register (subject to change by regulation) including: name; other previous names or aliases; date and place of birth, and, if the person has died, the date of death; address and previous addresses; times of residency at these addresses; current residential status and residential statuses previously held; photograph; fingerprints; other biometrics (e.g. iris recognition); signature; nationality; entitlement to remain in Britain; passport numbers; work permit numbers; and driver’s licence.
There is no provision for parliament to decide what information will be stored in or on the “smart” card. This will be left to the discretion of the Home Office.
‘Mother of all Databases’
According to NO2ID, the most dangerous aspect of the ID Bill is the National Identity Register — “the Mother of all Databases”.
Under the British bill, police organisations, the security services, the tax department, the Department for Work and Pensions, and customs and excise can have access to this register.
No comparable register operates (officially at least) anywhere in the world, according to a study by the London School of Economics which estimated it would cost between £10.6 billion and £19.2 billion to roll out. That’s about £300 per person.
Ideas floated to defray the massive cost of the British ID card have included selling “verification services” to private companies and outsourcing the input of biometric and other personal data to cheaper contractors in Mumbai, India.
NO2ID points out that no European country has such a comprehensive or invasive card system. As in Australia, the New Zealand public rejected similar proposals outright in 1991 and, following widespread criticism, Canada abandoned its proposed biometric ID card system in early 2004. ID card proposals have always been rejected by the United States Congress.
Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand have card systems very similar to that being pushed by the Blair government. China is moving rapidly in this direction with the development of a compulsory ID database and card system, but abandoned the biometric element after it concluded that the technology was unworkable with large populations. The US military in Iraq is developing a similar card and biometric system to control access to Fallujah, while the UNHCR has deployed an iris biometric system to control refugee traffic across the Pakistan-Afghan border.
From Green Left Weekly, July 27, 2005.

This gives you a great of idea of the current economic state of the U.S. I find this disturbing yet I find this depiction very accurate.

Joe Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN) for 6 a.m. While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG). He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA).
After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator (MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY) and continued his search for a good paying AMERICAN JOB.
At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day, Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL) poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in.....AMERICA.....

Look what was accomplished by the London attacks. There is no way people in NY and NJ would have tolerated this breach of privacy pre-9/11 or pre-London terror attacks. Look at what they are saying now…
I guess we’ll hear this headline next: “NY, NJ commuters OK with body cavity searches”.

N.Y., N.J. commuters OK with bag searches
By Charisse Jones, USA TODAY
NEW YORK — Stepping off the subway Monday, Roberta Nelson said she hadn't been stopped yet by a police officer wanting to search her bag. If it happens, she said, she won't mind.
"I think it's necessary," Nelson, 30, said. "But I agree with a lot of people that it's not going to be a deterrent."
With patience and resignation, millions of commuters in New York and New Jersey awoke Monday to the prospect of police searching their bags to deter a London-style terrorist attack.
A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday found that 53% of those surveyed said the federal government is not doing enough to prevent terrorist acts on buses, subways and trains, while 39% said the government was doing the right amount. (Poll results: Feelings on terror)
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs New York's 660-mile subway system, and New York police began randomly searching commuters' bags and containers Friday. New Jersey's transit system and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey began random inspections Monday at their bus terminals, rail and light rail stations.
Passengers do not have to submit to the searches, but those who refuse will not be allowed to board.
Transportation officials reported no delays because of the inspections and few complaints from passengers. "I think they know it's for their added safety," MTA spokesman Tom Kelly said. "In fact, most people have been very willing to do it and appreciative of it."
Civil liberties groups were examining whether the bag checks violate the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches.
The New York Civil Liberties Union will announce Friday whether it will take legal action. The New York and New Jersey affiliates of the American Civil Liberties Union are asking commuters to contact them with any complaints.
"If we're going to spend the money, we should spend it on something that's going to stop a terrorist attack, and random searches of 4 to 6 million transit riders between New York and New Jersey is not the way to do it," said Deborah Jacobs, executive director of the ACLU of New Jersey.
Jacobs said the searches are invasive regardless of whether they are ruled unconstitutional. Some commuters have called, saying they believed they were stopped because of their race, she said.
"I think it's inevitable that people will feel they were targeted," she said. "In most cases since Sept. 11, these measures tend to affect non-whites disproportionately to others in society."
Alan Hicks, a Port Authority spokesman, said, "We're working to make sure that doesn't happen." He emphasized that the searches are random and officers have had special training.
Robert Kramer, who travels from his home in Hoboken, N.J., to Manhattan each day for work, said the searches are fine provided they don't prolong his commute.
"As long as it does not double my commuting time ... I'm for it," he said. Kramer said he's not worried that the bag checks could embarrass him: "I'm not coming to work with a backpack full of underwear."
Some commuters, however, said racial profiling is almost inevitable.
"Feelings are going to be hurt," said Chris Caccone, 30, of Brooklyn. "But there's a reason for profiling, because the police can't waste time searching people who are not likely to be carrying bombs, like an old lady."
Contributing: Leilani Gallardo

If you were told 10 years ago that there would come a day when we would be able to make purchases by swiping our finger, wouldn’t it have sounded far fetched and too much like crazy science fiction? Wouldn’t you have thought that would be something waaaaay in the future? Does is seem so far fetched now?
Now, think forward and consider the implantable microchip. Does that sound like crazy science fiction? Does that sound like it is waaaay in the future? Think again…
Notice the positive adjectives emphasized here in the report from the global elite controlled CNN news network: “faster”, “convenient”.

Look for more news coverage regarding credit card fraud, identity theft and missing children in the days ahead so they can justify biometric technology. If you ever found yourself watching the news and the top story is about a missing person, a runaway bride or something of that nature and you think to yourself…WTF??? How does that qualify as top national news???!!! Now you know why.

Cash or plastic? How about fingerprint?
Biometric transactions are faster and more convenient -- and closer than you may think.
By Grace Wong, CNN/Money staff writer
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Instead of keeping countless cards and pieces of information that verify your identification, soon there may be only one thing you need: yourself.
As identity theft has become the bane of consumers everywhere, technologies aimed at making transactions more secure are gaining ground. Such "biometric technologies" include iris scans, as well as those for fingerprints, palm, skin, voice and face patterns.
"In everyday life, the use of biometrics has been growing," said Philip Youn, a consultant at International Biometric Group.
The underlying strength of biometrics is that it uses patterns that are unique to each individual. Your fingerprints belong to you alone, and unlike that password to your online bank account, you can never lose it.
Where can you see it now?
Retail. Albertson's, the No. 2 supermarket chain, is one of hundreds of retailers testing biometric payment systems that let customers pay for purchases with a mere swipe of a finger.
It works like this: You register your fingerprint and your bank account with a service provider. The main ones are Pay By Touch and BioPay.
When you shop at a participating merchant, you just swipe your finger and the payment is automatically transferred from your bank to the merchant -- you don't have to hand over a card, sign a receipt or punch in a PIN.
Earlier this year, Albertson's joined the Pay By Touch network and is testing the service at four of its stores in the Portland, Oregon area.
"One thing we've heard repeatedly from our customers is that they would like to speed up the checkout process," Albertson's spokeswoman Shannon Bennett said. The feedback has been "very positive" she said, although the company hasn't announced any expansion plans for the program.
So far Pay By Touch is available at 100 to 200 stores while rival BioPay's system can be accessed at 150 locations.
"Biometric payments are the safest because no information is passed to the merchant," said Donita Prakash, vice president of marketing at BioPay.
And because you don't have to present your card at the point of sale, the transaction is faster, Pay By Touch marketing director Shannon Riordan said.
Another selling point: biometrics could offer are instant age verification for alcohol and tobacco sales.
Computers. Getting started with biometrics for your computer is as easy as picking up a product like the Biopod Password Manager produced by APC. The small fingerprint scanning device, which plugs into a USB port, stores all your passwords in your fingerprint.
When you go visit your favorite Web sites -- whether it be or your investment portfolio -- all you have to do is scan your fingerprint.
If you don't want to deal with external hardware, IBM, Toshiba and Compaq all sell notebook models already outfitted with a fingerprint reader.
The price of the Biopod is about $50 while laptops with the device built-in can sell for as little as $1,300.
Travel. If you travel internationally, then soon you'll be carrying some high-tech identification. The Department of State has launched a plan to introduce electronic passports that come with a chip that stores the usual personal information as well as a digital photo which enables biometric comparison through the use of facial recognition technology at international borders.
According to State Department spokeswoman Joanne Moore, the electronic passports are still in test mode, but partial implementation is planned for the fall and full implementation in 2006.
Fundamentally flawed technology?
No biometric technology is 100 percent reliable, and privacy advocates are concerned with another problem -- centralized databases holding huge amounts of personal information.
"Whenever you're collecting uniquely identifiable information that you can't change, that's a very bad idea. It's a honeypot for hackers and attackers," Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum, said.
"Biometric technology would seem like it's a fantastic fix for identity theft, but once the ultimate identifier is stolen, there is no recourse for an individual to prove who they are," she said.
While victims of identity theft can get a new credit card number, change their address and even apply for a new Social Security number, they can't change their DNA.
Furthermore, there are those who just cannot use certain biometric systems, IBG's Youn said, explaining that some people's fingerprints are damaged, and others are born without readable prints -- although this is a small portion of the population.
Representatives from Pay By Touch and BioPay said when it comes to security, users of biometric payment services can relax because both companies don't store pictures of fingerprints. Instead, tiny measurements unique to each finger are recorded as an algorithm. If a hacker breaks into the system, all he or she would find is a number rather than a usable image of a fingerprint, they said.
Is a federal law that better protects personal data on the way?
© 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.

I personally think that we will look back in retrospect and consider 9/11/01 as the event that sparked the events leading up to WW III. Although no one officially considers the world to be in the midst of WW III as of the time of this writing, observing events unfold behind the scenes since that dreadful day leads me to believe that we are at the very beginning stages of WW III today. By the time it is officially recognized as a world war, we will already be knee deep into it. The global elite has planned 3 world wars before bringing in the one world government, the third of which was planned to originate in the middle east. This is exactly where we stand today. We are on the brink.

Are You Prepared For World War Three?
When that defining moment finally comes,
will you have the time to remember
what you could have done to stop it?
By John Kaminski

Let's pretend, just for the moment, that this is a hypothetical question.

Let's pretend, just for argument's sake, in the comfort of your own easy chair, in front of your own big screen TV, just a few easy steps away from your favorite, anxiety-reducing snacks in your refrig, that this is just an academic exercise in geopolitical and psychological speculation, a polite brainstorming session that imaginary participants might conduct if certain coincidental worst case scenarios were to come to pass ... all at the same time.

And let us acknowledge, in the calm certainty of our own typically secure routines, that any resemblance of this imaginary debate to actual persons and events living or dead may not be purely coincidental.

OK? Got it? Pretend it's hypothetical. Just for fun. Then let's begin.

Are you ready for World War Three?

What kind of pathetic paranoid poppycock is that? What IS this? Another Y2K drill? Much ado about nothing, I think.

Remember. You're pretending it's hypothetical. You agreed.

Oh, all right. Let's see. Mmmmmm .... of course I'm not ready. Nobody is ready for World War Three. You CAN'T get ready for that.

What will you do when it happens?

Sit here and be vaporized, I guess. What could anybody do?

So ... does that mean you're not ready?

Of course I'm not ready for World War Three! Is anybody ready for World War Three?

Yes, I think there are some people who are ready?

Oh yeah? Who?

Well, three types of groups, at least. First, there are the people who are already victims of major wars, the people in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, Colombia, not to mention Burma, the Philippines, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Congo, and certain other countries, people who are already scavenging in often-radioactive garbage dumps just to make ends meet; many of their relatives or children have already been killed by invaders, and they're just living hand to mouth, not caring whether the food they eat or the things they find might be radioactive or not, because when your expected life span is only a few more weeks or months, you don't much care about those things. Survival becomes a day-by-day operation. If the superpowers who have these weapons destroy themselves by using them, that would be good news for the folks routinely diving in dumpsters.

Second, there are the people who plan and wish to execute nuclear wars. They have already built themselves secure bunkers miles beneath the earth's surface. There are many in the U.S. and Europe. The figure they can ride it out, and they have a new, secret technology that actually detoxifies radioactive contamination, but they're keeping it under wraps until after the Big One so then they can come out when the coast is clear and continue making scads of money doing two things: cleaning up radioactive rubble and repossessing real estate whose owners have been obliterated, are slowly and agonizingly died of radiation poisoning, or simply have scampered off to more hospitable climes.

Third, there are the people who saw it coming and had the foresight to move to remote locations in the Southern Hemisphere. As long as widespread nuclear explosions didn't trigger a pole shift, those in the lower Southern Hemisphere would be relatively safe from the nuclear winter that will follow World War Three and render the entire Northern Hemisphere completely uninhabitable. The winds in the world are pretty much hemisphere specific, so that the winds that blow around the world in the Northern Hemisphere don't cross over into the southern, and vice versa, although with the magnitude and volume of these explosions in all-out nuclear war, there is bound to be some crossover.

Humph. Sonofagun. You have this all worked out, don't you?

What will you do when it actually happens?

When what actually happens?

When World War Three actually happens.

How will I find out about it?

Well, there are several ways you could find out about it. If you lived in an urban area like New York or Beijing or Cairo or Teheran, you'd probably find out about it when you saw a flash of light brighter than anything you've ever imagined, but it would last for only a millisecond and then you'd see nothing ever again. If, like most people, you lived in towns moderately close to these cities, you'd probably feel these humongous thumps and wonder why your house was disintegrating all around you. If you lived way out in the sticks you'd start to see these radiant atmospheric flashes, feel relatively gentle ground tremors, and then in a few hours you'd see a smoky blackness creeping toward you from the direction of the cities that would grow blacker and blacker as the hours passed. Depending on each person's individual perceptual skills, it would be a matter of minutes or hours before you realized you would never see the sun again, because you will never survive the abject cold that would be produced by the sun being blotted out for probably from five to 15 years, except, as I said before, in extremely lucky places in the way Southern Hemisphere. Didn't you ever wonder why all those Israelis are buying up huge chunks of real estate in Patagonia?

You mean I won't see something on television and be able to briefly feel a pang of remorse about someone else being killed far away, and then be able to put it out of my mind so I could watch Monday Night Football with my usual intense focus?

Not likely. Here's a variation on the initial question. What would you do if you got information that you really believed and trusted that World War Three was about to start in a few months? What steps would you take to prepare yourself?

How would I know I could trust the information?

Well, you'd hear it from the sources you always trusted. Your newspapers, your TV, maybe even from some particularly reliable Internet site.

But would I believe it? Would I be willing to give up everything I've worked for all my life, and just bolt into the wild blue yonder because I read something some journalist, no matter how well connected, might have just dreamed up?

Well, let's say you had an inside source in the secret government, and he told you about the plan. Let's say you regarded it as having the authenticity of all those insider stock tips he'd given you over the years that had made you a bundle. Someone who could discourse effortlessly on Masonic kingpin Albert Pike's 1871 prediction that there would be THREE World Wars and final one would begin in the Middle East and erase both Zionized Christendom and Islamic world in one mighty stroke. And someone who had scary connections with alphabet intelligence agencies.

Yes, I see. What would I do? Hmmm.

Would you run, or would you try to alert others?

Oh dogbiscuits! You know what it's like to tell people that you really know what's going on, and that they don't. They think you've got marbles rattling around in your brain, and they just ignore you, at best. At worst, they call Homeland Security and the men in the little white coats with the large guns show up at your door. At least, you become socially ostracized for not going along with what everybody else believes.

So which would you do?

Well, I guess I'd try to find out if the tip was real or not, and if I determined it WAS real, I'd try to alert the most important people I know to see if they could do something about it.

What would make you decide if the tip was real or not?

Well, our best sources are on TV, I think. At least that's what everybody believes. Most people don't believe something is really real unless they see it on television.

So you're saying that what you see on TV is actually real?

No, I'm not that naive. I know stuff that appears on the news is often shaded by those who own the TV networks to inflict the spin they want to put on most world events. Hell, that's how we got in all those wars.

So what if someone on TV, highly reputable, came on and predicted all-out nuclear war? Would you act on that?

Probably not. I wouldn't believe him.

OK, say you were certain of the tip you received being real. Then what would you do?

I'd call the police, then my congressperson.

And what would you do if they all said you were nuts? And then they said they knew who the bad guys really were, because they had this evidence that they couldn't really tell you about because of National Security, but they were going to nuke them all to smithereens.

I don't know. Cry? Or run into the street screaming.

OK, one more question. If you had the power to impact a large number of people and the money to arrange some effective plan of action to the catch the people who were planning to use nuclear weapons, and you were certain that they were going to carry out their plan on the basis of at least 50 years of continuing atrocities perpetrated against innocent people which they later blamed on completely innocent patsies, what would you do ..... ?

The new Harry Potter book, “The half blood prince”, is the big thing these days. The mental conditioning begins at a young age. I believe the mindset that this will produce in the younger generation (and even the older generation) will make the social soil fertile for the acceptance of witchcraft, occultism, spiritism which is what the new world religion and it’s leader will be all about.

Potter mania could negatively affect kids: psychiatrists

New Delhi: PTI
As Harry Potter, a young man now, enters into a chilling saga of revenge and dark magic, psychiatrists wonder if the Potter-crazy children the world over are ready for this sudden and violent transition into a hitherto unknown world.

As Harry Potter, a young man now, enters into a chilling saga of revenge and dark magic, psychiatrists wonder if the Potter-crazy children the world over are ready for this sudden and violent transition into a hitherto unknown world.

The 'Boy Who Lived' now knows he is the 'Chosen One' and his fate is entwined with that of the evil Lord Voldemort. But psychiatrists say, author J K Rowling, who introduces Harry to some "seriously dark magic," has not kept in mind the negative imprint the violence would leave on the minds of kids.

As Potter-fever gripped the world on the eve of July 16 and the sixth book of the Harry Potter series flew off the shelves, children eagerly awaiting Harry's escapades found them entering a dark world, psychiatrists say that may be a little more than they can handle.
"Sometimes books and films that are full of thrilling images may provoke their instincts," Dr Jitender Nagpal, a psychiatrist with the VIMHANS says. 'Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince' - the latest from Rowling's stable not only takes Potter through an advanced course in magic, some of it dark, but leaves some serious tragedies in the wake that children say they never expected and saddened them.

"Children as young as five years, especially of the upcoming public schools, now imbibe images that percolate to them, affecting their progressive behaviour," Nagpal says.

"I was dying to read this book as it holds some of the answers to where book five left off - Harry posed with the gargantuan challenge of facing Lord Voldemort and either of them winning the unto-death battle," says Neha Aurora, a student.

"Intoxicatingly thrilling" - despite her glorious verdict for the book, she claims "it is downright chilling at many places." The world around Harry has suddenly become dangerous with the rejuvenation of Lord Voldemort and he has had to pick up and use new complicated spells to cope with adverseries.

"While his previous spells simply caused objects to fly, zoom or at best stupefy his enemies, in this book he actually draws blood, though unwittingly," she says.

"Ghastly details, vivid images of violence," Nagpal says, "can bring about extreme emotional instability in children." "Fanatic involvement in larger than life characters can affect their cognitive profile, as they do not differentiate the line between fantasy and reality," he says.

However, psychiatrist Sanjay Parekh defends the author saying the book is not necessarily so-called children's literature.

"The book is a progressive series and the youngsters must have grown up along with Harry. Though anything violent is not condoned, but adolescents can easily identify with the boy wizard's emotions, his passing phases," Parekh says.

As for the generous smatterings of romance in the book, he says "romance can never be a matter of concern for children. Violence is. Parents of little children thereby must also themselves read any literature they hand to their kids, to answer their curiosity," he says.

However, book critics say Harry's gradual shedding of puppy fat to grow into the young man who is discovering his hormones and gathering his wits to hunt down the 'Dark Lord' reflects the only natural human transition from childhood to adolescence and would not affect minds of very young readers.

As for death and devastation, the book only prepares little ones for the harsh world, where the "good people" are not necessarily invincible, they say.

"For one thing, children very young these days capture violence and adult emotions and somehow tend to ventilate them through diverse channels," Nagpal says adding that not all of the ventilation process is constructive.

"However there is a difference between violence in real life images, as in television and films and violence in fantasy, which is more toned down," Parekh says.

Book six shows Harry concocting more complicated potions, slashing his arch enemy Malfoy's face with one single dark spell, albeit unknowingly, he is more aggressive, inquisitive and definitely outgrowing his childish crushes.

Finally, there is some good news coming out of the geo-political arena. How sincere Kim Jong Il really is, remains to be seen.

N.Korea calls for peace treaty with U.S.
PYONGYANG, North Korea, July 22 (UPI) -- North Korea called for a peace treaty with the United States to replace the armistice, saying it is essential to end the three-year nuclear standoff.
North Korea is technically still at war with the United States and South Korea, as the 1950-1953 Korean War ended only in an armistice, not a peace treaty.
"The building of a peace mechanism is a process which the DPRK (North Korea) and the United States should go through without fail in order to attain the goal of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula," the North's Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
Replacing the "fragile" armistice with a lasting peace mechanism "with a view to doing away with the last hangover of the Cold War era" is essential for the reunification of the peninsula for regional security, said the statement carried by the North's state-run Korean Central News Agency.
The demand came ahead of crucial six-nation talks on dismantling North Korea's nuclear programs slated for next week.
Copyright 2005 by United Press International. All Rights Reserved.

An Iran invasion seems inevitable, which would mean that an act that would provoke it is also inevitable. The only question is how severe will the provoking act be? The degree of severity will be in proportion to the speed in which the global elite wants to carry out their agenda. As more and more people are waking up to the true nature of the powers that be through free flowing information on the internet, they cant waste too much time before enough people figure it all out. Every terrorist attack opens up more people’s eyes to the true instigators of the terror. I would have to think they are not in the position of taking their time in carrying out their agenda.

July 21, 2005
Nuclear Attack in United States ‘Imminent’ As Jews Continuing Fleeing From North America, Benjamin Netanyahu Identified As London ‘Target’ In Bombings, Israel Continues Descent into Total Chaos
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Russian Subscribers
Russian Intelligence Analysts are reporting today that the terrorist attacks in London were the result of a failed Israeli Mossad Operation to assassinate the Israeli Government Official Benjamin Netanyahu, and who Western Intelligence Forces have identified as being the leader of the massive Israeli Spying Ring presently being targeted in the United States and who are ‘ready’ to target an American city with a smuggled in Nuclear Bomb.
Perhaps these most strange events are best stated by one of President Putin’s aides who said, “We are now seeing the beginning of the end for Israel, at least as it used to be, and the United States is a part of their battleground, maybe the whole world we be.”
The consequences of Israel’s present Civil War spreading beyond its borders does indeed have grave consequences for the entire world and as the latest victims in London can attest to when different factions within Israel’s Intelligence begin fighting among themselves. But the intended victim of the London terrorist attacks, Benjamin Netanyahu managed to escape the same fate, and as we can read as reported by French Bella Ciao News Service in their article titled “Who tipped off Benjamin Netanyahu to London attacks and why didn’t they tell anyone else?" and which says;
"Terrorism expert Tommy Preston of Preston Global in Frankfort, Kentucky, said sources in the intelligence community reported that at least one person in London, England was warned of Thursday morning’s terrorist attacks moments before the initial blast. Preston, citing sources in the intelligence community, said former Israeli Prime Minister and current Finance Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was in London this morning for an economic forum. "Just before the first blast, Netanyahu got a call from the Israeli Embassy telling him to stay in his hotel room. The hotel is located next to the subway station where the first attack occurred and he did stay put and shortly after that, there was the explosion," Preston said."
The situation in Israel itself at this hour remains grave, and as we can read as reported Israelis Haaretz News Service in their article titled "Police expect violence in anti-pullout march to Gaza" and which says, "Pullout protesters were planning to hold a banned march to the Gaza Strip settlement of Gush Katif on Wednesday evening. Police said they were expecting violent clashes. About 20,000 security forces personnel, some equipped with water hoses, were encircling the Kfar Maimon encampment and preparing to stop the estimated 7,000 protesters from marching. The protesters were planning to break through the western gate of Kfar Maimon, the western Negev town where right-wing activists have been encamped since Monday night, when they began their march."
To the spectacle of Israeli’s fighting and killing each other the world has never seen, but to the Israeli’s themselves their actions against the War Criminal Sharon are indeed meant to free their Nation from clutches of the criminals currently ruling over them, and as we can read as reported by Israel’s Haaretz News Service in their article titled "Settler rally held despite efforts to prevent march" and which says;
"MK Effi Eitam (Religious Zionism) said that preventing buses from reaching Netivot was a "tragic mistake that would escalate the situation and create more violence." MK Uri Ariel (National Union) called the move a stupid mistake, saying "the prime minister, Ariel Sharon, has created with his own hands the radicals and provocateurs, he behaves like a dictator and does not allow people to express their protest and feelings democratically." The Yesha Council was also infuriated by the move that they called a "tyrranical behavior of the Sharon clan." According to the council "a red line has been crossed whereby the prime minister does not allow the holding of a wide public protest against all the rules of democracy."
As always the truthfulness of these events are not being told to the American peoples, and as we can read as reported by Israel’s Arutz Sheva News Service in their article titled "Sharon Wants to Take Over Jewish Nation's Assets" and which says, "Speaking with Arutz-7's Elkanah Perl, Schachter emphasized both the corruption and high-handed methods of Sharon and his close cronies, and the dearth of accurate information available to Israel-supporters in the U.S. "The voice of those who oppose the disengagement plan is not heard the way it should be amongst U.S. Jewry," Schachter said. "There is a feeling here as if Sharon is the great savior of Israel, because he's a great general who knows exactly what he's doing...and that's the problem. It's important that this news is publicized in the U.S. in order to strengthen those who are fighting for the Land of Israel and to have people get to know the facts."
But to the average Israeli citizens themselves these terrifying events are all to real, and as we can read as reported by the Israel Today News Service in their article titled "Prophets of Doom" and which says, "The latest polls show that Israeli public support for the Gaza pullout has plunged to a low of 48 percent, down from a high of 68 percent in February. Pollsters say many Israelis are fed up with the turmoil over the plan, which is dividing the nation. The outgoing head of Israel’s Shin Bet security service (the Israeli equivalent of the FBI) also left his post on a pessimistic note. Avi Dichter said Jewish militants might open fire on Israeli troops during the Gaza evacuation, or worse, they could try a suicide attack to kill Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. With these dire warnings it’s no wonder that public support for the withdrawal has declined. It’s becoming obvious to the public that the pullout, which is costing more than $2 billion and tearing the nation apart, will not accomplish anything."
As the events of London on 7/7 and New York on 9/11 also clearly show, there is no escaping for the world from these events in Israel, and as we can read as reported by the Washington Post Writers Group News Service in their article titled "Chertoff fears nuclear attack" and which says, "Michael Chertoff scares me. That’s good, because Tom Ridge was just making us laugh. Chertoff, the new homeland security chief, has been making the rounds in the past week after months immersed in the broken bureaucracy he inherited from Ridge. He’s thrown out the childish props that provided so much raw material for late-night comics. No duct tape for him. Chertoff knows that few of the most visible “homeland security” measures the Bush administration made so much of after 9/11 are going to help. Certainly not the color-coded national threat-o-meter, which made people in Minnesota think they needed to worry as much as people in Manhattan.
Not the 30-minute, no-stand rule aboard airliners flying in and out of Washington’s Reagan National Airport. Soon we may hear it is no longer necessary to force toddlers to remove their Shrek sneakers before boarding. Chertoff is a serious man who insists upon talking about such serious possibilities as an attack involving nuclear materials, and the need for his department to have a chief medical officer to “mitigate” the effects of a biological attack. Listening to Chertoff, you sense that he agrees with just about every police official who popped up on TV in the days immediately after the London bombings. We can’t prevent every attack, they said.
Now the homeland security chief tells us we continue to be at risk for a catastrophe that troubles his sleep far more than the prospect of a bomb or two on a subway or bus. Chertoff manages to instill faith in his own stewardship, while simultaneously undermining confidence in the president he serves."
To good effect is the United States Homeland Security Director worried about a terrorist nuclear attack, especially since the highest ranking Israeli spies in America continue their flights to Israel before American Intelligence Authorities are able to arrest them, and as we can read as reported by The Hill News Service in their article titled "Abramoff duo quits U.S." and which says;
"Two former associates of Jack Abramoff, the embattled lobbyist, left the country Monday night en route to a new life in Israel. The relocation comes as a Justice Department taskforce presses forward with an investigation into potential criminal wrongdoing stemming from Abramoff’s business dealings. Sam Hook and his wife Shana Tesler both worked with Abramoff at the law firm, Greenberg Traurig. Hook served as the registered agent for Grassroots Interactive, a lobbying venture tied to Abramoff that has reportedly been subpoenaed by the Justice Department taskforce."
These top Israeli spies also join the mass exodus of Jews from North America currently being undertaken, and as we had previously reported on in our July 8th report titled "Mass Exodus of Jews from United States Begins as ‘Summer of Blood’ Predicted For America as US Backed Iraq signs Defense Treaty with Iran" and wherein we had stated;
“Russian Intelligence Analysts are reporting today that the Israeli Government has ordered an expedited removal from both the United States and Canada of all its ‘Special Assets’ and for their immediate return to Israel. This information has also been confirmed by Israeli Press Sources, and as we can read as reported by the Israeli Arutz Sheva News Service in their article titled “Record Number of US & Canadian Jews Moving to Israel on Single Day" and which says;
"More than 1,800 North American Jews will move to Israel this summer through Nefesh B’Nefesh in close cooperation with the Jewish Agency for Israel. On July 13th, 2005 two separate chartered El Al flights with some 500 olim (immigrants) from the U.S. & Canada will arrive simultaneously, marking the largest arrival of North American Jews in Israel’s history. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Vice Premier Shimon Peres, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Jewish Agency Chairman Ze’ev Bielski and other officials will greet the first of this summer’s arrivals."
This information coincides with our previous report of today titled "British Commando Units Seal off Israeli Embassy in London in Wake of Attacks as US Congressman Suspected of being Israeli Spy Is Detained While Attempting to Flee to Israel" and wherein we had reported on Israelis Top Spies in the United States attempting to flee to Israel immediately prior to the tragic terrorist attacks in London.
Speculations among Russian Security Analysts are that these sudden moves by Israeli Intelligence Organizations are but pre-cursers to a series of catastrophic terrorists events scheduled for the Americas this summer, and what one Analyst states will be the United States ‘Summer of Blood.”
For the reasons of the dismantling of this massive Israeli Spying Ring in Israel we have also previously reported upon in our June 25th report titled "United States Begins Long Awaited Crackdown on American Jews as Massive Israeli Spy Network Suspected Of Smuggling Nuclear Weapon into Western Part of America", and wherein we had reported;
“But to the United States greatest concern are the ever increasing concern is that their Homeland is about to become another battleground in this Secret War with Israel, especially with the reports that both the American FBI and CIA are frantically searching for a former Mossad Officer named David E. Lipman to uncover the whereabouts of a Nuclear Weapon smuggled into the United States. News reports from the Israeli Newspaper the Jerusalem Post clearly show the targeting of this Mossad Agent by the Military Leaders of the United States in their article titled "Missing Arizona rabbi faces child abuse charges" and which says;
"Rabbi David E. Lipman has disappeared without a trace from his home and Reform synagogue in Prescott, Arizona, missing since May 20 after two teenage girls from his congregation accused him of fondling them. Prescott police have no leads on the whereabouts of Lipman, who is reported to be proficient in several languages and who spent time in Israel during his studies at Hebrew Union College."
But not to abusing children is Mossad Agent Lipman’s real crime, but for a number of cross border meetings with the International Arms Dealer Arif Durrani is he wanted, and as we had previously reported on in our June 23ed report titled "Mossad Attack upon the United States ‘Imminent’ As Massive Power Struggle Erupts In Washington over Israeli Lasers Provided To Iraqi Insurgents and Israel Draws Closer To China" and wherein we had stated;
“As the United States also places further sanctions upon the Israeli Government for both their massive spying operations being uncovered at the highest levels of American Political, Economic and Media leaderships and the passing onto China of some of the most secret United States weapons technology, the Israeli Government has decided to abandon its support of American and switch its allegiance towards the Chinese, and as we can read as reported by the Jerusalem Post News Service in their article titled "China, Israel discuss expanding defense ties" and which says;
"Expansion of defense ties with Israel was on the agenda during talks with his Israeli counterparts this week, Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing said Tuesday. Li, who spoke at the start of a meeting with the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, did not go into detail about the current dispute between Israel and the US over the Israel upgrade of Chinese Harpy drones. He said that during his visit he had held talks on expanding ties in the fields of "trade, army, culture, education and tourism."
Of the greatest concern to the Americans however is what the Mossad had recently transported to the United States from Mexico under the direction of one of Israel’s most known and trusted arms dealers who has been arrested in Mexico, and as we can read as reported by the Mexidata News Service in their article titled "Intrigue behind arrest of Pakistani arms dealer in Mexico" and which says;
"Convicted Pakistani arms dealer Arif Durrani was captured in Rosarito Beach, Baja California, Mexico, by a special team of agents sent from Mexico City, on June 12. And while Mexican government officials initially gave out little information on why he was detained, once the decision was reached to deport Durrani (on immigration charges), according to the Associated Press a statement was made: “Durrani faces an arrest warrant in the U.S. for trafficking in anti-aircraft missiles.”
Durrani, who following his arrest was taken to Mexico City, was put on a June 15 flight that made a stop in Los Angeles, California. Upon landing in the U.S., Durrani was taken into custody by federal officials for illegally exporting military aircraft parts, according to a 1999 indictment unsealed the following day.
Yet there are other possible scenarios that could clarify the arrest: Durrani was still trafficking in illicit arms; he was organizing a Mexico-based terrorist plot against the U.S.; or he was about to go public with allegations regarding the Iran-Contra affair.
Durrani is definitely a shady character, an international arms dealer from Pakistan who once served prison time for selling arms to Iran in the Iran-Contra scandal. As well, his mere presence in Rosarito Beach, located just south of the U.S.-Mexico border from San Diego, is suspicious. During his residency in Rosarito Beach, Durrani could have been shipping contraband across the border, or even organizing a terrorist plot.
But if he was a national security threat, why did U.S. authorities allow him to openly live in Rosarito Beach for over one year? Following Durrani’s release from prison and deportation from the U.S., he ultimately moved to Rosarito Beach where he operated openly. And without doubt U.S. authorities knew where he was. In fact, Durrani well may have been in Mexico with the tacit agreement of the U.S. government.
Professor Alan Block at Pennsylvania State University states, “there was a deal made with the U.S. immigration authorities that permitted him to live in Baja California. I am absolutely certain that they knew he was there.” As well, Durrani was once seen in Rosarito Beach driving a Mercedes with U.S. government license plates, which he said belonged to a friend. Could the U.S. authorities have allowed a known arms trafficker to operate freely along the border for over one year? Another possibility is that U.S. officials did not consider him a threat because Durrani had worked for them. Durrani has long maintained that he worked for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, and that he sold arms to Iran per instructions that came from Oliver North when the latter was with the National Security Council. Durrani’s legal defense is that he was North’s “fall guy” in the Iran-Contra affair."
Russian Intelligence Analysts further report that the Mossad attacks in London, and like the American attacks on September 11, 2001, were preceded by manipulations of the world’s financial markets that have been traced back to Israel, and as we can read as reported by the WorldNetDaily News Service in their article titled “Who shorted British pound? Currency fell 6% in 10 days before London terror attacks" and which says;
"In the 1988 Hollywood hit "Die Hard," starring Bruce Willis, a group of "terrorists" take over a Japanese banking institution in Los Angeles, hold hostages and make demands for release of "political prisoners." But it turns out the terrorists aren't really terrorists. They are bank robbers trying to make off with the fortune in the bank's vaults. Could it be Osama bin Laden has seen "Die Hard"? That is a question Scotland Yard and other law enforcement agencies are actually asking themselves following the July 7 London transit system attacks that killed 54 and injured scores more as they continue to scour the planet for evidence and additional conspirators.
Why? Because it appears some profited by short selling the British pound in the 10 days leading up to the attacks. The pound fell about 6 percent (approximately 1.82 to 1.72) against the dollar for no apparent reason – until, of course, the terror attacks sent the British markets reeling still further. "This was an almost unprecedented weakness and far too sharp to be a coincidence," one economist with more than 35 years of experience in the investment industry [said]."
But of all of the mistakes committed by Israel’s Mossad in the London attacks, and according to Russian Intelligence Reports, the allowing of one of their British Operatives to enter Israel, and not erase this information, was perhaps their biggest ‘slipup’, and as we can read as reported by Italy’s ADN Kronos International News Service in their article titled "London Bombs: Suspect Bomber's Puzzling Israel Visit" and which says;
"Israeli authorities have revealed that one of the suspects in the London bombings visited Israel in 2003, but that they have no evidence to link him to a suicide attack against a Tel Aviv night club carried out shortly afterwards by two British nationals of Pakistani origin. Mohammed Sidique Khan, a teacher's assistant at an eleimentary school, arrived in Tel Aviv and left the next day, Israeli officials have told reporters. Investigators say they have no evidence that Khan, himself of Pakistani origin, was linked to Assif Muhammad Hanif who on 30 April 2003 blew himself up at a Tel Aviv nightspot, killing another three people, and his alleged accomplice, Omar Khan Sharif, who was subsequently found in the sea off Tel Aviv.
Still, some Israelis are now wondering whether Sidique Khan's visit - which took place shortly before the suicide attack - was somehow related to the bombing. Visitors carrying British passports do not require a visa to enter Israel and terrorism experts in the country have warned that lenient regulations governing access to the Jewish state from abroad could make it more vulnerable to terrorist attacks."
(I must personally comment on this particular articles seeming to allude that anyone can enter Israel from a foreign country without suspicion, this is not true. The security provisions imposed by Israel against all foreigners, especially those from American and Britain, are the most stringent in the world and anyone having visited Israel knows there is nothing ‘lenient’ at all about whom they allow in their country.)
The greatest danger to the Americans themselves remains the likelihood of one or more of their cities being attacked with the nuclear bombs that have been smuggled into their country. Even greater is their not being told by their Military Leaders the horrible truths relating to who is attacking them and why. It has been often reported here of the Americans inability to understand the world as a whole, this we know, but even with this being so their right to know these things should be respected.
It has often been said that the only people who are able to survive and those who have prepared. It is likewise known that people only realize this after disaster strikes. No where is this more evident in America today than in New York City, where having suffered and lived through one such attack their citizens have learned this lesson well, and as we can read as reported by the New York Daily News Service in their article titled "Most in city have terror survival plan" and which says;
"Nearly nine out of 10 New Yorkers now stock emergency supplies in their homes in case of a terror attack or other disaster, according to a survey released yesterday. The city's Office of Emergency Management, which launched a preparedness campaign two years ago, said New Yorkers have responded in a big way. A recent survey by Marist College found: 88% of New Yorkers stock some emergency supplies in their home. 51% say they have an emergency plan. 55% have a "Go Bag" of supplies to take with them in an emergency - including copies of important documents, contact numbers, cash, bottled water and snacks, a flashlight, a portable radio, prescriptions, and a first-aid kit."
Sadly though the remainder of the citizens in this country have not learned these lessons, but they soon will.

When is a theory no longer a theory? If there was enough evidence pointing to a certain conclusion, is it still considered a theory? It is a conspiracy “theory” in the minds of those that have not even taken a look to see what is going on. It is a genuine conspiracy in reality when the facts are examined.

They Are Not “Conspiracy Theories”
They Are, in Fact, “Discoveries”

Jesse, Editor,
July 22, 2005
Those to whom information is presented must deal with their personal unwillingness to hear new facts.
We have to make a serious effort to distinguish between the expression of an unfounded theory and the disclosure of verifiable information and facts.
They absolutely refuse to accept even the most convincing proof because they dare not admit to themselves that they have been lied to by officials in whom the placed their trust.
It is currently standard practice in America to simply dismiss any piece of information that punches a hole in any widely accepted explanation of a disturbing event. In many cases, especially when a serious crime is in question, the "conspiracy theory" tag is immediately attached to any new discovery about the event. Information related to such important topics such as 9/11, election fraud, the new world order, secret societies, or globalization is too often ignored as part of a baseless conspiracy theory even before any of it is ever presented, discussed, or evaluated.
There seems to be no set criteria for dismissing information as a foolish conspiracy theory. The only prerequisite for information to be so categorize seems to be the desire to reject it. The reason for the rejection does not seem to matter. It appears that anything people do not want to believe is simply set aside as not believable. It almost seems that if you set some people of fire they would dismiss the flames as non-existent, simply because they did not want to believe what was happening. The pain and damage done by the fire, no matter how devastating, would not be evidence enough to convince these people that the fire was real. Their need to believe otherwise would win out. In the same vein, people dismiss information and apply the conspiracy theory tag to anything they chose to disbelieve at their own discretion, regardless of any hard evidence that accompanies the "theory."
It's time to put an end to this nonsense once and for all. It's also time dispense with the name calling and and understand the dynamics of what is happening when new information is rejected. We have to deal with the resistance to any tampering with accepted "truths." And we have to find ways to convince people to seriously consider the new information, new discoveries if you will - that so many refuse, under any circumstances, to acknowledge.
It is absolutely accurate to say that conspiracies exist all around us every day of our lives and and in all walks of life Conspiracies are a very common part of life. Children conspire to play jokes on their friends, football teams conspire (in the huddle) to outmaneuver their opponents; the rich conspire with one another to get richer and governments conspire about virtually everything. Any time two or more people are involved in setting private plans to do anything, you have a conspiracy. And every single time you have a powerful government, you have secret organizations conspiring to remain secret. Conspiracies, by definition are shrouded in secrecy. In turn, their secrecy begets speculation and that speculation spawns new theories about the conspiracy itself. .Is there any wonder that theories arise about things we do not fully understand and events we find suspicious? In the end, theories are inevitable. Truths, however, are essential.
It is perfectly acceptable for curious parties to evaluate or theorize about conspiracies. It is natural to assume that conspiracies take place and it is perfectly understandable for people to speculate on potential or known conspiracies. Trying to figure out what trades your favorite baseball team might make is a perfect example of this. The team is conspiring to make changes and you are theorizing about the changes. There is nothing wrong with that. Strangely, when you call your local sports radio show to speculate on the trade, no one will call you a conspiracy theorist, despite the fact that the name does apply. By speculating about the secret plans of others, you actually are expressing a theory about their conspiracy.
Conspiracy "theories" are just that; theories. Theories are based on a logical or a reasonable theses that take known information into account and draw a conclusion based on those known facts. Theories, in essence, are educated guesses, and conspiracy theories are educated guesses about conspiracies people perceive around them. The sinister nature of conspiracy theories, then, is totally undeserved.
When new facts are brought out about controversial issues, something strange happens. Minds close and battle stations are taken. A confusion arises between unfounded theories and actual facts, discoveries, clues or evidence that may or may not support existing beliefs about those issues. We have to make a serious effort to distinguish between the expression of an unfounded theory and the disclosure of verifiable information and facts.
Today there is an ongoing battle between those in possession of newly discovered information and those who do not want to even consider the validity of that information. Real evidence and factual information are being lumped with baseless theories. This is not always the fault of the person to whom the information is presented. In many cases, the presenters offer unpopular conclusions too quickly that alienate their audience. This is often the case when new information about the events of 9/11 are revealed. When people are involved in discussions about the attacks, they are prone to dismiss verifiable evidence because they are offended or distressed by greater ramifications that arise. . This is both unproductive and dangerous. Information has to be examined and evaluated, regardless of its wider implication. That is the responsibility of the recipient. But there has to be a way to clearly present valid, tangible, verifiable and often undisputed information so that it is more readily accepted. That responsibility belongs to the presenter, who must deal with facts rather than conclusions.
Another thing to keep in mind is the possibility that a simple discovery can disprove a great deal of what is previously accepted as truth. At the same time, however, it may not completely prove the validity of an alternative theory. It only proves that an existing belief is wrong. This is the case regarding the mountains of evidence uncovered by the independent 9/11 researchers. What they have discovered easily disproves the official version of the events and the Kean Commission findings. What it does not prove conclusively is what actually took place.
There is also another factor to deal with when dealing with the truths, half truths, and lies that surround events not clearly resolved in the minds of the public. Holding on to half truths is often easier than accepting that one has been fed a truckload of lies in the first place. Suffice it to say there is a large segment of the American population that continues to dismiss every one of the verifiable findings of the independent 9/11 research community. They absolutely refuse to accept even the most convincing proof because they dare not admit to themselves that they have been lied to by officials in whom the placed their trust. Betrayal by those who lead the country they love is simply too painful to accept. Denial is too often the best defense of the deceived.
My own venture into educating the public about media deception has led me into a world of information that has been hidden from the public. Actually, it is not completely hidden, but it surely can not be found in the mainstream media. If we use Iraq as an example, even the most rudimentary research into the history of the first Gulf War will uncover a reality that is very different from the common folklore. When I bring up issues regarding the first Bush administration and Iraq, such as the hiring of a PR firm to lie to Congress about atrocities committed by the Iraqis in order to garner support for war, people immediately tag my information as my conspiracy theory. In part, they are correct. There was a conspiracy, but it was not mine. And there was no theory, there was only truth... The account is factual, it really happened and it was a conspiracy to lie to the Congress and the nation. Fortunately, this particular issue is verifiable. It is also no longer denied. Sadly, like so much people should know, these events are destined to remain in the dustbin of history, thanks to our mass media. And it might explain why I, along with many other people, are working hard to bring the truth to the people.
When researchers, history buffs, truth seekers, conspiracy nuts or whatever you want to call us, present newly discovered, yet verifiable information to the public, we are directly attacked as promoters of a conspiracy theory and lambasted with the usual assortment of insults. . This is totally unacceptable. We can no longer allow the conspiracy theory tag to be indiscriminately used whenever anyone has new discoveries to reveal. There has to be a concerted effort to clarify the goals of those with information to impart. Presenting new evidence can not be perceived as an attempt to establish a forgone conclusion. At the same time, new information must be dealt with in isolation of any other ramifications or another resistance relating to its possible reality.
9/11 remains the perfect example with which to illustrate my concerns. A massive amount of valid evidence exists to show that elements of the official story (itself a conspiracy theory because it is not verifiable), are false. It is not possible, however. to use the newly discovered evidence as the basis for a conclusion about what actually happened and who was responsible. At least not yet. There are many indications, and there is a long trail of evidence suggesting US government complicity, but that is all there is. That much is a theory, but the evidence itself is comprised of facts. That evidence can not be dismissed simply because the theories that are wrapped around them are inconclusive. The proverbial baby cannot be thrown out with the bath water.
In conclusion, let me summarize two "conspiracy theory" problems that must be dealt with:
1. Those who opt to disclose new discoveries must clearly separate the theoretical elements of their presentation from the information they disclose.
2. Those to whom information is presented must deal with their personal unwillingness to hear new facts. They must become more receptive to new evidence and avoid dismissing verifiable evidence simply because the ramifications are distressing or difficult to conceive.
We have to discourage the misuse of language that wrongly labels and categorizes people with information to share. Hostile or incorrect terminology only serves to interfere with our mutual and communal education. It is vital that we examine evidence and discoveries for what they are. We must be careful not to expand evidence beyond its empirical reality. Facts must not be confused with folklore, but must be presented within the limits of their validity. By doing this, we may convince the skeptics among us to listen with less resistance and to end the practice of dismissing evidence solely because it disproves their initial beliefs. If we deal effectively with these obstacles, we all may become better informed about the things we need to know. And perhaps one day we will come to know the reality that continues to evade us to this day.
Jesse - Editor,
• WHY AMERICANS REFUSE TO BELIEVE THE 9/11 EVIDENCE!!! - The attacks of 9/11 were so unthinkable that most Americans would refuse to believe the complicity of their own government, even if presented with a mountain of evidence. - Very simply, it is possible to escape blame if you do something that nobody in the world believes you could do.


Post a Comment

<< Home