Monday, January 28, 2013

Insight into the Canadian Banking system!


Canadian Banking system by a twelve-year-old!
12-year-old blasts Canada's banks
Victoria Grant's critique of financial system goes viral
The Canadian Press
Posted: May 16, 2012
Canada's banking system has been the subject of international praise from economists grappling with global turmoil, but one 12-year-old girl begs to differ.
Victoria Grant of Cambridge, Ont. is earning a reputation as a financial pundit after her tirade against her homeland's borrowing practices went viral on YouTube.
Grant is already a veteran of the financial lecture circuit, but her appearance on April 27 is garnering unusual attention. A video of her address, shot at the Public Banking in America Conference in Philadelphia, has already attracted nearly 65,000 views since being posted a week ago.
For six minutes, the casually clad youngster holds forth to conference attendees on the reasons why so many of the world's countries are facing staggering debt.
Her well-rehearsed speech, delivered in a clear, youthful voice, takes aim at Canada's modern day financial system and champions a greater role for the country's central bank.
"The banks and the government have colluded to financially enslave the people of Canada," she says.
Grant lays out a brief history of the Canadian banking system, referencing obscure historical figures such as former Vancouver mayor Gerald McGeer and explaining that the Bank of Canada held primary control over government lending until the 1970s.
Starting then, she says, governments began borrowing from private banks instead at considerably higher interest rates than those available through the central bank.
The result, Grant argues, is a rapidly increasing national debt.
The pint-sized pundit is quick to offer a solution.
"If the Canadian Government needs money, they can borrow it directly from the Bank of Canada," she says. " ... Canadians would again prosper with real money as the foundation of our economic structure."
Calls to Grant's home were not immediately returned.
Child's speech attracts supporters, critics
Her arguments have been championed in more orthodox financial circles.
Last June, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives published a plea from retired finance professor George Crowell, who now works on behalf of the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform.
Crowell echoes all of Grant's assertions, arguing borrowing from the Bank of Canada would shore up depleted government resources and usher in an era of prosperity for Canada.
Such a change in monetary policy, combined with crucial changes in tax policy, would make available tens of billions of dollars that are urgently needed to rebuild our public infrastructure, protect our environment, and strengthen Medicare and other social programs so vital in meeting human needs," Crowell said.
Critics of Crowell's arguments contend inflation rates would soar if the central bank was able to lend money below commercial interest rates.
Reaction to Grant's video was largely positive, with U.S. financial media outlet Bloomberg featuring a link to her speech on its web page.
YouTube commentators bubbled over with praise, saluting her for explaining complex concepts in comparatively simple terms.
"Good for you Victoria, if you even understand half of what you are saying, you are doing better than half the Canadian public," wrote one YouTube user. "I have for years tried to explain this very simple fact to people around me, and they think I am crazy. Maybe if they saw it from a 12 yr old they would be shamed into paying attention."
One Twitter user offered more concise praise: "Victoria Grant For Prime Minister!"
Others, however, were skeptical that Grant's words were truly her own.
"If you believe that she wrote it and it was impromptu, you are nuts," wrote one commenter on the Huffington Post Canada website.
"It was a put up job by Toddlers and Tiaras parents."

The Crime of the Canadian Banking System

Over the past 4 years, the Canadian people have paid $137.4 billion in interest on money borrowed from private banks whereas the Bank of Canada could legally print the public's money into existence rather than borrowing it at interest. "They've paid out this huge sum because our government has failed to abide by the law."
Bill Abram, a retired high school teacher and activist on Vancouver Island, B.C., explicates the trick of fractional reserve banking.

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Hillary Clinton's Testimony on Benghazi!

All The Difference in the World
"I do care a lot" and "None of this was my fault" and "What difference at this point does it make?"
Daniel Greenfield
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived back in the Senate, after dodging a few falling safes, multiple banana peels and an ornery dog named Henry, to give a carefully prepared histrionic rant which can be summed up, “I do care a lot” and “None of this was my fault” and “What difference at this point does it make?”
The last isn’t a sarcastic restatement. It’s what she actually said.
It might make a difference to a Coptic Christian whose trailer was blamed by the leader of the free world for a series of Al Qaeda attacks against American diplomatic facilities and who was sent to prison on the orders of members of the administration.
That fellow of many names, now serving a year in prison, is the only one to actually get locked up. The ringleader of the attack walks the streets of Benghazi freely. A drone could make short work of him, but no drones are coming his way. Instead a car bomb, planted by Libyan enemies nearly took him out. Some of the other Benghazi attackers were killed by the Algerian military during the siege; doing the work that Obama won’t do. If the Benghazi terrorists finally die, it will most likely be at the hands of the French, the Syrian army or Libyan rival militias.
Benghazi, Obama said, during his appearance with Jon Stewart, the man of many grimaces, was a bump in the road. And that’s all it was. The Obama campaign bus drove over four bodies and reached its destination in an armored parking garage somewhere in D.C. An irritated Hillary Clinton, who is prepping for her own bus tour in 2016, has every reason to demand to know what difference it makes now to discuss who lied about what and who failed to secure the Benghazi mission.
Al Qaeda is dead, except for the parts of it rampaging across Syria, Iraq, Mali, Libya, Algeria and Pakistan
The election is over, and her testimony was delayed until after the fat lady held up her talking points at the debate and sang. Al Qaeda is dead, except for the parts of it rampaging across Syria, Iraq, Mali, Libya, Algeria and Pakistan, and a decade of war is coming to an end or just beginning. It makes no difference now which one of those it really is, just as it makes no difference, whether, as Clinton said, it happened “because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans?”
Dead is dead. The Benghazi four are dead. Stability in the Middle East is dead. Hope is dead. Victory is dead. It’s time to discuss the serious stuff. Like finding the right title for Hillary’s next biography, ghost-written and set for release around 2015, right after the Dems suffer a Congressional setback from angry NRA voters and just before the next election to position her as the new voice of hope.
“Bumps in the road” is one option. It really communicates that Hillary has been through a lot and driven over a lot of hard roads full of potholes and people who were only there because the Republicans refused to fully fund her infrastructure and outreach programs. But “What Difference Does It Make?” best captures the zeitgeist of the time. That sense that nothing matters once you’ve won.
What Difference Does It Make?: Hillary Clinton in Peace and War” will show up on shelves with a cover of her in some distant country looking out at the exotic landscape or surrounded by properly foreign children. It will be packaged along with a public speaking tour of colleges as Hillary promises to teach the leaders of tomorrow how they too can make a difference her way. The tour will use up Hillary’s store of funny and inspiring stories from her meetings with foreign leaders and human rights activists, most of which will be made up, but what difference does it make?
Everyone will pretend to be inspired by her. Suddenly it will be of paramount importance (circa 2015) that young women have a president of their own to look up to. It’ll all be fake, like her career, but what difference does that make. The real campaign slogan, at this point, might as well be, “Hillary, why not?” and “You know it’s going to happen anyway.”
Over in Cairo, leading senators visited Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President, Mohammed Morsi and tried to explain to him that ranting about Jews being the bloodthirsty spawn of apes and pigs who must be driven out of the Middle East is “inappropriate” if he expects to be considered a force for stability in the region. In response, Morsi told the senators that he respects all religions and that the only reason the New York Times belatedly mentioned the story a month later is because the apes and pigs control the media.
Afterward Senator McCain called for $480 million in economic aid to the Morsi regime and Obama sent him a bunch of tanks and jets, because really what difference does it make?
Morsi knows that he can say whatever he pleases and still get the F-16s and Abrams tanks and the billions of dollars in aid, and so it makes no difference at all what he says.
Sure at some point in the near or distant future, Morsi might use those weapons to, “free the land from the filth of the Jews”. And then the Christians. And when that happens, someone will sit down in front of a Senate panel and explain that they really do care a lot, that it wasn’t their fault and that assigning blame makes no difference at this point.
Much as it might be nice to think that if Obama wasn’t in office, that we wouldn’t be sending planes and tanks and money to Morsi, that’s wishful thinking. McCain would have embraced the Arab Spring in the White House, the way that he embraced it in the Senate. He would have bombed Libya and would probably have been bombing Syria last year. Romney might not have backed the overthrow of the Egyptian government if he had won in ‘08, but he would still be shipping the same goodies to Morsi in the name of maintaining regional stability if he had taken his inauguration oath this week. The difference is that unlike Obama, he wouldn’t have known what he was doing or why.
Hillary Clinton knows it quite well. Most of her stories may as fake as her biographies, past and present, but she’s served in the Senate and hung out in the White House. And if McCain had won, she would be sitting on a panel blasting whatever hapless McCain appointee was holding down the SOS desk for failing to properly secure whatever half-assed intelligence operation was taking place there.
This mutual hypocrisy makes any genuine concern difficult to sustain. It reduces all hearings to bouts of political investigations, to prospective 2016 candidates shouting at each other over what they would have done. And then there’s nothing left, but to ask what difference would it make if she had secured the Benghazi mission, if Obama had dispatched timely rescue forces or if we had stayed the hell out of Libya. If would have made a large difference to the dead, but not a whole lot to Hillary 2016.
France is fighting in Mali now and it’s getting about as much support from Washington, as the dead of Benghazi did.
France is fighting in Mali now and it’s getting about as much support from Washington, as the dead of Benghazi did. The drones aren’t flying here either and neither is much of anything else. Obama Inc’s people have said that they support the French operation but that they’re still waiting to get a “clear picture” of the mission, the enemy and how much this will offend the Morsis of the Muslim world.
The quest for a clear picture was also the pitch made by Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Barack Obama whenever they were asked about the Great YouTube Trailer Terrorist Attacks of 2012. What some cynical people might see as lies or calculation inaction, was just an effort to fiddle with the rabbit ears of intelligence agencies to get a clearer picture.
The picture will never come in crystal clear, but then it’s not meant to. Like one of those artfully stylized big box TVs showing test patterns in the window displays of retro boutiques, it just adds a little style and mystery to the careers of those responsible. The real story will go on dripping out bit by bit, and it will go on not making a difference.
This really isn’t about Benghazi, which could have been secured for a fraction of the $16 million that her State Department spent on overpriced Kindle book readers and the $4.5 million it spent on art in embassies. You could have dropped the cost for fully protecting the Benghazi mission into the billion that State spent on global warming. Or the dough that Howard Gutman, campaign contributor and Ambassador to Belgium who shares some of Morsi’s views, spent renovating his embassy into a shining example of Green Sustainableness could have instead been spent on fortifying the mission.
This isn’t even about Hillary 2016. It’s about the Middle East where bad policies make a world of difference. And it’s about a political establishment that rewards the Hillary Clintons for the disasters they make while punishing the Michele Bachmanns for the truth that they tell, because it is unable to come to terms with its own mistakes.
Carter gave us the Mullah-ridden Iran and began pouring money into the Pakistani terror machine of the ISI. Obama gave us a North Africa that is beginning to look like Iran and has shoved handfuls of cash, weapons and support at any Islamist whose views and affiliations stop just short of Al Qaeda, even if he happens to be Al Qaeda’s best friend.
But what difference does it make when few Republican senators can discuss what the Brotherhood really stands for and its impact on the Middle East and the West? What difference does it make when Romney could not even begin to explain what was really going on in the region beyond a few talking points that he had memorized? What difference does it make when Hillary Clinton can give her performance, knowing it will get rave reviews from the media, and then look over her ghostwriters’ latest proofs from the chapter on Pakistan that focus on microfinance and sustainable energy?
Crimes don’t make a difference unless there are people who can expose them for what they are. Many of the things that we consider unacceptable behavior today had to be criminalized.Democrats have criminalized many ordinary things, such as buying cough syrup without a photo ID or making a movie that offends Muslims, but they have decriminalized other things, such as funding and arming terrorists and endangering the survival of the free world.
Reversing this process and reversing Hillary 2016 requires men and women who can show why what happened in Benghazi, in Cairo and across the region makes a difference. Why it’s more than just another random occurrence that can be shelved until the end of time when the clear picture that Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and assorted administration officials talk about finally develops. It will make a difference when there are enough people who realize that in the last four years, these policies have made all the difference in the world and paved the way for replacing the war of drones and hijackers with a global war on the scale of the first two.
Then the difference that Hillary dismissed and that her colleagues in Obama Inc. have held at bay for another four years will finally be made.
Daniel Greenfield is a New York City writer and columnist. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and his articles appears at its Front Page Magazine site.
Daniel can be reached at:
Also See:
What Happened in Benghazi?
31 October 2012
The Saga of the Benghazi Report!
22 December 2012

Monday, January 21, 2013

Are Suspicious 'Suicides' Really Government Murders? (Part 1)


Was Aaron Swartz Murdered?
by Richard Evans
January 19, 2013
When Aaron Swartz refused to deal with the devil, did the government "suicide" him?
"You could eat a sandwich in the time it takes to suffocate from hanging. If he really was as depressed as media says, he could have easily gotten a prescription for Xanex, put on some nice music, light some candles and gone to sleep and never wake up. Why hanging? "
Latest- Gordon Duff Blames CIA "rogue elements" (right!) -- "No question this was a murder." Six days ago, an internet activist was found hung in his Brooklyn apartment. The coroner and Media say he killed himself. Swartz was no Occupy Wall Street hippie. At 27, he'd already reached the top of his field. He was a software genius and Internet champion. He co-authored the "RSS 1.0" a widely-used syndication format. he also co-founded Reddit which was sold to Conde Naste. He founded Open Library, an internet database dedicated to obtaining public domain documents that had been appropriated by private interests. He 'hacked' the Library of Congress database and uploaded it to Open Library making it available for free. The "social media" industry has virtually taken over every aspect of human communication. This industry increasingly is synonymous with erosion of privacy and commercialism. The movie, 'The Social Network' glorified Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg, as a 'genius' at betrayal of friends and classmates in order to get sex, money, and power. Aaron Swartz wasn't as famous as Mark Zuckerberg - but he was an effective advocate for freedom of information. He wasn't billionaire, or even a millionaire, though he could have been. Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig said, "He never did anything for the money".
LEGAL PROBLEMSIn 2010, Swartz downloaded the entire JSTOR archives because the organization pays the publishers of scholarly articles, not the authors.
On July 19th, 2011, the Attorney General of Massachusetts threw the book at him. He was charged under the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, otherwise known as "hacking". But this broad, fuzzy law wasn't a good fit for downloading uncopyrighted articles with intent to redistribute.
At the moment, that's not a crime yet. Making such a thing a crime is what the PIPA / SOPA bills meant to do. Undaunted by the warning from Federal muscle to "chill", last year Swartz was a significant organizer against the SOPA bill that threatened freedom of information access on the internet.
Lawrence Lessig, said, "The government was not gonna stop until he admitted he was a felon. In a world where the architects of the financial crisis regularly dine at the White House, it's ridiculous to think Aaron Swartz was a felon."
Lessig knew Aaron for twelve years. He was Swartz' advisor on intellectual property law for Creative Commons and Open Library.
WAS HE MURDERED?The mainstream media has been doing a snow job to make us believe that Aaron Swartz committed suicide by tying a rope around his neck and hanging himself.
Personally, I think he would have been creative enough to think of a less horrible way to die. You could eat a sandwich in the time it takes to suffocate from hanging. If he really was as depressed as media says, he could have easily gotten a prescription for Xanex, put on some nice music, light some candles and gone to sleep and never wake up. Why hanging?
Hanging is a horrible way to die. The sentence of hanging was intended to send a message to other offenders "this could happen to you". I think that's why Aaron Swartz died by hanging. It's a message to other activists -- probably those he knew who worked with him.
Swartz's father is an intellectual property consultant to MIT's computer lab. At Aaron's funeral, he said his son was killed by the government.
Media has since spun Swartz' father's remark as if it he was speaking figuratively. Don't you believe it. I don't like the way mainstream media writers frame Swartz's hanging as a reaction to 'bullying'. It implies Swartz was afraid of the government, that he was a coward, or mentally ill.
That's not it. Swartz's career shows the familiar pattern of attempts to assimilate him into the system - scholarship to Stanford, lucrative job under auspices of WIRED, a fellowship from Harvard's institution on ethics. All these perks failed to control him, so they switched to Federal muscle tactics.
Each attempt to control him drove him further beyond the pale. But I think his death warrant wasn't issued till last year when he became an effective leader of a million people and stopped the PIPA and SOPA bills. Effective leaders aren't allowed.
Bertrand Russell wrote frankly that geniuses would be carefully offered a place with the elite, but those that persisted in bucking the system would be exterminated. From "The Scientific Outlook", 1931, Russell wrote;
"On those rare occasions, when a boy or girl who has passed the age at which it is usual to determine social status shows such marked ability as to seem the intellectual equal of the rulers, a difficult situation will arise, requiring serious consideration. If the youth is content to abandon his previous associates and to throw in his lot whole-heartedly with the rulers, he may, after suitable tests, be promoted, but if he shows any regrettable solidarity with his previous associates, the rulers will reluctantly conclude that there is nothing to be done with him except to send him to the lethal chamber before his ill-disciplined intelligence has had time to spread revolt. This will be a painful duty to the rulers, but I think they will not shrink from performing it." Lessig said "Aaron Swartz is now an icon, an ideal. He is what we will be fighting for, all of us, for the rest of our lives."
Here's a partial list of suspicious 'suicides' or 'accidents' of scientists and politicians that bucked the system.
Other sudden deaths of natural leaders.
Beverly Eckert organized the 9/11 Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission. Eckert's husband died in the World Trade Center. She was a prime organizer of families of 911 victims. Within a week of this photo op with Obama after his inauguration in 2009, she died in a commuter plane crash in Buffalo, NY.
The "Suicide" of Gary Webb (Shot twice in the head)
Politicians and plane crashes (very incomplete) Note John F. Kennedy, Jr., son of former President John F. Kennedy, died along with his wife and sister-in-law when their plane crashed into the Atlantic in 1999. Had he lived, he could have stolen the Presidential election from Skull and Bones in 2004.
Was Aaron Swartz Killed By An MIT Satanic Child Porn Ring?
By Yoichi Shimatsu
Exclusive to
15 January 2012
Let us start by dismissing the prosecution’s ludicrous charge that any programmer as talented as Aaron Swartz would dedicate his life to stealing an archive that dispenses its academic papers for a few dollars apiece to the public or for free to students under department accounts. MIT professors, who are so full of themselves, are the only ones who might take seriously such a fool’s errand as a worthy objective for the brilliant and rebellious Swartz or the law suit as the cause of his so-called “suicidal depression.”
The mass media have been fed, and eagerly swallowed, the unpalatable lies hurled against a courageous young man whose guilt lies solely in his disgust at the online filth from “respectable” Internet paragons who have deviously corrupted the morals of his generation. America’s leading center for computer science has unleashed a campaign of slander against Swartz, who cannot defend himself through the media or in the docket now that he is dead.
My personal regret is that he had to act alone without the guidance and support of those faraway people including myself who have been fighting against the same vile pedophile elite. In American society where tens of thousands of children disappear every year without any serious investigation or public concern, the young man assumed the burden of justice on his own and paid the ultimate price for it. Using the JSTOR issue as a mere cover for his covert investigation into MIT wrongdoing was an immature tactic, which now undercuts his reputation postmortem.
As a traditional journalist and editor, I have never before supported Anonymous and their hacking activity, but the untimely death of Swartz changes the rules of engagement. Striking at the nerve center of the military-corporate-pharmaco-porno complex is an ethical duty not a crime, one of few available means to defend constitutional law. To the morally reprobate professors and administrators at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, I say unequivocally: You have started a war that will end when you fall on your swords.
The Culprit is MIT not Swartz
No, it is not Aaron Swartz who should be on trial but that lofty institution of hired learning, MIT, which is responsible for the heinous crimes that led to his death. The risks taken on by Swartz, which so have threatened MIT, can be understood only through the issue of child porn as orchestrated and produced by its acclaimed professors and distributed to their wealthy and powerful sponsors. The MIT cyber-pimps cater to a clientele that includes the highest echelon of the State Department, major corporations, intelligence agencies, the military brass, and the White House.
Every element in the Swartz case indicates that he died in a heroic attempt to expose the perversion that has corrupted the hearts and minds of the global elite, a heinous and often murderous vice that traumatizes innocent children and threatens every family on this planet.
This exposition of the facts is a torturous path that leads from the hallowed ivy halls in Boston to the outskirts of Phnom Penh, where a world-famous professor arranged underage sexual services for visiting dignitaries and sent encrypted child porn via satellite to illicit databases on the MIT campus.
Nicholas Negroponte, you have no place to hide in Southeast Asia or Africa, not any longer. You are under watch and will be relentlessly tracked down, not just for child porn and pimping children but now as an accomplice to murder. Your only way out is to turn over the video files along with the entire list of names, and you had better do it sooner than later because the powerful pedophiles on that list are going to silence you to cover their own tracks.
A Telltale Security Tape
The security video that triggered hacker Aaron Swartz’s indictment, to the contrary, exposes the criminal activities of his adversaries at MIT in the events that led to his death by hanging.
Some highlights from that video clip include:
- his slim physique, a waist size of no more than 30 inches, a short length that makes it practically impossible to hang himself with a belt, as reported by the Brooklyn police.
- a bicycle helmet held up to cover his face, meaning Swartz was cognizant of the surveillance camera inside the computer-routing and wiring closet on the MIT campus. On an earlier entry into the closet he was videotaped without the helmet and must have noticed the hidden camera at that time.
- the steel rack stacked with routers and at least one server into which he had plugged a laptop for a download, which required an extraordinary amount of time, indicating that the content was high-quality video and not documents.
- his trespass was a physical “break in” or walk in, which indicates the targeted server could be accessed only via a dedicated line and not with a hack. A dedicated line indicates the transfer of illegal content to strong encryption.
MIT Has No Proprietary Right to JSTOR
The videotape of Swartz’s download led to the MIT complaint that spurred a federal prosecutor in Boston to indict him for pirating online journals distributed by JSTOR, a subscription-based electronic archive of scholarly papers. The charges are patently absurd.
Why would a so-called notorious hacker bother with redistributing journal articles that can be purchased at nominal cost or gained for free by students with a department account?
Unlike the Wikileaks trove of diplomatic cables, none of the papers are classified or contain state secrets.
Why didn’t he simply hack into the main JSTOR archive, whose files are accessible in bulk online from dozens of universities?
Swartz was a research fellow with the Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard, which also has an institutional account with JSTOR. Given his street cred and past associations, he could have easily found a webmaster with the password to the JSTOR server.
How can MIT, which is not the owner of the allegedly accessed material, file theft charges against him?
The JSTOR archive is not owned or based at MIT, as media reports suggest, but is registered at the Network Connections server farm in Herndon, Maryland. JSTOR is under the control of a nonprofit organization called ITHAKA, whose board of directors includes top university administrators and the W.W. Norton book publisher. The trespass (into a tiny closet) was done at MIT, but ITHAKA, the party with proprietary rights over the JSTOR intellectual property, does not appear as the chief plaintiff. (Analogy: Whenever a car is stolen from a parking lot, the car owner and not the car hop is supposed to file charges against the thief.)
MIT obviously has something to hide.
When Internet Vigilantism Becomes Necessary
The mass media attributes the alleged “suicide” by short belt to “depression” without conducting any investigation into why Swartz might have been depressed. Article after article also describes him as a “co-founder of reddit”, as if he was one of the principle partners who owned the bulletin board, which was later sold to Conde Nast and operated by its subsidiary Wired magazine. His employee stock option in the company is a normal practice in the tech start-up field.
Swartz complained about relocating to the San Francisco offices of Wired for a routine job that he dreaded. There was obviously more to his bleak mood at the corporate-run reddit. Since he was not estranged from his parents and had an intelligent and attractive girlfriend, his foul mood seems to have arisen from professional concerns.
What would a decent family-oriented youth find so disturbing about working at corporate-controlled reddit? The bulletin board had gained profitable notoriety for its sub-edit groups that promoted discussion and images on underage sex, snuff porn, violent rape of adolescent girls, incest and abusive language. The crudest reddit posts came from the Internet’s most disgusting troll, Violentacrez, who was later exposed as then 49-year-old Texas-based programmer Michael Brutsch, a former soldier with a wife and children.
Whenever a person of sound mind and intact morality tries to go against the child-porn rings that are hiding in plain sight on the Web, he or she learns hard lessons fast. The child-porn pimps are well-organized, highly maneuverable into new websites, massively funded and deeply connected to regulators and law enforcement. These demented monsters are capable of making vicious threats and meting out brutal revenge against their critics. Invariably, the child-porn providers get away to start up again. Only insignificant subscribers are ever arrested in FBI and police round-ups, indicating higher-up protection for the pedophile crime bosses.
Pedophiles at MIT Media Lab
The road from Boston ends outside Phnom Penh. From 2003 till 2009, I worked on-and-off in Cambodia with an international team of anti-pedophilia activists, who were volunteers and all of them fathers. The team came to Cambodia following up on a slew of leads, including photos of naked infants taken by Newsweek Tokyo bureau chief Bernard Krisher on display at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Hong Kong, a den of pedophiles connected with the Jimmy Savile case. Former British Governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patton is now widely suspected as a high-level protector of the satanic BBC rapist and his old-boy circle. The FCCHK canceled a rented room for an anti-pedophile seminar for which I was one of the invited speakers.
Lionized by CNN and TIME, Krisher is the publisher of the English-language Cambodia Daily, whose staff was hostile to our presence in Phnom Penh. Earlier, I had known of Krisher’s visits to North Korea, supposedly to provide food relief, when in fact he was visiting orphanages in the secretive dictatorship to select children for overseas “education”. In that same period, from the late 1980s throughout the 1990s, “Chinese” orphans were arriving at Boys Town in Nebraska, which became entangled in a scandal involving Senate pages supplied for underage sex services.
Foreign NGOs, including “child-protection” groups, were rabidly opposed to our team’s direct-action methods, which included supplying night-vision videocams to the Cambodian police for nighttime stakeouts outside the premises of known child-sex brothels. Anyone who thinks that habitual pedophiles can be stopped with billboards and television commercials has not a clue. On several occasions, I came close to fist fights to prevent foreign men from taking the motorcycle ride to the countryside outside Phnom Penh, where Vietnamese girls as young as 7 were being dolled up with make-up and offered to the highest bidder.
When two of our team members, Caucasian fellows, tried to walk up a road that led to an orphanage “helped” by Krisher (according to staff pocketed the donations), they were blocked by Cambodian policemen wielding submachine guns. We then met with American-educated parliamentarians, who supported our campaign but said our effort was near hopeless since Southeast Asian refugee children are preyed upon back in the USA, where law enforcement was supposedly less corrupt than in Cambodia.
A Royal Decree
After several foreign pedophiles were arrested and convicted on the basis of videotape evidence, the foreign community in Cambodia turned against our team in rage. Alarmed, diplomats at the embassies of the United States, Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand and Japan launched investigations against our team members on any minor charge they could dig up in their home countries.
Meanwhile, the pedophile community was panicked because some of their members agreed to have a beer with our teammates to discuss the impact of the arrests. One employee of an NGO was murdered, and the blame was pinned on our resident team member, who later was brutally injured and nearly killed in a staged accident. The local politicians were starting to worry about the war inside the expat community.
Then, finally, the big break came, like the first storm that ends a dry season. Queen Monica, the wife of the late King Sihanouk, put the troubled orphanage under her royal protection. The Cambodian police shut down the orphanage’s satellite-link tower, which was being used to uplink child-porn videos and connect American pedophiles to their little sweethearts.
The teachers told me that computers and satellite communication system were installed and maintained by Nicholas Negroponte, the founder of the MIT Media Lab. “Nick was a frequent visitor and one of the orphanage sponsors who arranged the weekend pajama parties in the city whenever foreign VIPs arrived,” a teacher told me. “Since he gave us the computer equipment, our staff was in no position to say no. The average age of the abused orphans was 10 years old.”
Following the royal intervention, Bernie Krisher flew into Thailand to attend the opening of another orphanage, where he got a tap on the shoulder from the national chief of police. He was told to leave on the next plane out of Cambodia. Professor Emeritus Negroponte, however, continues his duplicitous role in Asia and Africa due to his connections in the Ivy League and his wealthy donors. He lives on embezzled money and borrowed time. He’s due for permanent retirement.
One Laptop, One Child Abuse
The “One Laptop per Child” project was initiated by the MIT Media Lab founder, who is the brother of former UN ambassador and intelligence official John Negroponte. The Zionist brothers have family origins in the Jewish community of Greece.
A quick look at MIT Media Lab reveals some questionable characters at the helm.
- Negroponte’s major promoter and sidekick has been Steward Brand, who evolved from being a back-to-nature founder of the Whole Earth Catalog to a raving advocate of “nuclear power, genetic modification and geoengineering”. (Let’s hope he relocates to Fukushima where he can personally enjoy all three wondrous advances.)
- Walter Bender, founder of Sugar Labs, which developed the One Laptop per Child project’s XO-1 Children’s Machine, the communication tool of choice for pedophiles to communicate with their little brown lovers.
- Frank Moss, who was trained at the Technion Institute in Haifa, a center for the Israeli Defense Force’s cyberwarfare R&D projects. The Media Lab itself is heavily involved in military-related projects with the US Air Force, the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, the Army Research Office and Google, which is a high-tech contractor in artificial intelligence for DARPA.
- Joi Ito, who once ran a nightclub in Roppongi, Tokyo’s drug-peddling and prostitution district run by a yakuza boss whose interest lies in Caucasian models performing coprophilia and bondage, increasingly favorite video themes besides child porn among the American university technocrati. Since he never earned a higher degree, Ito’s main qualification is apparently his status as godson of Timothy Leary. For those who were/are too stoned to comprehend political reality, Leary began his drug experimentation as a psychologist for the MK-ULTRA mind-control program and became a proselytizer of hallucinogens under a CIA psy-op campaign to disable the antiwar movement.
MIT Media Lab is yet another spin-off from the all-powerful MK-ULTRA and DARPA. No wonder it’s been producing child porn and involved in overseas pedophilia. The One Laptop program is a clever vehicle to provide early sex education to children across impoverished Asia and Africa who have yet to reach pubescence.
A Disturbing Pattern
As in the campaign of character assassination that led to the downfall of Eliot Spitzer, the assault on Aaron Swartz is another example of a crusading American Jewish individual being persecuted, punished and likely executed by their Zionist “brethren”. Swartz’s death by hanging is a microcosm of the sort of brutal mafia enforcement within the Jewish “community”, which unfortunately has gone nearly unreported in the Zionist-controlled media.
Swartz was a research fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, which is based at Harvard and in Israel. This much-needed program was organized by Lily Safra, the plucky spouse of a Syrian Jewish banker who died in a mysterious arson on his mansion in Monaco. The Brazilian-born widow later survived her own ordeal of false accusations of murder from a transsexual novelist, writing apparently on behalf of the actual perpetrators.
Edmond Safra was a banker for the Aleppo Jewish community, which over the millennia has been renowned for scholarship and good relations with Muslim and Christian neighbors. The Aleppo synagogue, until its destruction by Arab rioters enraged at the declaration of Israeli statehood in 1949, was the center of traditionalist Sephardic moral resistance to the secular, authoritarian and Eurocentric Zionists led by the Rothschild clan.
The Zionist killing of dissenting Jews was a policy of the Haganah militia. The newborn Israeli state, under President Yitzak Ben-Zvi, a leader of the Rothschild-backed Haganah, ordered the extrajudicial execution of outspoken Dutch Jewish activist Jacob de Haan, who proposed that Jews should support a non-religious state of Palestine shared with Arabs, instead of endorsing the bigotry of a separatist entity. The Israeli propagandists have since vilified the victim’s anti-Zionist views as arising from a homosexual attraction to Arab men. How low into the gutter can they stoop?
To conduct ethnological studies on Near Eastern Jews with the aim of gaining their submission to Zionist authority, Ben-Zvi ordered the Aleppo community, which was one of the longest established Jewish cultural centers, to surrender its Aleppo Codex, the most accurate manuscript of the Hebrew Bible. Despite opposition from the scholars of Aleppo, the Codex was delivered to Tel Aviv. The teachings of Moses, known as the Torah, were missing, however, and probably for good reason.
The Aleppo Torah is critically important to the traditionalists because the Mosaic perspective affirms the God-ordained role of the Jews as a stateless people guided by prophets and not subjects of worldly rulers, especially their own. Obviously, the Syrian Jewish scholars were worried about the possibility of an alteration of the text to support the statehood claims of modern Zionism. The fact that the ancient city of Aleppo is now being leveled to the ground is no fluke of history, it is the inevitable consequence of the systematic destruction of the Mideast by Zionist ambitions.
There is a moral parallel between the resistance of the Aleppo scholars with the life and death of Aaron Swartz, a young American Jew who dared to stand against the degraded and dumbed-down mass culture of corporate-controlled Internet, which should have been a realm of free inquiry and serious thinking. It is recurrent tragedy that the Jewish people so rarely stand by their prophets and instead bow down before tycoons and tyrants. Then and now, from the Egyptian tribulations to the destruction of the peaceful Sephardic Jewish communities and today’s fabrications from MIT, truth is being trampled on while decadence, deceit and corruption thrive.
In Memory of Sean Parlaman
One does not have to be a Jewish scapegoat to suffer character assassination and false charges. Another young American, Sean Parlaman, who “fell” from a high-rise window in Pattaya, Thailand, in 2002, was the leading anti-pedophile activist of his generation. Like Swartz, he was falsely accused by his foes, in his case with the preposterous charge of engaging in sex with an underage police informer he had met in a jail cell. Soon thereafter, the notoriously corrupt Pattaya police came to serve him with an arrest warrant, and it was they who reported that he had leapt out a window to his death.
While facing death threats and vilification from the entrenched foreign pedophile network in Thailand (his Wikipedia biography is pure slander written by the perverts), Parlaman started investigating child-trafficking across the Burma border. Along that militarized frontier, the Mossad and CIA under the cover of refugee aid programs have continuously smuggled in weapons and explosives, used for killing civilians in Myanmar, in exchange for opium and children. It is an injustice indeed that Sean did not live to see the 2009 police arrest of the politically connected second-generation Baptist missionary Robert Moss, aka Bobby Morse, on charges of sex with preteen tribal girls. At least, Parlaman is vindicated.
The pedophiles have been able to abduct, abuse and sometimes murder children across Southeast Asia because of protection from U.S. embassies in the region. The unofficial but widely recognized dean of the criminalized diplomats is Ralph “Skip” Boyce, former ambassador to Jakarta and later to Bangkok. It was during his tenure in Thailand that Negroponte and Krisher set up shop in neighboring Cambodia. It was earlier during his years in Indonesia that the skeletal remains of more 50 boys were discovered inside a cave in Bali. Anti-pedophile activist call him Ralphie Boyz. This sorry excuse for an ambassador later left diplomatic service to head Boeing in Southeast Asia, a region known for kickbacks in military and civilian aircraft sales.
Once upon a time a dedicated American activist in Thailand and now a bright kid on the East Coast, it is always the decent idealists who die too young, their legacy disparaged. Even though the culprits find shelter behind the ivory tower of MIT or the protective gates of a permissive State Department, the pedophiles will be brought to justice, one way or the other. For the children to live, the predators must be destroyed.
Yoichi Shimatsu, former editor of the Japan Times Weekly, is a science journalist based in Hong Kong.

Rogue elements within CIA responsible for Swartz murder
Gordon Duff
An intelligence analyst tells Press TV that rogue elements within the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) are responsible for the assassination of American dissident Aaron Swartz. He also added that the US mainstream media has turned a blind eye to the issue.
US internet activist Aaron Swartz, who was an outspoken critic of US President Barack Obama’s policies was recently found hanged in his apartment.
The 26-year-old blogger and computer prodigy was found dead in his apartment in Brooklyn, New York City, on January 11.
Swartz died weeks before he was scheduled to face a trial on accusations of hacking a website and downloading millions of academic papers.
Brooklyn’s chief medical examiner ruled the death a ‘suicide by hanging,’ but no further details were available about the mysterious death.
Last year, Swartz openly criticized Washington and the Tel Aviv regime for launching joint cyber attacks against Iran. He was also critical of Obama’s “kill list,” a list of individuals who are suspected of terrorism by the US and are listed for targeted killing after final approval by the US president himself.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today (Ohio) to have his opinion about the issue of Swartz's death.
A rough transcription of the interview with Gordon Duff follows.
Press TV: Mr. Duff, just how is Swartz's death being treated - especially with his father now saying that "the government" has killed his son?
Duff: There is no coverage in the mainstream media at all and we have found no possible excuse to this death other than the interference of ... We are believing rogue elements within the Central Intelligence Agency are responsible.
There is no other possibility and that is a place that I go very reluctantly but I can think of no other responsible party. It has to be them. No one has this kind of power. No one would do something so obvious. There is no question that this was a murder.
Press TV: And so how is the US government itself reacting to accusations of its involvement in this death? I mean some say it killed Swartz to cover up some issues and to silence the voice of dissent?
Duff: We had the Sandy Hook killings. There is a considerable controversy about that. With all of the discussion of gun control in the US, there is no discussion of anything else at all.
The Swartz's issue has been pushed off the newspapers. Our government is very good at burying new stories. And this is what they have done with this one. They are not allowing us to have any voice in this controversy.
Press TV: And as an American citizen, how have the public reacted to his death?
Duff: 90 percent of the American public are utterly unaware of the issue because it has not been reported on mainstream news, newspapers, television. Not one word has come to the American public.


As I look at the story of Aaron Swartz, the guy responsible for the defeat of SOPA, I can't help but recall this story:
Eight months before an idiot son of the Bush crime family "won" election for president...
A year and a half before Osama bin Laden became famous for 9-11...
Mark Lombardi, who had just achieved a major breakthrough in his career as an artist, reportedly hanged himself in his Brooklyn studio.
His art form?
Drawing intricately detailed diagrams of the relationship between the Bush family and its allies, the Bin Laden family, and other global criminals.

Another "Enemy of the State" who 'hung himself' in NYC

Friday, January 18, 2013

What's Not Being Told About Newtown, Sandy Hook Elementary School? (Part 2)

Radio: Beck to Use Straw Man Arguments to Debunk Real Sandy Hook Questions
The Intel Hub
January 24th, 2013
By Shepard Ambellas
In what will essentially be a continuation of the debunking FEMA camps saga, Beck is planning an apparent all out “straw man” assault on “conspiracy theorists” Wednesday on his radio show.
His presentation will likely include a video put out by what I would consider a counter-intelligence group (channel) pushing the theory that the Sandy Hook School shooting was a hoax involving all actors. The video has ascertained over 11 million views and is ultra viral.
This theory encompassed by the videos maker quickly circulated around the internet as it has been used over and over by the mainstream media including CNN’s Anderson Cooper as an argument, once again claiming that “conspiracy theorists” say “all actors” were used in the school shooting when in fact this is only the view (personal opinion) of several misinformed under-researched conspiracy theorists and not the reports presented by credentialed alternative media agencies.
I would like to also mention that the purpose of this article is to raise public awareness to the prudent questions and facts surrounding the Sandy Hook School shooting which took place at 9:30 am on December 14, 2012, in Newtown Connecticut.
These questions need answers and the facts need to addressed instead of being overwhelmingly frayed by mainstream reports.
Here are some important questions that Glenn Beck will be sure to not to address:
Glenn Beck will be sure to not address the fact that the suspects car (black Honda Civic) was reported by eyewitnesses (minutes after the shooting) and was shown on video to have had all 4 doors open with two black sweatshirts discarded on the passenger side onto the ground signifying possible multiple shooters.
Glenn Beck will not address the fact that the police actually did chase a man into the woods and apprehend him after the shooting however no further reports by officials have been released.
Glenn Beck will not address the fact that police audio confirms that people possibly disguised as nuns in ski masks in a purple van were spotted by police heading away from the scene shortly after the shooting.
Glenn Beck will not address the fact that Lt. Paul Vance of the Connecticut State Police and the Newtown Police Department has previously been engaged in Active-Shooter Drills locally.
Glenn Beck will not point out that Adam Lanza was listed dead on the SSDI Death Index on December 13, 2012, one day before the shooting.
Glenn Beck will not tell you that initial reporst describe the shooters as being disguised as members of the clergy.
Glenn Beck will not address that all evidence pertaining to Adam Lanza was sealed by a Superior Court Judges for 90 days following the shooting.
Beck will likely not address why no surveillance footage was released from school cameras.
He will most likely instead tell you essentially that we can’t ask questions regarding any of these issues, out of respect for the victims families and or because it makes pro 2nd Amendment activists look bad.
It is also important to note that actors were likely not used in the shooting (besides the ones clearly used in interviews by the corporate media) and that real victims did indeed lose their lives that day. However, the media has gravitated toward this issue and it is adding confusion to what facts lie in front of us.
Contributed by The Intel Hub of
The Intel Hub is a beacon of information that hosts many different ideas and topics that the corporate media is simply too scared to cover. Rather than pigeon hole ourselves into the left right paradigm we instead view world events from a middle ground not influenced by establishment politics and corporate funding. Whether it be Geo-Politics, Human Rights, the expanding Police State, or the New World Order, brings you real news and information that you can count on.
 Joyce Riley Interviews Mike Powers 1-16-13 TPH Sandy Hook Special Investigation

7 Sandy Hook Facts You Can't Ignore 
The story, as told, is physically impossible
Joyce Riley, the producer of "Beyond Treason" a film about experimentation on US troops, interviews an expert in armed operations.
There are so many problems with the official story.
Here are just a few big ones:
1. The deranged young man who allegedly committed this crime weighed about 120 pounds.
If you calculate all the weapons and ammo the shooter was said to be carrying, it would have weighed nearly as much as him.
2. Breaking into (or shooting open) secured doors such as the school had is not something an amateur is likely to get right on the first try. It's a SWAT team level skill that requires much training and practice.
Recall in addition to this, the shooter was supposedly carrying 100+ pounds of gear. Quite an acrobatic feat for a 120 pound young man who was not known to be in super fit physical condition.
Related to this point is the strange fact that news reporters never photographed the smashed in door. Why miss out on a photo like that when they've exploited every other part of the story?
3. Shooting "hundreds" of rounds in an enclosed space without ear protection (and there is no indication the dead young man found on the scene had any) would blow out your eardrums undermining your inner ear balance and your ability to stand up, let alone engage in these exertions.
Summary: This evil act, if carried out as claimed, required super human physical fitness and a very high level of tactical skill - way beyond shooting skills - that would required serious, sustained training.
What happened?
I don't know, but the official story is total bullshit.
Is this "Deceased" Emilie Parker With Obama?
Henry Makow
January 17, 2013
(Updated from 21/12/12-) Up to Seven Shooters (Incl Lanza) according to New Video (45 min) Mysterious van with suspects masked and nun costumed. Principal interviewed by local paper. Yet she was supposed to be dead.
No record of Adam Lanza since 2009. He could have been killed then for all anybody can confirm. Barber says he stopped coming three years ago.
The girl with Obama is wearing the same outfit Emilie wore in a family picture seen here.
Note also, she is wearing red, black and silver, the colors of satanism.
Illuminati hiding in plain sight? Is Emilie the girl with Obama, (seen in family pic sitting at far right) wearing the same dress? Or is it her sister (between parents) already wearing the dress of the deceased? Or are all 3 children in family pic wearing variations of the same outfit?
The trouble is- the girl with Obama has her hair parted the same way as Emilie, not her sister who has pigtails. Her hair is also longer than her sister's. (See picture below)
Obama and the children seem pretty cheerful considering Emilie was supposedly brutally murdered days before. Look at Robbie Parker's right hand - hisfingers look like talons; it looks unnatural. Also, as others have noted, the baby is sucking two fingers making a sign of Baphomet. Fingers seem skewed. Younger sister seems to be making a handsign too.
 Grieving father Robbie Parker
Maybe the reason he was laughing on the video moments before this image was taken is because his daughter did not die.
Bottom line- This was either false flag state terror like 9-11 or a staged hoax (or elements of both) but there are too many unanswered questions to believe the official story. It is highly unlikely that an autistic 20-year-old would shoot schoolchildren multiple times (so there would be no witnesses.) He had no motive. However the people now calling loudest for gun restrictions had a very strong motive.
See how long the hair of the girl with Obama is. Compare with sister wearing pigtails in the family pic. The Illuminati love to pull these stunts.
Sandy Hook Another compilation of some of the problems with official story.
New Video Shows Media Suppressing Second Shooter in Custody (45 min)
Aunt" refers to Emilie being an example to her Big Sisters? (2 min 38)
Helicopter footage shows dozens of responders doing nothing.
Shooting a Hoax?
Another Excellent Youtube Exposes the Facts (Jan 15)
Emergency Drill held at the same time - this is the false flag MO
Also note, the drawing reportedly drawn by Emilie was that of an owl
(Moloch, God of child sacrifices and Bohemian Grove references) with
Masonic blue wings. See attached picture. (Thanks Tony)
More - "Rest in Peace" page for teacher Vicki Soto appeared on FB 4 Days Before Dec. 14 Shooting
See this male witch signing Baphomet. He is with Victoria Soto.
A youtube that examines discrepancies
Ryan Lanza is arrested at 7.43 am according to this newscast, announcing massacre. Massacre took place at 9.35 a.m.
Reader reports a witness saying that the cops were at the Lanza home in Newtown hours before any shooting at Sandy Hook ever took place at the school, and the entire property had been roped off with police authorities everywhere. I remember this well, and this person said a coverup was taking place.Related - See Our Main Story - Newtown-The 9-11 of Gun Control

Shooters Captured? Discrepancy Over Guns or Rifle

Sandy Hook AR-15 hoax? Still no school surveillance footage released
Monday, January 14, 2013
(NaturalNews) Here at Natural News, we have a reputation for asking intelligent questions about things that don't add up. There are a lot of mysteries out there, and they deserve to be explored and questioned: Why is there still mercury in vaccines? Why did the WTC 7 building implode and fall when no airplane hit it? If the government can create money from nothing, why are we still paying taxes?
And today, I'm adding to that list this commonsense question: Why has no surveillance footage been released from the Sandy Hook shooting, showing Adam Lanza blasting away with an AR-15?
Here's why the non-release of this video footage is so interesting:
Every time a school shooting takes place, one of the very first things that gets released to the media is the school surveillance footage depicting the gun and the shooter. The purpose of this is to associate the pain and anguish of the massacre to the image of a scary-looking rifle.
In mere days after the Columbine shooting in 1998, for example, the media received footage from the massacre and began playing it over and over again, hammering home the images of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold with their guns. The same is true with numerous other school shootings as you'll see below.
But with the Sandy Hook school shooting, no video footage has been released. A reasonable person has to ask the question: WHY?
You see, the release of footage of Adam Lanza murdering children with an AR-15 -- if such a thing even happened -- would strongly support the mainstream media's call for banning so-called "assault rifles." It would also:
• Amp up the emotional impact of the fear mongering being carried out by the media.
• Provide visual support for the gun-grabber's plea to ban all rifles.
• Provide a wealth of images to be used by newspapers and magazines to further demonize the image of rifles.
... and yet, for some reason, we see no surveillance footage from Sandy Hook.
Why is that?

Answer: The AR-15 appears to have been left in his car and never even used in the shooting

The real answer to all this -- and this reveals the "Big Lie" of the mainstream media -- is that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle was left in Lanza's car.
It was never brought into the school in the first place. As a result, it was not used in the shooting.
This was openly admitted in an NBC news report that has since been scrubbed and marginalized. But NaturalNews captured the video and posted it on our own private video network which is immune from censorship:
Click here to watch the NBC News video yourself.
Here's a partial transcript of the video:
Matt Lauer: Pete Williams, our chief justice correspondent, has got some new information as well, good morning.
Pete Williams: Matt, good morning to you. This continues to be a very complex investigation, and there is a lot of contradictory information out there, but there is some new information this morning from a couple of federal officials and state officials. They say now that there were actually four handguns recovered inside the school. Not just two as we were initially told. Four handguns and apparently only handguns that were taken into the school.
We knew that Adam Lanza... also had an assault-style, AR-15 style rifle that he had taken to the school that was in the car he drove there, his mother's car. But we've been told by several officials that he left that in the car.

Adam Lanza left the AR-15 in the car

This simple fact, which was confirmed by "federal officials and state officials" has been completely scrubbed out of the mainstream media, and replaced with the "assault weapon lone gunman" theory that just happens to fit nicely with the citizen disarmament agenda being pushed by anti-American traitors like Dianne Feinstein and Joe Biden.
This is why no video footage has been released. Because the real video footage almost certainly shows HANDGUNS used in the massacre, not a rifle. There may even be other elements in the video footage that they don't want the public to see, including the possibility of multiple shooters.
And yet with Sandy Hook, we see no video footage at all. Why is that?
Three possible explanations
Explanation #1) They are busy doctoring the video footage to insert an AR-15 into the video frame by frame. The technology to do this has existed for many years as we all saw with the movie Forrest Gump, where actor Tom Hanks was shown shaking the hand of JFK. You can see that at the :48 mark of this YouTube video.
Explanation #2) No video footage was ever taken by the school. This is absurd, as it's already on the record that the Sandy Hook school had installed a video security system to monitor anyone entering or leaving the school. In fact, it's even more interesting than that:
this school security policy letter was sent to parents at the beginning of the 2012-2013 school year, and it clearly states:
...the office staff will use a visual monitoring system to allow entry. Doors will be locked at approximately 9:30 a.m. Any student arriving after that time must be walked into the building and signed in at the office...
It's quite clear that if a student approached the school carrying an AR-15 rifle, he would not have been allowed entry! The only way he could have entered the school with the security system in place was to hide handguns under his clothes. You cannot hide an AR-15 rifle in a pocket, obviously.
Explanation #3) The video footage has been seized by the government and "archived" along with the footage of the missile that struck the Pentagon during the 9/11 attacks. Where is all that video footage? It was all seized and completely hidden from public view.

Petition created to demand release of the video footage

Click here to read the White House petition demanding the release of the Sandy Hook video footage.
Also See:
What's Not Being Told About Newtown, Sandy Hook Elementary School?
(Part 1)
19 December 2012

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Gun Control in America ... Really?


DHS Preparing For Civil War In The US? 
Man who doesn't 'believe' in guns rescued from armed robbery by two good Samaritans with guns
by: J. D. Heyes
Friday, January 18, 2013
(NaturalNews) He doesn't own a firearm and says he "doesn't believe" in guns at all. But now he's grateful a couple of other locals did not share his values.
According to Houston-area station KHOU-11, the man had just been victimized at gunpoint by a robber when a pair of good Samaritans came to his rescue recently.
Police say the criminal suspect, identified as Christopher Hutchins, who was canvassing a neighborhood near the 2500 block of Wichita St. near Hermann Park, had no clue what he got himself into when picking his target.
'I don't believe in guns, but...'
In this case, the station reported, the victim, Kevin Dorsey, had just walked back to his car from a bar around the corner and had not yet closed his car door one evening when a man alleged to be Hutchins who was wearing all black and a ski mask pulled a gun and put it to his chest. The suspect took Dorsey's wallet, cell phone and car keys.
Following the robbery, Dorsey started running down the street, at which point he said two men in a Mercedes stopped and asked him what had happened. When he told them, the men in the car took off in pursuit of the suspect. When they caught up to him, they opened fire on him, Dorsey said.
The suspect fired back but in the end, the station reported, the two Samaritans won the gun battle and took him down.
"I don't believe in guns," said Dorsey. "I don't own a gun. I'm totally at the mercy of my saviors. They obviously sent two angels to help me. These people protected me when I couldn't protect myself."
After he had been shot, police say Hutchins allegedly jumped a fence and was then attacked by a German Shepherd, an attack that served to prevent his escape. Talk about having a bad day; first, he loses a gun battle with a pair of armed, justice-minded gun owners, then gets nearly mauled to death by a dog.
Police say Hutchins was sent for treatment at local Ben Taub Hospital and that he is expected to recover.
New rules and restrictions not really about 'saving lives'
As we've pointed out here at Natural News, especially lately since new
gun control talk began within the Obama Administration and his allies in Congress following the horrific massacre of children and adults in Newtown, Conn., good people exercising their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves and others is reason enough to end the assault on American gun owners.
"As the president said, if your actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly," Vice President Joe Biden said recently, in reference to new gun control policy and legislation under consideration at the White House.
Banning certain weapons, limiting ammunition capacity, licensing and other restrictive requirements won't save lives - they are measures that will cost lives because they will empower the criminal who is already operating outside the parameters of civil society.
Violence in America: Ban all Guns, Knives, Bats, Bras, and Rocks!
Rocks should be registered as to size, weight, color, and sharp edges and kept under lock and key by rock owners
Dr. Don Boys
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Enough is enough. Today two more 6-year old students in Maryland were suspended for pretending to throw rocks at each other on the playground. It’s about time we got serious about the violence that rocks (especially assault rocks) play in our society and we must act now. I have a suggestion.
If we are really serious about protecting people from violence we should ban all guns, knives, hammers, clubs, (far more people were killed last year with hammers and clubs than with assault rocks),frozen meat, bats, bras (since one man killed his wife with her bra), and rocks. Rocks are really dangerous since they are so plentiful and easily attained. Students will go from pretending to throw rocks to actually throwing them. Stop the madness now with a ban on all rocks.
Let’s not play around with this issue when lives are in the balance. Get serious and eventually ban all rocks, in all places, all weights, and all sizes. I mean if we save even one life, it will be worthwhile. I know the conservative bleating hearts will scream but they are mean, mad, and malicious people. Who cares what they think? They spend all their time clinging to their rocks as they read their Bibles, so who cares about them? They drive around town in their pickup trucks with a huge load of rocks in the bed. What does an honest person need with all those dangerous rocks?
All sane people know rocks are evil. Is it necessary to remind anyone of the use that rocks play in the religion of Islam? Children, especially boys, seem to have a tendency to throw rocks at other children, birds, cats, and other innocent animals. Rocks are evil and must be illegal.
Maybe not today, but soon America will be rock-less except for police, FBI, CIA, FEMA, IRS, BATF, military, security guards, celebrity bodyguards, senators, etc. Only the elite need rocks.
It may be difficult to ban all rocks since the National Rock Association (NRA) is such a powerful and heartless organization and all the rednecks belong to it. The (NRA) is getting rich from fees by selling memberships, coffee mugs, sweatshirts, etc. So we may have to ban the biggest rocks and eventually ban smaller rocks when another tragedy happens. You know, don’t let a crisis go to waste. We must take advantage of every situation to eventually take every rock away from every American. You know, a totally rock-less America.
For a while we will have to settle for getting rid of rocks incrementally, and to begin with, we can license all rock carriers. We can charge large fees for their license, the bigger the rock, the bigger the fee. This will also give us a list of all rock owners and their locations.
Arrest any person seen with a rock unless he has a permit to carry. Even then, the size and shape of the rock should be restricted. Some rocks are more dangerous than others. I remind the heathen out there that little David killed a giant of a man with a smooth rock but he had five rocks. It should have been illegal for him to have an excess of rocks. That is over-kill. The law must stipulate that no person can have more than one rock in his possession at any time. After all, why does a person need more than one rock? Such people are obviously up to no good and innocent lives are at stake.
Rocks should be registered as to size, weight, color, and sharp edges and kept under lock and key by rock owners. Of course, no felon or mentally unstable person should be permitted to possess dangerous rocks, so no politician can legally have rocks–Not too sure how small or large a prohibited rock should be but we’ll leave that small detail to the regulators. Surely we can trust them to be reasonable.
Until we can pass laws banning all rocks, we should go after all Rock Throwing Clubs where their sole purpose is to kill innocent and helpless creatures. Such clubs should be disbanded along with all Rock Throwing Ranges where they practice their rock throwing. After all, such activities are dangerous and will destroy a neighborhood. Also, none of those ranges did an environmental impact study before they were built so we can close them down without new laws! We should use any pretext to destroy the whole rock business.
Rock fanatics will resist these common sense suggestions and speak of never, never giving up their rock until it is pried from their cold, stiff fingers. Well, we can arrange that.
Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.
Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives, author of 14 books, frequent guest on television and radio talk shows, and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. His most recent book is ISLAM: America’s Trojan Horse! His new eBook, The God Haters is available for $9.99 from These columns go to over 11,000 newspapers, television, and radio stations. His other web sites are and Contact Don for an interview or talk show.
Don Can be reached at

The Great Gun Debate: Piers Morgan vs Larry Pratt

Obama’s gun policy advisors: 8-year-olds

Dan Calabrese
Hey, why not? The entire gun control push is based on emotion anyway, so why not justify it by releasing a bunch of handwritten letters from kids urging the president to do something? It’s as shameless as it is pathetic, but is anyone really surprised by now that
Eight-year-old Grant from Maryland, writes the President, “there should be some changes in the law with guns. It’s a free country, but I recommend there needs be [sic] a limit with guns.”
Grant’s ideas: “Please don’t let people own machine guns or other powerful guns like that. I think there should be a good reason to get a gun. There should be a limit about [sic] how many guns a person can own.”
“Even though I am not scared for my own safety, I am scared for others,” writes Eleven-year-old Julia from Washington, DC. “My opinion is it should be very hard for people to buy guns.”
Julia continues: “I beg you to work very hard to make guns not allowed, not just for me, but for the whole United States.”
Ten year-old Taejah is less specific. “I am very sad about the children who lost their lives in Conn.,” he writes. “So I thought I would write to you to STOP gun violence. Thank you, Mr. President.”
I especially like Taejah’s letter, because it so perfectly encapsulates the mentality of a kid. Mr. President, gun violence is bad so please stop it. Sure, kid. We’ll get right on that. An adolescent can be forgiven for failing to understand that the president of the United States is not all-powerful, and cannot stop evil just by deciding he wants to. He’s a kid. It’s fine that he wrote the letter and it’s fine that he wants to see gun violence stopped.

Emotional appeal that relies on THE CHILDREN! to shield him from criticism

But it’s not fine that the actual president of the United States, who is well aware of the limitations of his office and of his power, to wave around naive stuff like this as if it’s justification for serious policy. Obama knows perfectly well that he is not going to make a dent in gun violence with his proposed actions, so he tries to justify it with an emotional appeal that relies on THE CHILDREN! to shield him from criticism.
Know what, though? These pint-sized letter writers are pretty typical of the mentality that elected and re-elected Obama in the first place. If you believe in the magical power of government to solve problems simply by passing decrees that declare them solved, then Obama’s the kind of guy you’re probably going to vote for because he encourages that belief and offers policies that presume to harness this wonderful beneficient power for the benefit of all of us.
There’s a reason you can’t vote when you’re 8. You’re too naive and immature to understand the real issues and the real nature of government. Maybe 18 is too young too, judging from the apparent mentality of so many young voters to expect the government miracles Obama promises. At least Taejah has the excuse of being 8. The fact that Obama resorts to infantile stuff like this to sell his policies tells you all you need to know about them.
Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by CainTV, which can be found at
Complete list of Obama’s 23 executive orders on guns
23 steps to....nothing substantial
Robert Laurie
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Here's a list of all 23 executive orders signed by the President this afternoon. Most are geared toward health care, post-crime investigation, and gun safety education. Not one of them would have done a thing to prevent the shootings at Sandy Hook. If today’s goal was to ensure this “never happens again,” this list represents an epic failure.
As the boss said earlier, Washington excels at doing things that, in the end, do absolutely nothing.
Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
Propose rule making to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
Nominate an ATF director.
Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.
Robert Laurie’s column is distributed by CainTV, which can be found at
When Only Tyrants Have Guns
By Chip McLean
January 12, 2013
The death of innocents is always tragic. To feel empathy for those who lost their lives and their grieving loved ones is a normal, healthy reaction. To feel any less would be less than human. Unfortunately, a far less noble part of humanity – the “never let a good crisis go to waste” mindset of those who see human suffering as a means to an agenda – always display their ugly faces at such times. So it is with the recent Sandy Hook shootings.
Predictably, before the mourning families could even make funeral arrangements, the usual suspects were already inundating the airwaves with a cacophony of anti-gun gibberish. People such as Michael Bloomberg
were already demanding “immediate action.” Naturally by “immediate action,” Bloomberg and others of his ilk mean to strip gun owners of their right to bear arms.
The gullible that rely on emotion rather than logic are easy prey for such opportunists as Bloomberg, Dianne Feinstein, Eric Holder and of course Barack Hussein Obama. Governmental anti-gun types are shameless in their efforts to exploit a tide of mindless emotionalism by advocating what they euphemistically refer to as “sensible gun laws”. While they bend over backwards attempting to sell their notions as “sensible,” there is nothing sensible about it. To these control freaks, the only solution to gun shootings is to disarm the law abiding. Take for example Obama’s flippant response to the NRA’s idea of posting armed guards in schools: “I am not going to prejudge the recommendations that are given to me. I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem.” (emphasis added)Such vapid “reasoning” and presumptuousness are unfortunately typical of this administration... Apparently it hasn’t dawned upon Obama et al, that high profile school shootings such as the recent Sandy Hook incident, occurred in “gun-free” zones. Ever since the passage of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, students and faculty alike have become sitting ducks. By 1995, the law was found to be unconstitutional by the USSC, but in 1996 Bill Clinton, with assistance from his anti-gun zealot attorney general Janet Reno, found a “creative” means of simply bypassing the constitution and keeping this horrendous law in effect. Based on the exponential increase in school shootings (can you say Columbine, Virginia Tech and yes, Sandy Hook) it is more than safe to say that this “gun free zone” idea has been an abject failure - and has actually led to an increase in school shootings. Armed guards - or better yet - faculty members who have concealed weapon permits would provide a far more effective deterrent to lunatic Columbine wannabes, than leaving our children and teachers defenseless against such attacks.
How about rephrasing “more guns in schools” to “more guns in the right hands” Mr. Obama? That would be a “sensible” gun policy.
Here’s the dirty little secret – for all their hysterical anti-gun rhetoric, the gun grabbers really don’t care about saving lives – what they care about is power. They use tragedies like Sandy Hook to pursue their real goal, which is to disarm American citizens. They attempt to disguise their real intents, and in some cases even give lip service to the second amendment. One especially comedic example is that of John Kerry, who during his unsuccessful 2004 presidential campaign went on a photo-op “hunting” trip, complete with camos in order to show he supports “hunters”. Understand – and this is a crucial point – the second amendment isn’t about “hunting.” It never has been. The fact is that the right to bear arms was put into place by the founders as a means of protecting the citizens from tyranny. That is why would-be governmental gun grabbers hate that pesky second amendment. An armed populace is the one thing standing between them and what they want – an omnipotent central government accountable to no one and free to impose its will on a defenseless public. Sound harsh? Consider the gun policies of Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse Tung and think again…
Reading the founders’ own writings about the right to bear arms makes it quite clear what their intent was when adding the second amendment. Chuck Baldwin
wrote a recent column that addresses this issue and I will repeat here two quotes he used from Thomas Jefferson and George Washington: “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson
“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence… From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable… The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes.” – George Washington
In Baldwin’s follow-up column, he puts forth a three point plan of action for combatting these assaults on our freedom. I agree strongly and recommend you read Chuck’s complete column on this, but allow me to boil it down here with a couple of observations:
1) Make phone calls to our representatives and senators on Capitol Hill. It is imperative that our congress critters hear from us regarding our complete and total opposition to any new gun control measures. They need to hear from us NOW and en masse.
2) If Congress passes any new gun bill, the states themselves need to stand up to Washington – therefore our state governors and legislatures need to hear from us as well…they need to be reminded that the federal government serves at the pleasure of the people – not the other way around. When the federal government oversteps its bounds and tramples the very constitution that limits its scope, it is incumbent on the states to preserve the rights of its people. I would say that governors need to prevent the enforcement of any unconstitutional seizure of firearms by the federal government using every means at their disposal, including arresting and incarcerating any federal agent who attempts such action on the individual state’s soil.
3) Baldwin’s third point is that we as individuals must be prepared to draw a line in the sand... “(I) refuse to comply with any law requiring us to register or surrender our firearms–including our semi-automatic rifles. Ladies and gentlemen, whatever the consequences might be, and whatever anyone else does or doesn’t do, I am prepared to become an outlaw over this issue! I don’t know how to say it any plainer: I will not register my firearms, and I will not surrender my firearms. Period. End of story. It’s not just a saying with me: when my guns are outlawed, I will be an outlaw!”

Amen Chuck Baldwin! Freedom is worth fighting for – now, as it was in 1776. Our right to bear arms is the one freedom that preserves all of the others. It is time to let the Obama-coms and any spineless representatives who would simply cave in order to “get along”, know that enough is enough. It is time to let them know that their days of shredding our constitution are over, and that their idea of a socialist utopia with the elite feeding at the taxpayer trough – all the while issuing unlawful edicts to the rest of us that threaten our liberties – is not going to happen. There are millions of law abiding gun owners in this country…but an out of control federal government coming after them will do so at its own peril.
© 2013 Chip McLean - All Rights Reserved
Chip McLean is the editor/publisher for Capitol Hill Coffee House. Chip is a former broadcaster.
His interest in politics began at the age of eight, when his parents took him to a Barry Goldwater rally during the 1964 presidential election. In addition to his work at CHCH, Chip's columns have appeared in a number of online conservative publications.