Friday, 29 November 2013 21:26
Pentagon Piracy & Facebook Spying! Nov 30/13
US govt caught using pirated software for military, settles for $50mn
Published time: November 28, 2013 02:28
Edited time: November 28, 2013 05:03
Get short URL
Reuters / Rick Wilking
Share on tumblr
The Obama administration has agreed to pay Apptricity US$50 million for pirating the company’s logistics software the US Army used beyond contracted parameters.
While the Obama administration’s has launched efforts against intellectual property theft - including the Joint Strategic Plan run by Vice President Joe Biden that aims to curb copyright infringement - the US Army was concurrently using pirated Apptricity enterprise software that manages troop and supply movements. The company sued the government, accusing the US military of willful copyright infringement.
The Administration settled with the company, it was recently announced, agreeing to pay US$50 million, though Apptricity originally called for over four times that amount to cover unpaid licenses, TorrentFreak reported.
In 2004, Apptricity agreed with the US Army to license the troop-movement software, allowing the government to use it on five servers and 150 standalone devices. Despite the deal, the Army has used the software worldwide.
“The Army has used Apptricity’s integrated transportation logistics and asset management software across the Middle East and other theaters of operation. The Army has also used the software to coordinate emergency management initiatives, including efforts following the January 2010 earthquake in Haiti,” the company said.
The improper installation of thousands of unlicensed copies of software was discovered incidentally, when the US Army Program Director said during Strategic Capabilities Planning 2009 that thousands of devices had Apptricity software.
Ultimately, 93 servers and over 9,000 standalone devices of the Army had the unlicensed software. Apptricity figured it was owed US$224 million based on usual fees of US$1.35 million per server and US$5,000 per device.
Apptricity filed a lawsuit at the US Court of Federal Claims, alleging the government of willful copyright infringement, all while concealing the illegality.
“The Government knew or should have known that it was required to obtain a license for copying Apptricity software onto each of the servers and devices,” the company told the court, asking for at least US$224,543,420.80 in damages, equal to what it lost in licensing fees.
The government went on to admit the illegal use and entered into lengthy negotiations with Apptricity to settle.
“After Alternative Dispute Resolution proceedings, the parties agreed to settle for $50 million. The figure represents a fraction of the software’s negotiated contract value that provides a material quantity of server and device licenses for ongoing and future Department of Defense usage,” Apptricity announced.
Monday, 25 November 2013 22:15
Banker Employer Break Laws & Ben Fulford report! Nov 26/13
More illegal complicity to violate our rights by the sheeple people! T
Bank info... reservation of rights.... pdf file
UCC 1-207 Review
It's so important to know and understand the meaning of "Without Prejudice, UCC 1- 207," in connection with your signature, that we should go over this once more. It's very likely that a judge will ask you what it means. So please learn and understand and be able to explain it carefully:
The use of "Without prejudice UCC 1-207," in connection with my signature indicates that I have reserved my Common Law right not to be compelled to perform under any contract that I did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And furthermore, I do not accept the liability associated with the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement.
Once you state that, it's all the judge needs to hear. Under the Common Law, a contract must be entered into knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally, by both parties, or it can be declared void and unenforceable. You are claiming the right not to be compelled to perform under any contract that you did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally. And you do not accept the liability associated with the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or agreement.
The compelled benefit is the privilege to use Federal Reserve Notes to discharge your debts with limited liability rather than to pay your debts with silver coins. It's a compelled benefit, because there are no silver coins in circulation. You have to eat, and you can only buy food with the medium of exchange provided by the government. You are not allowed to print your own money, so you are compelled to use theirs. This is the compelled benefit of an unrevealed commercial agreement. If you have not made a valid, timely and explicit reservation of your rights under UCC 1-207, and you simply exercise this benefit rendered by government, you will be obligated, under an implied agreement, to obey every statute, ordinance and regulation passed by government, at all levels - federal, state and local.
See UCC 1-201. General Definitions (3) "Agreement" means the bargain of the parties in fact as found in their language or by implication from other circumstances including course of dealing or usage of trade or course of performance..."
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER INFORMATION
Let us briefly discuss the issue of the employee providing a Social Security number to the employer. We must take a practical and constitutional approach to this issue.
What possible reason could there be for the employer to require the NON-TAXPAYER employee to furnish a Social Security number? The average payroll clerk would claim the number was needed so the employer would withhold Social Security taxes, undoubtedly.But if the employee's job description does not involve any revenue taxable activity,he is not subject to any of these indirect taxes under any circumstances. The right to lawfully contract one's own labor to engage in innocent and harmless activities for lawful compensation cannot be (and therefore has not been) taxed for revenue purposes. Surely, the free exercise of such a constitutionally secured right cannot be limited only to those individuals who furnish a number. Surely there can be no act of Congress which would require such a number to be furnished by a NON-TAXPAYER.
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436, 491. The Internal Revenue Code does indeed contain sections requiring a Social Security number from those who ARE subject to an internal revenue tax, but the NONTAXPAYER is without the scope of the revenue laws.
Many people in the "freedom movement" have tried to obtain jobs without giving a Social Security number, only to have the employer quote a section from the Internal Revenue Code. This, of course, is not a valid reason in the case of a non-taxpayer because the revenue laws relate only to "taxpayer(s)" as defined. If an employer believes there is requirement for a non-taxpayer to furnish a Social Security number, the burden of proof rests with the employer - NOT the NON-TAXPAYER. The employer will have a difficult time here because the number can only be required from those subject to the tax (WHICH ALMOST NONE OF YOU REALLY ARE!!). Even if the employee provided a number to the employer, it still does not make the employee subject to the tax. The furnishing of a number does not change a non-taxable activity into a taxable activity. It's the nature of the activity that creates the liability.
Let us look back to the Helvering Case now. After discussing Title VIII in the Helvering Case, the U. S. Supreme Court next discusses Title II of the act. "Title II has the caption 'Federal Old-Age Benefits.' The benefits are of two types, first, monthly pensions, and second, lump sum payments, the payments of the second class being relatively few and unimportant.
"The first section of this title creates an account in the United States Treasury Account -201. No present appropriation, however, is made to that account. All that the statute does is to authorize appropriations annually thereafter... Not a dollar goes into the Account by force of the challenged act alone, unaided by acts to follow."
It's now obvious, that none of the money collected from the so-called Social Security taxes goes directly into any special account. The only way money gets into the above mentioned account is when Congress appropriates money from the general Treasury. When the public is told that the Social Security account is depleted, it's only because Congress has not appropriated sufficient funds from the general Treasury to keep the account solvent.
Money collected in so-called Social Security taxes goes into the general Treasury fund, and, no longer being identifiable, is spent along with the rest of the moneys collected. Pay attention to the arguments from the politicians regarding the status of the Social Security System and REALLY hear what it is they are quarreling about. If Congress chooses to appropriate funds for Social Security benefits, it can. However, if there is no legal claim that can be made upon the funds by the "taxpayer(s)" (as defined) who have paid the so-called Social Security taxes. The payment of taxes into the general Treasury is completely separable from Congress's choice in how and where public funds are to be spent.
Congress may impose taxes on all legitimate subjects of taxation. If it's a direct tax, it shall be apportioned. If it is an indirect tax (duty, impost or excise), it shall be uniform. HOWEVER, and here is another one I bet you didn't think of, CONGRESS CAN LAWFULLY ONLY SPEND MONEY FOR PURPOSES AUTHORIZED BY THE U. S. CONSTITUTION!!!
"The Congress shall have Power to Lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." - U. S. Constitution, Article I, sec. 8, cl. 1.
Providing the spending is deemed to be for the common defense and/or the general welfare of the nation, such spending is within the bounds of the Constitution. On the other hand, if the spending is deemed to be for the welfare of specific persons, as opposed to the general welfare of the nation, then the spending is not within the bounds of the Constitution, and therefore the spending is unconstitutional.
If such spending of public funds for the so-called Social Security benefits is deemed to be for the general welfare of the nation, then such spending is within the bounds of the Constitution. The recipients are entitled to the benefits provided by congressional appropriations, regardless of the sources of revenue from which the general Treasury obtained the taxes.
The tax paid into the Treasury is exactly that; a tax. Moneys appropriated from the general Treasury and subsequently spent on general welfare is exactly that; general welfare. The point being that it's actually frivolous for a person to say that because he paid so-called Social Security taxes, he has the right to Social Security benefits. The two are separable, which was one of the main purposes of the separability clause in the Social Security Act, at - 1103.
Unfortunately, the common misunderstanding of Social Security by the American working men and women is of such magnitude that there will be many who will not believe what they have read here and will not want to believe it even if they go to a law library and get copies of the court cases cited. I KNOW this because this information has already been available since at least 1986. Further, for a much longer time it has been available in other formats which work from a different standpoint, but nonetheless do work. YOU ARE CONTROLLED BY LIES AND FEAR - NOT BY THE
CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS OF YOUR LAND. There will, however, be Americans who are researching the court cases in an attempt to get to the bottom of the "taxing" problems and lies facing the American working men and women. Will it not be wondrous when the day of profound lies and enactment through force will be put behind us as a nation and people?
Before appropriating any public funds, Congress is to judge if the spending is for the general welfare of the nation. As you read the various court cases, you will find that the courts will not interfere with Congress's judgment if by any reasonable possibility the spending is for general welfare.
If providing Social Security checks every month to retired millionaires is deemed to be for the general welfare of the nation, then such spending is indeed lawful and constitutional. If, on the other hand, such spending is deemed not to be for the general welfare of the nation, then such spending is an unlawful and unconstitutional conversion of public funds, and, most surely constitutes criminal behavior. But then, didn't the millionaire also probably contribute to that account? Can anyone in the possession of even a portion of their proper faculties honestly contend that this type of spending is for the general welfare of the nation?
It would appear, however, that the questions as to the constitutionality of the spending of public funds for the particular purposes are NOT being directly raised before Congress or the courts. When the fundamental principles of constitutional taxation and constitutional spending are better understood by the American working men and women, these issues will then, and only then, be properly raised by the citizens to Congress in addition to being raised profoundly in the courts.
Great numbers of people want to do away with Social Security because they see that it is wrong, badly managed and the ones presently paying the costs will likely not have benefits later. Others, of course, want to keep the programs because of their well justified fear that many of the elderly and poor would not otherwise have any resources of funds with which to sustain themselves. Look carefully, though, for you can see from the Supreme Court cases, the taxing provisions are completely separate from the provisions for appropriating public funds for general welfare.
Stated differently, Congress can lawfully appropriate funds for the general welfare of the nation if they so choose - and have done so constantly without your even taking note. It also can tax all lawful subjects of taxation - and you who are not subject to the taxation have somehow convinced yourselves to donate (voluntarily contribute) according to the rates provided plus penalties for not donating enough.
Congress can even utilize its power to direct taxation, which it has not implemented in over 100 years, I suppose because all of you NON-TAXPAYERS keep donating and contributing so freely according to their needs and rates. I can find no other reason for sending your money and filling out forms, etc., for actually you do so most unlawfully when you are not even "eligible" as a "taxpayer."
While it's obvious that millions of working folks are having money withheld from their wages under the guise, pretext, sham and subterfuge of withholding so-called Social Security taxes, this unlawful, unconstitutional deprivation of property can come to an abrupt halt without jeopardizing the welfare of the truly needy. Congress will still have the power to obtain sufficient revenue from the lawful subjects of taxation and the needs of the nation can still be met quite constitutionally and you the people can keep total tabs on it.
It's glaringly apparent that you must take action for all of the programs which are for general welfare, along with those where spending is done under the mere guise of general welfare, need to be fully reconsidered and the programs totally overhauled. However, the American people will not be able to give clear and meaningful instructions to their public servants in Congress until the American people themselves have an understanding of the constitutional principles of taxation and the constitutional principles which apply to the use of "public" funds.
Much needs to be done to stop the illegal acts of those employers who are willfully,knowingly, corruptly and unlawfully withholding part of their employee' wages under the guise, pretext, sham and subterfuge of "withholding taxes" in the cases where the employee's job descriptions do not involve any revenue taxable activity (which is the category within which almost ALL of you belong). The employers must know that the revenue laws only apply to those who are engaged in revenue taxable activities; i. e., unlawful, harmful and non-innocent. They must know
that the withholding of ANY funds under the guise of taxation from those who are NON-TAXPAYERS and are not subject to the tax is totally and blatantly illegal. It's only because of lack of knowledge on the part of the working men and women that this CRIME continues on and on and on, unabated.
We will point out another point of interest to these employers: THEY WILL FIND
QUITE EMPHATICALLY THAT THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE WILL NOT COME TO THEIR AID WHEN THEY ARE SUED BY THE DAMAGED NONTAXPAYER EMPLOYEE; providing such nontaxpayer presents himself as a nontaxpayer as described in the Economy Case, and not as a "taxpayer" as defined in the Internal Revenue Code.
Saturday, 23 November 2013 23:33
USA TPP & Pentagon Actions Nov 24/13
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
House Pushing Back on Trade Deal; More Detail on How Secret Arbitration Panels Undermine Laws and Regulations
Wow, this is amazing. Word has apparently gotten out even to Congressmen who can normally be lulled to sleep with the invocation of the magic phrase “free trade” that the pending Trans Pacific Partnership is toxic. This proposed deal among 13 Pacific Rim countries (essentially, an “everybody but China” pact), is only peripherally about trade, since trade is already substantially liberalized. Its main aim is to strengthen the rights of intellectual property holders and investors, undermining US sovereignity, allowing drug companies to raise drug prices, interfering with basic operation of the Internet, and gutting labor, banking, and environmental regulations.
The update from the New York Times:
The Obama administration is rushing to reach a new deal intended to lower barriers to trade with a dozen Pacific Rim nations, including Japan and Canada, before the end of the year.
But the White House is now facing new hurdles closer to home, with nearly half of the members of the House signing letters or otherwise signaling their opposition to granting so-called fast-track authority that would make any agreement immune to a Senate filibuster and not subject to amendment. No major trade pact has been approved by Congress in recent decades without such authority.
Two new House letters with about 170 signatories in total — the latest and strongest iteration of long-simmering opposition to fast-track authority and to the trade deal more broadly — have been disclosed just a week before international negotiators are to meet in Salt Lake City for another round of talks…
Many members have had a longstanding opposition to certain elements of the deal, arguing it might hurt American workers and disadvantage some American businesses. Those concerns are diverse, including worries about food safety, intellectual property, privacy and the health of the domestic auto industry.
Others say that they are upset that the Obama administration has, in their view, kept Congress in the dark about the negotiations, by not allowing congressional aides to observe the negotiations and declining to make certain full texts available.
This development is more significant than it might appear. “Fast track” authority limits Congress’s role in trade negotiations. The Administration presents a finished deal, and individual members have only an up or down vote. At that point, because the pending agreements have been misleadingly presented as “pro trade,” dissenters will be depicted as anti-growth Luddites.
But the loss of fast track authority would substantially undermine America’s ability to bully the other parties in the negotiations. Our Japanese-reading regular Clive parsed an article in the Asahi Shinbun as saying that the Japanese were positioning themselves to resist the US onslaught:
The pretty clear subtext of this Japanese newspaper feature is, this is supposed to be an agreement – a negotiation. If a negotiation stalls, it’s because of intransigence on behalf of one or more parties. Let’s count [in the graphic accompanying the article] the flags of the countries who have gone along with things in the TPP proposal… Look-ee there, there’s two Japanese flags. Let’s count the flags of the countries who are opposing things… that’s two – yes, dear Asahi Shinbun readers, T-W-O please note – star spangled banners. So don’t blame us (Japan). It doesn’t actually come right out and hit readers on the head with that editorial, but, in classic Japanese passive aggressive fashion, it is, by the standards of Japanese journalism, sticking a chop stick up Uncle Sam’s behind.
Shortform: Japan to the US “If this is supposed to be a negotiation, be prepared to come and negotiate. You’ll put stuff in the TPP we don’t like. If you expect Asia to swallow it, you’d better be prepared to have to accept things you’re not too keen on. If you don’t, then it’ll be a case of Yankee Go Home from some countries. PS. If it all ends in tears, Japan is completely blameless, it’s all those other countries at fault.”
So the TPP was already in danger of going pear-shaped, independent of well-warranted Congressional opposition.
Let’s give more detail on how heinous this deal and its ugly sister, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, aka the Trans Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, are. They would extend the authority of secret arbitration panels to hear cases against governments and issue awards. Mind you, the premise of these panels is that some of the signatory nations have banana republic legal systems that might authorize the expropriation of assets, like factories, so foreign investors need recourse to safe venues to obtain compensation. This is a ludicrous proposition to most of the signatories, not only to signatories of the Atlantic agreement (all advanced economies with mature legal systems) as well as potential signatories like Singapore, Japan, Canada, and Australia (and while America’s judicial system leaves a lot to be desired, it can hardly be accused of being unfriendly to commercial interests).
A post in Triple Crisis by Martin Khor gives a good overview:
In the public debate surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), an issue that seems to stand out is the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system. It would enable foreign investors of TPPA countries to directly sue the host government in an international tribunal.
In most US free trade agreements (FTAs) with investor-state dispute provisions, the tribunal most mentioned is the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), an arbitration court hosted by the World Bank in Washington.
ISDS would be a powerful system for enforcing the rules of the TPPA, which is currently being negotiated by the US and 11 other Pacific Rim countries. Any foreign investor from TPPA countries can take up a case claiming that the government has not met its relevant TPPA obligations.
if the claim succeeds, the tribunal could award the investor financial compensation for the claimed losses. If the payment is not made, the award can potentially be enforced through the seizure of assets of the government that has been sued, or through tariffs raised on the country’s exports.
ISDS is related to relevant parts of the TPPA’s investment chapter. One of the provisions is a broad definition of “investment” which includes credit, contracts, intellectual property rights (IPRs), and expectations of future gains and profits. Investors can make claims on losses to these assets.
Under the “national treatment” provision, a foreign investor can claim to be discriminated against if the local is given preference or other advantage.
Under the clause on fair and equitable treatment, which is contained in many existing trade and investment treaties, investors have sued on the ground of non-renewal or change in the terms of a licence or contract and changes in policies or regulations that the investor claims will reduce its future profits.
Finally, investors can sue on the ground of “indirect expropriation”. Tribunals have ruled in favour of investors that claimed losses due to government policies or regulations, such as tighter health and environmental regulations.
Even though no one has seen the exact language of the text, since it is being kept under wraps, both deals are believed to strengthen and extend investor rights, which means give them easier access to the courts. Consider this description from a July presentation by Public Citizen:
What is different with TAFTA [pending Trans Atlantic Free Trade Agreement] (and TPP) is the extent of “behind the border” agenda
• Typical boilerplate: “Each Member shall ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations and administrative procedures with its obligations as provided in the annexed Agreements.” …
• These rules are enforced by binding dispute resolution via foreign tribunals with ruling enforced by trade indefinite sanctions; No due process; No outside appeal. Countries must gut laws ruled against. Trade sanctions imposed…U.S. taxpayers must compensate foreign corporations.
• Permanence – no changes w/o consensus of all signatory countries. So, no room for progress, responses to emerging problems
• Starkly different from past of international trade between countries. This is diplomatic legislating of behind the border policies – but with trade negotiators not legislators or those who will live with results making the decisions.
• 3 private sector attorneys, unaccountable to any electorate, many of whom rotate between being “judges” & bringing cases for corps. against govts…Creates inherent conflicts of interest….
• Tribunals operate behind closed doors – lack basic due process
• Absolute tribunal discretion to set damages, compound interest, allocate costs
• No limit to amount of money tribunals can order govts to pay corps/investors
• Compound interest starting date if violation new norm ( compound interest ordered by tribunal doubles Occidental v. Ecuador $1.7B award to $3B plus
• Rulings not bound by precedent. No outside appeal. Annulment for limited errors.
And that’s alarming in light of some of the cases already brought before these panels in existing trade agreements like NAFTA. For instance:
Eli Lilly is suing the Canadian government for not having the same extremely pro-drug-company patent rules. It is seeking $500 million in damages for two drugs that Canada approve to be sold as generics. If Eli Lilly prevails, other drug companies are sure to follow suit.
Vattenfal, a Swedish company, is a serial trade pact litigant against Germany. In 2011, Der Spiegel reported on how it was suing for expected €1 billion plus losses due to Germany’s program to phase out nuclear power:
According to Handelsblatt, Vattenfall has an advantage in seeking compensation because the company has its headquarters abroad. As a Swedish company, Vattenfall can invoke investment rules under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), which protect foreign investors in signatory nations from interference in property rights. That includes, according to the treaty’s text, a “fair and equitable treatment” of investors.
The Swedish company has already filed suit once against the German government at the ICSID. In 2009, Vattenfall sued the federal government over stricter environmental regulations on its coal-fired power plant in Hamburg-Moorburg, seeking €1.4 billion plus interest in damages. The parties settled out of court in August 2010.
Friday, 22 November 2013 20:18
LG TV Surveillance & Sheeple Problem! Nov 23/13
More crimes against humanity by manufacturers and retailers! Tami
LG Electronics Inc. has confirmed that some of its smart TVs send information on home viewing habits back to the company without consent and says it will fix the problem, BBC News reports.
The company began investigating after Jason Huntley, a 45-year-old IT consultant in Britain, detailed in his blog how his LG smart TV logged the channels he was watching and sent the data to LG.
He said the company continued to collect which channel he was watching even after he disabled the information collection feature.
"The (LG) server acknowledges the successful receipt of this information back to the TV," he said in an email. The information appeared to be sent to LG unencrypted, he said.
In a statement to BBC News, later on Thursday LG confirmed:"We have verified that even when this function is turned off by the viewers, it continues to transmit viewing information, although the data is not retained by the server ... A firmware update is being prepared for immediate rollout that will correct this problem on all affected LG Smart TVs so when this feature is disabled, no data will be transmitted."
However, the company is still investigating the alleged problem to determine its "relevance to our Canadian customers," said a statement emailed to CBC News by LG Canada.
In his blog post, Huntley reported that in addition to data about viewing habits, also collected were the names of files saved in an external USB hard drive plugged into the TV as well as the TV's unique identification information.
Customer directed to retailer
The world's second-largest TV maker said Thursday that customer privacy is its top priority and takes the issue very seriously.
However, when Huntley asked LG about the data collection last week, the company blamed a TV retailer for not disclosing the company's terms and conditions when he made the purchase.
LG introduced an ad platform to target its smart TV users in 2012. The LG Smart AD lets advertisers reach target audiences by utilizing device information, location and details such as age and gender, LG says on its website. (REUTERS)
"As you accepted the Terms and Conditions on your TV, your concerns would be best directed to the retailer," LG said in an email to Huntley that outlined the response from the company's U.K. head office.
LG introduced an ad platform to target its smart TV users in 2012. The LG Smart AD lets advertisers reach target audiences by utilizing device information, location and details such as age and gender, LG says on its website.
However it was not immediately clear which features in LG's smart TVs were triggering the data monitoring.
"All we can be sure of is that the information is being sent," Huntley said.
He said was "very surprised" at the amount of attention he received with the blog post.
"This indicates that privacy issues are becoming increasingly important to people everywhere, as we are so dependent on technology in our everyday lives."
Separately, Samsung Electronics Co. said it does not collect information on files in USB hard drives connected to its smart TVs. But it did not respond to a question about whether it logs users' viewing habits. Samsung is the world's largest TV maker.
With a file from CBC News
Sheeple: Why You Should Feel Sorry For Them
Sheeple to me are all government and gov agencies, military, college and university staff with exception to a few. Some more are all bankers and staff, corporate leaders and staff, media and staff except for a few globally. As well as all Satanists world wide as well as religious flocks except for a few. Some university trained environmentalist, pharmaceutical medical personnal and light of the darkness trained new agers and channels except for a few. I pray they all wake up soon! Tami
It is often said there only two kinds of people in this world: those who know, and those who don’t. I would expand on this and say that there are actually three kinds of people: those who know, those who don’t know, and those who don’t care to know. Members of the last group are the kind of people I would characterize as “sheeple.”
Sheeple are members of a culture or society who are not necessarily oblivious to the reality of their surroundings; they may have been exposed to valuable truths on numerous occasions. However, when confronted with facts contrary to their conditioned viewpoint, they become aggressive and antagonistic in their behavior, seeking to dismiss and attack the truth by attacking the messenger and denying reason. Sheeple exist on both sides of America‘s false political paradigm, and they exist in all social “classes”. In fact, the “professional class” and the hierarchy of academia are rampant breeding grounds for sheeple; who I sometimes refer to as “intellectual idiots”. Doctors and lawyers, scientists and politicians are all just as prone to the sheeple plague as anyone else; the only difference is that they have a bureaucratic apparatus behind them which gives them a false sense of importance. All they have to do is tow the establishment line, and promote the establishment view.
Of course the common argument made by sheeple is that EVERYONE thinks everyone else is blind to the truth, which in their minds, somehow vindicates their behavior. However, the characteristic that absolutely defines a sheeple is not necessarily a lack of knowledge, but an unwillingness to consider or embrace obvious logic or truth in order to protect their egos and biases from harm. A sheeple’s mindset is driven by self centered motives.
So-called mainstream media outlets go out of their way to reinforce this aggressive mindset by establishing the illusion that sheeple are the “majority” and that the majority perception (which has been constructed by the MSM) is the only correct perception.
Wednesday, 20 November 2013 21:26
Arsenic In US Chicken & Nestle Water Thief! Nov 21/13
After years of sweeping the issue under the rug and hoping no one would notice, the FDA has now finally admitted that chicken meat sold in the USA contains arsenic, a cancer-causing toxic chemical that’s fatal in high doses. But the real story is where this arsenic comes from: It’s added to the chicken feed on purpose!
Even worse, the FDA says its own research shows that the arsenic added to the chicken feed ends up in the chicken meat where it is consumed by humans. So for the last sixty years, American consumers who eat conventional chicken have been swallowing arsenic, a known cancer-causing chemical. (http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/loc…)
Until this new study, both the poultry industry and the FDA denied that arsenic fed to chickensended up in their meat. The fairy-tale excuse story we’ve all been fed for sixty years is that “the arsenic is excreted in the chicken feces.” There’s no scientific basis for making such a claim… it’s just what the poultry industry wanted everybody to believe.
But now the evidence is so undeniable that the manufacturer of the chicken feed product known as Roxarsone has decided to pull the product off the shelves (http://www.grist.org/food-safety/20…). And what’s the name of this manufacturer that has been putting arsenic in the chicken feed for all these years? Pfizer, of course — the very same company that makes vaccines containing chemical adjuvants that are injected into children.
Technically, the company making the Roxarsone chicken feed is a subsidiary of Pfizer, called Alpharma LLC. Even though Alpharma now has agreed to pull this toxic feed chemical off the shelves in the United States, it says it won’t necessarily remove it from feed products in other countries unless it is forced by regulators to do so. As reported by AP:
“Scott Brown of Pfizer Animal Health’s Veterinary Medicine Research and Development division said the company also sells the ingredient in about a dozen other countries. He said Pfizer is reaching out to regulatory authorities in those countries and will decide whether to sell it on an individual basis.” (http://www.usatoday.com/money/indus…)
But even as its arsenic-containing product is pulled off the shelves, the FDA continues its campaign of denial, claiming arsenic in chickens is at such a low level that it’s still safe to eat. This is even as the FDA says arsenic is a carcinogen, meaning it increases the risk of cancer.
Read Full Article
Read more at http://www.realfarmacy.com/fda-admits-factory-farmed-chicken/#gpOatHtOVQ6h0G7P.99
Nestlé is draining developing countries’ groundwater to make its Pure Life bottled water, destroying countries’ natural resources before forcing its people to buy their own water back.
Now Nestlé is moving into Pakistan and sucking up the local water supply, rendering entire areas uninhabitable in order to sell mineral-enriched water to the upper class and people in the EU and US. Meanwhile the poor watch their wells run dry and their children fall ill from dirty water.
Please join me in telling Nestlé to stop stealing Pakistan’s water and making villages uninhabitable. http://action.sumofus.org/a/nestle-water-pakistan/?sub=taf
Tuesday, 19 November 2013 21:26
Ben Fulford Global News Nov 20/13
Cabal is in surrender negotiations; told to hand over $700 trillion or $10,000 for each human
Posted by benjamin
November 19, 2013
Representatives of a committee of 15 individuals, who claim to be in charge of the system for creating and distributing US dollars and most other privately owned central bank currencies, are trying to arrange a peace agreement for the cabal. They agreed last week, in negotiations with a White Dragon Society representative, to initially make available $700 trillion, or $10,000 for each man, woman and child on the planet earth to be delivered in the form of goods and services. They also agreed to debt forgiveness for all nations including, they say, some debts that date back to the 1700’s. They also agreed to forgive most individual debts.
The committee claims to be headed by two Asian men, each over 90 years old, and representatives of five Asian families, seven European families and one Russian family.
There was also a meeting last week between representatives of Asian banking clans and the WDS. These clans claimed the rights to most of the world’s gold. They were also agreeable to the proposal to distribute $700 trillion to the people and nations of the world.
However, there are still some powerful factions still clinging to the Zionist nightmare of starting Armageddon, notably the Cohen crime family in New York and an Italian P2 Lodge member by the name of Giuseppe Di Antonio, according to a high ranking P2 official. Di Antonio is the man behind recent threats to kill Pope Francis, he said. This group has a highly organized faction inside Mossad and also sits atop the New York and Los Angeles based media conglomerates, he noted. Their main financial instrument is Leumi Bank, he added. They also run various Pentecostal Christian cults, he said. A representative of the families mentioned above confirmed the existence of this group and said they would need help in dealing with them.
It is true that that New York is a highly gangster contaminated city and that is proven by the fact that mass murderers like the loathsome monster toad Henry Kissinger and Larry “pull it,” Silverstein are still strutting around like peacocks. It may be necessary to send in the militia from Minnesota to New York to start arresting these criminals and parading them in hand-cuffs in front of corporate media cameras so that all can see it is no longer business as usual for these scum. If the Minnesotans need help, doubtless Canadian armed forces can be made available upon invitation.
The Californians also need to round up members of the Cohen gang in Los Angeles and can be sure of Latino help in doing so.
If this does not take place, it will be proof for the people of the world that the once sovereign Christian Republic of the United States of America has become a slave state run by Satan worshipping Babylonian (not Jewish) gangsters.
The French, for their part, also helped the WDS last week by delivering paper documents revealing the exact coordinates of all the Google, NSA, Facebook etc. computing centers in the United States. The unspoken threat in the delivery of this information is that these data centers can be taken out with intercontinental ballistic missiles. Preparations have also been made by the Europeans to cut off all intercontinental communications cables on the Atlantic seabed, if necessary. This is a response to NSA hacking of European financial and other computer networks. It is also a clear indication of how isolated the rogue US regime is.
Speaking about rogue US regime, we have a new name to add to the list of known participants in the March 11, 2011 nuclear and tsunami mass murder attack on Japan: General Richard Meyers, according to an agency source. General Meyers was made Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Pentagon immediately after the 911 mass murder.
If the American people do not start rounding up criminals like General Meyers and putting them in jail, the international financial noose being put around that country will continue to get tighter. Judging from the various news reports, the so-called Obama care health insurance scheme, for example, appears to be just an effort by the corporate government in Washington D.C. to steal some insurance money in order to keep itself from going under for a few more weeks.
The pentagon faction that claims to be using Obama as their representative needs to move in on New York and start arresting the Wall Street criminals ASAP if they want to save themselves.
In any case, while the clean-up of the last pockets of cabal resistance continues, proposals are being put on the table on how to distribute the promised $700 trillion.
The WDS has proposed that the following existing organizations and groups would be qualified to distribute the $700 trillion in a non-corrupt, non-inflationary way:
The Chinese government including representatives from Taiwan, The Roman Catholic Church and the governments of South and Central America, The Japanese government and ASEAN, The Commonwealth of Nations (provided an Indian is put in charge), France and Francophone Africa, The Republic of the United States and the government of Canada, Northern Europe plus Russia and the Islamic world.
This is just an initial proposal based on the fact that these organizational structures already exist and have proven themselves to be relatively corruption free. Of course the Islamic nations will have to sort out their various historical disputes and select a single representative before funding will go in their direction.
This WDS proposal is only limited to the existing US dollar system and does not exclude new government issued currencies, grass roots currencies like Bitcoin or any plans by other independent groups. The proposal merely reflects the fact that these pre-existing groups could be able to carry out big projects almost immediately as soon as the money starts to flow.
We do not make any predictions on how soon this will start to happen but we can confirm that serious players have been meeting and that a general agreement exists now to start a massive campaign to “save the planet.”
Benjamin Fulford answers some detailed questions from a reader
Date: Monday, 18-Nov-2013 01:34:07
Link to original:
Full text copied here:
A few questions:
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
Page 9 of 52