Behind Bilderberg

BEHIND BILDERBERG, TRILATERAL: THE GLOBALISTS HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM

A gaping hole in the economic matrix

by JON RAPPOPORT | INFOWARS | JUNE 11, 2015

Stay with me on this one. You’ll see what the powers-that-be are really worried about.

You can roll up Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the World Trade Organization, NAFTA, and the several current trade treaties nearing completion… you can insert all these Rockefeller Globalist forces into one great corporate agenda, and…

There is a problem. A problem for Globalism. This is, behind the scenes, what the titans of control are whispering about.

It starts here: understand that mega-corporations are the instruments of world domination. They move into countries where cheap labor, land, and resources are abundant, and they take over. This is what they’re meant to do. This is the plan.

Intelligence agencies and armies may precede them, but the corporations are the most capable organizations on the planet, when it comes to exercising enduring control.

The top three or four hundred corporations are responsible for at least 25% of all world trade.

However… here is the rub. As Globalist policies allow corporations to shut down domestic factories in industrialized countries and open up those same factories in places where slave wages are the order of the day; as tariffs on imported goods are canceled, killing off businesses that try to compete with mega-corporations; as leading economies decline…

The consumer base for these mega-corporations shrinks.

To put it simply, the corporations sell products. They need buyers. All over the world.

The top manufacturing corporations are running their assembly lines at about half-capacity. They could produce much, much more of what they sell.

But only a tenth of the world population has the means to buy these products.

There are partial fixes for the problem: profit-making wars; sales of corporate products to governments; governments basically paying citizens so they can buy certain products. But, in the long run, that solution doesn’t cut it. The mega-corporations are still lacking consumers. You can create only so many artificial buyers. Beyond that, the market system irretrievably heads downward.

Mega-corporations have the potential to produce and sell more and more; the consumer base is shrinking.

Globalism, the very system that is determined to elevate the power of mega-corporations, is diminishing the number of people who can consume what the corporations make.

The snake has been eating its tail for some time now.

Mega-corporate CEOs and their advisors aren’t completely stupid. Some of them see the handwriting on the wall.

World Bank and IMF fixes aren’t going to make this problem go away.

Neither is some drastic depopulation program. That would be heading in the wrong direction. Fewer consumers.

What about a radical re-set involving a new global currency? Suppose, for example, every inhabitant of the planet were outfitted with a free credit card carrying substantial buying power? Theoretically, that might work, if you discount what people who actually earn a living are going to do when they see billions of their fellow humans who don’t work outfitted with comparable consuming power. And that rumbling class warfare would be just the stormy beginning of the trouble.

Creating money out of thin air to satisfy the avarice of banks, to pay off governments’ soaring debt, to boost corporate bottom lines is one thing. Creating money out of nothing to make six or seven billion brand new consumers is quite another thing. In that case, the corporate-welfare gifting would lead to pollution and destruction of the environment on a scale that makes current levels look like a few leaking picnic baskets on a Sunday park outing.

And over the course of several generations, populations would descend into a nightmare of side-by-side buying power and increased unemployment. If you think, psychologically speaking, that’s a marvelous idea, and would bring peace and contentment, you need a brain transplant.

There is another factor to consider: technological innovation. For mega-corporations, that means robots/machines replacing humans as employees. More unemployment—unless the corporations hold back and refrain from implementing the “automation revolution.”

The corporate thrust, however, is always about moving forward. More robots in the workplace. Bigger assembly lines. Higher production.

It turns out that the Globalist agenda has an expiration date. Beyond it, the system comes apart at the seams.

The normal solution to a problem of this magnitude is: think short-term; avoid the inevitable; pretend all is well; leave the answers to the next generation.

Consider how hard-charging greed-head mega-corporate masters would react to the following proposition: “Look boys, we know you have the ability to produce goods for two or three planets the size of Earth. But we want you to service only a tenth of one planet, and that base will shrink further. Okay? Don’t worry, be happy. Everything is fine.”

Behind every Bilderberg, CFR, Trilateral conference, this is the specter that lurks in the shadows.

They’re not worried about escalating the level of their political control over populations. It’s the economics that don’t add up, no matter how many holes in the dam are temporarily plugged.

There is one extremely radical solution I haven’t mentioned. You could call it depopulation-repopulation. Via some vast plan, the numbers of people on Earth would be enormously reduced—and then over, say, the next hundred years or so, those numbers would be built up again with humans who, in some Brave New World fashion, are conditioned/programmed to be avid workers and consumers, who would be paid far more than a subsistence wage. These living androids/robots would satisfy the hunger of mega-corporations to produce and produce and sell and sell…

The multiple risks of trying a plan like that would amount to an open confession of an agenda so heinous it would create open-ended global revolution, from Tierra del Fuego to the North Pole.

Every present Globalist agenda-item does two things: a) it aims at tighter control of populations, and b) it enforces and progressively lowers a ceiling on mega-corporations. It reveals a future in which the number of those corporations will be drastically reduced. And that’s the rub. That’s the hidden factor.

Yes, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. But everyone who thinks that analysis is the core of the current crisis is looking no farther than the end of his nose.

Because the rich, up the road, will get poorer, too. They’ll sink in the Globalist swamp.

The mega-corporate leaders are ultimately on both the sending and the receiving end of a long con. It’s a con perpetrated by their own system, a system built to make them kings forever.

How little they know.

It turns out that decentralization of power, on every level, is more than just the hope and dream of a relative few. It’s a planet-wide imperative; and survival is at stake.

The greatest economic matrix ever devised is blowing its engine.

Don't Even Talk About the 2nd Amendment

NEW OBAMA POLICY WOULD MAKE “MERELY POSTING FIREARM INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET” A CRIME

The blogosphere is sounding off about a pending new Obama policy that would impact not only the 2nd Amendment, but the 1st Amendment as well

by MAC SLAVO | SHTFPLAN.COM | JUNE 11, 2015

The blogosphere is sounding off about a pending new Obama policy that would impact not only the 2nd Amendment, but the 1st Amendment as well.

As incredible as it seems, individuals would be in violation by “merely posting information on the Internet about common firearms” which “could be interpreted as illegally sharing sensitive information with foreign nationals”

Applying issues related to “exporting” and “foreign nations” under an international treaty to individual on-line speech (under the guise of improperly sharing technical data about firearms) may seem like a stretch, but it is apparently what is happening, unless public opposition is voiced before this oh-so quiet regulation sets in towards the end of summer.


While it remains to be seen if such a policy would be enforceable, the mere redefinition of Internet activities – now under FCC regulation – is startling, suggesting that the “bark” about guns may be just as threatening to this anti-gun administration as the “bite” of ‘military-style weapons’ like the AR-15 that so frequently drives media coverage. According to theWashington Times:

Gun control and control of free speech would be combined in a new Obama administration plan that could send Second Amendment advocates to prison.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is furious about new regulations announced last week. The plan uses national security as an excuse to threaten gun advocates with prison time for sharing information about “military-style weapons. The problem is that almost every firearm is considered “military-style” by President Obama and the gun-control crowd.

These new restrictions involve commonly and legally available personal firearms.

Under the new proposal from the State Department, merely posting information on the Internet about common firearms could be interpreted as illegally sharing sensitive information with foreign nationals. So Mr. Obama’s plan is two-for-one in restricting constitutional rights: He would combine gun control with control over free speech.

And the penalty for violating this policy could be drastic if upheld:


The penalty? 20 years in prison plus a $1 million fine for each violation.Each time that any foreign national accesses the data is considered a separate violation.

Wow… I guess that’s pretty severe – enough to discourage even chance encounters with loose talk about one of the most sacred items that many Americans own.

The NRA is charging that the interpretation of language in the proposal would have the State Department treating online speech about firearms in the same way it treats actual firearms when it comes to the regulation of their “export.”


It’s happening again— President Obama is using his imperial pen and telephone to curb your rights and bypass Congress through executive action.

[…] the Obama State Department has been quietly moving ahead with a proposal that could censor online speech related to firearms. This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second. Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published.

The rationale is technical, but maybe that’s the point. The potential to enforce gun speech all about catching people on the technicalities, and is tied to the history of participation of in the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). None of that will stop it from creating consequences for those it would go after:


With the new proposal published on June 3, the State Department claims to be “clarifying” the rules concerning “technical data” posted online or otherwise “released” into the “public domain.” To the contrary, however, the proposal would institute a massive new prior restraint on free speech. This is because all such releases would require the “authorization” of the government before they occurred. The cumbersome and time-consuming process of obtaining such authorizations, moreover, would make online communication about certain technical aspects of firearms and ammunition essentially impossible.

[…]

Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities. Prior restraints of the sort contemplated by this regulation are among the most disfavored regulations of speech under First Amendment case law.

The end run around the 2nd Amendment is nearly complete, giving Obama until the end of his administration to set in place legal hurdles that even a gun-toting, pro-2nd Amendment, NRA- and Tea Party-backed politician would be hard pressed to undo completely.

Yikes.

Bilderberg 2015 Agenda

BILDERBERG 2015 TO FOCUS ON RE-BRANDING AUTHORITARIANISM
Global elite schemes to put squeeze on ordinary citizens

by PAUL JOSEPH WATSON | JUNE 10, 2015

The Bilderberg Group has released its full participant list and agenda for the 2015 elitist confab days before it’s set to begin in Austria, but as ever, the topics up for discussion are so vague as to almost be meaningless. And we know that many of the most sensitive topics never appear on that list in the first place. So what’s the real agenda?

For a start, it’s unusual that Bilderberg is taking place after the G7 conference. It’s normally the other way around. This suggests that Bilderberg’s role in not only setting the consensus, but making the final call on many of these issues will be pivotal this year.

The intense security surrounding the InterAlpen Hotel, with our reporters Rob Dew and Josh Owens already having been harassed numerous times by police, illustrates how paranoid Bilderberg are about keeping the details of their agenda under wraps. Anyone who violates Bilderberg’s giant “security zone” which stretches for miles around the perimeter of the hotel faces a 500 euro fine. If they refuse or are unable to pay the fine, it’s two weeks in prison.

Artificial intelligence will be one of the core discussion topics at Bilderberg 2015. The most interesting newbie in terms of Bilderberg attendees is undoubtedly Regina Dugan – former DARPA director and now Google executive and a pioneer of ingestible ID microchips. Dugan, along with Google Chairman Eric Schmidt and Demis Hassabis, Vice President of Engineering for Google DeepMind, will scheme with global power brokers on how to grease the skids for public acceptance and adoption of Big Brother technology that otherwise wouldn’t look out of place in a dystopian sci-fi thriller.

This all ties into Bilderberg’s overarching goal of re-branding authoritarianism.

As a result of endless money printing and growing wealth inequality, the global elite has created the pre-conditions for widespread riots and civil unrest. We already had a taste of this with Ferguson and Baltimore. Now the wealthy are buying safe rooms and secret hideaways in remote locations as they prepare to hunker down for the next stage of the economic collapse. Earlier this week, Bloomberg reported that Johann Rupert, the billionaire owner of Cartier, is worried about artificial intelligence and robots replacing human workers causing class warfare and social disorder.

Make no mistake, Bilderberg wants class warfare. They want riots, because this allows the elite to exploit the chaos to pose as the saviors and introduce the solution of statist and economic totalitarianism.

If you want to get a true insight into what motivates Bilderberg, look no further than the guy who calls the shots – Henry Kissinger. All the other Bilderberg attendees – bar David Rockefeller – show deference to the former National Security Advisor.

Kissinger has always been an aggressive advocate of Realpolitik, an amoral and Machiavellian form of diplomacy and policy making which eschews morality and ethical considerations.

Kissinger has been implicated in numerous war crimes, crimes against humanity, kidnap, torture, and murder in places like Chile, Cambodia, and East Timor.

But what’s most alarming is the fact that the 92-year-old Kissinger still advises the Obama administration today. He’s been lobbying for years for regime change in Syria, which may at some stage be achieved as a result of ISIS – created partly as a result of the U.S. arming other jihadist groups in the region – taking over half of the country, something the Syrian rebels never accomplished.

Under the guise of stopping terror financing to ISIS – which only seems to have become stronger since the US and others began officially targeting the terror organization – Bilderberg will discuss imposing harsher bank regulations, eviscerating whatever financial privacy we have left, as well as a coordinated EU crackdown on the sale of precious metals.

This ties into the wider war on cash. Numerous influential voices have recently called for eliminating physical currency altogether, giving central banks and governments the power to directly control your finances under the justification of preventing an economic collapse. At its most authoritarian extreme, this means having to obtain government permission every time you withdraw or spend a moderately large sum of money. France is already set to introduce laws in September which will restrict French citizens from making cash payments over €1,000 euros.

HSBC will be represented by no less than three powerful individuals at Bilderberg. The bank was just forced to pay another $43 million dollar fine for illegal money laundering involving arms dealers and helping the wealthy avoid taxes, but that won’t stop them scheming to control your finances.

Preventing Greece from ditching the Euro and stacking the deck against the EU referendum ‘out’ vote in the United Kingdom will also be a core centerpiece of Bilderberg’s agenda going forward. The EU and the euro single currency is a pet project of Bilderberg. If that pillar of world government begins to crumble, it undermines the rest of the architecture of global government, including TPP, which again despite not being on the list, will be discussed by Bilderberg members.

TPP could also be used to sneak through draconian climate change regulations under the radar. Bilderberg is scheming ways of how to bypass Congress and directly implement the post-industrial revolution they’ve been pushing for over a decade. These measures, if fully enforced, will bankrupt the United States, cost millions of jobs, and force the country into deindustrialized debt slavery.

Geopolitcally, Bilderberg will also put pressure on recalcitrant European countries like Austria to further isolate Russia while encouraging the arming of Kiev-backed militias. Don’t be surprised to see a major confrontation between NATO and Russia before the end of the year as a result of this agenda.

After slamming the G7 as authoritarian, China has also been completely frozen out of any Bilderberg representation. The hegemonic importance of targeting Beijing’s influence in the South China Sea, again risking a potentially devastating confrontation, will be emphasized.

Another topic on the list is the US presidential election. Let’s not forget that Bilderberg almost certainly acted as kingmaker back in 2008 when both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were strongly rumored to have paid a visit to the conference in Chantilly, Virginia.

The attendance of Jim Messina of The Messina Group, the organization that ran Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign, proves that Hillary is Bilderberg’s pick for 2016. Messina is now advising Hillary Clinton. His presence at Bilderberg will be focused around ensuring none of Hillary’s potential challengers get the big bucks from the innumerable transnational banks and corporations that will also be represented at the secretive confab.

So in summary, Bilderberg’s talking points and agenda for the next 12 months;

– Further isolating Russia over Ukraine – arming Ukrainian militias and potentially stoking a major confrontation with NATO

– Strangling financial support for Hillary Clinton’s potential 2016 presidential competitors

– The elites positioning themselves as financial saviors when more riots and civil unrest

– Moving towards the abolition of cash and imposing economic totalitarianism

– Discrediting the ‘out’ campaign for the United Kingdom’s EU referendum

– Re-branding authoritarianism in anticipation of the coming economic collapse

– Finalizing the TPP as the next pillar of global government

– Dismantling China and the BRICS’ ability to challenge the unipolar system

– Selling artificial intelligence and Big Brother surveillance as “trendy” and “cool” in order to fool the general public into adopting technology that will eviscerate their livelihoods and personal privacy.

Infowars reporters Rob Dew, Josh Owens and Paul Joseph Watson will be in Austria all week covering the Bilderberg Group conference.

Founding of Bilderberg

THE BILDERBERG GROUP: FOUNDED BY A NAZI AND CONTINUING THE AGENDA OF THE NAZIS

When you want to discover what an organization is really all about, it is important to dig down to the roots

by MICHAEL SNYDER | END OF THE AMERICAN DREAM | JUNE 9, 2015

When you want to discover what an organization is really all about, it is important to dig down to the roots. And when you uncover the roots of the Bilderberg Group, you find some very unsettling things. It turns out that the Bilderberg Group has had Nazi connections from the very beginning, and it continues to advance the agenda of the Nazis to this very day. This year, the Bilderberg Group is meeting from June 11th to June 14th at the Interalpen Hotel which is near the city of Telfs, Austria. This organization has so much power that even several days before the event police are keeping everyone (including reporters) 10 kilometers away from the hotel. If this is just a group of private citizens getting together to chat about world issues, why all the security? What is so special about this group of people that rates such extraordinary measures? And why are they so bound and determined to keep all of the rest of us away from them?

During World War II, the Nazi effort to unite all of Europe (and ultimately the rest of the world) through war failed miserably. When the war ended, those that believed in that dream decided that another approach would be necessary. Instead of war, a united Europe dominated by Germany would be achieved through international treaties and diplomacy. In 1957, the European Economic Community was established, and it began with just six countries: Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany. Since that time, it has expanded to 28 nations and has become known as “the European Union”.

The idea for the common currency that the European Union uses today, the euro,was conceived and developed by the Bilderberg Group. This organization has always been at the forefront of European unity, but most people have no idea where it came from.

Well, the truth is that the Bilderberg Group first met in 1954, and one of the key founders of the group was Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. Not only was he a founder, Prince Bernhard actually served as the organization’s chairman until 1976. So why is this important? Most people do not realize this, but Prince Bernhard actually belonged to the Nazi Party at one time. The following is an excerpt from an article that appeared in the Telegraph…

“Bernhard, a secret history” has revealed that the prince was a member of the German Nazi party until 1934, three years before he married Princess Juliana, the future queen of the Netherlands.

Annejet van der Zijl, a Dutch historian, has found membership documents in Berlin’s Humboldt University that prove Prince Bernhard, who studied there, had joined Deutsche Studentenschaft, a National Socialist student fraternity, as well as the Nazi NSDAP and its paramilitary wing, the Sturmabteilung.

He left all the groups on leaving university in December 1934, when he went to work for the German chemical giant, IG Farben.

And Prince Bernhard’s association with IG Farben also links him to the Nazis. The following comes from a book entitled “The Nazi Hydra In America” by Glen Yeadon…

“The Bilderberg group, founded by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, held its first meeting in 1954. The prince, a former officer in the SS, had worked in IG Farben’s notorious NW7 group, which served as spies for the Third Reich. Bernhard belonged to the Dutch branch of the Knights Templar. In 1954, he was appointed to govern the Dutch order. John Foster Dulles was one of the most helpful Americans in setting up the Bilderberg group. Incidentally, in 1954 Dulles testified in favor of a bill designed to return vested enemy assets, such as GAF, to their previous owners.”

As the quote above just pointed out, John Foster Dulles was instrumental in helping the Bilderberg Group get established. His brother, Allen Dulles, was responsible for Operation Paperclip which enabled large numbers of Nazi scientists (among others) to come into the United States and start working for the U.S. government in various capacities. Allen Dulles was so passionate about this program that it continued even when two presidents tried to shut it down…

Dulles’ CIA Operation Paperclip assimilated Nazi scientists into the American establishment by obscuring their histories and preventing efforts to bring their true stories to light. The project was led by officers in the United States Army. Although the program officially ended in September 1947, those officers and others carried out a conspiracy until the mid-1950s that bypassed both law and presidential directive to keep Operation Paperclip going. Neither PresidentsTruman nor Eisenhower were informed that their instructions were ignored.

The “godfather” of the Bilderberg Group is a former U.S. Secretary of State named Henry Kissinger. He has attended the gathering almost every single year, and he will be there once again in 2015. This is a man that is so committed to globalization that he even wrote a book entitled “World Order“. But what hardly anyone knows is that he actually discussed overthrowing the West German government with a group of “disgruntled Nazis” back in the 1970s…

A German academic has unearthed evidence showing former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissingeronce discussed a coup with disgruntled Nazis to overthrow the West German government in the 1970s.

Kissinger and Richard Nixon were aggrieved at the left-leaning government of the day’s burgeoning friendship with the hardline East German government.

Kissinger became the contact man for a secret spy network made up of old Nazis and elite aristocrats aimed at torpedoing the plans formulated by Chancellor Willy Brandt.

The guys behind this movement have been at it for a very long time.

And they are still advancing the values and principles at the heart of the Nazi movement to this very day. The following are just a few examples of this…

Just like the Nazis, they advocate for highly centralized national governments that are heavily socialized.

Just like the Nazis, they are deeply committed to globalization. The Nazis sought to establish their empire through war, while these guys seek to do it through diplomacy and negotiation.

Just like the Nazis, they believe in strict gun control for the general population, centralized government-controlled education and the removal of organized religion (especially Christianity) from public life.

Just like the Nazis, they believe that they are the elite of the world, they are anti-Israel, and they believe in using military power to advance their cause when necessary.

And just like the Nazis, they are deeply committed to eugenics and population control. These days, they use language that is more “politically correct”, but most of them are absolutely convinced that the number one problem in our world is overpopulation. For much more on this, please see my previous article entitled “46 Population Control Quotes That Show How Badly The Elite Want To Wipe Us All Out“.

Of course nobody associated with the Bilderberg Group would ever use the word “Nazi” to describe themselves. That term has become so associated with evil that nobody wants anything to do with it. But the values and the principles of the Nazis endure in organizations such as the Bilderberg Group.

The ultimate goal, of course, is a one world government that dominates the entire planet.

Let us hope and pray that they are never able to achieve that.

I hear nothing!

FORMER EPA SCIENTIST SPEAKS OUT AGAINST GMOS

While hundreds more scientists realize the dangers

by CHRISTINA SARICH | INFOWARS.COM | JUNE 7, 2015

A former senior scientist from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been speaking out against GMOs, but his voice is especially noteworthy among the many scientists who talk about genetically modified organisms. Why? Because he studied the impacts of altered crops on the environment. Read on to find out what this expert has to say about a genetically modified world and the ‘pesticide treadmill’ that biotech has us all running on.

Dr. Ramon Seidler’s credentials are nothing to sneeze at. He was a professor of microbiology at Oregon State University for 16 years before he worked at the EPA. He holds many honors, too, including being listed by the International Biographical Centre of Cambridge, England as one of the 2,000 outstanding World Scientists of the 20th Century.

During Seidler’s tenure at the EPA, he (along with other scientists) conducted GMO experiments that were contained in indoor environments. The experiments were meant to mimic what happens outside, just as if a farmer had planted a GM crop in Idaho, Michigan, or California. The gene transfer capabilities and survival rates of genetically modified seed were observed. He also observed transgenic DNA and Bt toxin products in agricultural ecosystems.

What he and his scientific peers found was that GE bacteria survived for years in soil, even after it was removed from the plants.

The former professor states that GE crops provide no significant increase in crop yields, but do pose several other major concerns: namely cross-pollination of non-GM species, and negative impacts to the environment. He calls these ‘side effects’ of broken biotech promises.

He also points out that one-third of the world already has the choice to ‘opt-out’ of GMOs because their food is labeled, and though Americans overwhelmingly want GM foods to be labeled, they are not.

As other scientists have pointed out, Seidler mentions the fact that very little true research has been conducted by independent scientists at any American universities. Biotech has restricted these studies by requesting that professors sign an agreement prior to the research being completed which forces them to send all results to the biotech companies before being published – ostensibly – to be vetted and discounted should it paint their GM seed in any negative light.

The former scientist says this is nothing short of censorship, and individuals who have conducted years of research are unable to publish their findings in any reputable journals because biotech would simply veto the results.

Seidler also details how the biotechnology industry has parroted the claim that “pesticide use has declined’ since they introduced GMOs, but he states this is absolutely untrue. He commented:

“Initially, insecticide use declined due to the effectiveness of Bt toxin in controlling pest insects. However, as time went onglyphosate use increased some 13-fold to control weeds and other non-genetically engineered synthetic chemicals were introduced to control insects as the Bt toxin became ineffective.

Glyphosate has been extensively applied to hundreds of millions of acres of genetically engineered crops, and the residues are in our air, water, and human bodies. 

Now virtually all of genetically engineered seeds are coated with insecticides and fungicides and these chemicals have increased some 10-fold in the last 10 years.

When seed coated pesticides are added to those pesticides that are injected into the soil at seed planting, pesticide use climbed back to where it was approximately 10-12 years ago.”

This ‘pesticide treadmill’ as Seidler has dubbed it, has all of us sick, and our soil contaminated.

To read more about a former EPA’s stance on GMOs, read the entire interview here.

Joel Skousen's Government Cover-ups: RFK

This is the official version of the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, as put forward by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and the LA District Attourney's office (LADA).

On 5th June 1968, 12.15am, Senator Robert F. Kennedy was making his way from the ballroom at the Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles, to give a press conference, after winning the California Primary. The prearranged route went through a food service pantry. While making his way through this area, a Palastinian Arab, Sirhan Sirhan, stepped forward and fired a .22 revolver at the Senator. Although Sirhan was quickly subdued, Kennedy and five others were wounded, although only Kennedy was fatally wounded. Sirhan was arrested at the scene, charged and convicted of first degree murder. He was to have been executed, but the U.S. Supreme Court voided the constitutionality of the death sentence before the sentence could be carried out. Sirhan has been incarcerated at Corcoran State Prison, California, since then. Under Californian law, he should have been automatically scheduled for release in 1984, but this was not the case.

The Complications

The problem with this scenario is that the physical evidence and eyewitness reports would seem to show that Sirhan was incapable of inflicting the wounds attributed to him.

The autopsy carried out by Coroner Thomas Noguchi showed that Senator Kennedy had been shot three times. One shot entered the head behind the right ear, a second shot near the right armpit and a third roughly one and a half inches below the second. All shots entered the body at a sharply upward angle, moving slightly right to left. These shots are incompatible with eyewitness reports of the shooting. Sirhan had no access to the Senator's rear, and Kennedy never turned more than sideways to Sirhan. In addition, Sirhan fired with his arm parallel to the floor, i.e. straight ahead. Maitre d' Karl Uecker, who had been leading Kennedy forward by the right hand at the time the shooting started, grappled Sirhan after his second shot and pushed the gun away. All these points, as well as the fact that the gun was one and a half to six feet from Kennedy, prove that Sirhan could not have inflicted the fatal wounds to the Senator.

Sirhan's .22 revolver contained eight bullets and he had no chance to reload. This caused a problem for the official version of the assassination as all bullets had been accounted for, except for one which was lost in the ceiling space. Reports indicated that a wooden door jamb contained two bullets. This frame and as many as five or six ceiling tiles were removed from the crime scene for tests. Photographs of the crime scene show at least this many tiles missing and more besides. Los Angeles Police Department criminologist DeWayne Wolfer was quoted as saying &quotit's unbelievable how many holes there are in the kitchen ceiling." This suggests that LAPD found more bullets (or traces of bullets) than could be accounted for by Sirhan's eight shot revolver, at least seven and probably more.

As well as the problems noted above, there are the reports of suspicious people in the area at the time of the assassination. The first policeman on the scene, Sergeant Paul Schraga, was approached by a couple who told him that they had encountered a young man and woman fleeing the Ambassador Hotel shouting &quotWe shot him! We shot him." When asked who they had shot, the young woman joyously replied, &quotSenator Kennedy." Schraga sent out an All Points Bulletin on the two suspects. This was the start of the &quotPolka-dot Dress Girl" controversy. In one of the most intuitive pieces of police deduction since the JFK assassination, LAPD declared that Sirhan was the sole assassin within minutes of the crime. Schraga was asked to cancel his APB, and when he refused, it was canceled by his superiors.

The couple's story was explained by the LAPD as a case of mishearing, stating that the young woman must have said &quotThey shot him!" However, a young woman sitting on a staircase outside the Ambassador Hotel, Sandra Serrano, corroborated the couple's story.

Two witnesses in the pantry also saw armed men, aside from Sirhan and security guard Thane Eugene Cesar. Lisa Urso noticed a blond haired man in a grey suit putting a gun into a holster. A second, unnamed, witness saw a tall, dark-haired man, wearing a black suit, fire two shots and run out of the pantry.

The Cover-up

In 1968 it was not a federal offence to murder a presidential candidate. The case, therefore, came under LAPD juristriction. The investigation was based on the wish of Police Chief Ed Davis that it would not be &quotanother Dallas." Whether this meant an intense, professional investigation or a tighter cover-up is debatable.

As the case was the responsibility of the LAPD, there was no pressure to release their findings, the &quotSummary Report". Researchers into the RFK Assassination finally forced the Report and the LAPD's files to be released, in 1988. Compare this to 1964 for the Warren Commission Report (the year after JFK's assassination) and it becomes obvious why the official version of the assassination has been unchallenged, despite the obvious complications.

After the release of the files, it became clear to what extent the cover-up had been carried out. Evidence which contradicted the official version was destroyed. The more extreme acts of destruction included:
2,400 photographs burned because they were &quotduplicates." In fact, there were no lists precise enough to show that all the photos destroyed were indeed duplicates.
Ceiling tiles and the door frame from the pantry destroyed, because, according to then Assistant Chief Daryl Gates, they wouldn't fit into card files.
In addition, LAPD records showed that they had recorded 3,470 interviews during the course of the investigation. Only 301 interviews were released. Examination by researchers showed that for 51 key &quotconspiracy" witnesses, there were no interviews.

The LAPD were not alone in conducting this cover-up. The Los Angeles District Attorney's Office was also involved. The scope of this involvement was seen in the files released to researchers in 1985, due mainly to the inclusion of a box of tapes, videos and documents sent from the LADA branch at Van Nuys. This box contained evidence which went against the official version. The most graphic examples were the video reconstructions from 1968 and 1977, which prove that Sirhan could not have inflicted the wounds on Senator Kennedy. However, by using selected stills from the reconstructions, the official version was supported.

The coverup of the RFK assassination has been maintained because the facts are simply not known. Whereas the Warren Commission report was released the year following the JFK assassination, LAPD's &quotSummary Report" was not released until 1986. The files were released two years later. Both of these achievements were made despite strong LAPD/LADA resistance, for obvious reasons.

The RFK assassination was not investigated in by the House Select Commitee on Assassinations because of the seemingly open and shut nature of the case. Now that the facts are known, perhaps it is time that the RFK assassination was investigated. While the JFK assassination has reached the point where the answer is &quotOswald might have done it or he might not have", there is no possible way that Sirhan could have inflicted the wounds on Senator Kennedy. All that is required is the official investigation.

BOOK RECOMMENDATION:  Melanson, Philip H. The Robert F. Kennedy Assassination: New Revelations on the Conspiracy and Cover-Up, 1968-1991. New York: Shapolsky Publishers, 1991. 362 pages.  

There are more than thirty JFK assassination books for every book on the RFK assassination, but in some respects the implications of the latter are more alarming. Philip Melanson, a professor of political science at Southeastern Massachusetts University and director of the Robert F. Kennedy Assassination Archives, has made an outstanding contribution on this difficult subject.

The problems with the official version can be summed up in several points: 1) More bullets were recovered than could fit in Sirhan's gun; 2) Nitrite deposits and powder burns indicate that shots were fired at point- blank range, but witnesses are consistent that Sirhan's gun was never closer than two or three feet; 3) Sirhan was seen before the shooting with an associate or handler who has never been found; 4) Evidence suggests that he was in a hypnotic trance during the shooting; 5) The LAPD suppressed or destroyed evidence, and intimidated witnesses who contradicted the official line. The "robot assassin" angle in this assassination seemed incredible in 1968, but since then we have learned much more about the CIA's long history of research into mind-control. It's no longer easy to dismiss such a possibility, nor is it easy to accept it.

Take it to Court

PROOF YOU’RE BETTER OFF FIGHTING TRAFFIC TICKETS IN COURT

Small town "speed trap" lacks prosecutor to try traffic cases!

by KIT DANIELS | INFOWARS.COM | JUNE 4, 2015

A small town in Texas known as a “speed trap” doesn’t have a prosecutor and relies on motorists to pay their tickets without challenging them in court, the city’s former judge admitted.

The former judge of Calvert, Texas, David Viscarde, said that small towns write so many tickets not only for the revenue but also because they know the vast majority of drivers who simply pay up have no idea that the towns are incapable of trying the cases.

“The mindset of most small towns — including Calvert, and I can only speak for Calvert — is, ‘After all, we’re only Calvert, who’s going to know?'” He told WFAA. “The problem is, I knew.”

He also said that Calvert has no desire to hire a prosecutor.

Calvert alone has over 5,000 traffic cases pending, yet the city only has a population of around 1,100.

Viscarde ultimately resigned in disgust because, in his own words, “their municipal court is their cash cow.”

“The pressure to collect revenues in Calvert — and probably other small towns in Texas — is excessive,” he also said. “And what happens is, you got judges like me who say they’ve got better things to do with my time.”

State and local governments combined make upwards of six billion dollars a year in ticket revenue, according to the National Motorist Association.

“The association recommends that drivers always fight their tickets and it even publishes a 250-page guide on how to do it,” Business Insider reported.

Especially because America’s highways are going to keep turning into a revenue-generating control grid.

“Back in the old days, the highways of America were great examples to the rest of the world of the tremendous liberties and freedoms that we enjoyed,” journalist Michael Snyder wrote on the subject. “Americans loved to hop into their vehicles and take a drive, but now government is sucking all of the fun out of driving.”

“The control freak bureaucrats that dominate our political system have figured out that giant piles of money can be raised by turning our roads into revenue-raising tools.”

A link to Eddie’s script to stay out of jail: http://bit.ly/TrafficStopPracticeScript

Ron Paul's take on USA Freedom Act

USA FREEDOM Act: Just Another Word for
Lost LibertyWritten

by Ron Paul

Apologists for the National Security Agency (NSA) point to the arrest of David Coleman Headley as an example of how warrantless mass surveillance is necessary to catch terrorists. Headley played a major role in the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attack that killed 166 people.

While few would argue that bringing someone like Headley to justice is not a good thing, Headley’s case in no way justifies mass surveillance. For one thing, there is no “terrorist” exception in the Fourth Amendment. Saying a good end (capturing terrorists) justifies a bad means (mass surveillance) gives the government a blank check to violate our liberties.

Even if the Headley case somehow justified overturning the Fourth Amendment, it still would not justify mass surveillance and bulk data collection. This is because, according to an investigation by ProPublica, NSA surveillance played an insignificant role in catching Headley. One former counter-terrorism official said when he heard that NSA surveillance was responsible for Headley's capture he “was trying to figure out how NSA played a role.”



The Headley case is not the only evidence that the PATRIOT Act and other post-9/11 sacrifices of our liberty have not increased our security. For example, the NSA’s claim that its surveillance programs thwarted 54 terrorist attacks has been widely discredited. Even the president’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies found that mass surveillance and bulk data collection was “not essential to preventing attacks.”

According to the congressional Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 and the 9/11 Commission, the powers granted the NSA by the PATRIOT Act would not have prevented the 9/11 attacks. Many intelligence experts have pointed out that, by increasing the size of the haystack government agencies must look through, mass surveillance makes it harder to find the needle of legitimate threats.

Even though mass surveillance threatens our liberty, violates the Constitution, and does nothing to protect us from terrorism, many in Congress still cling to the fiction that the only way to ensure security is to give the government virtually unlimited spying powers. These supporters of the surveillance state are desperate to extend the provisions of the PATRIOT Act that are set to expire at the end of the month. They are particularly eager to preserve Section 215, which authorizes many of the most egregious violations of our liberties, including the NSA’s “metadata” program.

However, Edward Snowden's revelations have galvanized opposition to the NSA’s ongoing violations of our liberties. This is why Congress will soon vote on the USA FREEDOM Act. This bill extends the expiring surveillance laws. It also contains some “reforms” that supposedly address all the legitimate concerns regarding mass surveillance.

However, a look at the USA FREEDOM Act’s details, as opposed to the press releases of its supporters, shows that the act leaves the government’s mass surveillance powers virtually untouched.

The USA FREEDOM Act has about as much to do with freedom as the PATRIOT Act had to do with patriotism. If Congress truly wanted to protect our liberties it would pass the Surveillance State Repeal Act, which repeals the PATRIOT Act. Congress should also reverse the interventionist foreign policy that increases the risk of terrorism by fostering resentment and hatred of Americans.

Fourteen years after the PATRIOT Act was rushed into law, it is clear that sacrificing liberty does little or nothing to preserve security. Instead of trying to fool the American people with phony reforms, Congress should repeal all laws that violate the Fourth Amendment, starting with the PATRIOT Act.

USA Freedom Act doesn't mean more Freedom??

USA Freedom Act Extends and Minimally Limits Parts of PATRIOT Act

Written by Warren Mass

The USA Freedom Act, passed in the Senate yesterday by a 67-32 vote and quickly signed by the president, purports to “reform the authorities of the Federal Government” to (among other things) conduct electronic surveillance for “foreign intelligence, counterterrorism, and criminal purposes.”

Many of those authorities — which the National Security Agency (NSA) has used to justify the collection of phone records — had been found in provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act that expired at midnight Sunday night. Therefore, Congress could have eliminated those surveillance powers merely by doing nothing.

Despite promises made by its supporters, the USA Freedom Act doesn’t end government snooping. It merely shifts the responsibility for collecting communications metadata from the NSA to companies such as AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon, which already keep customer records for as long as five years. The NSA or the FBI would simply need to obtain permission from the secret FISA Court to access that data — and the court nearly always grants it.

After H.R. 2048 reached the Senate, a three-way battle erupted among senators who wanted to pass that legislation; Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who opposed even its very limited restrictions on NSA snooping and wanted to renew the expiring portions of the PATRIOT Act intact; and those such as Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who opposed both the PATRIOT Act and the USA Freedom Act.

Paul took to the Senate floor for 10 and a half hours on May 20 to hold up McConnell’s bill that would have extended the government’s surveillance authority to the end of 2020.

Though McConnell, as noted above, opposed the USA Freedom Act because he was against limiting the NSA’s powers, Paul opposed it because it extends government surveillance authority while pretending to limit it. Both men were among the 32 senators casting “Nay” votes against H.R. 2048.

McConnell expressed his opposition to the bill in strong terms:

I cannot support passage of the so-called USA Freedom Act. It does not enhance the privacy protections of American citizens, and it surely undermines American security by taking one more tool from our war fighters, in my view, at exactly the wrong time.

Though his opposition to the bill was for different reasons than Paul's, the junior senator from Kentucky probably wouldn’t disagree with McConnell’s use of the adjective “so-called” and his statement that the bill “does not enhance the privacy protections of American citizens.”

Senator Paul’s father, former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), has publicly criticized the USA Freedom Act. He stated in a columnpublished early last month:

The USA FREEDOM Act has about as much to do with freedom as the PATRIOT Act had to do with patriotism. If Congress truly wanted to protect our liberties it would pass the Surveillance State Repeal Act, which repeals the PATRIOT Act. Congress should also reverse the interventionist foreign policy that increases the risk of terrorism by fostering resentment and hatred of Americans.

Representatives Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) introduced the Surveillance State Repeal Act (H.R. 1466) on March 24.

The Surveillance State Repeal Act would completely repeal the 2001 PATRIOT Act. Additionally, the bill would repeal the FISA Amendments Act, which contains provisions for e-mail data harvesting, would also make retaliation against federal national security whistleblowers illegal, and would require that any FISA collection against a U.S. person takes place only pursuant to a valid warrant based on probable cause.

NPR reported Obama’s statement welcoming passage of the USA Freedom Act:

Enactment of this legislation will strengthen civil liberty safeguards and provide greater public confidence in these programs. I am gratified that Congress has finally moved forward with this sensible reform legislation.

But the Associated Press also reported that the president was critical of members of Congress who held it up:

After a needless delay and inexcusable lapse in important national security authorities, my administration will work expeditiously to ensure our national security professionals again have the full set of vital tools they need to continue protecting the country.

The Executive Office of the President issued a statement on May 7 (the day before the legislation passed the House), saying: “The Administration supports swift House passage of the USA FREEDOM Act, and urges the Senate to follow suit.”

The backing of the Obama administration should have been enough to make most Republicans wonder what was wrong with the USA Freedom Act, but few members of the GOP share Rand Paul’s commitment to the principles once so eloquently expressed by Benjamin Franklin: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Give Them Hell Rand!

One of many victories yet to come.

All Hail the Corporations

RULE BY THE CORPORATIONS

TTIP: The Corporate Empowerment Act

by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS | INFOWARS | JUNE 2, 2015

The Transatlantic and Transpacific Trade and Investment Partnerships have nothing to do with free trade. “Free trade” is used as a disguise to hide the power these agreements give to corporations to use law suits to overturn sovereign laws of nations that regulate pollution, food safety, GMOs, and minimum wages.

The first thing to understand is that these so-called “partnerships” are not laws written by Congress. The US Constitution gives Congress the authority to legislate, but these laws are being written without the participation of Congress. The laws are being written by corporations solely in the interest of their power and profit. The office of US Trade Representative was created in order to permit corporations to write law that serves only their interests. This fraud on the Constitution and the people is covered up by calling trade laws “treaties.”

Indeed, Congress is not even permitted to know what is in the laws and is limited to the ability to accept or refuse what is handed to Congress for a vote. Normally, Congress accepts, because “so much work has been done” and “free trade will benefit us all.”

The presstitutes have diverted attention from the content of the laws to “fast track.” When Congress votes “fast track,” it means Congress accepts that corporations can write the trade laws without the participation of Congress. Even criticisms of the “partnerships” are a smoke screen. Countries accused of slave labor could be excluded but won’t be. Super patriots complain that US sovereignty is violated by “foreign interests,” but US sovereignty is violated by US corporations. Others claim yet more US jobs will be offshored. In actual fact, the “partnerships” are unnecessary to advance the loss of American jobs as there is nothing that inhibits jobs offshoring now.

What the “partnerships” do is to make private corporations immune to the laws of sovereign countries on the grounds that laws of countries adversely impact corporate profits and constitute “restraint of trade.”

For example, under the Transatlantic Partnership, French laws against GMOs would be overturned as “restraints on trade” by law suits filed by Monsanto.

Countries that require testing of imported food, such as pork for trichnosis, and fumigation would be subject to lawsuits from corporations, because these regulations increase the cost of imports.

Countries that do not provide monopoly protection for brand name pharmaceuticals and chemical products, and allow generics in their place, can be sued for damages by corporations.

Obama himself has no input into the process. Here is what is going on: The Trade Representative is a corporate stooge. He serves the private corporations and will go on to a million dollar annual salary. The corporations have bribed the political leaders in every country to sign away their sovereignty and the general welfare of their people to private corporations. Corporations have paid US senators large sums for transferring Congress’ law-making powers to corporations.http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/27/corporations-paid-us-senators-fast-track-tpp When these “partnerships” pass, no country that signed will have any legislative authority to legislate or enforce any law that any corporation regards as inimical to its bottom line.

Yes, the great promiser of change is bringing change. He is turning Asia, Europe, and the US over to rule by the corporations.

Only those who have sold their integrity for money sign these agreements. Apparently Merkel, a Washington vassal, is one of them.http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150530/1022740004.html

According to news reports, both of France’s main political parties have sold out to the corporations, but not Marine Le Pen’s National Front Party. In the last EU elections, the dissident parties, such as Le Pen and Farage’s, prevailed over the traditional parties, but the dissidents are yet to prevail in their own countries.

Marine Le Pen objects to the secrecy of the agreements that establishes corporate rule. As Europe’s only leader, she speaks:

“It is vital that the French people know about TTIP’s content and its motivations in order to be able to fight it. Because our fellow countrymen must have the choice of their future, because they should impose a model for society that suits them, and not one forced by multinational companies eager for profits, Brussels technocrats bought by the lobbies, and politicians from the UMP [party of former president Nicolas Sarkozy] who are subservient to these technocrats.”

It is vital that the American public also know, but not even Congress is permitted to know.

How does it work, this “freedom and democracy” that we Americans allegedly have, when neither the people nor their elected representatives are permitted to participate in the making of laws that enable private corporations to negate the law-making functions of governments and place corporate profit above the general welfare?

What do you think may happen later this year?

RAND PAUL: MY OPPONENTS ‘SECRETLY WANT’ TERROR ATTACK ‘SO THEY CAN BLAME IT ON ME’ [VIDEO]

One of the people in the media the other day came up to me and said, “oh, when there’s a great attack aren’t you going to feel guilty that you caused this great attack?”

by DAILY CALLER | AL WEAVER |JUNE 1, 2015

While addressing the Senate Sunday, Sen. Rand Paul said that opponents of his efforts to end the NSA’s bulk data collection and force an expiration of the Patriot Act “secretly want” a terror attack on the U.S. so they can blame Paul for it.

Paul said that would be like blaming the Boston police commissioner for the Boston bombings.

RAND PAUL: People here in town think I’m making a huge mistake. Some of them, I think, secretly want there to be an attack on the United States so they can blame it on me. One of the people in the media the other day came up to me and said, “oh, when there’s a great attack aren’t you going to feel guilty that you caused this great attack?” It’s like the people who attack us are responsible for attacks on us.

Do we blame the police chief for the attack of the Boston bombers? The thing is that there can be attacks even if we use the Constitution, but there have been attacks while collecting your bulk data. So the ones who say when an attack occurs it’s going to be all your fault, are any of them willing to accept the blame? We have bulk collection now, are any of them willing to accept the blame for the Boston bombing, for the recent shooting in Garland? No, but they’ll be the first to point fingers and say, “oh, yeah it’s all your fault, we never should have given up on this great program.”

I’m completely convinced that we can obey the Constitution, use the Fourth Amendment as intended, spirit and letter of the law, and catch terrorists.

WATCH:

Eastasia

UN Finds Credible Ties Between ISIS And Israeli Defense Forces

Nathaniel Downes | | February 12, 2015

Traditionally such groups as ISIS have relied upon Saudi Arabia for support

“We’ve always been at war with Eastasia!”

So goes the famous line from George Orwell’s novel 1984. And so, too, can our forces today claim over a number of groups we find in the Middle East. In many ways, the enemy of my enemy is my friend when dealing with the Middle East, and in the battle between ancient tribal groups, when you lack an enemy, sometimes you need to make one.

In a new report from the UN, it is revealed that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) were maintaining regular contact with members of the so-called Islamic State since May of 2013. Initial reports from the IDF stated that this was only for medical care for civilians, but that story fell apart when the UN observers identified direct contact between IDF forces and ISIS soldiers, including giving medical care to ISIS fighters. Observations even included the transfer of two crates from the IDF to ISIS forces, the contents of which have not been confirmed at this time. Further the UN report identified what the Syrians label a crossing point of forces between Israel and ISIS, a point of concern brought before the UN Security Council. This report from the UN strengthens the claims by the Syrian regime that Israel is heavily involved in operations within the nation.

This is part of a continuing pattern of Israeli support for the Islamic State. It was only two months ago that Israel attacked Syrian forces in opposition to ISIS forces. Israeli attacks even killed an Iranian military adviser for the Syrian military just two weeks ago. The U.S.’s financing of ISIS, part of the effort against Syrian president Assad, is well documented, as well. That the efforts to undermine the Assad regime were in turn strengthening the same terrorist group which recently set a Jordanian pilot on fire to set an example is conveniently ignored by the higher up military command.

When the United States began operations against ISIS, Israeli high command seemed reluctant to give any support and called the move a mistake. The support of ISIS fits in with Israeli concerns in the region, namely that of Syria and Iran, and U.S. opposition to ISIS has put the United States in the awkward position of once again arming the enemies we will be fighting tomorrow.

Syria and Iran both pose a threat to Israel with their sizable conventional forces and political clout in the region, in much the same way Iraq was before the elimination of Saddam Hussein. With the toppling of Saddam, pieces of concern remain, and Israel appears to still maintain the old axiom that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Supporting ISIS for Israel enables them to eliminate two issues at once, only once Syria is no longer a concern — a move which would in turn neutralize Iranian influence in the region — Israel then would turn its attention to ISIS, bolstered by other anti-ISIS forces from Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United States. That would take several more years, however, during which time ISIS would continue to grow in both size and power. By the time they turn their attention to ISIS, it is quite possible that ISIS would have toppled the nations which Israel is counting on for support of such an operation. Too little, too late.

Traditionally such groups as ISIS have relied upon Saudi Arabia for support, but Saudi money is conspicuously absentfrom ISIS coffers. Unlike groups before, ISIS has gone self-financed, relying upon prostitution, slavery and oil for its financial well-being. This, in turn, removes the protections which Saudi Arabia has relied upon for almost a century to prevent such organizations from turning on the House of Saud and potentially conquering the kingdom which is now in the sights of the Islamic State.

In turn, the ISIS forces have all but forced the Kurds to become a mighty force unto themselves, much to the anger of neighboring Turkey. Rather than helping to fight ISIS, Turkey is instead attacking the forces standing in opposition to ISIS. The entire situation has spiraled out of control.

In effect, there is no side to support here, as each side is being supported at once in opposition to the other side. By enabling the creation of ISIS, we have taken an already unstable situation and poured gasoline over it. Now we are facing a true threat, not from ISIS or Iran or Syria, but against our own arrogance. We have been blinded to the death and destruction created by our actions in the Middle East.

We once were respected throughout the region, as neutral peacebrokers, the nation which oversaw the breakup of the Barbary pirates and a country which became eternal friends with the people of Iran when all of Europe ignored them. Now we are Israel’s expected muscle, to carry out their dirty work in an effort to destabilize the region and de-power those the tiny nation views as a threat. They will support anyone, if it meets a short-term goal, even if the result is a plot more complex and ridiculous than an episode of “Passions. This can, and will cost them long-term.

The United States cannot be party to this. Whatever the political and economic cost, the U.S. must disengage from all sides in the Middle East, before it is too late.