A prophetic interview with Sir James Goldsmith in 1994 exposes pathology of economic decline – sober warning then vs. NAFTA & GATT, and a sober, vindicated warning today against TPP, ASEAN, and more.
December 7, 2012 (LD) – The sneering, conniving defenders of free-trade laughed in Sir James Goldsmith’s face during a 1994 interview when Goldsmith warned that not only would unskilled labor be moved offshore in the wake of both NAFTA and GATT, but skilled labor as well, undermining the very purpose of nation’s economy to serve the needs of society, and instead serve the needs of vast corporations. Goldsmith stated that the interests of these corporations were entirely divorced from the interests of society – a statement that is, now more than ever, demonstrably clear today.
Whatever Goldsmith’s past may have been, and whatever his motivations were for speaking out against GATT, his analysis was accurate and his predictions vindicated many times over. We, as a planet, would be fools to allow another free trade agreement (FTA) to pass, only to widen the divide yet further between the interests of corporations and the interests of the societies they feed parasitically off of.
Not only must one protest FTAs in all of their insidious forms, we must understand the source from which vast corporate cartels draw from to bend the will of governments and mass media in order to pass them through. We must also understand the fundamental purpose of economics, to serve society’s needs, and how we can develop an alternative economic model that accomplishes this, preferably on a local level.
There are a total of 6 parts which can be found here:
Cuba, Thailand, New York City. All three have faced either economic or natural disasters. The adversity and degree to which each was affected varies, but all have lent us invaluable lessons and warnings about future, inevitable collapses and disasters. With this knowledge in hand we can begin preparing ahead of time, so not only do we “survive” the collapse, but we create thriving, advanced communities that remain entirely unaffected by such collapses – after all, prevention is the best medicine.
Cuba: In 1991, the Caribbean nation, after the fall of the Soviet Union upon which its economy hinged, found itself so destitute it was unable to feed its own people. The writing had been on the wall, particularly when Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began instituting “glasnost” economic reforms, but little was (or could be) done in time to head off the consequences of collapse.
With no other choice, the people of the city of Havana began tearing up empty lots, reclaiming abandoned buildings, and planting “urban gardens.” Neither “communist” nor “capitalist,” the spurt of survival-driven local enterprise brought a people teetering on the edge of starvation back to a degree of stability. Journeyman Pictures, in their 2003 documentary “Seeds in the City – Cuba (23 mins),” tells the story of Havana and the urban gardening revolution that took place there.
It is a story that has people around the world clamoring with interest and admiration. But despite all the people of Havana have accomplished, one can only imagine how much further ahead they could have been if they had the foresight to begin localizing before the collapse when they had the resources, time and chance to leverage technology to its fullest potential on a local scale. The lessons of Havana’s journey haven’t been entirely lost on nations next in line for economic catastrophe. Many (but not nearly enough) in cities across the United States have begun investigating roof-top gardening and raised-bed gardening (.pdf) similar to that found in Havana. In Southeast Asia’s urban city-state of Singapore, aquaculture and vertical gardening are being developed, and people around the world have been quietly perfecting the art of indoor hydroponics.
Before one can have an advanced civilization, one must be able to feed themselves and find clean water. The movement in Havana, in turn inspiring movements around the world, offers us a model to begin developing before the collapse. Had the people of Havana preemptively developed urban agriculture before the collapse of the Soviet Union, they may have thrived instead of just survived. …
Note: This is NOT an endorsement of Judy Wood, she’s an embarrassment. This is just a demonstration of how a disinformation specialist works.
People who look into the physics of the collapses of the twin towers will soon run across the claims of Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds, that the towers were brought down by some kind of secret beam weapon from an orbiting satellite. They base this claim on the presence of incinerated cars nearby and handwaving arguments about the seismic signature, the shape of the dust clouds and overhead photos of damaged buildings in the vicinity. The cooked cars can be easily explained by the thermite hypothesis: the radiant energy of tons of molten iron would be contained by the shell of the building until the moment of collapse, at which point it would suddenly engulf the surroundings. In any case, a more direct approach would be to consider the geometry of the situation. The collapses were obviously axially symmetric. The buildings didn’t first start crumbling on one side and then another, all sides were involved simultaneously, at least until being obscured by dust. So assuming the beam hypothesis, either the towers were destroyed by multiple beam weapons in surrounding buildings, all triggered at once and somehow kept from destroying objects behind the crumbling towers, or a beam weapon or weapons pretty close to directly overhead.
Assuming the latter, what does this say about the location of a satellite carrying such a weapon? (I’m going to ignore the major problem that the collapses didn’t start at the tops of the buildings as would be expected from an overhead beam emanating from a source of small angular size). It would have to stay pretty close to directly overhead for the duration of the collapse, and it would have to pass overhead again when the second tower collapsed. But these two statements are contradictory. An orbital period of 30 minutes (the time between the collapse of the buildings) would require unrealistically low altitudes and high speeds. Even a satellite in a circular orbit of zero miles (e.g. orbiting a neutron star of one earth mass at an altitude of one earth radius) would take 84 minutes to complete and be travelling at nearly 5 miles per second. Obviously such an object would come and go in the blink of an eye and burn up in the atmosphere in no time at all. A geosynchronous satellite can be ruled out because NYC is nowhere near the equator. The only other alternatives would be 2 satellites at high inclined orbits, or a spacecraft which isn’t in orbit at all and using something other than inertial propulsion (i.e. antigravity) but at that point why not bring in the easter bunny while you’re at it?
The presence of thermite in the WTC dust, videos of molten metal at around 2K centigrade degrees (judging from the color spectrum) flowing from the south tower just before collapse and eyewitnesses to “rivers” of molten metal in the ruins is sufficient evidence of demolition. In terms of falsifying the official explanation, we can already prove the 9/11 investigation was a farce. Judy Wood does nothing but draw ridicule to a very reasonable demand that, at minimum, official lies and propaganda about the “war on terror” be worthy of a high school physics curriculum.