CDC Vaccine Researcher Goes Crazy, Starts “Listening to Conscience”

DDEES vaccine

The CDC has called on the Department of Health & Human Services Armed Militia to help locate a CDC researcher who went off his rocker this week, claiming that a voice identifying itself as his “conscience” compelled him to spill sacred vaccine secrets of the Government-Pharmaceutical Alliance.

Shortly before absconding from the CDC compound, the troubled researcher, identified as Dr. William W. Thompson, recorded a rambling “confession” in which he expressed “shame” for suppressing research findings showing that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (the “MMR”) dramatically increased the risk of autism when given to young black boys.

“A number of well-respected researchers were involved in the MMR autism study, none of whom have claimed to have been involved in a fraudulent coverup, so clearly Dr. Thompson’s claims are delusional,” said CDC spokesperson Ima Mengele…

Read much more at MMR Vaccine.

Book Review: Seeds of Destruction

In 2003, Jeffrey Smith’s “Seeds of Deception” was published. It exposed the dangers of untested and unregulated genetically engineered foods most people eat every day with no knowledge of the potential health risks. Efforts to inform the public have been quashed, reliable science has been buried, and consider what happened to two distinguished scientists.

One was Ignatio Chapela, a microbial ecologist at the University of California, Berkeley. In September, 2001, he was invited to a carefully staged meeting with Fernando Ortiz Monasterio, Mexico’s Director of the Commission of Biosafety in Mexico City. The experience left Chapela shaken and angry as he explained. Monasterio attacked him for over an hour. “First he trashed me. He let me know how damaging to the country and how problematic my information was to be.”

Chapela referred to what he and a UC Berkeley graduate student, David Quist, discovered in 2000 about genetically engineered contamination of Mexican corn in violation of a government ban on these crops in 1998. Corn is sacred in Mexico, the country is home to hundreds of indigenous varieties that crossbreed naturally, and GM contamination is permanent and unthinkable – but it happened by design.

Chapela and Quist tested corn varieties in more than a dozen state of Oaxaca communities and discovered 6% of the plants contaminated with GM corn. Oaxaca is in the country’s far South so Chapela knew if contamination spread there, it was widespread throughout Mexico. It’s unavoidable because NAFTA allows imported US corn with 30% of it at the time genetically modified. Now it’s heading for nearly double that amount, and if not contained, it soon could be all of it.

The prestigious journal Nature agreed to publish Chapela’s findings, Monasterio wanted them quashed, but Chapela refused to comply. As a result, he was intimidated not to do it and threatened with being held responsible for all damages to Mexican agriculture and its economy.

He went ahead, nonetheless, and when his article appeared in the publication on November 29, 2001 the smear campaign against him began and intensified. It was later learned that Monsanto was behind it, and the Washington-based Bivings Group PR firm was hired to discredit his findings and get them retracted.

It worked because the campaign didn’t focus on Chapela’s contamination discovery, but on a second research conclusion even more serious. He learned the contaminated GM corn had as many as eight fragments of the CaMV promoter that creates an unstable “hotspot.” It can cause plant genes to fragment, scatter throughout the plant’s genome, and, if proved conclusively, would wreck efforts to introduce GM crops in the country. Without further evidence, there was still room for doubt if the second finding was valid, however, and the anti-Chapela campaign hammered him on it.

Because of the pressure, Nature took an unprecedented action in its 133 year history. It upheld Chapela’s central finding but retracted the other one. That was all it took, and the major media pounced on it. They denounced Chapela’s incompetence and tried to discredit everything he learned including his verified findings. They weren’t reported, his vilification was highlighted, and Monsanto and the Mexican government scored a big victory.

Ironically, on April 18, 2002, two weeks after Nature’s partial retraction, the Mexican government announced there was massive genetic contamination of traditional corn varieties in Oaxaca and the neighboring state of Puebla. It was horrifying as up to 95% of tested crops were genetically polluted and “at a speed never before predicted.” The news made headlines in Europe and Mexico. It was ignored in the US and Canada.

The fallout for Chapela was UC Berkeley denied him tenure in 2003 because of his article and for criticizing university ties to the biotech industry. He then filed suit in April, 2004 asking remuneration for lost wages, earnings and benefits, compensatory damages for humiliation, mental anguish, emotional distress and coverage of attorney fees and costs for his action. He won in May, 2005 but not in court when the university reversed its decision, granted him tenure and agreed to include retroactive pay back to 2003. The damage, however, was done and is an example of what’s at stake when anyone dares challenge a powerful company like Monsanto.

The other man attacked was the world’s leading lectins and plant genetic modification expert, UK-based Arpad Pusztai. He was vilified and fired from his research position at Scotland’s Rowett Research Institute for publishing industry-unfriendly data he was commissioned to produce on the safety of GMO foods.

His Rowett Research study was the first ever independent one conducted on them anywhere. He undertook it believing in their promise but became alarmed by his findings. The Clinton and Blair governments were determined to suppress them because Washington was spending billions promoting GMO crops and a future biotech revolution. It wasn’t about to let even the world’s foremost expert in the field derail the effort. His results were startling and consider the implications for humans eating genetically engineered foods.

Rats fed GMO potatoes had smaller livers, hearts, testicles and brains, damaged immune systems, and showed structural changes in their white blood cells making them more vulnerable to infection and disease compared to other rats fed non-GMO potatoes. It got worse. Thymus and spleen damage showed up; enlarged tissues, including the pancreas and intestines; and there were cases of liver atrophy as well as significant proliferation of stomach and intestines cells that could be a sign of greater future risk of cancer. Equally alarming – this all happened after 10 days of testing, and the changes persisted after 110 days that’s the human equivalent of 10 years.

GM foods today saturate our diet. Over 80% of all supermarket processed foods contain them. Others include grains like rice, corn and wheat; legumes like soybeans and soy products; vegetable oils; soft drinks; salad dressings; vegetables and fruits; dairy products including eggs; meat and other animal products; and even infant formula plus a vast array of hidden additives and ingredients in processed foods (like in tomato sauce, ice cream and peanut butter). They’re unrevealed to consumers because labeling is prohibited yet the more of them we eat, the greater the potential threat to our health.

Today, we’re all lab rats in an uncontrolled, unregulated mass human experiment the results of which are unknown. The risks from it are beyond measure, it will take many years to learn them, and when they’re finally revealed it will be too late to reverse the damage if it’s proved GM products harm human health as independent experts strongly believe. Once GM seeds are introduced to an area, the genie is out of the bottle for keeps.

Despite the enormous risks, however, Washington and growing numbers of governments around the world in parts of Europe, Asia, Latin America and Africa now allow these products to be grown in their soil or imported. They’re produced and sold to consumers because agribusiness giants like Monsanto, DuPont, Dow AgriSciences and Cargill have enormous clout to demand it and a potent partner supporting them – the US government and its agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture and State, FDA, EPA and even the defense establishment. World Trade Organization (WTO) Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) patent rules also back them along with industry-friendly WTO rulings like the February 7, 2006 one.

It favored a US challenge against European GMO regulatory policies in spite of strong consumer sentiment against these foods and ingredients on the continent. It also violated the Biosafety Protocol that should let nations regulate these products in the public interest, but it doesn’t because WTO trade rules sabotaged it. Nonetheless, anti-GMO activism persists, consumers still have a say, and there are hundreds of GMO-free zones around the world, including in the US. That and more is needed to take on the agribusiness giants that so far have everything going their way.

In “Seeds of Deception,” Jeffrey Smith did a masterful job explaining the dangers of GM foods and ingredients. Engdahl explains them as well but goes much further brilliantly in his blockbuster book on this topic. It’s the story of a powerful family and a “small socio-political American elite (that) seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival” – future life through the food we eat. The book’s introduction says it “reads (like) a crime story.” It’s also a nightmare but one that’s very real and threatening.

This review covers the book in-depth because of its importance. It’s an extraordinary work that “reveals a diabolical World of profit-driven political intrigue (and) government corruption and coercion” that’s part of a decades-long global scheme for total world dominance. The book deserves vast exposure and must be read in full for the whole disturbing story. It’s hoped the material below will encourage readers to do it in their own self-interest and to marshal mass consumer actions to place food safety above corporate profits.

Engdahl’s book supplies the ammunition to do it and is also a sequel to his earlier one on war, oil politics and The New World Order and follows naturally from it. It covers the roots of the strategy to control “global food security” that goes back to the 1930s and the plans of a handful of American families to preserve their wealth and power. But it centers on one in particular that above the others “came to symbolize the hubris and arrogance of the emerging American century” that blossomed post-WW II. Its patriarch began in oil and then dominated it in his powerful Oil Trust. It was only the beginning as the family expanded into “education of youth, medicine and psychology,” US foreign policy, and “the very science of life itself, biology, and its applications” in plants and agriculture.

The family’s name is Rockefeller. The patriarch was John D., and four powerful later-generation brothers followed him – David, Nelson, Laurance, and John D. III. Engdahl says the GMO story covers “the evolution of power in the hands of an elite (led by this family), determined (above all) to bring the entire world under their sway.” They and other elites already control most of it, including the nation’s energy, the US Federal Reserve, and other key world central banks. Today, three brothers are gone, David alone remains, and he’s still a force at age 92 although he no longer runs the family bank, JP Morgan Chase. He’s active in family enterprises, however, including the Rockefeller Foundation to be discussed in Part II of this review. …

http://www.rense.com/general80/seedsofdestruction.htm

Even the CFR is having second thoughts on the US coup in Ukraine

According to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russian President Vladimir Putin, the argument goes, annexed Crimea out of a long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of Ukraine, as well as other countries in eastern Europe. In this view, the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 merely provided a pretext for Putin’s decision to order Russian forces to seize part of Ukraine.

But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine — beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 — were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president — which he rightly labeled a “coup” — was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West.

Putin’s pushback should have come as no surprise. After all, the West had been moving into Russia’s backyard and threatening its core strategic interests, a point Putin made emphatically and repeatedly. Elites in the United States and Europe have been blindsided by events only because they subscribe to a flawed view of international politics. They tend to believe that the logic of realism holds little relevance in the twenty-first century and that Europe can be kept whole and free on the basis of such liberal principles as the rule of law, economic interdependence, and democracy.

But this grand scheme went awry in Ukraine. The crisis there shows that realpolitik remains relevant — and states that ignore it do so at their own peril. U.S. and European leaders blundered in attempting to turn Ukraine into a Western stronghold on Russia’s border. Now that the consequences have been laid bare, it would be an even greater mistake to continue this misbegotten policy. …

U.S. and European leaders blundered in attempting to turn Ukraine into a Western stronghold on Russia’s border.

THE WESTERN AFFRONT

As the Cold War came to a close, Soviet leaders preferred that U.S. forces remain in Europe and NATO stay intact, an arrangement they thought would keep a reunified Germany pacified. But they and their Russian successors did not want NATO to grow any larger and assumed that Western diplomats understood their concerns. The Clinton administration evidently thought otherwise, and in the mid-1990s, it began pushing for NATO to expand.

The first round of enlargement took place in 1999 and brought in the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland. The second occurred in 2004; it included Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Moscow complained bitterly from the start. During NATO’s 1995 bombing campaign against the Bosnian Serbs, for example, Russian President Boris Yeltsin said, “This is the first sign of what could happen when NATO comes right up to the Russian Federation’s borders. … The flame of war could burst out across the whole of Europe.” But the Russians were too weak at the time to derail NATO’s eastward movement — which, at any rate, did not look so threatening, since none of the new members shared a border with Russia, save for the tiny Baltic countries.

Then NATO began looking further east. At its April 2008 summit in Bucharest, the alliance considered admitting Georgia and Ukraine. The George W. Bush administration supported doing so, but France and Germany opposed the move for fear that it would unduly antagonize Russia. In the end, NATO’s members reached a compromise: the alliance did not begin the formal process leading to membership, but it issued a statement endorsing the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine and boldly declaring, “These countries will become members of NATO.”

Moscow, however, did not see the outcome as much of a compromise. Alexander Grushko, then Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said, “Georgia’s and Ukraine’s membership in the alliance is a huge strategic mistake which would have most serious consequences for pan-European security.” Putin maintained that admitting those two countries to NATO would represent a “direct threat” to Russia. One Russian newspaper reported that Putin, while speaking with Bush, “very transparently hinted that if Ukraine was accepted into NATO, it would cease to exist.”

Russia’s invasion of Georgia in August 2008 should have dispelled any remaining doubts about Putin’s determination to prevent Georgia and Ukraine from joining NATO. Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, who was deeply committed to bringing his country into NATO, had decided in the summer of 2008 to reincorporate two separatist regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But Putin sought to keep Georgia weak and divided — and out of NATO. After fighting broke out between the Georgian government and South Ossetian separatists, Russian forces took control of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Moscow had made its point. Yet despite this clear warning, NATO never publicly abandoned its goal of bringing Georgia and Ukraine into the alliance. And NATO expansion continued marching forward, with Albania and Croatia becoming members in 2009.

The EU, too, has been marching eastward. In May 2008, it unveiled its Eastern Partnership initiative, a program to foster prosperity in such countries as Ukraine and integrate them into the EU economy. Not surprisingly, Russian leaders view the plan as hostile to their country’s interests. This past February, before Yanukovych was forced from office, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused the EU of trying to create a “sphere of influence” in eastern Europe. In the eyes of Russian leaders, EU expansion is a stalking horse for NATO expansion.

The West’s final tool for peeling Kiev away from Moscow has been its efforts to spread Western values and promote democracy in Ukraine and other post-Soviet states, a plan that often entails funding pro-Western individuals and organizations. Victoria Nuland, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, estimated in December 2013 that the United States had invested more than $5 billion since 1991 to help Ukraine achieve “the future it deserves.” As part of that effort, the U.S. government has bankrolled the National Endowment for Democracy. The nonprofit foundation has funded more than 60 projects aimed at promoting civil society in Ukraine, and the NED’s president, Carl Gershman, has called that country “the biggest prize.” After Yanukovych won Ukraine’s presidential election in February 2010, the NED decided he was undermining its goals, and so it stepped up its efforts to support the opposition and strengthen the country’s democratic institutions.

When Russian leaders look at Western social engineering in Ukraine, they worry that their country might be next. And such fears are hardly groundless. In September 2013, Gershman wrote in The Washington Post, “Ukraine’s choice to join Europe will accelerate the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin represents.” He added: “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” …

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the-ukraine-crisis-is-the-wests-fault

Not sure how he defines “democracy” but in any case it’s interesting that this understanding of world events is held in common between the “conspiracy theorists” and the CFR.  But the sheep will probably stay focused on MSNBC’s narrative, because they’re LAZY and laziness leads to ignorance and stupidity, which is what makes them sheep.

Here is what the empire has done to Ukraine:

Obama’s Ethnic Cleansing Operation in Ukraine

 

The CIA’s Weaponization of a Generation of Afghan Children

US paying price of backing Islamic militants: Pak Prof
Shyam Bhatia in London

The role of the US in “fanning Islamic militancy” has been highlighted by a visiting Pakistani professor who was the star performer at a seminar sponsored by The Democracy Forum in London.

Nuclear physicist Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy, from Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, was a keynote speaker at the seminar entitled ‘The role of education in combating terrorism’. In his view, the US has played a major role in contributing to the Islamic radicalisation that currently prevails in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. …

At least as important, according to Hoodbhoy, was the earlier meddling of US government agencies like USAID and the CIA, encouraging Islamic radicalisation which shaped the world view of both young Pakistanis and their Afghan counterparts.

The US role in this process is especially relevant today as the Taliban stage a comeback in parts of Afghanistan in anticipation of the American pullback from the country in 2014. Squads of Taliban-backed morality police are active in provinces like Nuristan where they mete out Draconian punishments to anyone who watches television, listens to music or participates in any other types of activity deemed to be un-Islamic.

Back in the 1980s, the US government spent millions of dollars to produce educational textbooks for Afghan refugee children that were filled with violent images and militant teachings from the Koran.

Published by the University of Nebraska in the US, these textbooks were subsequently exported to the madrassas (schools) operating along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

“They distributed millions of Korans to madrassas with the aim of fanning radicalism,” Hoodbhoy explained. “It was viewed as the most efficient way of fighting the Soviet Union by putting this across as a religious war. The policy was evolved between the US and Pakistan and Saudi Arabia was the funder. But it was very close consultation between General Zia (Pakistan’s late president) and the CIA which conducted the biggest covert war in history (against the Soviet Union.)”

At the time, President Bush explained that some 10 million US-supplied books intended for Afghan school children would teach “respect for human dignity, instead of indoctrinating students with fanaticism and bigotry.”

Yet, the content in one of the mathematics textbooks written in Dari and Pushtu, read out by Hoodbhoy, included the following:

“One group of Mujahed attacks 50 Russian soldiers. In that attack, 20 Russians were killed. How many Russians fled?”

Another mathematics problem states: “A Kalashnikov bullet travels at 800 metres per second. A Mujahed has the forehead of a Russian in his sights 3,200 metres away. How many seconds will it take the bullet to hit the Russian’s forehead?”

Still another textbook publishes a verse from the Koran, followed by a tribute to the Mujahideen who are described as obedient to Allah and willing to sacrifice their wealth and life to impose Islamic law on the government.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120625/main6.htm

Also see “The Jihad Schoolbook Scandal” in the reference section.

Corporate Media Plays Dumb on Spread of Radical Islam

Lies and propaganda set stage for invasion of Syria same as it did in Iraq

“The voice of an apparent British militant narrating the video showing the beheading of American journalist James Foley has triggered renewed questions about why the U.K. is a breeding ground for jihadis,” NBC News reports today.

“At least 400 Britons are among the estimated 2,000 Europeans who are fighting for the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), according to Prime Minister David Cameron. And the ease with which Europeans can travel into Syria through Turkey has alarmed intelligence officials in the West.”

This sort of reporting is ignorant or, more likely, engineered to be misleading. NATO and the United States have used Turkey (and Jordan) as a staging area for the proxy war against the al-Assad government in Syria for months.

“All the available evidence indicates that U.S., U.K., Israel, Turkey, France and Saudi Arabia meticulously planned the genocidal covert war on Syria for years before actually launching it in 2011. Right from the beginning, Turkey has been at the epicenter of this war in every possible respect,” writes Turkish researcher Cem Ertür.

The establishment media, particularly its liberal faction, has covered the proxy war staged in Syria in fits and starts, so NBC’s supposed ignorance is disingenuous.

For instance, PBS aired a Frontline segment on “American handlers in Turkey” working with Qatar to train “rebels” how best to engage in war crimes and “finish off soldiers still alive after an ambush,” and the alternative media, including Infowars.com, regularly provides factual information on how the U.S., NATO, Turkey and the Gulf Emirates not only support this proxy war but also covertly fund and train ISIS.

Reality, as usual, is ignored and dismissed by the establishment media as it fulfills its assigned role as a war propaganda division of the U.S. government and the military industrial and intelligence complex.

Here is a sampling of Infowars.com coverage on the U.S.-NATO sponsored war in Syria:

Saudi Arabia, Sunni Caliphate, NATO Run Secret Terror Army in Iraq and Syria

NATO’s Terror Hordes in Iraq a Pretext for Syria Invasion

ISIS and the Plan to Balkanize the Middle East

Rand Paul: U.S. Created “Jihadist Wonderland” in Syria

Ron Paul: Syria Chemical Attack A ‘False Flag’ 

More Evidence U.S. Funds al-Qaeda Terrorists in Syria

Susan Rice Admits U.S. Giving Arms to Al-Qaeda in Syria

Turkey Behind Sarin Attack in Syria

British Intelligence Nurtured Jihadists for Years

Jihadist terrorists, sheltered and encouraged by British intelligence, have operated behind the scenes for decades, a fact completely ignored by the establishment media as it devises a pretext for the invasion of Syria.

For background on this, see:

British Intelligence: Her Majesty’s Terrorist Network

British Intelligence Asset Haroon Rashid Aswat Escapes Extradition

CIA Double Agent? CIA and British Intelligence Created Ruse Known as Al-Qaeda

David Cameron to Arm Woolwich Terrorists?

Specifically see The British, the Middle East and Radical Islam for detailed background on how the British, and later the U.S., created, nurtured and expanded Islamic terror networks.

Following remarks by Cressida Dick, the Metropolitan Police’s assistant commissioner and head of specialist operations in Britain, that the country will experience increased terrorism for “many years” as a result of young British men participating in the Syrian war, Richard Barrett, a former head of counter-terrorism at MI6, said the war in Syria funded and supported by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, with U.S. military trained terrorists “is likely to be an incubator for a new generation of terrorists.”

This “new generation of terrorists” is now coming online with a predictable flourish of hyperbole and misinterpretation provided by the establishment media.

ISIS, like Saddam Hussein’s illusory weapons of mass destruction and his vaporous collaboration with al-Qaeda, is the latest, and likely the greatest (in terms of murder and terror) manufactured terror threat.

The Bush neocons – with the help of The New York Times in lockstep with the rest of the establishment media – snowballed fabrication, half-truth and outright lies into a flimsy predicate for mass murder (more than a million Iraqis died) and war crimes approaching those committed by the Nazis and the Soviet Union.

Obama the establishment teleprompter reader, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense and their counterparts in Europe will elevate the threat of ISIS, a threat honed by the U.S. military, into a full-fledged attack on Syria.

NBC and the rest of the corporate media will do their part as well.

 

MILLIONS OF AMERICANS ARE VULNERABLE TO STARVATION

The cost of food has been steadily increasing in places like Thailand and Venezuela as evidenced by the fact that since the beginning of 2014, riots are occurring in countries that are suffering through extreme food shortages.  These mass protests movements may all have one thing in common, increasing food prices are the cause of the civil unrest.

According to Dr. Yaneer Bar-Yam and his research colleagues at the New England Complex Systems Institute (NECSI), they are collectively stating that civil unrest, spurred by food shortages. may be anticipated for their effect by a mathematical model that correlates the variables of rising food costs, diminished and that are related to income and civil unrest. The present data suggests that America is ripe for the same kinds of civil disruption that we are witnessing in Thailand and Venezuela. How bad could the civil unrest become?  Nobody can be certain except to say that America is entering into uncharted waters. …

In calculating the overall inflation rate, the government does not count the price of food. However, there are several reliable food inflation figures and the food inflation rate is estimated to be between 19% to 22%.

In the article, “Food Price Inflation Scares the Fed” the commodity food costs were exploding on the upside. Calculation of the food inflation rate, given the lag in commodity costs impacting prices on grocery store shelves, we find that the annual U.S. food inflation rate is now running at a staggering +22% and the rate is increasing with no end in sight to the escalation.

The real and specific cause for food inflation is the $940 billion of additional monetary stimulus from the United States Federal Reserve’s quantitative (bail out) easing over the last twelve months.  Both the cost of food and gasoline inflation rates are awakening the variables associated with hyperinflation. Please note that the $940 billion of giveaway bailout money is nearly half of what we take in as a country in taxes. If you truly want to be accurate about America’s economic future, repeat the accurate mantra, “There will be no economic recovery” and “Many Americans are going to starve to death”. ….

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/08/22/millions-of-americans-are-vulnerable-to-starvation/

The economic situation is a major factor in US  foreign and domestic military posture.   They need a false flag to have someone else to blame for the catastrophe they have created.

What The World Bank Actually Does

As many have heard by now, the leaders of the so-called BRICS nations – Brazil, India, China, Russia and South Africa – used the occasion of the 6th BRICS Summit in Brasilia, Brazil to announce the creation of the long-awaited BRICS Development Bank.

Formally the “New Development Bank,” it will be based in Shanghai and capitalized with an initial $10 billion in cash ($2 billion from each of the five founding members) and $40 billion in guarantees, to be built up to a total of $100 billion.

Immediately, the press began touting the new bank as a potential rival to the current IMF / World Bank system of infrastructure development and poverty reduction in the third world. “BRICS Development Bank Could Challenge World Bank and IMF” touts US News & World Report. “BRICS Ink $50 Billion Lender in World Bank, IMF Challenge” asserts Bloomberg. The World Bank, for its part, is downplaying the rivalry, with World Bank President Jim Young Kim openly welcoming the bank at a recent meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. “The only competition we have is with poverty,” he told reporters at the meeting.

But all of this talk about a potential rival to the IMF and World Bank have exposed the general public’s ignorance about what exactly these institutions are and what they do. While most are familiar with the IMF and its predatory lending practices (and those who aren’t are encouraged to acquaint themselves with the “IMF riot” strategy that was developed in the third world and is now being imported to Europe), the World Bank is less scrutinized and less well understood. What is it, what does it do, and why is it important for the BRICS to challenge its hegemony in the development and poverty reduction arenas?

For the answer to that, we’ll need to examine the World Bank’s history, both the official history that it touts to the outside world and the real history of its part in plundering the developing world that it is supposedly there to help. …

http://theinternationalforecaster.com/International_Forecaster_Weekly/What_The_World_Bank_Actually_Does