French doctors perform face transplant surgery

Before and after

POLICE STATE SYMPTOMS

The War On Toddlerism

Treating children as young as four as sexual deviants, criminals and subversives emphasizes slip towards the police state

Steve Watson
www.Infowars.net
Thursday, December 21, 2006

Nothing emphasizes the decline of America into an authoritarian police state more than the treatment of children as possible enemies, deviants or criminals. A few cases, involving very young children, have caught our attention this month that indicate in the current climate any sniff of power is corrupting absolutely those who believe they have it.
The AP reported today that a five year old boy has been accused of sexually harassing a kindergarten classmate:
Washington County school officials told Charles Vallance that his son pinched a girl's buttocks earlier this month in a hallway at Lincolnshire Elementary School. The school says that meets the state's definition of sexual harassment.
The father of the child insists that his son knows nothing about sex and was just playing. Nevertheless the "offence" will remain on the child's file.
This is not an isolated case. The same report from the AP says that in Marlyland alone, where this incident took place, 28 kindergarten students were suspended for sex offenses in the last school year - 15 of those suspensions for sexual harassment.
Earlier this month a four year old boy was accused of "improperly touching" a female school employee. The principal of La Vega Primary School sent a letter to the parents of the boy that said the pre-kindergartener demonstrated "inappropriate physical behavior interpreted as sexual contact and/or sexual harassment."
The school says that the boy rubbed his face in the chest of the employee. Again the parents were outraged insisting that a four year old cannot know what it means to act sexually.
What kind of sick light does this put America into where teachers and school officials are suspending children barely beyond the age of toddlers for sexual deviancy?
Just because adult culture has become saturated in sex does not mean that children no longer have innocent minds and must be treated as if they are corrupted little perverts.
Furthermore, the double standards on display here are astounding given that kindergarten children are now being taught sex education in some schools. Some even go as far as to have "diversity" programs whereby kids as young as four and five are taught about gay sex. One Father in Lexington was jailed for opposing this, as if he was some kind of evil person for not wanting his child, a baby barely out of nappies, to be taught anything about sex, especially gay sex.
''This is not about creating a forum for hate . . . for any segment of society," Mr Parker said after his arraignment. ''I'm just trying to be a good dad."
The war on toddlerism doesn't stop with sex either.
There have been all kinds of cases all over the country that paint a picture postcard which illustrates the downfall of America into a police state divorced from any form common sense or reason. Here is a short list of links you can check:
Handcuffing Of 5-Year-Old A Picture Postcard Of America's Decline
School Suspends Kindergartner For Bringing Pocket Knife To Lunch
Skateboarding Children Arrested in Massachusetts
Child arrested for bringing a toy to school
Child Arrested for Trying to Bring Water to Terri Schiavo
No homework? Tell it to the judge
Officer's Taser is used on girl, 9
Student's refusal to adjust cap leads to arrest, controversy
9-year-old arrested for stealing bunny
Boy investigated by FBI for researching paper on Chesapeake Bay Bridge
Secret Service Questions Students
Goose Creek Police tape prompts questions on school raid
Last month we also reported the story of a fifth grader named 'Mark' who called in to Alex Jones' Infowars TV show by phone and reported that he had been sent home with a disciplinary report for visiting 9/11 Truth websites such as Infowars.com.
Mark's father revealed that the school has also approached him, recommending a psych test for behavior such as "running" and "making farting noises." Indeed every child would be subject to behavioral testing under The President's "New Freedom initiative."
Meanwhile, schools like Lee Middle School in Wyoming, Michigan conduct drills where police officers burst in and point guns at children's heads, all without informing the students or the school beforehand. "Some parents," the AP reported, "were upset."
"Some kids were so scared," said Marge Bradshaw, the mother of one of the students, "they wet their pants."
This is part of a chilling effect to nullify even the pursuit of freedom of speech. How does it reflect upon the nature of discourse in a free society when even the principal of an elementary school feels the need to crush the desire of enquiring young minds who are simply trying to learn more about the seminal event in American history?
Schools are being transformed into prisons where freedom of thought and expression in education has given way to an enflamed environment of paranoid suspicion.
Beyond schools, baby milk is being taken from mothers at airports and babies are being put through x-ray machines because they could be terrorists.
In a broader sense this is indicative of the decline of everything good about America. When it has got to the point where children are looked upon as possible sex criminal terrorists what hope do fully grown citizens have of not being treated in the same manner?

www.infowars.net

WHO RULES THE WORLD PART 4

THE ROTHSCHILDS
In describing the activities of the Rothschild family, author Fritz Springmeier wrote, "They have indebted kings, manipulated kingdoms, created wars, and molded the very shape of the international world." This powerful banking firm had humble beginnings. The man responsible for this global banking empire was born in the ghetto in Frankfurt-am-Main in 1743, and the son of a money lender. Mayer Amschel Bauer, who eventually took the name Rothschild (which means "red shield"), had five sons and five daughters.
After his father died, he was sent to the firm of Wolf Jakob Oppenheim[er], where he learned the coin business. In 1764, he became a dealer in rare coins and metals. Mayer Amschel envisioned a very closely connected family banking empire on five continents with each son in a different country. While he started the vision and set down very strict rules for his sons, it was the brilliance and cunning of his 3rd son, Nathan, who started NM Rothschild & Sons in England that paved the way for the firm to become the first, truly, international banking cartel.
Mayer Amschel's first coin transaction was with William, Hereditary Prince of Hesse-Kassel. By the end of the 17th century, he had established himself as Frankfurt's leading dealer, not only in coins and metals, but also in all kinds of antiques. By 1797, he was one of the richest Jews in Frankfurt and his business had moved into banking. According to English historian, E. C. Knuth,
It was Nathan, founder of the British house which plays so important a role in the affairs of the City (the financial and legal part of the City of London which is in itself a private corporation and known by the same name as the larger City of London) and consequently in the affairs of all the world. Professor Usher stated in his Pan-Germanism of 1913: "Russia, Turkey, Egypt, India, China, Japan and South America are probably owned, as far as any nation can be owned in London or Paris. The world itself, in fact, pays them tribute; it actually rises in the morning to earn its living by utilizing their capital, and occupies its days in making the money to pay them interest, which is to make them still wealthier" (Knuth, p.69).
Furthermore, it was the goal of poverty-stricken Mayer Amschel to have titles of nobility. However, because they were Jewish, they were shunned and restricted from society. This went back to the first king who booted the Jews out of his kingdom because they lent at usury, something that was not done in the Christian religion. However, as lending at interest became more widespread, especially because of the rise of central banks, their integration into society became accepted.
Amschel's benefactor, Prince William of Hesse-Kassel, made his money by selling mercenaries to the rulers of Europe, so they could wage war to enlarge their kingdoms. William's cousin, King George III was one of William's largest customers, helping him with his was against the Colonies. William was pure royalty. His grandfather was George II of England. He was a nephew of the King of Denmark and a brother-in-law to the King of Sweden. The income from selling mercenaries made William the richest ruler in Europe. From a very clever business standpoint, Mayer Amschel determined he was going to be his banker and gain his business. He did so by selling him rare coins at rock bottom prices. It worked and soon he was selling to other members of royalty.
According to Frederick Morton, Mayer was at the right place at the right time. Since the entire treasury of Denmark consisted of a deficit, and William had a huge surplus, the question was how to help his uncle, the king of Denmark? William could not do it, directly, because of delicate family ties. So he used his kingdom of Denmark as collateral to cut a deal, incognito, with an obscure bank, like the Rothchilds' (Morton, 36).
However, it was Napoleon who really enriched Mayer Amshel Bauer who by that time had changed his name to Rothschild. Napoleon was determined to rid Europe of Prince William and so, as the prince fled Napoleon, he entrusted Rothschild with $3M. His son, Nathan, who established banking interests in England, invested this money in "gold from the East India Company, knowing that it would be needed for Wellington's peninsula campaign." On the temporarily stolen money, N. Rothschild made four profits before he returned it to the Prince with interest: (1) on the sale of Wellington's bonds which he bought at 50 cents on the dollar and collected at par, (2) on the sale of gold to Wellington, (3) on its repurchase, and (4) then selling it to Portugal.
Furthermore, the Rothschilds funded both sides of the Napoleonic War with their various banks across Europe. Because of their unrivalled network of secret routes and fast couriers, including, pigeons, it was their intelligence system that allowed Nathan in England to provide Napoleon with important information on how the war with Wellington was going.
Nathan had a particular place (a favorite column) at the London Stock Exchange from which he would conduct business. From that position he could direct his traders, while non-affiliated traders could see if he was buying or selling, which usually set the trend for the day. After he learned that Wellington had won the war with Napoleon, Nathan stood at his post and without any expression on his face began to direct his traders to sell. This went on for most of the day. The non-affiliated traders determined that Wellington had lost, and they started to sell. Then, right before the market closed, when prices had hit rock bottom, Rothschild directed his agents to purchase all the bonds for pennies on the dollar. He had known more than they did. Biographer Frederick Morton wrote this about Nathan,
We cannot guess the number of hopes and savings wiped out by this engineered panic. We cannot estimate how many liveried servants, how many Watteaus and Rembrandts, how many thoroughbreds in his descendants' stables, the man by the pillar won that single day (Morton, 50).
Once it was clear that Britain won the war, these bonds increased in value higher than the face value, which provided Rothschild with a 20:1 return on his investment. This coup gave the Rothschild family complete control of the British economy, now the financial center of the world, following Napoleon's defeat. Nathan Rothschild, now in essence controller of the new central Bank of England, said,
I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.
After Napoleon's defeat the leaders of Europe were meeting in Congress at Aix-la-Chapelle. Important financial arrangements were going to be discussed. The most important piece of business was the floating of a second installment of a French loan, designed to help the new government pay off its war indemnity. The first French loan went to various investment banking houses: the Ouvards of Paris, then Hopes (the ancient Anglo-Dutch banking house) and Barings of London, while the Rothschilds were shunned. The established banking houses would not give them any piece of the action. But, unbeknownst to them, the Rothschilds started buying the same bonds these banks were floating. This boosted the price of the bonds which encouraged the above referenced banking houses about the demand for these bonds. By the end of the week, the market was on the verge of an unexpected crash. Little did they suspect that the Rothschilds, whom they had snubbed, had all their banks buy the bonds and then sell them all at once after they had given them a false high! The Rothschild's made their abilities very clear and were permitted entry into this privileged club of finance.
According to Derek Wilson, in 1830 there were uprisings in Poland, Belgium, and the northern Italian states of Parma, Modena, and Romagna. The Rothschilds worked to maintain peace and stability. Armed intervention meant money. Money meant applying to the "five brothers of Europe" who began to attach political strings to their loans. Salomon was quite open: "These gentlemen should not count on us unless they decide to follow a line of prudence and moderation...Our goodwill does not yet extent to the point of putting clubs into the hands that would beat us." When the Rothschild's would not finance the Belgian revolutionaries, they relied on their negotiation skills. When they got into power, James Rothschild said of the change, "Now is the moment to make ourselves absolute masters of that country's finances. The first step will be to establish ourselves on an intimate footing with Belgium's new Finance Minister, to gain his confidence...and to take all the treasury bonds he may offer us" (Wilson, p.100).
On the other hand if you offended the Rothschilds, as the Spanish government did, the five brothers taught them a lesson by buying 1,800,000 pounds to speculate in Spanish government stock and engineered a dramatic fall in its value (Wilson, 101).
One of the reasons for the acumen of the Rothschild's is that, when you have banks in five countries, you need to have access to the news before anyone else. Therefore, early on, a courier service was set up. The Rothschild's attributed their ability to have the scoop before any king or ruler to their carrier pigeons which flew as far as Rio de Janeiro. As their business evolved down through the centuries, the Rothschilds found ways to carry information to all parts of the world. However, during the 18th and 19th centuries, they relied on horse and ships. As a result of the business they did between themselves, this information service developed to the point of being considered one of the first intelligence services. The Rothschild coaches would careen down highways, carrying cash, securities, litters, and news. Their news service was considered the best in Europe which prompted other countries to use it. As is the case, "the mails were not only an instrument for carrying letters but also for inspecting them (Morton, 92). One wrote, "If the breeze didn't carry Rothschild pigeons, it pushed Rothschild sails. 'The English ministry,' wrote Talleyrand to Louis Philippe's sister, 'is always informed of everything by Rothschild ten to twelve hours before the dispatches of the British ambassador arrive. This is necessarily so because the vessels used by the Rothschild couriers belong to that house take no passengers and sail in all weathers'" (Wilson, 92).
The Rothschild's were very instrumental in setting up the first Bank of the United States and financing the War of 1812. While the British were successful in burning the White House, thanks to Andrew Jackson, and in burning other important buildings and vital documents, they were routed out of America in the War of 1812. As president, Andrew Jackson vetoed the charter for the Bank of the U.S. According to Niall Ferguson in his book, The House of Rothschild's - Money's Prophets,
No sooner had the Rothschild's appeared on the American scene then Governor McNutt of Massachusetts, was denouncing 'Baron R' for having 'the blood of Judas and Shylock flow[ing] in his veins, and ...unit[ing] the qualities of both his countrymen. The first and second central banks of the United States employed the Rothschild's as agents.
The Rothschild's did bullion brokering and refining, accepting and discounting commercial bills, direct trading in commodities, foreign exchange dealing and arbitrage, as well as, insurance. Recall that it was the British Rothschild's who financed Cecil Rhodes and DeBeers Diamonds, becoming the biggest shareholders. Rhodes purchased the two farms from the DeBeers brothers (they were Boers), where diamonds were found for 6,300 pounds.
In 1905, the largest diamond in the world, weighing 530.20 carats, the Cullinan Diamond, was found. It was cut into 9 large stones which include the Cullinan I at 530.20 carats, which is now part of the British royal scepter. (I remember the first time I saw it in 1978, I could not believe it was real and asked the guard. He looked at this naive American and said in a very dry tone, "Yes Mum.") The Cullinan II is 317.40 carats and is in the British Imperial State Crown. The Cullinan III weighs 94.40 carats and is in Queen Mary's Crown. Both the Cullinan IV at 63.60 carats and the Cullinan V at 18.80 carats are worn by Queen Elizabeth II as pieces of jewelry. Note that 5 of the 9 Cullinan stones belong to the British royal family. What would you give the Lord Rothschild in return for these baubles?
It was the Rothschild's who financed the railroad system of Europe and the Suez Canal for Britain. Prime Minister Disraeli formed a very close relationship with the Rothschilds, even becoming "uncle" to their children. At one point Disraeli, to avoid government hassle and "seize the moment" took it upon himself to ask the Rothschilds for a 4M pound loan to finance the Suez Canal for the Queen. Their terms were 5% with a 2 ½% commission. In a letter to the Queen, Disraeli wrote, "Four millions sterling! And almost immediately. There was only one firm that could do it -- Rothschilds....the Khedive [canal] is yours, Madam" (Wilson, 236). Disraeli was elevated to the House of Lords, as the Earl of Beaconsfield.
In 1870, the Rothschilds formed the world's second largest oil producer, the Caspian and Black Sea Petroleum Company. In 1910 Henry Ditterding (Royal Dutch Petroleum) and Marcus Samuel (Shell Transport and Trading Company) began acquiring Caucasian oilfields. In 1912, they approached De Rothschild Freres, who had his own oil fields in the Caspian and Black Seas. The new company became known as Royal Dutch Shell in 1912, and is the second largest oil company in the world.
There is much to be said about the Rothschilds' cunning and unscrupulous ways, yet they have become the bankers to all the crown heads of Europe: Britain's King George IV, French King Louis XVIII, the Duke of York, the Duke of Clarence, Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, the Duke of Kent who married Victoria of Saxe-Coburg from whom Queen Victoria was birthed, numerous members of the most important families of the Austro-Hungarian aristocracy, including the Thurn und Taxis family. According to Ferguson, "When Europe was restored, the Rothschild's established a network of private financial relationships with key public figures. The image of the Rothschilds as the centre of a web of 'corruption' would become a recurrent one in the years after 1830. But it was not, in reality, the 'bribes, loans, and other favors they bestowed on men like Metternich which made them the dominant force in international finance after 1815, it was the sheer scale -- and sophistication -- of their operations" (Ferguson, 162).
I have not begun to scratch the surface, concerning the amazing feats this family has achieved. The various biographies that I have read contain descriptions of their mansions, assets, wineries, tamed zebras, patronage of the arts and music, power, and political and financial achievements. From very little means, they are considered almost royal. They have their own crest of arms, as a result of the titles bestowed upon them by numerous royal families, and they are socially connected to all of the world's royal and non-royal elite. A number of Rothschilds were instrumental in populating Palestine back in the late 1890s, were involved with the first Zionist Congress in Basel in 1893, and with the founding of the State of Israel, as well as financing it. Edmond de Rothschild worked closely with Lord Balfour and Lloyd George in getting the Balfour Declaration to create the State of Israel.
The Rothschilds financed Britain's Anglo-Boer War for control of the vast diamond mines on Boer property. For that, Nathaniel Rothschild in 1885 was given the title of Lord Rothschild. He became the first Jewish peer in England. A. N. Knuth says this about their vast wealth,
The Annual Encyclopedia of 1868 records that Jacob (Paris House of Rothschild) had been established in Paris in 1812 with a capital of $200,000 by Mayer Amschel, and at that time of his death in 1868, 56 years later, his fortune was estimated at over $300M and his yearly income at $40M. In comparison it may be significant to note that there was at this time no fortune in all America that equaled only one year's income of Jacob (Baron James de Rothschild (70).
In short, the Rothschild's created modern banking, international banking, global bonds, and every other type of finance available. Today, they are busy "privatizing" the assets of the world and taking control of toll roads, water companies, electric companies, space, infrastructure, etc. It is the central banking system that controls the monetary system of the world, as well as, the investors in the central banks, including royalty such as the King and Queen of England and other international bankers, of which the Schiffs, Morgan's, Lazard Freres, and Rothschild's are part.
In 1852, Nathan began reining gold and silver for the Royal Mint and the Bank of England. Today, at the Bank of England, the Rothschild's fix the world's daily price of gold. Lastly, CitiGroup is a financial conglomerate, as well as, an international bank. It was instrumental in getting the Congress to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act, a 1933 law that put "firewalls" between banking and brokerage activities to avoid another 1929 crash. CitiGroup was instrumental in helping to facilitate the crash of the NASDAQ. The reason why your brokers do not know anything about gold (i.e. the only protection against a fiat paper money system) is that they work for brokerage companies that are either controlled by the Rothschilds or by others like the Rothschilds. Like most everyone else brokers do not know, or even care, as long as they have jobs.
Former Federal Reserve Chairman, Paul Volcker went to work for the Rothschild's, as chairman of the European investment banking firm, J. Rothschild, Wolfensohn and Co. from 1992 until 1995. It should be noted that the former World Bank President James A. Wolfensohn, sold his company to Kissinger and Co. when he became president of the World Bank in 1995.
San Jose Mercury reported in January 12, 1992 that the longtime chief executive of BankCal invited Edmond Rothschild to purchase the bank as a minority shareholder. Through manipulation, he carried out a series of actions, which dropped the value of BankCal's stock drastically. Meanwhile financial advisors and securities analysts convinced small stockholders to sell their BankCal stock at rock bottom prices for as little as $16 a share. Rothschild bought some at that price but had others buy for him at bottom prices, so that he had a majority of stock. He then sold the majority of shares to the Japanese and made a killing. Richard Freemon, a large stockholder, who had sold, sued Rothschild and the directors for cheating him on his stock. The $25M law suit was settled out of court. This has been their method of operation. Are the Rothschilds only ones? No, but they appear to be the chief power.
The reason for discussing the Rothschilds is that, apart from the Queen, I believe they control -- or have more control than the other powerful families on Planet Earth--the entire monetary system of the world. While there is some natural supply and demand in the market, I think we need to understand that most of the market changes are orchestrated to take from us--and transfer it to the international bankers. Rarely is there mention of them or do you see a photograph of them and their endeavors--that is because they own many newspapers.
A number of years ago, the DeBeers Diamond cartel came under the control of the Oppenheimers who also control Rhodes gold-mining company, the Anglo-American Corporation. Interestingly enough, it was the first Rothschild, Amschel Mayer Bauer, who went to work for the Oppenheimers in Frankfurt after his father died. Perhaps an old debt is being repaid.
Today the Rothschild's are worldwide, involved in investment banking, debt-related financing, restructuring, privatization, equity capital markets, oil and gas, mining, mergers and acquisitions, and private placements. Some of the deals include convertible preferred stock for the Chicago Climate Exchange; restructuring for France Telecom, Rio Tinto, Euro Disney, and Vivendi; debt advisory to Royal Ahold, Texas Pacific Group, and South African Airways; and privatization for Beijing Capital International Airport, the Government of Peru, the Government of Chile, the Government of Denmark, Air Portugal, and the Philippines National Transmission Company. Oil and Gas include acquisitions in Royal Dutch Petroleum, Petrochemical and gas stations by Sinopec, and Xstrata. Regarding mergers and acquisitions, out of the top investment banks by country Rothschilds rank #4 in France, #1 in the UK, #4 in Germany, #1 in Italy, #7 in Australia, #2 in Latin America and #9 in Spain. The Rothschilds have banks all over the world, providing a seamless connection worldwide. They operate three different banks in the UK, besides Frankfurt, Zurich, Moscow, and North America, as well as, banks in Brazil, Mexico, Australia, Asia, and South Africa.




IN CONCLUSION
In short, this newsletter is about power to control and power to determine value. This letter by no means exhausts the topic. It would take a sizeable book to discuss other powerful families, like the Rockefellers, the Schiffs, the Morgans, the DuPonts, the Astors, the Li's from China, and the British royal family, in addition to the Carnegies, Mellon's, and Vanderbilts.
In light of the rapid drop in the price of gold and oil, and to answer the question posed earlier of "Who controls value?" we see one name: Rothschild. When we want to discuss the value of gold -- it is set by the Rothschilds on a daily basis. When we want to discuss the value of oil -- they own one of the largest oil companies in the world. And, when we want to discuss interest rates, they are one of the controlling families that own the Federal Reserve Bank, with equally great power over the Bank of England.
We have just seen a major shift--or reversal--in two major trends that have been dominant since 2000: gold and oil. Is this temporary? At every turn we hear of more wars. There are those who say Bush is preparing for an October strike against Iran. If that is the case, the drop in oil and gold was an excuse to skim off the top of the world's assets (yours and mine). It appears that we are in a time of perpetual war for war is a transfer of wealth and an opportunity to finance both sides. There is nothing in this world that is not affected by the supreme power of a few major families worldwide. Furthermore, most of the major political players today are members of one of Rhode's secret societies: the Council on Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute for International Affairs, and the Pilgrims Society.
In conclusion, we get to participate in the "crumbs from the master's table." To quote King Solomon, the richest man in the world, "The thing that has been, it is that which shall be and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun" (Eccl. 1:9).
Ferguson, Niall. The House of Rothschild Money's Prophets 1798-1848 (New York, 1998).Knuth, E.C. The Empire of the City (Milwaukee, 1946).Mayer, Martin. The Bankers (New York, 1974).Morton, Frederic. The Rothschilds (Greenwich, 1961).Quigley, Carroll. Tragedy and Hope (New York, 1966).Quigley, Carroll. The Anglo-American Establishment (New York, 1981).Rotberg, Robert I. THE FOUNDER Cecil Rhodes and the Pursuit of Power (New York, 1988).Walbert, M.N. The Coming Battle (1899, republished 1977).Wilson, Derek. Rothschild A Story of Wealth and Power (London, 1988).
By Joan M. Veon, CFP®Veon Financial Services, Inc.301/371-0540
Copyright © 2006 Joan Veon

FREE SPEECH ZONES TODAY, CONCENTRATION CAMPS TOMMORROW

Detention Camps in the US? For who? Us? Here is some information and some links to get you started with finding more information on the Concentration/Detention Camps planned and built in the US.
Google links here.
and Google links here too.
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/camps.htm
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/internment_camps.htm http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/con_camps.htm
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/camps.htm http://www.uhuh.com/control/garden.htm http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/hu110.htm#FEMA,%20hu%20110 http://www.uhuh.com/control/campsum.htm

WHO RULES THE WORLD PART 3

CECIL RHODES
In the book The Founder: Cecil Rhodes and the Pursuit of Power by Robert Rotberg, a Rhodes Scholar, he says this about Cecil Rhodes:He is the Founder -- of international diamond industry, of Rhodesia, and of the Scholarships; the Premier -- of the Cape; the Lawgiver -- of the Glen Grey act, of the Rhodesia's; the World States man -- the confidant of Queen Victoria and Kaiser Wilhelm, the colleague of Lord Salisbury, Lord Rosebery [a British Prime Minister who was related to Rothschilds], and other British political leaders; and the Visionary -- the giant genius who dreamed of reuniting the English-speaking worlds, linking the Cape to Cairo by rail and telegraph, and propagating a heady gospel of decent deeds, of noble ends absolving questionable means, and of the compelling pull of purposeful magnets of destiny (Rotberg, 3).Born an aristocrat, by the time of his death in 1902 at 48, Cecil Rhodes and his siblings received rents from nearly 1600 properties of the family estate, which were purchased before his father died in 1794. Rhodes was ruthless, evil, vain, and cunning. He used whatever means to bring Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) under British rule, as well as, give British protection to Botswana and Malawi. He almost took Mozambique from the Portuguese, and Zaire from the Belgians. He fought the Anglo-Boer War against the Afrikaners who lived in Natal and the interior highlands, where they set up two independent republics, the Orange Free State and the South African (Transvaal) Republic. There, gold was discovered and Rhodes used any and all means to gain control of these countries in order to gain control of the gold. It should be noted that back in Britain, supported by the British Foreign Office and sympathetic newspapers, the Brits were fed a steady diet of why it would be good for Britain to help the poor, backward Africans have peace.Rhodes spent most of his time in South Africa looking to consolidate all of the diamond concessions under his power. There were the two DeBeers mines and the "Kimberley", which was divided into four mine with over 3,600 claims against it and owned by 98 companies and individuals. According to his biographer, "power" and "control" were central organizing principles for Rhodes. He used his own money, along with that of several others, including: Alfred Beit, who owned the most powerful South African financial house of Wernher, Beit & Co.; Lionel Phillips, who controlled H. Eckstein & Company, the largest South African mining syndicate; and the heavy financial backing of the British and French Rothschild banks. And so, by 1889 Rhodes was able to put the Kimberley diamond mines under his DeBeers Diamonds.Rhodes waged war against any and all who got in his way of consolidating the diamond mines. Supported by the British government, which agreed to his Anglo-American vision, Rhodes waged a financial war against competitors Barney Barnato and the Standard Company, and Baring Gould and the Central Company. Rhodes said of the Central Company, "We must have the four mines and I will allow no foreign vulture to step in at the end and form a separate mine on the Stock exchange apart form us to get a flotation on our name" (Rotberg, 205). His method was to swallow up poorer ones and buy out richer ones.After diamonds were found on the DeBeers farms, Rhodes mercenaries fought a vicious war against the Boers, "independent-minded farmers, ranchers, and merchants in southern Africa who lived by the Bible and rifle" (Institute for Historical Review). They were lead by President Paul Kruger. According to Mark Weber of the Institute for Historical Review, Jan Smuts, a 31 year old Boer general, and future South African prime minister, wrote that for every male Boer killed four Boer women and children were starved to death in British concentration camps. He described the war as follows:Lord Kitchener has begun to carry out a policy in both Boer republics of unbelievable barbarism and gruesomeness which violates the most elementary principles of the international rules of war. Almost all farmsteads and villages in both republics have been burned down and destroyed. All crops have been destroyed. All livestock which has fallen into hands of the enemy has been killed or slaughtered (Rotberg).The British government declared war after the Boers signed a treaty that recognized King Edward VII as their sovereign. The DeBeers corporate trust was, permitted to acquire any asset of any kind by any means. It could also own mines, water rights, houses, farms -- anything. It could trade in precious stones, all manner of miners, any kind of machinery, patents, inventions, and products in Africa or elsewhere. It could construct and operate canals, railways, gasworks, reservoirs, factories, and so on. It could engage in banking. It could even acquire 'tracts of country' in Africa or anywhere, together with rights transferred to it by indigenous rulers, and expend moneys for the pacification and administration of such estates (Rotberg, 209).DeBeers was to be run by "Life Governors", which was a new and innovative concept at the time. They would control the operations of the concern and be able to operate in nearly all respects as if there were no other shareholders. The five Life Governors would be entitled to ¼ of all profits beyond the first 30% which would go to dividend recipients (Rotberg, 207). Once they had control, the Life Governors, basically, had another kind of East India Company operating, thus controlling 90% of the world diamonds. Without this cartel, the price of diamonds would be a fraction of the current market value -- as they are very plentiful. In fact sapphires and rubies have a higher per carat value, depending on the quality of the stone, than diamonds.Regarding the Life Governorship and the ability of Rhodes to take DeBeers cash whenever he wanted to seize a new opportunity, both he and Beit gave up their life governorship in exchange for 80,000 shares of DeBeers, so that Rothschild and the others could manage the corporation (Rotberg, 648).In the case of gold, Rhodes fomented war, whenever it was needed and was not afraid of exploiting the graciousness of African rulers to effectively take their countries from them, instead of just mining gold. Regarding gold found in the trans-Limpopo region, the trans-Zambezia, the copperlands of Katanga, and the borderlands of Lake Malawi, Rhodes betrayed the trust of the ruler of that region, Lobengula.To help with the operation, Rhodes offered Rothschild a large share, gratis, in what he believed would eventually prove to be a great thing, as he subdued Lobengula's territory. Rhodes was able to control Zimbabwe by "moneys obtained by pyramiding shares backed by promises rather than assets. DeBeers and Gold Fields had solid stakes but the famous trust deeds were licenses for stock speculations" (Rotberg, 274). What Rhodes did before he took control of new lands is get a royal charter from the Queen to establish a mining corporation and, then, he raised monies by selling shares. The Rothschilds were always important shareholders in every scheme Rhodes floated.While the following is based on strong research of Georgetown University professor, Dr. Carroll Quigley, because of the secrecy surrounding Rhodes dealings, it cannot be verified. Dr. Quigley named the following as being included as key players or Initiates with Rhodes: Nathan Rothschild, Baron Rothschild; Sir Harry Johnston; William T. Stead; Reginal Brett; Viscount Esher; and Alfred Milner, Viscount Milner; Alfred Beit; Archibald Primrose, Earl of Rosebery; Arthur James Balfour; Lionel Curtis; Viscount Waldorf Astor and Lady Astor. The Association of Helpers or the Inner Circle included: Philip Kerr, Marquess of Lothian; Lionel Curtis; Jan Smuts; and Arnold Toynbee; The Outer Circle included: Robert Cecil, Viscount Cecil of Chelwood and Isaiah Berlin (Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, 311-313).After the death of Rhodes, Lord Rothschild, Alfred Beit, and Stead carried out the plans in his seven wills, which includes the Rhodes Scholarship program. According to Dr. Carroll Quigley who wrote from an insiders point of view in his book, Tragedy and Hope,In 1891, Rhodes organized a secret society with members in a 'Circle of Initiates' and an outer circle known as the 'Association of Helpers' later organized as the Round Table organization. In 1909- 1913, they organized semi-secret groups known as Round Table Groups in the chief British dependencies and the United States. The Round Table Groups were semi-secret discussion and lobbying groups whose original purpose was to federate the English speaking world along lines laid down by Cecil Rhodes. In 1915, Round Table groups existed in England, South Africa, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and the United States. Money for their activities originally came from Cecil Rhodes, J. P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney families, and associates of bankers Lazard Brothers and Morgan, Grenfell and Company. In New York, it was known as the Council on Foreign Relations and was a front for J.P. Morgan and Company, in association with the very small American Round Table Group.Quigley also wrote,There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates to some extent in the way the Radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.According to one expert on the dream of Cecil Rhodes', the U.S. Roundtable Group, known as the Council on Foreign Relations-CFR is the equivalent of the British Royal Institute for International Affairs, now known as Chatham House. Another group is the Pilgrims Society of which Queen Elizabeth II is the patron. There are other related groups. Many of the people who are members of one group are also members of other related groups. President Bill Clinton was our first Rhodes Scholar president and he, along with most of our presidents, and key officials, throughout the present and past administrations, are members of the CFR.In several previous newsletters on oil, I discussed the role of President Nixon and Henry Kissinger's National Strategic Study Memorandum 200, as well as, the role of the Council on Foreign Relations with regard to keeping third world countries backward, so they would not need their own oil resources for industry or manufacturing plants. The old adage, "He who owns the gold, makes the rules" will always be true. If gold were not important or valuable, Rhodes would not have waged vicious wars over it. The same is true for diamonds. When will gold lose its shine? When diamonds lose theirs.

THE PERFECT ENEMY

Looking at the latest cover of Newsweek one may get an idea of what I mean when I refer to the "terrorists" as "the perfect enemy". On the cover there is an Iraqi child gripping the muzzle of an assault rifle, with the title "The Next Jihad". This cover speaks Orwelian volumes, to the trained observer. These "islamo-fascist" are renewable, thus undefeatable. They are the perfect enemy because they enable the governments of the world to ultimately produce a final solution. Endless wars will not defeat the enemy, they are not designed to. Years of war will eventually exhaust the populations’ patience and emotional condition. There will be an outcry for an end, a safe solution; and that is exactly what will be provided. Micro chipping, databases, militarized police states, surveillance cameras, all will emerge. There will be no other way to defeat an enemy that dwells in the shadows, an enemy that is renewable, an enemy with no chain of command or base of operations. To guarantee an ongoing victory everyone will need to be monitored and controlled. Wake up before it is too late. Don’t be fooled any longer. Do your homework. Find out who has funded and trained these rogues, these terrorists and the nations that harbor them. Connect the dots before you wake up and realize that you are a slave in your own home and nation. The next jihad? When then, with an ever-reproducing enemy, will war overcome the "terrorists"?!

WHO RULES THE WORLD PART 2

CENTRAL BANKS
Regarding the power of central banks, if you will take a piece of paper money out of your wallet -- any denomination -- you will see these words, "Federal Reserve Note -- This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." You might ask yourself why the paper money does not state that it is a note from the Treasury of the United States? If the Federal Reserve is not the Treasury, what is it? The Federal Reserve is a "central bank." To put it in every day terms, it is a private corporation which claims to provide a service to the people of the United States by providing the money used in our banking system.
When America was founded, there were great and serious debates over who should control the monetary system of our new country. While President Washington was chosen by unanimous vote, he appointed a number of constitutional advisers. Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson believed in the capacity of the common people for self-government. Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, an aristocrat by birth and breeding and connected to the Tory element of the Revolution, believed our monetary system should be like that of England's with a private corporation -- central bank (Bank of England). Washington accepted the views of Hamilton and signed a bill into law creating our first central bank (The Coming Battle, M.W. Walbert, 1899, republished 1977, 3).
When Congress refused to renew the Bank's charter in 1811, the War of 1812 ensued, and in 1816 Congress re-chartered the bank with a capital stock of $35M. "From 1816 to 1828, it was the sole arbiter of the financial affairs of the nation, both public and private. Its power in politics was immense and it swayed elections as well" (Walbert, 11).
Senator Benton of Missouri thoroughly understood the means by which the bank had obtained its mastery over the commerce and industry of the nation and at the session of Congress presented a resolution in the Senate to the effect that the charter should not be renewed (Walbert,12). Senator Benton said,
The government itself ceases to be independent, it ceases to be safe when the national currency is at the will of a company [Bank of the United States, now Federal Reserve]. The government can undertake no great enterprise, neither war nor peace, without the consent and co- operation of that company; it cannot count its revenues six months ahead without referring to the action of that company -- its friendship or its enmity, its concurrence or opposition -- to see how far that company will permit money to be scares or to be plentiful; how far it will let the money system go on regularly or throw it into disorder; how far it will suit their interest or policy. People are not safe when such a company has such power. The temptation is too great, the opportunity too easy, to put up or put down prices, to make and break fortunes, to bring the whole community upon its knees to the Neptunes who preside over the flux and reflux of paper. All property is at their mercy, the price of real estate, of every growing crop, of every staple article in the market, is at their command. Stocks are their playthings -- their gambling theatre on which they gamble daily with as little secrecy and as little morality and far more mischief to fortunes than common gambles carry on their operations (emphasis added) (Walbert, 14).
When Andrew Jackson was elected President in 1828, he announced in his first message to Congress that he would not renew its charter. By that time, the Bank had great accumulations of reserves. Jackson advocated the passage of a law distributing these surplus revenues back to the states. He ended up vetoing the law Congress passed to re-charter the Bank. His reasons were salient and vital to future U.S. security. Jackson pointed out that the bank's stock, worth $8 million, was held by foreigners, chiefly in Britain, and that this was the most dangerous feature of the plan because a majority of shares of its stock might fall into alien hands, which, if we were involved in a war, could use its influence against the United States (Walbert, 17).
In 1881, President James A Garfield said,
Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce....and when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.
Needless to say, the move to re-establish control over the economy of the United States did not abate. Between 1840 and 1913, there was much done to try and re-establish a private corporation to control our monetary system.
In 1910 a group of men met in secret on Jekyll Island to plan the establishment of the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States. These men were members of Cecil Rhodes secret circles: Frank Vanderlip, Benjamin Strong, Paul Warburg, Henry P. Davison, Charles Norton, and Senator Nelson Aldrich.
Three years later in 1913, the central bankers took action. This time the people involved in this effort included some of the wealthiest people in America: Senator Nelson Aldrich (grandfather of David Rockefeller); Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb and Company, an international banking house; Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury; Henry P. Davidson, Senior Partner of J.P. Morgan & Company; Charles D. Norton, and Frank Vanderlip, President of National City Bank which today is CitiGroup. The passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was done through chicanery. Those in the Senate who favored the Act did not go home while those that were against it went home for Christmas. In a special session convened with quorum, the Act passed at 11:45 p.m. on December 24, 1913 -- an evil act of bondage for the American people.
Today, only five countries in the world are without a central bank: Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Cuba and Libya. All of these just happen to be on George Bush's "Evil of Axis" list.
With the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, our monetary system changed back to one of control by a private corporation and not the U.S. Treasury. Our currency is an IOU against the "Federal Reserve Note." Earlier in the day on December 24, 1913, Congressman Charles A. Lindberg, Jr. stated from the House floor: "This Act established the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this bill, the invisible government by the Monetary Power will be legalized...The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill." We should note that President Woodrow Wilson could have vetoed this bill like Andrew Jackson did, but he had been put into power by the same powers that passed the bill.
Since 1913, the Federal Reserve Act has been amended over 195 times. In 1914-1939, U.S. Federal Reserve Notes were backed by gold certificates to 40% of their value. This was reduced by 25% in 1945 and today it is questionable as to how much gold backing there may be.
There have been a number of empowerments given to all central banks, including the Federal Reserve, over the last ten years. In 1997, the Bank of England was given powers, like the Federal Reserve, which included the power to set interest rates without permission from government and to have a separate pool of foreign exchange reserves to INTERVENE in currency markets at their discretion. A Washington Times article has stated that their central bank minister, Gordon Brown, was "modeling the Bank of England much more closely after the U.S. Federal Reserve which can adjust rates even if that causes short-term political discomfort for the White House" (Washington Times-WT, 5/7/97,1). About the same time, the Bank of Japan was also given more power to determine monetary policy. Currently, the Bank of England, the Bundesbank and the European Central Bank all have the same power as the Federal Reserve to change interest rates without approval from government, first.
Also in 1997, it appears that there was a harmonization between Fed concerns and market direction. Starting then, every time Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan made any kind of comment about the market, it reacted. This continues. The market takes its direction from the Fed.
Then, in 1999 Congress passed HR1094, which amended the Federal Reserve Act to broaden the range of discount window loans (i.e. where banks borrow from the Fed overnight to maintain their capitalization) that could be used as collateral for Federal Reserve Notes. Assets eligible for collateral include: Treasury and federal agency securities, gold certificates, Special Drawing Rights, foreign currencies, and discount window loans made under Section 13 of the Federal Reserve Act. What we can see is that as our indebtedness grows, this private corporation wants more collateral for the loans it is making to the U.S. government. Furthermore, with the expansion and harmonization of central bank powers, the Fed has gained great power over the government. It is the Federal Reserve Chairman who TELLS Congress what he thinks and some of what he is doing, not the other way around.
Karl Marx said this about central banking, "By means of the banking system the distribution of capital is taken out of the hands of the private capitalists and usurers. But at the same time, banking and credit thus become the most effective means of driving capitalist production beyond its own boundaries, and one of the most potent instruments of crises and swindles" (Mayer, 39).

POPE UNDERGROUND

The Pope And The Secret World Of Intelligence
Added: Jan 12th, 2007 7:06 AM

The Pope and the secret world of intelligence
By Gordon Thomas

Pope John Paul II was regularly briefed by the CIA. The revelation will further fuel the controversy about the resignation of Mgr Stanislaw Wielgus, the Archbishop of Warsaw.

His decision to quit, only minutes before he was due to celebrate his inaugural mass, came after he confessed to being an informant for Poland's communist-era secret police and intelligence service.

The news has sent shock waves across the worldwide Catholic fiefdom.

It will also cast a cloud over the cries of those millions of Catholics who had gathered in St Peter's Square two years ago to call for the canonisation of their nation's favourite son. It will raise serious questions as to which other Churchmen in the once-communist world had secret links to the intelligence network.

An MI6 officer, who served in Warsaw during the closing years of the 44 years of one-party rule in Poland, said last week: "There were question marks against a number of senior members of the Church. But the level of their collaboration is now difficult to assess. Some, like Wielgus, were recruited while still at university. Others became collaborators when they began to climb up through the Church hierarchy. This was not unique in communist Poland".

MI6 files indicate that "as many as fifteen percent of priests" in the former communist Poland and elsewhere in the Soviet Union had "some form of collaboration" with the regime.

"A number of those are still in office, some holding high positions. It is how to deal with them that will now give Pope Benedict XVI cause for concern", said the MI6 officer.

Before Christmas he publicly said he had chosen Stanislaw Wielgus to be Warsaw's new archbishop after scrupulous checks on his background and career in the Polish Church -- and that he had been "fully aware of his past in making the appointment".

Now Benedict has been forced to bring out of retirement Cardinal Josef Glemp, the former Archbishop of Warsaw and Primate of Poland -- and a close friend of John Paul.

While Poland's faithful struggle to come to terms with how Poland's security service had established a vast security apparatus, with spies and informers in every profession and workplace, they could draw comfort from the belief that John Paul had played a vital role in freeing them from communism without being tainted by the revelation that has destroyed the reputation of Wielgus.

Indeed, when he was Cardinal Karol Wojtyla of Krakow, John Paul had warned his clergy "to avoid any contact with the security forces if possible, and, if not, to report it to a superior".

But shortly after he was elected the 261 pope in 1978, John Paul had received a letter from President Jimmy Carter. It was hand-carried to the Vatican by his wife, Rosalynn. At the end of her private audience she handed it to the pope. One of those who witnessed the moment was Mgr John Magee, the pontiff's English-language private secretary.

Later over a private dinner with me at Rozellas, a Rome restaurant favoured by the Vatican hierarchy, John Magee confirmed the letter was "Washington approval for the pope to be briefed by the CIA on a regular basis".

Almost forty years before, one of the founders of the CIA, General William "Wild Bill" Donovan, had been received in audience by Pope Pius XII and decorated with the Grand Cross of the Order of Saint Sylvester, the oldest and most prestigious of papal knighthoods.

From that day when Donovan had bowed his head before the pontiff, the CIA had remained ensconced as the prime intelligence adviser to successive pontiffs.

But it would be William Casey more than any other director who, after Rosalynn Carter's visit, developed the CIA ties with the Vatican as John Paul's guide through the murky world of secret intelligence.

It was the CIA who kept him continuously informed on global events. As well as the CIA Rome station, based in the shadow of the Vatican walls, the agency operated a network of what Casey called "our messengers". They included Lee lacocca, the car magnate; Spyros Skouras, the shipping millionaire; Robert Abplanalp, the aerosol tycoon; Barron Hilton, the hotelier; William Simon, a former US Treasury Secretary; and Robert Wagner, the former Mayor of New York who became President Carter's personal envoy to the Holy See. Finally there was Clare Boothe who served on the US government's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, which oversaw the CIA's covert operations.

Throughout his long reign, John Paul knew he was never more than a telephone call from the present CIA director. In turn they had the direct line to the ivory-white telephone on the pontiff's desk: extension 3101 in the Apostolic Palace.

Casey's "messengers" unfailingly called the number to let John Paul know "an extra important message" was being hand-carried from Casey, and later his successors.

Those messages remain one of the many secrets stored in the Vatican archives.

But Jonathan Petre, a Vatican watcher, said last week: "The Church can expect to be implicated by more details of its links to the world of secret intelligence".

Gordon Thomas is the author of "Gideon's Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad", the new edition of which will be published in January 2007. He specialises in international intelligence matters. Gordon Thomas is also the author of the global bestsellers "Pontiff" and "The Year of Armageddon". Both books detail the secret workings of John Paul's papacy. He accompanied the Pontiff on several of his overseas tours, including a visit to Poland.

© Gordon Thomas 2007
Copyright © 2007 Canada Free Press

WHO RULES THE WORLD PART 1

INTRODUCTION
At the January, 2006 World Economic Forum, five of the world's most important economists bewailed the fact that they had missed the rise in oil and in gold. By May, gold had risen to $730 oz. while energy had gone over $70 bbl.
When gold stayed at $600 oz. after falling from its high in May and the oil markets reached $75 bbl., their most recent high, I asked myself what would be used to change the commodity cycle. In May we saw a 10-15% drop in the price of gold and a correction in the price of oil. Throughout the summer the market recovered with oil reaching $75bbl. While gold stocks made up some of the loss, gold bullion did not. It stayed around $600 oz. Oil today is at $60 bbl. CNBC said on September 21, "With oil down 20%, the steep decline is even confounding the experts!" Is what we are seeing indeed confounding all the experts, or is it managed and manipulated to benefit a small group of powerful insiders?
Last week, we saw once again how Wall Street changes the minds of investors. For the last ten years or so, the gas guzzling SUV has been the premier choice of vehicles for most Americans. High oil prices put both General Motors and Ford at risk, as both companies announced drastic measures and big lay-offs last week. The Ford Company, in announcing they were not going to manufacture the SUV any longer said, "The North American business model does not work." In response to this information, a friend of mine, who just visited Italy, told me that she was surprised at the increase in the number of SUVs in Italy.
Why the huge drop in the price of oil? Wall Street would have us believe that it was the new oil reserve found in the Gulf, even though it will take 7-10 years to bring it on line. On 9/11, 2006 CNBC's Larry Kramer forecasted that oil will never go back to $75bbl, and that it is time to buy drug stocks. A little later that same day, we were told that the rise in gold and oil, which began 9/11/01, was over. The price of gas at the pump began to drop and, according to CNBC the next day, "Consumers are feeling better, more secure, and richer over lower energy." CNBC then went on to show SUV's and tell us, "Maybe it is time to buy an SUV."
The bottom line is that Wall Street and our central bank made a huge mistake by raising interest rates at the same time they increased the price of energy and they are back-peddling. What they found is that the power of the consumer to buy is gone. They are not able to put gas in their SUVs and they are not buying new ones. Furthermore, they cannot afford a new home which doubled in price as a result of 45 year low interest rates. In other words, there is a very high inventory of SUVs by all the auto dealers and home builders have at least one year of homes on the market.
Currently, gold is at $565 (9/21) and has lost over 22% in spite of the fact that the metal hit a 26 year high of $730 oz. in mid-May. Within the last two weeks, gold is down 10%, for a total drop of 20% year to date. According to one gold analyst, the central bankers began dumping gold on July 18 to keep it from rising as a result of the new Middle East War. They say that if gold had risen to $700 oz., oil would have exploded to $90bbl. Does any of this make sense? As a friend of mine would say, "What in the earth is going on?"
Perhaps, instead, we need to ask "Who is in control?" Are there natural forces that set the value of diamonds, gold, bonds, stocks, housing, farm land, etc., or are they manipulated to fill the coffers of powerful groups and individuals, as they skim off the top of the world's asset highs? This newsletter is not an excuse for the market but hopefully will educate you about forces behind the scene.
Having spent 25 years in this business and having covered 90 global meetings over the last 12-13 years, I have observed presidents, prime ministers, kings, princes, dukes, key officials from the various United Nations organizations, CEO's from some of the world's most powerful corporations, economists, and others. My research and observations have led me to determine that there are a number of powerful forces that rule the world, independent of government. In fact, government is getting weaker through privatization, as it spins off assets and sells them to corporations. Just recently, Norway overthrew their Democratic Socialist government so they can privatize more of their government assets! While I personally believe the British royal family rules the world, they do not rule it alone. There are at least three actors: central banks, the power and legacy of Cecil Rhodes, and the immense financial power of the biggest international banking family, the Rothschilds. When you consider all of these, you have a three-strand cord -- in other words, a strong cord that it will not break.
Central banks control the monetary system of the world and determine when business cycles are going to change simply by increasing or decreasing the money supply in the banking system. This small group of powerful insiders know when to sell high and buy low because they determine when the market cycle is going to change. What has just happened with oil and gold prices is an example of the power brokers who rule the world.
Cecil Rhodes was a British aristocrat who went down to South Africa to mine diamonds and ended up discovering gold. DeBeers Diamonds was the corporation that he founded as a result of the Anglo-Boer War. He also founded one of the largest gold companies in the world, Gold Fields.
Rhodes loved his mother country so much that he dedicated everything he had to setting up secret societies and college scholarships (Rhodes Scholars) for the furtherance of bringing the world under British rule. Rhodes said the British "are the finest race in the world and if the world were British, there would be no further wars." (Interestingly enough, he would have to wage war against all the independent nations of the world in order for "peace" to happen.) Working closely with Rhodes in helping to finance his quest to corner the diamond and gold markets and to carry out his final vision, was his banker, Nathaniel Rothschild of the British Rothschild banking family.
I make no claim to knowing everything. We are all entitled to our opinions. The following analysis is mine, based on years of extensive research both in regard to history and to the market. Consider:
When Rhodes died, he left a series of wills in which he wanted to set up a secret "society of the just", based on the Jesuit Society, to carry out his vision of a world united under British rule. Interestingly enough, he worked very closely with the British and French Rothschild families to finance the merger and consolidation of all the various South African diamond and gold concessions. One of his directives was to educate well selected men (and recently, women) from key colleges and universities from around the world, in the philosophy of bringing the world under British rule. These people are known as "Rhodes Scholars" and include former President Clinton and many others in government.

MAY VEE SEE YOUR PAPEZ PLEEZ PART 2

NATIONAL ID: TARGET THE STATE HOUSES

By: Devvy Kidd
January 11, 2007

"The law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will. This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance." --Thomas Jefferson: Legal Argument, 1770. FE 1:376

The National ID is of paramount concern to those of us who refuse to be tagged and numbered like animals. Many do not want to comply, but don't know what to do as an individual. First, this national identification is voluntary, not mandatory for the individual. However, the sinister and devious minions behind the scenes who write this legislation for our corrupt Congress added some provisions they hope will force Americans to surrender, i.e. you won't be able to fly on commercial planes, ride on Amtrak or enter a federal building. You see, these areas are under the control of the federal fist and they are counting on enough Americans who don't know what this new law says, will simply comply in order to hop on a plane or train to to see grandma or for a business requirement:

"Supporters claim it is not a national ID because it is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make non-persons out of its citizens. The citizens of that state will be unable to have any dealings with the federal government because their ID will not be accepted. They will not be able to fly or to take a train. In essence, in the eyes of the federal government they will cease to exist. It is absurd to call this voluntary." Congressman Ron Paul on

HR 418

What about the states? Many have already expressed concerns that they simply don't have the money to implement this insidious and phony tool to "fight the war on terrorism." The National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators indicated in a recent report that the costs of reissuing drivers licenses to conform to this national identification within the recommended time, the on-site verification procedures and other requirements will run the states approximately ONE BILLION DOLLARS on the front end and roughly TEN POINT ONE BILLION DOLLARS over the next five years. Anyone who isn't walking around in a self imposed coma understands that these draconian laws coming out of Congress usually end up costing ten times what they estimate.

I am wondering the only state I can find so far that has at least a working paper on opting out is New Mexico? (

See here) Why haven’t the other states simply told their federal house representative and counterfeit federal senators that since this law gives the states the option to "opt out," we simply aren't going to comply? Don't these legislators, governors and attorney generals for the states read and analyze what comes out of the District of Criminals? Yes, the State of New Hampshire did make a valiant effort - at least part of their General Court. Last March their House passed a bill to reject the national id, but it was killed in their senate. It's most unfortunate the people of the State of New Hampshire didn't rise up and throw any member of their legislature out of office this past November who voted against the bill. But, unless people know what the federal legislation says and their options, they won't act. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear there are any real newspapers in the State of New Hampshire that even care for their own personal liberty and freedom or they would have begun a massive media campaign to support HB 1582 (see below

) and put pressure on the state house.

Let me once again use an excellent example of why the states cannot be forced to comply with this national id law because it's of utmost importance that we all get on the same sheet of the law here in order to defeat this giant step towards Nazism:

Memorandum for Walter Zellman from Sallyanne Payton, clearly marked: Preliminary Draft for Official Use Only. Do Not Quote or Release For Any Purpose, page 4, Health Care Task Reform under Hillary Clinton. Please note these sections: "(b) may the federal government use other actors in the governmental system and the private sector as its agents and give them orders as though they were parts of a prefectorial system? The short answer is "no." State governments are independent, although subordinated, sovereignties, not subdivisions of the federal government.

"Although the federal government may regulate many of their functions directly [as well, for example, it subjects state water districts to the Clean Water Act], it may not require them to exercise their own governmental powers in a manner dictated by federal law. The states may be encouraged, bribed or threatened into entering into joint federal state programs of various sorts, from unemployment insurance to Medicaid; but they may not be commanded directly to use their own governmental apparatus in the service of federal policy. There is a modest jurisprudence of the Tenth Amendment that seems to have settled on this proposition. See the DOJ [Dept. of Justice] memorandum for a fuller elaboration."

What does this mean from a constitutional position? It means that the government can attempt to bribe the states, they can threaten them, but in fact, the states cannot be forced to get down on their knees to the federal machine. These three cases are important for those who are unfamiliar with the importance of the Tenth Amendment:

Marbury v Madison, U.S. v Lopez and Printz/Mack vs US

.

This is why the legislation was crafted the way it was with the provisions that will forbid any citizen from being able to exercise their right to fly on commercial air liners, Amtrak and enter federal buildings. This is the iron fist of totalitarian government. If the states opt out, their citizens become non-citizens. This is beyond an outrage and only a massive outrage by the citizens of the states will cause such a firestorm, we will see one state after another not only opt out, but sue the federal government to stop them from taking away your rights as a citizen of that state.

This national id will do nothing to "fight the war on terrorism." It is already a disaster in progress because the technology to be used isn't ready and the bogus Department of Homeland Security has proven to be another government nightmare;

see here

. You do not have to accept this drivers license. You CAN refuse. The states CAN and must refuse to comply, but they will not unless there is enough heat to melt the entire Yukon. The state houses MUST hear from you now. Not next week or next month. Action is the order of the day. Taking a stand is the order of the day. No more talking about it.

NOW is the time to send your snail mail letter to your state rep and state senator; use the same letter. Forget e-mail. Members of Congress get hundreds of thousands per month. You get a form response and your e-mail doesn't get read because they don't have the manpower. Use snail mail. It gets opened and read for distribution. If a member of your state legislature gets 11,000, 29,000 or 109,000 letters flooding their office telling him/her that you will not surrender your state driver's license and will not comply with the voluntary national id, they will sit up and pay attention. If you don't make your voice heard, the wolves will devour you. If your state rep or senator is in favor of protecting your rights and the rights of the state he/she represent, then send them a short letter letting them know they have your support and will stand by them. They need to hear from you. Your letter doesn't have to be five pages long, i.e.:

Dear Rep. Smith and Senator Smith:

I am writing today to let you know that I will not surrender my Texas driver's license for a federal national id. Under this new draconian law, I am not required to comply. The State of Texas has the option to opt out of this new hijacking of states rights (the issuance of driver's license is the sole responsibility of each state as mandated by laws from the state legislature). As my representative for the State of Texas, you represent me, not the globalists in Washington, DC and therefore, you and your colleagues in the state house must refuse to comply with this unnecessary federal law. Our tax dollars are needed to benefit the people of this state, not to be wasted for another stupid, unworkable hair brained scheme by the power hungry feds. This national id will do NOTHING to stop any terrorist, it is merely another tool to track the move of Americans and deny we the people our right to travel. Allow me to give you a couple of examples regarding the right of the states of the Union:

"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." --James Madison, Federalist No. 39, January 1788

Although the federal government may regulate many of their functions directly [as well, for example, it subjects state water districts to the Clean Water Act], it may not require them to exercise their own governmental powers in a manner dictated by federal law. The states may be encouraged, bribed or threatened into entering into joint federal state programs of various sorts, from unemployment insurance to Medicaid; but they may not be commanded directly to use their own governmental apparatus in the service of federal policy. Contact your legal department and request copies of Marbury v Madison (1803), Lopez v U.S. (U.S. Supreme Court) and Prinz/Mack v U.S. (U.S. Supreme Court) because they are the legal justification for the State of Texas to exercise it's right to say no.

Please understand that if you don't stand up for the rights of our state and my rights, I will be a participant during the next election cycle to see that you do not return to office. Our state needs leadership. We need individuals in the state house who have a complete command of the U.S. Constitution, our state constitution and the will to stand up to the tyrannical actions coming out of Washington, DC. We the people have had it with elected public officials who refuse to uphold their oath of office and kow tow to the federal machine instead of fighting for the rights of our sovereign state and its citizens.

Sign off politely. You might wish to enclose one or more of the important items below. I have already sent my letter and the same to my federal rep and counterfeit federal senator. I simply told them that I refuse to volunteer into the national id. If he/she doesn't stand up to the feds and opt out of this worthless waste of money, I will never vote for them should they come up for reelection. Short and to the point.

2007 is the year of action, not more excuses. Jodi Waters, one woman who became tens of thousands, spear headed the assault against the gasoline additive MTBE. She won. We the people won. Jodi beat the biggest oil companies in the world. Frederick Douglass said, "Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them." I will NOT quietly submit. This is just the beginning in the year of "we can." Be sure to talk to family and friends who don't have a computer. Bring up this issue at church. The national id is the gateway tool to a forced bio chip, the mark of the beast, and no Christian should accept this national id, period. This issue is a major fight and every voice counts.

Exhibits:

1,

National Conference of State Legislatures - Real ID Act of 2005/Driver's License Title Summary
2, Real ID to cost states at least $2.5 billion
3, A National ID Bill Masquerading as Immigration Reform by Congressman Ron Paul
4, National ID Cards Won't Stop Terrorism or Illegal Immigration

LOSING SOVEREIGNTY

Full Steam Ahead For "The Invasion" & The American Union
Government funded drug running cartels, secret illegal social security programs and Pesos for Pizzas. What happened to the United States of America?
Infowars.net January 8, 2007
Steve Watson & Alex Jones

Recent disturbing incidents on the US/Mexico border, coupled with mainstream news reports concerning government aiding of illegal immigration serves to once again remind US citizens that the sovereign borders are systematically being broken down and the country is being quietly amalgamated into a Pan American Union.
Last week it was reported that a U.S. Border Patrol entry Identification Team site was overrun by a team of armed Mexicans Wednesday night along Arizona's border with Mexico, somewhere along the 120 mile section of the border between Nogales and Lukeville, an area known for being a drug corridor.
The guard were forced to flee as troops are not allowed to apprehend illegal entrants and do not carry armed weapons.
"We don't know if this was a matter of somebody coming up accidentally on the individuals, coming up intentionally on the individuals, or some sort of a diversion?" said Rob Daniels, Border Patrol Tucson Sector spokesman. "We just don't know and that's why everything's got to be looked into."
Imagine if muslims or Arabs were caught shooting at national guard and overrunning them, we would never hear the end of it. This incident however, is the latest in a long line of stories that barely reach the footnotes of the local nightly news.
In late 2005 there were dozens of American citizens kidnapped over the Texas border and taken down to Mexico and held. This was kept very quiet. There was a huge stand off, some were killed. 800+ US citizens were killed on the Texas border in 2005, hundreds more were killed in 2006.
There are over a million illegal aliens, conservatively, in Houston alone. There have been multiple car bombings there, and in Dallas, which have quietly been attributed to illegals and forgotten about.
We have previously covered multiple instances of armed Mexican troops straying over the borders and even firing at and killing federal officers .
Last month CNS news reported that Texas sheriffs and lawmakers are routinely threatened, fired upon and overrun by US TRAINED gun-toting members of the Mexican military, crossing regularly into U.S. territory, where they are partnering with drug cartels and criminal gangs to protect sophisticated smuggling operations.
We have also exposed how illegal immigration is being used by drug commando organizations such as Los Zetas (pictured) to gain unrestricted passage into the US.
Former DEA agents have come forth declaring that such groups, admittedly trained by the US Government are being used as front groups for CIA and government controlled narcotics operations. To shut down illegal immigration and strengthen the borders would go some way to prevent such lucrative activities, therefore it's a government no-no.
The open plan to merge the US with Mexico and Canada and create a Pan American Union has long been a Globalist brainchild but its very real and prescient implementation on behalf of the Council on Foreign Relations has finally also been reported on by mainstream news outlets.
The Union is the globalist cabal's meal ticket towards raping an entire continent of its resources and sovereign capabilities. Strengthening the borders is not on the Agenda here, the American Union is all about DISSOLVING the borders.
The framework on which the American Union is being pegged is the NAFTA Super Highway, a four football-fields-wide leviathan that stretches from southern Mexico through the US up to Montreal Canada. Toll roads are to be placed upon existing roads in Security Prosperity Partnership agreements that bypasses Congress, agreements between the bureaucracies of the US and Mexican governments, to raise capital to build the Super highway that will go South of Texas and into Mexico.
Coupled with Bush's blanket amnesty program , which the Democrats in congress are set to approve this week as their first order of business, the Pan American Union is the final jigsaw piece for the total dismantling of America as we know it.
We have also seen in the past how "immigration control efforts" such as Real ID , boosting troops on the borders and building fences are simply smoke and mirrors behind which lie methods of control, outrageous elitist profiteering and the destruction of freedom.
The truth is that immigration is too profitable for the elite, both in the US and in Mexico, to put a stop to it. In late December 2005, Mexican President Vicente Fox hired a GOP lobbying firm to sweeten political sentiment in the US towards Mexicans and the immigration issue.
The Mexican government is now even giving illegals hand-held satellite navigation devices in order to facilitate their safe journey across the desert.
Get 5 months free at Prison Planet.tv when you sign up for our New Year Special! TV shows, conference footage, field reports, protest clips, in studio camera and audio interviews, books, every Alex Jones film, dozens of other documentaries! Click here to subscribe!
In light of all this it is also disturbing to read that the US government has been SECRETLY paving the way for the funneling of billions of Social Security funds to illegal Mexican immigrants. As a result of lawsuits, the U.S. government last week released the actual U.S.-Mexico Social Security Totalization Agreement , an understanding signed between the Bush administration and the Mexican government in 2004.
This is not the first time the Bush administration has moved to aid the benefits of Mexicans illegally working working in the US. In 2005, the New York Times reported that the Bush administration had initiated a program to start paying hospitals and doctors for providing emergency care to illegal immigrants. Members of Congress from border states had sought the money, totaling $1 Billion. They said treatment of illegal immigrants imposed a huge financial burden on many hospitals, which are required to provide emergency care to patients who need it, regardless of their immigration status or ability to pay. The administration had previously abandoned a proposal that would have required many hospitals to ask patients if they were U.S. citizens or legal immigrants.
Add to this previous mainstream reports of banks and lenders opening their doors to illegal immigrants, facilitated by government agencies, such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. As reported in the Wall Street Journal , the FDIC is encouraging banks to lend and invest in undeserved markets regardless of customers' immigration status.
The US armed forces has also seen an influx of foreign troops, an average of 20% of ground troops in Iraq are now non citizens, this is set to rise to 50% over the next year with foreign recruitment stations facilitating the supply.
Think about this, non-US citizens wearing the uniform of American soldiers, stationed at home and abroad.
Today the Dallas Morning News reported that patrons of the Dallas-based Pizza Patrón chain, which caters heavily to Latinos, will be able to purchase American pizzas with Mexican pesos. What kind of twilight zone have we entered here? Yeah forget the dollar, it's basically dead now anyway - lets just use the Peso as the national currency.
Social Security, roads, military, intelligence gathering, regulations, federal agencies - all within the US, Canada and Mexico are being merged into one system at the cost of national sovereignty and the common law.
We are talking about an advanced empire state with a class based multicultural chowder bowl for a population, something has to give somewhere. The Soviet Union and The former Yugoslavia are telling examples of what happens when many cultures are played off against one another and asked to coexist within one country. Most recently this cultural phenomenon has been evident in France which seems to be on the same track of self-destruction with its massive non-assimilating 2nd generation Muslim population.
This cultural rift is already overwhelmingly evident in the US. We have previously covered the Nightmare Racism and Open Call for Revolution from groups such as the Atzlan reconquista movement, MEChA and La Raza who call their American based radio stations "the Invasion". Such groups have no desire to respect US culture and wish for nothing more than the US to be broken up . Of course these groups are minority movements, yet their reach evidently becomes increasingly appealing to proud Mexicans when the President tells them they can come to the US and do awful jobs because they are less worthy than Americans.
Social, political and economic forces are pulling America apart and driving her toward a bloody conflict that may fracture the nation into several different countries. Bush's rhetoric of allowing a legal force of underling workers that will do the dirty work for America sounds like a direct avocation of a creation of a massive underclass of illegal, Third World, uneducated and poor slaves.
This only serves to benefit one section of society, the elite.

www.infowars.com

COOKING THE BOOKS

http://worldvisionportal.org/WVPforum/viewtopic.php?t=160

A PURELY AMERICAN AFFAIR

Robert Fisk Sees A Dictator Created Then Destroyed By America
Jan 1st, 2007 9:52 AM
by: Robert Fisk

Saddam to the gallows. It was an easy equation. Who could be more deserving of that last walk to the scaffold - that crack of the neck at the end of a rope - than the Beast of Baghdad, the Hitler of the Tigris, the man who murdered untold hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis while spraying chemical weapons over his enemies? Our masters will tell us in a few hours that it is a "great day" for Iraqis and will hope that the Muslim world will forget that his death sentence was signed - by the Iraqi "government", but on behalf of the Americans - on the very eve of the Eid al-Adha, the Feast of the Sacrifice, the moment of greatest forgiveness in the Arab world. But history will record that the Arabs and other Muslims and, indeed, many millions in the West, will ask another question this weekend, a question that will not be posed in other Western newspapers because it is not the narrative laid down for us by our presidents and prime ministers - what about the other guilty men? No, Tony Blair is not Saddam. We don't gas our enemies. George W Bush is not Saddam. He didn't invade Iran or Kuwait. He only invaded Iraq. But hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians are dead - and thousands of Western troops are dead - because Messrs Bush and Blair and the Spanish Prime Minister and the Italian Prime Minister and the Australian Prime Minister went to war in 2003 on a potage of lies and mendacity and, given the weapons we used, with great brutality. In the aftermath of the international crimes against humanity of 2001 we have tortured, we have murdered, we have brutalised and killed the innocent - we have even added our shame at Abu Ghraib to Saddam's shame at Abu Ghraib - and yet we are supposed to forget these terrible crimes as we applaud the swinging corpse of the dictator we created. Who encouraged Saddam to invade Iran in 1980, which was the greatest war crime he has committed for it led to the deaths of a million and a half souls? And who sold him the components for the chemical weapons with which he drenched Iran and the Kurds? We did. No wonder the Americans, who controlled Saddam's weird trial, forbad any mention of this, his most obscene atrocity, in the charges against him. Could he not have been handed over to the Iranians for sentencing for this massive war crime? Of course not. Because that would also expose our culpability. And the mass killings we perpetrated in 2003 with our depleted uranium shells and our "bunker buster" bombs and our phosphorous, the murderous post-invasion sieges of Fallujah and Najaf, the hell-disaster of anarchy we unleashed on the Iraqi population in the aftermath of our "victory" - our "mission accomplished" - who will be found guilty of this? Such expiation as we might expect will come, no doubt, in the self-serving memoirs of Blair and Bush, written in comfortable and wealthy retirement. Hours before Saddam's death sentence, his family - his first wife, Sajida, and Saddam's daughter and their other relatives - had given up hope."Whatever could be done has been done - we can only wait for time to take its course," one of them said last night. But Saddam knew, and had already announced his own "martyrdom": he was still the president of Iraq and he would die for Iraq. All condemned men face a decision: to die with a last, grovelling plea for mercy or to die with whatever dignity they can wrap around themselves in their last hours on earth. His last trial appearance - that wan smile that spread over the mass-murderer's face - showed us which path Saddam intended to walk to the noose. I have catalogued his monstrous crimes over the years. I have talked to the Kurdish survivors of Halabja and the Shia who rose up against the dictator at our request in 1991 and who were betrayed by us - and whose comrades, in their tens of thousands, along with their wives, were hanged like thrushes by Saddam's executioners. I have walked round the execution chamber of Abu Ghraib - only months, it later transpired, after we had been using the same prison for a few tortures and killings of our own - and I have watched Iraqis pull thousands of their dead relatives from the mass graves of Hilla. One of them has a newly-inserted artificial hip and a medical identification number on his arm. He had been taken directly from hospital to his place of execution. Like Donald Rumsfeld, I have even shaken the dictator's soft, damp hand. Yet the old war criminal finished his days in power writing romantic novels. It was my colleague, Tom Friedman - now a messianic columnist for The New York Times - who perfectly caught Saddam's character just before the 2003 invasion: Saddam was, he wrote, "part Don Corleone, part Donald Duck". And, in this unique definition, Friedman caught the horror of all dictators; their sadistic attraction and the grotesque, unbelievable nature of their barbarity.But that is not how the Arab world will see him. At first, those who suffered from Saddam's cruelty will welcome his execution. Hundreds wanted to pull the hangman's lever. So will many other Kurds and Shia outside Iraq welcome his end. But they - and millions of other Muslims - will remember how he was informed of his death sentence at the dawn of the Eid al-Adha feast, which recalls the would-be sacrifice by Abraham, of his son, a commemoration which even the ghastly Saddam cynically used to celebrate by releasing prisoners from his jails. "Handed over to the Iraqi authorities," he may have been before his death. But his execution will go down - correctly - as an American affair and time will add its false but lasting gloss to all this - that the West destroyed an Arab leader who no longer obeyed his orders from Washington, that, for all his wrongdoing (and this will be the terrible get-out for Arab historians, this shaving away of his crimes) Saddam died a "martyr" to the will of the new "Crusaders". When he was captured in November of 2003, the insurgency against American troops increased in ferocity. After his death, it will redouble in intensity again. Freed from the remotest possibility of Saddam's return by his execution, the West's enemies in Iraq have no reason to fear the return of his Baathist regime. Osama bin Laden will certainly rejoice, along with Bush and Blair. And there's a thought. So many crimes avenged. But we will have got away with it.