Archive | June 8, 2017

Global Warming Hoax Was Costing U.S. Taxpayers $4.7 Billion per Year*

Global Warming Hoax Was Costing U.S. Taxpayers $4.7 Billion per Year*

By Baxter Dmitry

By exposing the global warming hoax as the scam that it is, President Trump has saved the American taxpayer tens of billions of dollars that would have been used to line the elites’ pockets.

Climate alarmists and mainstream media are trying to convince everyone that President Trump condemned the planet to ruin by refusing to sign the expensive and pointless Paris Climate Accord, but one very influential man — John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel — has hit back at the phonies and called them out on their self-serving lies. 

In a series of tweets and emails Coleman sent to Al Gore and various Democratic supporters and organizations, he called out climate alarmists with a barrage of facts based on actual science and not politically correct liberal groupthink.

As it turns out, if you chart global temperatures back into the ’70s, there is absolutely no sign of global warming.

There’s been less than one degree temperature change since 1978 and no warming to speak of since 1998. So where was the Democrats and their propaganda mouthpieces in the mainstream media getting their information from?

Weather Channel founder John Coleman reveals the truth about global warming:

Yovav Gad reports: It turns out that the government has been manipulating climate computer models. This means that the American taxpayers are being charged $4.7 billion a year in taxes that are being used to fund organizations that carry out meaningless studies based on bad science.

Basically, the American people are paying fake scientists to lie to them.

Spread this everywhere. Donald Trump deserves our support. He wants to help this nation. We can’t live in lies anymore. Trump’s move will save $100 billion and jobs! We can not afford luxuries now. Share this post if you support our President’s policy!

Al Gore predicted Arctic summer ice would disappear in 2013.


Gore said that on Sept. 21, 2007, “scientists reported with unprecedented alarm that the North Polar icecap is, in their words, ‘falling off a cliff.’ One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week warns that it could happen in as little as seven years, seven years from now.”

Former Vice President Al Gore basically started the “Global Warming” movement after producing a documentary film in 2006 “An Inconvenient Truth”. According to Michael Bastasch at the Al Gore may have some other hidden incentives pushing his aggressive Global Warming agenda — Liberal billionaire George Soros gave former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental group millions of dollars over three years to create a “political space for aggressive U.S. action” on global warming, according to leaked documents. A document published by DC Leaks shows Soros, a Hungarian-born liberal financier, wanted his nonprofit Open Society Institute (OSI) to do more to support global warming policies in the U.S. That included budgeting $10 million in annual support to Gore’s climate group over three years.

U.S. Programs Global Warming Grants U.S. Programs became engaged on the global warming issue about four years ago, at George Soros’s suggestion,” reads a leaked OSI memo. “There has been a budget of $11 million for global warming grants in the U.S. Programs budget for the last several years,” the memo reads. “This budget item captures George Soros’s commitment of $10 million per year for three years to Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection, which conducts public education on the climate issue in pursuit of creating political space for aggressive U.S. action in line with what scientists say is necessary to put our nation on a path to reducing its outsize carbon dioxide emissions.”

It’s unclear what year the memo was sent, but the Gore co-founded Alliance for Climate Protection (ACP) was established in 2006 and lasted until it became The Climate Reality Project in July 2011. In 2008, the Alliance launched a $300 million campaign to encourage “Americans to push for aggressive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions,” The Washington Post reported.

ACP got $10 million from the Open Society Institute (OSI) in 2008, according to the nonprofit’s tax filings. OSI handed over another $5 million to ACP in 2009, according to tax filings. The investigative reporting group ProPublica keeps a database that has OSI tax returns from 2000 to 2013. The DCNF could not find other years where OSI gave money to ACP.

Other reasons for changes in temperatures could also be related to things such as the Sun Solar variation and Aerosols forcing — scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming express varied opinions concerning the cause of global warming. Some say only that it has not yet been ascertained whether humans are the primary cause of global warming; others attribute global warming to natural variation; ocean currents; increased solar activity or cosmic rays. The consensus position is that solar radiation may have increased by 0.12 W/m2 since 1750, compared to 1.6 W/m2 for the net anthropogenic forcing.

The combined change in radiative forcing of the two major natural factors (solar variation and volcanic aerosols) is estimated to be negative for the past two, and possibly the past four, decades.

A few studies say that the present level of solar activity is historically high as determined by sunspot activity and other factors. Solar activity could affect climate either by variation in the Sun’s output or, more speculatively, by an indirect effect on the amount of cloud formation. Solanki and co-workers suggest that solar activity for the last 60 to 70 years may be at its highest level in 8,000 years.


Related Topics:

Climate Alarmists Have Been Wrong About Virtually Everything*

The Paris Climate Accord is GENOCIDE Against All Life on Earth*

Australian PM Advisor on the NWO Climate Change Hoax*

New Report Exposes Rockefeller Dynasty’s Role in “Climate” Scam*

Paris Climate Change Conference shows Road to NWO Weather Control*

Escape from Earth Forget it… Cancer Risks*

How World Leaders Were Duped Over Manipulated Global Warming Data*

Agenda: Redistribution of Global Wealth behind Global Warming Alarmists*

German Scientist Accused NASA of ‘Massive’ Temperature Alterations*

U.S. Places “Gag Order” on Weather Agency Employees, Inserts Geo-engineering Propaganda into ‘Common Core’ Syllabus*

Bill and Hillary Clinton Owned Slaves in The 1980’s*

Bill and Hillary Clinton Owned Slaves in The 1980’s*

Bill and Hillary Clinton have admitted to owning black slaves in the 1980’s during their time at the Arkansas governor’s mansion.

According to the Clinton’s, the unpaid slaves were used to perform “household tasks” in order to keep their costs down to a minimum. reports:

Contrary to popular understanding, the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution did not prohibit slavery. The text makes it clear:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

The nifty little loophole of that word “except” means that slavery isn’t actually banned outright; someone simply has to be convicted of a crime in order to be enslaved. This gave Southern states a welcome free hand in re-establishing forced servitude for African Americans in the years after Reconstruction collapsed; as Douglas Blackmon documents in Slavery By Another Name, the Jim Crow era was in many places characterized by a mass re-enslavement process, whereby criminal laws were devised that allowed states and municipalities to put black people in chains again. Today, forced labour among African Americans persists; in Louisiana, for example, felons are sentenced to “hard labour” as well as prison time, and inmates at the infamous Angola prison still pick cotton at gunpoint.

The prison labour system in the United States has long been an unacknowledged scandal. It’s quite plainly a form of slavery. The Thirteenth Amendment even admits as much: it doesn’t say that when you’re forced to work for being convicted of a crime, that isn’t slavery. It says that slavery is legal if it is imposed as part of a conviction for a crime. All manner of people benefit from the system; as Mother Jones has reported, Congress actually incentivized private companies to use inmate labour, and the incarcerated now produce everything from bedding to eyeglasses. They even staff call centres, with a company called UNICOR encouraging companies to “smart-source” their call-center work to prisoners rather than sending it overseas.

But two possibly unexpected beneficiaries of the contemporary prison slavery system were none other than Bill and Hillary Clinton, who during their time at the Arkansas governor’s mansion in the 1980’s used inmates to perform various household tasks in order to “keep costs down.” Hillary Clinton wrote of the practice openly and without any apparent sense of moral conflict.

The Clintons’ practice has gotten some renewed attention over the last day, with the rediscovery of the relevant passage from It Takes a Village. Last year I wrote a bit about Hillary’s admission in my book Superpredator: Bill Clinton’s Use and Abuse of Black America:

Clinton was, however, generous enough to allow inmates from Arkansas prisons to work as unpaid servants in the Governor’s Mansion. In It Takes a Village, Hillary Clinton writes that the residence was staffed with “African-American men in their thirties,” since “using prison labour at the governor’s mansion was a longstanding tradition, which kept down costs.” It is unclear just how longstanding the tradition of having chained black labourers brought to work as maids and gardeners had been. But one has no doubt that as the white residents of a mansion staffed with unpaid blacks, the Clintons were continuing a certain historic Southern practice. (Hillary Clinton did note, however, that she and Bill were sure not to show undue lenience to the sla…servants, writing that “[w]e enforced rules strictly and sent back to prison any inmate who broke a rule.”

Indeed it’s really difficult, given the facts, to conclude that this practice was anything other than slavery. The Clintons were perfectly content to be waited on by black people who received no compensation and would have been pursued and dragged back in chains if they had tried to leave. There is only one word for such an arrangement.

One could almost respect the honesty with which Hillary spoke of her use of convict labour. She acknowledges that these men were black, and that she had a strict policy of sending them back to prison if they violated any rules. But Hillary Clinton isn’t like the Atlantic writer who dwelled on his upbringing as part of a family who held a woman in a state of slavery. Her forthrightness in It Takes a Village is not because she is attempting to grapple with the atrocity in which she was complicit, but because she doesn’t see anything wrong with what happened. Whereas many of us would be appalled at the idea of having our meals served by unpaid black servants, Clinton found the whole situation quaintly traditional, and was favorably impressed by the financial benefits of not paying her staff. What others might call “a crime against human dignity,” Clinton referred to in It Takes a Village as simply “an unusual aspect of living at the governor’s mansion.”

The Clintons’ use of prison labour was only one small part of a long and horrifying record. Both Clintons, but especially Bill, have consistently manipulated black political interests while showing complete disregard for the humanity of African Americans. This stretches from Hillary’s perpetuation of a hideous racist myth about a wave of hyper-violent “superpredators” to Bill’s politically-motivated execution of a mentally disturbed black inmate.

Predictably, when people started to mention how disturbing it was that the Clintons had kept slaves, a few especially committed online Hillary fans began to issue impossibly contorted defenses, including blaming “DudeBros” for bringing the matter up and explaining that Hillary had tried to empathize with the convicts. (To see why the defenses fail, simply imagine how laughable they would seem if applied to any other situation of unpaid black labour, e.g. if a 19th century Southerner offered them.)

But let’s also be clear: the issue of prison labour isn’t just about the Clintons. I believe the Clintons have an indefensible record of behaviour toward black people. But the story of the Clintons in the Arkansas governor’s mansion also just illustrates how ubiquitous and taken-for-granted situations of slavery are. It’s very easy to think “But that couldn’t possibly be slavery, the state is just assigning inmates to an interesting work detail.” Yet if we examine the facts critically, it’s hard to see how it could be anything else. Prison labor doesn’t seem like slavery because it no longer displays some of the imagery associated with slavery in our minds, such as the whippings and the auction blocks. But we’re still dealing with a situation in which people are working by compulsion rather than choice, and are threatened with violence if they leave. They are leased to corporations, as if they are property. The auction block may be gone, but the core aspect of slavery is not that people are bought and sold. Rather, it’s about the kind of dominance that is asserted over them. (After all, slavery can exist even if one party has a monopoly on slave-owning. It’s the forced labour and the experience of the slave that counts, not the trading element.)

Of course, one could draw a distinction between “slavery” (in which a person asserts all rights over a human being, including the right to sell them and their children and to take their life) and “involuntary servitude” (in which a person is simply forced to work), a distinction such as the Thirteenth Amendment contemplates. But “involuntary servitude” immediately begins to sound like little more than a euphemism for slavery, and many of the situations that modern anti-slavery advocates would consider to be slavery—such as that perpetrated by Alex Tizon‘s family—do not necessarily include people being murdered and having their children sold. (Though they sometimes do.) It is important never to minimize the distinct horrors of early American slavery, but the term also applies to situations in which the victims are treated comparatively “well,” and which are not characterized by all of the worst features of the pre-Civil War South. Thus I do think it’s fair to classify prison labour as a form of enslavement. Degrees of force obviously vary, but since the Angola prison plantation today looks exactly the same as it did in the 19th century, I believe the word helps us appreciate the evils of mass incarceration rather than diminishing the evils of the antebellum era.

The Clinton slavery controversy should not really be about the Clintons. It’s the prison labor system as a whole that is rotten, and they were only two especially amoral beneficiaries of it. Today, our attention should be focused on the cotton-pickers of Louisiana and the scores of other modern-day slaves. This is not a mere pathology of the Clintons, but a pathology of the country we all inhabit. And it is not just a single noxious political family that is complicit. We all are.


Related Topics:

Obama and Clinton brought slavery to Libya*

The Clinton-Silsby Trafficking Scandal and the Media Cover-Up*

FBI to Release Evidence on Clinton Child Sex Scandal*

Media Caught Covering Up Clinton’s Ongoing Looting Of Haiti*

Hurricane Matthew and the Clinton Foundation Theft from Haiti*

U.S. Taxpayers Funded Clinton’s Private Email Servers through ‘Former Presidents Act’*

Husband of Prosecutor Investigating Bill Clinton for Child Sex Charges Gunned Down*

Clinton Body Count in Six Weeks*

What Hillary Clinton Did To Haiti Should Scare any Voter*

Clintons Threatened Attorney General with Her Life*

Assassination of Top U.S. Democratic Party Official Leads to FBI Capture of Clinton “Hit Team”*

The Day Hillary Clinton Was Put Way Above The Law”*

Hillary Clinton the Career Criminal*

Clinton’s Emails Reveals a Sunni-Shiite War Would be Good for Israel and the West*

The Clinton’s Eugenics Agenda in Haiti*

Hillary Clinton and the Ex-Im Bank Financing of the World’s Largest Coal Plants in South Africa*

Haiti Loses another Foul Clinton Picked President*

Assassination Hit list Revealed in Hillary Clinton’s Emails*

The Clintons Treat Haiti as Their Own Vassal State*

U.S. Flag Falls under Pressure of Deceit at Clinton Rally*

Haiti and the Profoundly Silent Chelsea Clinton*

The Role of CIA-base in Libya Made Apparent from Clintons Bombshell*

Tomatoes and Shoes for Clinton


Virtually Indestructible Rogue GMO Grass Threatens Environment, Wildlife and Industry*

Virtually Indestructible Rogue GMO Grass Threatens Environment, Wildlife and Industry*

The U.S. seems unable to run out of things that could go wrong…

By Carolanne Wright

The USDA has announced genetically-engineered Kentucky Bluegrass will not be subjected to federal regulation and oversight. Developed by Scotts Miracle-Gro, the largest U.S. retailer of grass seed, the herbicide-resistant grass was specifically engineered to withstand massive amounts of Roundup — a herbicide created by Monsanto, which has experienced significant public backlash in recent years due to a World Health Organization report that classified its main ingredient, glyphosate, as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

While the USDA decision allows Scotts to sell the grass seed intended for lawns without government approval, the company previously ran into problems when they conducted field trials with another type of genetically modified grass — creeping bentgrass — for golf courses. Considering the earlier GM grass had escaped and spread into the wild on several occasions during these trials, the green light by the USDA for unregulated sale of Kentucky Bluegrass is disturbing — and has critics of genetically engineered crops up in arms.

Biotech Industry Side-Stepping Regulation

“It’s a blatant end-run around regulatory oversight.” ~ George Kimbrell, senior lawyer at the Center for Food Safety

Some, like Margaret Mellon, director of the food and environment program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, believe the USDA decision on Kentucky Bluegrass will open the door for other companies to follow suit, essentially rendering the Agriculture Department “out of the game of regulation.”

The crux of the issue involves the rules pertaining to pathogens and parasites in genetically modified crops. Normally, GMO plants are created by inserting a foreign gene using a bacterium that’s known to cause disease in plants. But Scotts intentionally avoided using any substance from plant pests in the creation of their GM bluegrass. The herbicide resistance gene and the genetic on-switch came from other plants and were fired into the grass’s DNA with a gene gun, rather than being carried in by a bacterium.

In September 2010, the company sent a letter to the USDA, arguing that, because of how the grass was created, it shouldn’t be subject to regulation. Not only did the USDA agree with Scotts, but they also refused to regulate the bluegrass as a noxious weed, as requested by the Center for Food Safety.

Apparently, Scotts learned its lesson from its creeping bentgrass (which does contain plant pest material) misadventure. The USDA had sat on the fence for 14 years, refusing to deregulate the grass, citing environmental concerns. However, the agency suddenly changed its stance and quickly dropped all regulations for bentgrass seed in January, 2017.

Scotts was also fined $500,000 in 2007 when bentgrass established itself in the wild after escaping field test sites in central Oregon. Now, the grass has been found growing in southern Oregon, presumably from a test growing site in Idaho. Since Oregon is one of the top grass seed producers in the world, contamination by GMO grass is poised to have devastating consequences for the industry, as well as organic grassfed dairy producers and ranchers.

GMO Grass Field Trials Gone Wrong

“After more than a decade of unsuccessful efforts to eradicate the genetically modified grass it created and allowed to escape, lawn and garden giant Scotts Miracle-Gro now wants to step back and shift the burden to Oregonians and Idahoans.” ~ Jeff Manning, Oregon Live

The altered grass — which is difficult to kill because it’s been modified to withstand heavy applications of Roundup — escaped from test fields in Parma, where it subsequently took root in nearby areas of Idaho and Oregon. Surprisingly, the genetically modified grass began growing in eastern Oregon’s Malheur County, after jumping the Snake River from the test fields in Parma. There are also fears of contamination in the Willamette Valley, the region known as the “grass seed capital of the world” — with a billion-dollar-a-year industry at stake.

“Imagine I had a big, sloppy, nasty Rottweiler, and you lived next door in your perfectly manicured house,” said Bill Buhrig, an Oregon State University extension agent in Malheur County. “Then I dump the dog in your backyard, I take off and now it’s your problem.”

In light of the uncontrollable nature of the grass, the USDA’s deregulation decision is alarming to say the least. Both the Oregon and Idaho’s Departments of Agriculture are against deregulation, as is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which believes there’s a strong chance the commercialization of the grass could drive endangered species to extinction. One example is the Fender’s Blue Butterfly, unique to the Willamette Valley. Critical habitat of the insect would be severely threatened by the grass.

Moreover, scientists from Oregon State University and the Environmental Protection Agency discovered that the GM grass had crossed with wild grasses, passing along its Roundup resistance.

The more a chemical is used consistently, the more likely that somebody’s weeds will become resistant. That’s standard, agreed-upon science,” said Douglas Gurian-Sherman of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“The way that Roundup is used because of transgenic crops exacerbates that problem.”

Currently, we’re seeing a major threat to agriculture because of these virtually indestructible “superweeds”, spawned by excessive use of the herbicide. Monsanto’s Roundup is already the most widely-used herbicide in the world — the commercialization of GM grass will inevitably push these numbers higher, which is exactly what we don’t need.

Numerous researchers have classified the herbicide as the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment, where it has been linked to a range of health disorders — including cancer, Parkinson’s disease and autism.

Beyond the environmental and health implications, many are concerned about the impact GM grass will have on the organic dairy and grassfed beef industry.

“As these seeds spread and more and more grass takes up that genetic trait, we’ll find organic farmers who want to grass feed their beef, can’t do it because their grass is genetically modified, which is prohibited in organic standards,” said Bill Duesing of the Northeast Organic Farming Association. “GMOs are pollution with a life of its own.” [source]


Related Topics:

Monsanto Has Lost $11 Million As Indian Cotton Farmers Begin To Use Indigenous Seed*

Alarming Amount of Glyphosates in the Foods you Eat*

Insects Ravages Monsanto GMO Cotton*

USDA to Approve ‘Agent Orange’ Crops!

Pakistan Death by GM Contamination*

Scientists Warn “Supercharged” GMOs Could be Used as Bio-weapons*

Super Salmonella Bug Spreading Across Europe

Mark of the “Beast”? Unique Patient Identifier (UPI) – Medical System’s New Gateway to Completely Control our Lives?

Mark of the “Beast”? Unique Patient Identifier (UPI) – Medical System’s New Gateway to Completely Control our Lives?

Big Brother is ready to watch you as you hop from doctor to doctor, treatment to treatment, and you have reason to be worried. Action Alert!

Congress has moved us one step closer to establishing a unique patient identifier (UPI) system. The UPI is meant to act like a passport into the healthcare system and to aid healthcare institutions in matching patients with their medical records.

A unique number assigned to every American that gives access to that person’s full medical records to every doctor, hospital, researcher, and public health department in the country. What could go wrong?

If this sounds ominous to you, you’re not alone. This all started with the passage of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA, which required Health and Human Services (HHS) to issue every citizen a UPI. The Act, which allegedly protected patient privacy, actually gave legal access to your records without your knowledge to an estimated 800,000 parties. After a public outcry, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) added language to a spending bill in 1998 prohibiting federal funds from being used to develop UPIs. This language has prevented the development of UPI—until now.

Now, President Trump has signed a bill that makes federal funds available to aid the private sector in developing a “patient-matching strategy.”

The public has demonstrated strong opposition to UPI. Polling has showed that 88% of Americans oppose requiring all patient medical records to be stored in a national computerized database over their lifetime; 78% said that it is very important that no one have access to their medical information without their permission. This desire for privacy is severely undermined now that Rep. Paul’s prohibition has been eliminated.

It would be hard to enumerate all the possibilities for abuse and discrimination with UPI. Medical records can include demographic data, genetic information, family histories, treatments, personal comments, hospitalizations, and lifestyle information. Putting all of this in one place makes it ripe for identity thieves and other criminals—a trend that is already skyrocketing with electronic health records. It could give the government an opportunity to coerce individuals into getting all the CDC-recommended vaccines. Moreover, it could make it more difficult to avoid being an involuntary research subject.

The bottom line is that a person’s medical information is among the most sensitive information there is, and is meant only for that patient and his or her doctor. We must oppose this latest government intrusion into our private lives.

Action Alert! Tell Congress to immediately repeal the appropriations language that instructs HHS to work with the private sector to develop a “patient-matching strategy.” Please send your message immediately.


Related Topics:

RFID Monitoring and DNA Profiles Unite*

Implant RFID Chip Technology in Students without Parental Consent*

Doctors Tell How Sex Traffickers are Implanting Microchips in Children*

House Passes Bill Allowing Americans to Be Tracked Via Microchips*

Australia, First Country to Begin Microchipping Its Population with RFID Implants in the Human Body*

Bill Gates’ Population Control Microchip*

NSA’s Medical Intelligence Hit List*


Brazil Court Continues to Delay Case That Could Unseat Temer*

Brazil Court Continues to Delay Case That Could Unseat Temer*

Michel Temer’s grip on power after being installed last year, through an impeachment process widely condemned as a group, is increasingly slipping. | Photo: Reuters

Temer is increasingly under pressure to resign, while court processes threaten to further jeopardize his executive power.

As multiple corruption scandals continue to swirl around Brazilian President Michel Temer and his government, the country’s top electoral court has re-launched a case that could remove the president from office over alleged illegal financing in his 2014 campaign as running mate to former President Dilma Rousseff.

The court entered its third day of sessions Thursday after deciding Wednesday to delay the final decision of whether or not to accept allegations that could lead to Temer’s removal from office.

The delays are in line with analysts’ predictions that the process could take weeks or even months as several judges have requested more time to study the case to continue the hearings. The final ruling, which does not have a deadline, could leave Brazil without a president for the second time in just over a year after the impeachment of former President Dilma Rousseff, a process widely condemned as a parliamentary coup.

Meanwhile, the government has said it is certain that Temer will be cleared of all charges by the court. The Senate-imposed president, whose approval rating has fallen to 8%, has said he will not step down despite widespread calls for his resignation as corruption allegations continue to come to light.

Just hours ahead of the scheduled start of the hearing Tuesday, Brazil’s federal police sent Temer Monday an interrogation document with a list of 82 questions as part of a separate investigation probing the president over accusations of corruption, organized crime and obstruction of justice.

Initially, Temer had 24 hours to respond to the questions, a deadline that ended Tuesday afternoon at 4:30 p.m. local time.

But his lawyers requested an extension as they argued it was “absolutely impossible to demand a manifestation of the President of the Republic in the short term of 24 hours.” The new deadline is set for Friday afternoon 5:00 p.m. local time.

As the election financing case moves forward and other corruption allegations continue to crash down around the president, protesters gathered outside the federal court in Brasilia to demand Temer’s resignation and call for direct elections to choose the next president of Brazil.

The accusations stem from an explosive wiretap, reported May 17, in which Temer was heard appearing to give his approval to bribes to buy the silence of the jailed former president of the lower house of Congress, Eduardo Cunha, the chief mastermind behind the impeachment of Dilma Rousseff last year and a powerful witness in government corruption cases.

The conversation was recorded by Joesley Batista, chairman of JBS, the largest meatpacking company in the world, which was also involved in a large corruption scandal for bribing Brazilian politicians, as part of a bid to win a plea bargain deal with prosecutors.

The bribes were intended to keep Cunha silent about embarrassing secrets that could jeopardize the legitimacy of Temer’s presidency. In the leaked wiretap, Temer is heard telling Batista about the payments: “Look, you’ve got to keep that up.”

Protesters with face masks of Brazil’s politicians. Photo: Reuters


Protest against Temer in Sao Paulo. Photo: Reuters



Police patrol in front of the federal court in Brasilia. Photo: Reuters



The president said the recording wasn’t proof of wrongdoing. He said that he didn’t report the bribery references to authorities because he did not believe them. The case was delayed as authorities investigated the source of the audio.

Attorney General Rodrigo Janot has accused Temer of corruption, criminal organization and obstruction of justice as a result of the wiretap. Temer separately faces accusations of irregular campaign financing and has also been named in the central corruption investigations, known as Operation Car Wash, probing a bribery scheme in the state-run oil campany, Petrobras.

According to the Brazilian Constitution, if Temer resigns or is dismissed, Congress must approve an indirect election in 30 days to choose the person who will continue the electoral period that Rousseff began in 2015 and that ends on Jan. 1, 2019. Tuesday’s electoral financing trial could unseat the president, or he could face an impeachment process over corruption accusations. Both processes would likely be lengthy.

Brazilians have taken to the streets to demand Temer’s resignation and for immediate direct elections to be held to allow Brazilian voters to elect the next president. Temer has reiterated that he will not be resigning.

According to a new poll released Monday by the country’s largest labor union, known as the CUT, nine out of 10 Brazilians prefer direct general elections and 75 percent reject Temer’s administration.


Related Topics:

Brazil’s Temer Defies Calls to Step Down over Wiretap Scandal*

Brazil’s Key Corruption Judge Who was Killed in a Plane Crash Demands Investigation and Protection from Temer*

Key Temer Aid Resigns as Scandal Closes in*

Canadian Company to Construct Brazil’s Largest Open-Pit Gold Mine—in the Heart of the Amazon*

Brazil Coup Architect Eduardo Cunha Sentenced to 15 Years for Corruption*

Brazil’s Coup Government Moves to Scrap Environmental Regulations*

Brazil Just Approved 20-Year Spending Freeze to Punish the Poor*

Washington Rape of Brazil Begins*

Route of Coup against Venezuela Begins at ExxonMobil*

Route of Coup against Venezuela Begins at ExxonMobil*

By William Serafino

Zamora Plan

It’s April 18. The political climate is defined by a highly confrontational and warmongering tone of the Venezuelan opposition the day before a national sit-in (plantón) where, once again, violent acts were to be expected: destruction and confrontation with law enforcement.

President Nicolas Maduro delivers a speech in the evening from Miraflores Presidential Palace. Along with Minister of Defense, General in Chief Vladimir Padrino Lopez, Vice President Tareck El Aissami and National Assembly member Diosdado Cabello announce the Zamora Plan to guarantee order and security in the country.

The decision was prompted after a U.S. State Department statement was released the same evening. The text openly supported the violence generated by clashes affiliated to the opposition agenda during the “plantón,” trying to intimidate key players of Venezuelan military and judicial institutions to allow these events so that they would avoid being the subject of incoming sanctions.

Among other important elements, the text pin pointed — without any evidence — the security apparatus, specifically the scientific police and the intelligence agency, of using torture and the state security forces to endorse the incursion of “collectives to repress the demonstrators.”

The anti-Chavista “planton” on April 19 left four people dead in different states of the country, including a sergeant of the National Guard in San Antonio de Los Altos, Miranda state.

Who is the head of the U.S. Department of State?

The current U.S. secretary of state — the foreign policy chief — is Rex Tillerson, a former general manager at ExxonMobil. Tillerson was the top manager of the company when former President Hugo Chavez made the decision to nationalize the Orinoco Oil Belt where the U.S. corporation had major projects.

Under Tillerson’s command, the U.S. company decided not to renegotiate its oil projects like the one belonging to Cerro Negro in Monagas with state-owned PDVSA, according to the new directives after nationalization. ExxonMobil sued PDVSA at the ICSID — the World Bank court to resolve investment disputes — seeking compensation in the amount of US$20 billion back in 2007.

After nearly a decade-long legal battle, reviews and appeals to various verdicts, on March 10, 2017, the ICSID decided that the lawsuit of ExxonMobil contained irregularities and freed PDVSA of paying any damages. The northern oil company suffered perhaps the biggest legal defeat of its history with this ruling in favour of the Venezuelan state.

Exxon Brand Politicians

ExxonMobil — as well as any other large international company from the United States — contracts politicians to exert influence within the structure of U.S. government according to their interests. So-called lobbying is legal in that country, and companies seeking to modify or pass laws for their benefit (tax exemption, removal of regulations, federal government subsidies, etc.) pay large sums of money to politicians (a large quantity of Republicans in the case of ExxonMobil) and lobby firms.

According to Open Secrets, in the 2016 cycle, the oil company invested financial resources to endorse more than a dozen politicians for these purposes. These included Donald Trump (current U.S. president, who appointed Rex Tillerson as secretary of state) with US$25,461, Marco Rubio with US$17,701 and Ed Royce with US$7,500.

Senator Marco Rubio from Florida and California Representative Ed Royce have not only introduced sanctions against Venezuela a key point in their legislative agenda, they have also met — on several occasions — with Venezuelan opposition leaders — such as Luis Florido, Lilian Tintori, Freddy Guevara, among others — to show them political support and diplomatic endorsement to the overthrowing agenda they lead on the ground.

Law S.3117: Financial support to Venezuelan opposition

According to Open Secrets, in 2016 ExxonMobil was one of the companies that paid (the website does not specify the amount) to lobby for the law S.3117 (Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs of the Law of Allocations of 2017), which establishes the funds and political objectives of the operations of the Department of State in key countries for the United States.

Money leaked to agencies such as the NED or USAID are based on that law. On May 3, 2017, under the leadership of Speaker of the House of Representatives Paul Ryan (another politician financed by ExxonMobil in 2016 with US$14,025), the law was sanctioned.

According to the official page of the Congress of the USA, the sponsor of this bill was South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who had the duty of lobbying for its execution according to the guidelines of its financiers.

The Senate report on the law highlights the importance of the U.S. State Department funding Venezuelan opposition groups (under the umbrella of “civil society” NGOs) with US$5,500,000 and other additional funds to bring political and economic reforms in Venezuela. At the same time, it stresses the importance that “regional organizations play in promoting reforms in Venezuela, in particular, the Organization of American States,” in addition to increasing the support of the Energy Security Initiative in the Caribbean to influence Negatively in the political and oil alliances of our country with the Caribbean.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson commented on April 19: “We are closely watching what happens in that country and working with others, especially through the OAS, to communicate our concerns to them,” surely referring to Uruguayan Luis Almagro as liaison and key operator of the American strategy for pressure within the organization.

The Caribbean bloc has played a key role in preventing U.S. allies from that organization definitively consolidate the international isolation of Venezuela.

But the attack on Venezuela reveals a geopolitical key: The U.S. urgently need to overthrow Petrocaribe not only to break the Venezuela’s international alliances but to transform the Caribbean into a powerful port to import liquefied U.S. gas (ExxonMobil is one of the leading exporters), leading to the continent’s energy and geopolitical domination. The coup against Venezuela is a maneuver to ensure the continent as an area of exclusive influence on the penetration of Russian and Chinese capital and investment.

Graham, during Juan Manuel Santos’ official visit to the White House in May, publicly offered war weapons to Colombia both to dissuade Venezuela and to prepare the neighboring country for an eventual “humanitarian emergency” or armed conflict.

Interest in Venezuelan Oil

As discussed previously, ExxonMobil’s oil reserves have suffered large reductions as a result of sanctions against Russia and the aging of strategic wells in the Middle East, a reality that affects its market capitalization and its dominance over the oil market.

This urgency leads ExxonMobil to seek extralegal procedures to conquer the huge reserves of oil and gas located in the Essequibo using the Guyanese government, an area claimed by Venezuela as part of its territorial sovereignty at the U.N.

But without a doubt, the incessant search for oil and gas in that territory expresses the superior objective of re-colonizing the Orinoco Oil Belt, in the format of “oil opening” that dominated Venezuela during the last stage of the 20th century. Conquering and securing the world’s largest oil reserves as a source of full supply, in a context of aggressive competition between oil companies and their geopolitical interests, is an increasingly urgent need the U.S. oil company wants to satisfy.

The crystallization of regime change is needed. Last month, an important group of experts from the think tank Council of Foreign Relations elaborated a set of recommendations to the U.S. government within the framework of this purpose.

In short, the viable options for a change of government in Venezuela proposed by the CFR (which has shaped U.S. foreign policy since the beginning of the 20th century) are to increase sanctions against key Chavista leaders, to push diplomatically from the OAS using neighboring countries such as Colombia and Brazil, and to demand that China and Russia withdraw their support of the Venezuelan government to intensify isolation.

The Trump Administration has fulfilled the vast majority of the CFR proposals as political routes to support the coup d’état agenda in Venezuela. The sanctions against the Venezuelan Vice President Tareck El Aissami, the State Department’s pressures from the OAS and the latest sanctions against the Supreme Court are a sign of this commitment, or at least that the CFR does indeed influence certain decisions of the White House. The CFR is also funded by ExxonMobil.

Threat of sanctions against PDVSA

On Sunday, June 4, Reuters leaked comments from alleged White House officials regarding sanctions being assessed against the national oil sector.

According to Reuters, collaborators of President Donald Trump have been asked to present recommendations to sanction the Venezuelan oil sector “if necessary.”

Given that 95% of Venezuela’s foreign exchange earnings come from PDVSA, vital resources for the payment of foreign debt and imports of food and medicines, a possible oil embargo or, in its absence, sanctions that prevent oil exports to the U.S. and investment of foreign companies (threatened with suspension of licenses to operate in U.S. territory), would be a strong blow to the economic recovery plan of the Venezuelan government and the population at large by paralyzing an important income source.

A measure that could be politically costly to the U.S. (striving to convince the public that all efforts are for the well-being of the Venezuelan population) and a reversal of its effects in practice in the medium term, considering most likely oil sales to China or India would increase significantly, at the moment 60 percent of PDVSA’s export destinations.

It is not by chance that these threats are leaked when the Venezuelan opposition’s capacity for mobilization is showing signs of burning out, street violence hasn’t been capitalized into political victories inside the country or before the international community. If this cycle of political recession increases, ExxonMobil would be pressured to take action on its own. After all, they are the owners of the circus and have invested resources that they do not intend to waste.

Closing (in progress)

According to a report by The Daily Beast in early April, top executives of ExxonMobil and Shell met in Washington in the hope that Nicolas Maduro would step down to start privatization projects of the world’s largest oil reserves. It is possible that Reuter’s leak has relation to these meetings and the decisions that would have been taken there.

The coup d’etat against Venezuela was not decided by the Venezuelan opposition but by the largest oil company on the planet; the framework of action of someone like Freddy Guevara or Julio Borges is limited to their condition of subordinates. If intervention by delegation fails, direct intervention (on an economic and financial scale) using positions of power and spheres of influence in the U.S. government, are even less visible.

The oil company, which truly executes the bulk of the maneuvers, has the U.S. secretary of state, a portfolio of right-wing representatives and senators — including Donald Trump — with influence in Congress and lobbying firms to impose its political and economic interests as a U.S. foreign policy against Venezuela.

In Venezuela, not only political power is disputed, but the organization of a new political, financial and energy geography on a continental and planetary scale, within highly belligerant political environment. The fall of Venezuela, for ExxonMobil, is fundamental for that disputed center of geopolitical gravity to distance itself from Russia and China, taking control in a region with the greatest natural and energetic resources of the planet.

Determining who the adversary is key to understanding what we are currently facing.


Related Topics:

World Bank to Reduce Venezuela Payout in Exxon Case*

Exxon Mobil-Norwegian Tanzanian Gas Deal Stopped in their Tracks!?*

Chevron and Exxon: The Criminals Behind Katrina*

Oil vs. Communities: Has the Chicken Come Home to Roost for ExxonMobil!

The Strategy behind Washington’s Destabilization of Venezuela*

Russia Helps Venezuela Fight Opposition’s ‘Economic War’*

Venezuela Oil Union Workers Back Maduro’s Constituent Assembly*

Tensions on the Rise As U.S. Announces Military Drills Near Venezuela*


We Have Met the Evil Empire and It Is Us*

We Have Met the Evil Empire and It Is Us*

By Gordon Duff

When I told my father, back in 1968, that I was joining the United States Marine Corps he responded: “I hope you aren’t going to claim you are doing this to defend your country. Nobody attacked us, look around, no Viet Cong here, this is Wall Street’s war like the last one and the one before it and the one before that.”

Everything my father predicted has come to pass, America as a deindustrialized police state with a clown in the White House, nothing new there. Anyone unaware that Eisenhower was a useless puppet as was Ford and Reagan and Bush 43 and the monstrosity we have now, deserves the America we have earned. His generation, those who grew up before the First World War, those who experienced the Great Depression with eyes open, they knew it was coming.

Life in America was pure injustice, the lash and the iron boot, despite the version of history we have been given by the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations who “re-invented” America and its history through taking control of public education in the late 1940s. You see, the multi-generational ignorance we bask in today is not unplanned. The threat represented by advances in communications and other technology was recognized and dealt with, utterly quashed at birth.

I recommend just a look at the Constitution itself. Why the “electoral college?” Few Americans know that the Senate was chosen, not elected, until the 20th century. Why two senators for states with no people? Why a Supreme Court? Those unaware that these unique aspects of America’s governmental organization need to read Charles Beard’s An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution (Columbia University Press, 1935).

There is nothing “democratic” about America and its government, the whole thing is a con. Election after election, every time Americans think they are voting to “drain the sewer” that Washington represents, only find themselves deeper in it. That was planned from the first also, but we are getting ahead of ourselves a bit.

Gordon’s roots in a lot of this go back to having a front row seat in what was really a fake war, and he never forgot it.


Today Americans are “defending democracy” in 6 dozen nations and, as predicted, invariably siding with tyrants, pushing a colonial agenda, there as bullies and thugs in uniform and doing so hiding behind the flag and the “honored dead.” I know this well because I was part of it.

When I served in Vietnam, there was no pretense that we were defending anything. Even in the elite combat unit I was in, the war itself was universally opposed as comic and absurd, it was impossible to miss. The Saigon government was beneath consideration, evil and corrupt, their military a useless pack of rabble compared to “the enemy,” the Viet Cong and NVA, relentless and highly motivated.

We were clearly fighting people who were defending their country from foreign invaders, the real enemy, “us.” Nations around the world are now doing the exact same thing and, under Trump, seemingly more each day.

The title statement is an amended quote from a 1960s-comic strip by Walt Kelly, called Pogo. It was famous once, used continually in one form or another. However, when American lost its sense of humor and began taking itself seriously, most likely sometime in the 1980s, all history, all balance, and certainly all real humor was forgotten. This is a boorish place. Let me explain.

For those of us who were born during the “post war baby boom,” the absurdity of patriotic rhetoric in response to the “red menace” poisoned our lives, polluted our educational experience, sickened our souls.

Even then, the reality of a government controlled by Wall Street was there to be seen. Higher education was unaffordable for all but the few, cities were dung heaps of filth and crime and America’s South was a land of starvation and poverty. Nearly half of all Americans lived in poverty, while the industrial workers of the North worked under conditions that made survival to retirement a pipe dream.

Every day my father would return from the Ford factory, describing 120-degree heat and air steeped in carcinogenic solvents. His friends and coworkers died in their 50s. By age 55, he had suffered half a dozen heart attacks and was on disability of $60 a month to support a family of 4. This is a common story, not an exception, this is how my generation grew up, mowing lawns, shoveling snow for money for shoes, working to support a family as early as 10. This is the American generation that went to Vietnam and it was the generation that taught the Pentagon that their games would not continue unopposed.

Angel Fire, NM


Today it’s different. The public questions little, those in the military question nothing. When America’s invading armies in Iraq and Afghanistan, under Bush never found WMDs or the massive underground terrorist fortresses Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld spoke of, what was the downside? Thousands of American military were killed over not just nothing but abject lies.

When billions in cash was stolen in both Iraq and Afghanistan, when 250,000 AK 47’s purchased by the U.S. government for the Iraqi military simply disappeared, nobody saw it. When Haliburton Corporation furnished the U.S. Army with drinking water taken unfiltered from the Euphrates River, one of the most polluted bodies of water on Earth, hundreds infected with Hepatitis and other diseases, nothing was said, certainly no congressional investigation, but the Pentagon was silent as well. Also silent were the troops in the field, silent then and still silent.

This is a huge change from Vietnam when those who returned home told everything.

Then again, back in 1969, I was a Marine, not a “war fighter” or a “warrior.” I made $100 a month, not $8000, I was fed 400 calories a day, not 7000, I had no PlayStation, no $400 boots and didn’t buy my combat gear from online outfitters. The life expectancy in a line unit was 3 months and nobody did year after year in a rifle squad as part of the “professional army.”

You know, with all that expensive gear and all that war fighter rhetoric, we still are beaten just as easily by poor people with broken weapons, poor people defending themselves against a foreign invader.

That part hasn’t changed, but back in 1969, we knew we had it coming. We still fought to survive, but we never fought to win. Win what? Nobody asks that anymore. Nobody ever asks “why?”


Related Topics:

War is a Racket

U.S. Soldiers Share the Truth about What “Fighting For Your Country” Actually Means*

Hundreds of Soldiers Resign from German Army*

50,000+ Okinawans Gather for anti-U.S. Military Rally after another Rape and Murder by U.S. Soldier*

U.S. Soldiers and Wikileaks Come Together to Tell the Truth about What’s Really Happening in the Middle East*

British Soldiers Throw War Medals to the Floor*

U.S. Soldiers Raped Boys in Front of Their Mothers*

U.S. Soldier: “The Real Terrorist Was Me and the Real Terrorism is This Occupation”

Saudi Commander and Soldiers Join Yemeni Forces*

Former Israeli Soldier Echoes the ISIS-Zionist Threat*

Ukrainian Soldiers Refuse to Kill their Own Flee to Russia*

U.S. Soldiers Raping Afghan Women*



World Loots Africa Over $41bn Each Year*

World Loots Africa Over $41bn Each Year*

According to this latest report, Africa ‘subsidizes’ the rest of the world to the tune of $41bn every year

By Amando Flavio

Africa is not poor, rather it’s being poorly managed. The traditional narrative about the continent, especially in the west that African countries are poor and only survive on western aid is not true, according to a new report.

In fact, this so-called aid is making Africa poorer. In 2014, a study conducted by a coalition of NGOs, and published by the Guardian, revealed that western countries use aid to hide the “sustained looting” of Africa.

The study showed that Africa loses nearly $60 billion a year through tax evasion, climate change mitigation, and the flight of profits earned by foreign multinational companies on the continent. The continent receives $134 billion each year in loans, foreign investment and development aid from western countries, but $192 billion leaves the continent each year, the 2014 study revealed.

A new report published by campaigners for social justice has confirmed what the 2014 study discovered.  According to this latest report, Africa ‘subsidizes’ the rest of the world to the tune of $41bn every year.

The study titled ‘Honest Accounts 2017’ was authored by Global Justice Now, the Jubilee Debt Campaign and other activists.  Just like the 2014 study, the researchers of this latest report compared money going in and out of Africa.

They discovered that the total amount going into sub-Saharan Africa (made up of 48 countries) each year is $161.6bn, while the total amount going out is $202.9bn. This leaves Africa a shortfall of $41.3bn.

The outflows included debt repayments by governments and the private sector, multinational company profits, the ‘brain drain’ effect, illegal logging, fishing and poaching, and costs associated with climate change. The researchers said all these activities milking Africa are carried out by Europeans, Americans and the wealthy from Asia.

According to details of the report, sub-Saharan countries in Africa received a total of $19.7bn in aid, but paid $18bn in debt repayments. This means aid entering Africa is not free, as it is being portrayed.

Africans living in the diaspora send about $32bn in personal remittances, but multinational companies took $32.4bn in profits and “illicit financial outflows” – linked to misreporting the value of imports and exports – totaled some $67.6bn, the report revealed.

Furthermore, illegal fishing on Africa’s waters, logging and the trade in endangered animals and plants by unscrupulous people from the rest of the world cost the continent an estimated $29bn every year.

Global Justice Now activist Aisha Dodwell said it is time for the world to stop the looting of Africa’s resources. She explained the looting has stalled development and increased poverty across Africa.

“There’s such a powerful narrative in Western societies that Africa is poor and that it needs our help. This research shows that what African countries really need is for the rest of the world to stop systematically looting them,” Aisha said.

Professor John Weeks of the School of Oriental and African Studies in the University of London, who has studied the exploitation of Africa by foreigners for 20 years now, said the report confirms the long-standing evidence that wealth was flowing out of Africa to other parts of the world, specifically to America and Europe.

“The greater part is legal, allowable as the result of deregulation of foreign exchange markets and weak central bank oversight and monitoring, all strongly encouraged by International Monetary Fund and World Bank lending policies,” he wrote in an email to The Independent.

The report has attracted attention in Africa. Many activists on the continent say they will press governments to implement policies to ensure that the future wealth of the continent benefits citizens and not foreigners.


Related Topics:

Hiding Africa’s Looted Funds and the Silence of Western Media*

Rothschild Billion Dollar Money Laundering Plot in Africa*

At the World Economic Forum-Africa Germany Pitched a Dubious New G20 Corporate Strategy*

World Bank Funds some of Africa’s most Notorious Land Grabs*

Leaked Trump Presidential Memo Would Free U.S. Companies to Buy Conflict Minerals from Central African Warlords*

E.U. Bullies its Way through an Reciprocal Trade Access in Africa*

Offshore Firm Helped Billionaires Plunder Africa*

BRICS Under Attack: NWO Tentacles Extending into South Africa*

Gates Foundation Gives Tulane U Millions to Curb African Population*