De nieuwe wereld orde

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door AEvanLoon

Gelooft u dan niet meer in de eeuwenoude samenzwering van de grote, supergeheime NWO-elite?
Bent u dan eindelijk wat redelijker geworden? Of is het bescheidener (nadat IlluSion... zo verstandig was om afstand te nemen van jouw esoterisch gedweep)?

Je zei dat we alle samenzweringen samennemen of te herleiden zijn tot één grote samenzwering. Dat hebben wij nooit gezegd. Niet alle samenzweringen zijn aan de NWO gerelateerd. Sommige staan er totaal los van, sommige hebben er in de verte "iets" mee te maken, en sommige zijn er echt mee verbonden.

Bovendien zie je het te karikaturaal. De NWO-elite is niet echt supergeheim. Ze is geheim in die zin dat de meeste mensen zich niet bewust zijn van hun bestaan en hun manipulaties, maar het is dus niet zo dat ze supergeheim zijn dat slecht enkelen het weten. Hun manipulaties en acties staan in ettelijke boeken beschreven en in principe kan iedereen het weten. Dat is hun sterkte, het onbesef van de massa.

[exodus]

Hier nog een stuk ivm Icke's visie ( en vele anderen) over negatieve entiteiten die de mensheid willen controleren. Met service to self wordt hier bedoeld het "negatieve pad", waarbij een entiteit volledig kan kiezen welke weg hij bewandeld. Service to self is alles voor zichzelf doen door manipulaties van andere entiteiten, dit in tegenstellling tot service to others. In metafysisch licht dat alles één is, beseft de negatieve entiteit dat service to self ook service is aan alles. De bewuste keuze tussen service to self of service to others markeert vanuit metafysisch oogpunt het einde van onschuldige fase van het goed/slecht zijn.

The negatively oriented being will be one who feels that it has found power that gives meaning to its existence precisely as the positive polarization does feel. This negative entity will strive to offer these understandings to other-selves, most usually by the process of forming the elite, the disciples, and teaching the need and rightness of the enslavement of other-selves for their own good. These other-selves are conceived to be dependent upon the self and in need of the guidance and the wisdom of the self.

As all, negative entities follow the Law of One observing free will. Contact is made with those who call. Those then upon the planetary sphere act much as do you to disseminate the attitudes and philosophy of their particular understanding of the Law of One which is service to self. These become the elite. Through these, the attempt begins to create a condition whereby the remainder of the planetary entities are enslaved by their free will.

[exodus]

Een professor die nog voor de U.S regering heeft gewerkt ivm de min of meer vergeten anthrax aanvallen na 9/11 zegt dat naar aalle waarschijnlijkheid de regering zelf achter die aanslagen zat. In het artikel worden alle feiten opgesomd die dit aanwijzen.

US Government Biological Weapons Legislator Says 2001 Anthrax Attacks Part Of Government Bio-warfare Program


Expert says FBI covered up the plot to attack Congress which may have been perpetrated by the same people who carried out the 9/11 attacks

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, December 13, 2006

The real culprits behind the 2001 anthrax attack on Congress were most likely US government scientists at the army's Ft. Detrick, MD., bioterrorism lab according to a former government biological weapons legislator and University of Illinois Professor.

Dr Franics A. Boyle says the FBI covered up these facts and has also quite clearly stated that he doubts the official government story that 19 arabs with boxcutters perpetrated the attacks of 9/11.

Boyle is a leading American professor, practitioner and advocate of international law. He was responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. He served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International (1988-1992), and represented Bosnia- Herzegovina at the World Court. Professor Boyle teaches international law at the University of Illinois, Champaign. He holds a Doctor of Law Magna Cum Laude as well as a Ph.D. in Political Science, both from Harvard University.

"I believe the FBI knows exactly who was behind these terrorist anthrax attacks upon the United States Congress in the Fall of 2001, and that the culprits were US government-related scientists involved in a criminal US government bio-warfare program," Boyle says in his new book Biowarfare and Terrorism.

Only a "handful" of scientists had the means to carry out the attack, yet the FBI ordered the destruction of the anthrax culture collection at Ames, IA., from which the Ft. Detrick lab got its pathogens. Boyle states that only top level scientists with access to "moonsuits" that enabled them to safely process and manufacture super-weapons-grade anthrax could have carried out the attacks.

"The trail of genetic evidence would have led directly back to a secret but officially-sponsored US government biowarfare program that was illegal and criminal" , Boyle said. However, impartial scientists were not allowed to perform genetic reconstruction of the anthrax found in letters mailed to Senators Daschle (D-S.D.) and Patrick Leahy, (D -Vt.) in late 2001.

We have previously exposed how leading members of the Bush administration and White House staff were on the anthrax-treating antibiotic Cipro up to six weeks before the attacks occurred. It is also documented that the anthrax strain used was military grade. This was widely reported in 2002 in publications such as the New Scientist. However, this fact has recently been totally changed with the FBI now suggesting that common anthrax, not military grade anthrax was used.

The whole thing "appears to be a cover-up orchestrated by the FBI." according to Dr Boyle.

Boyle goes on to inquire, "Could the real culprits behind the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001, and the immediately following terrorist anthrax attacks upon Congress ultimately prove to be the same people? Could it truly be coincidental that two of the primary intended victims of the terrorist anthrax attacks - Senators Daschle and Leahy - were holding up the speedy passage of the pre-planned USA Patriot Act ... an act which provided the federal government with unprecedented powers in relation to US citizens and institutions?"

Clearly Dr Boyle has a hard time believing what the government says happened on 9/11.

The anthrax attacks cleverly (or coincidentally if you choose to believe) coincided with the terrorist atrocities and sent Congress into shut down for days. Immediately after re-convening the liberty smashing PATRIOT Act was passed without even being read by members.

In addition, the Bush administration moved to begin planning a major $10 billion expansion of the bioweapons labs at Fort Detrick. Residents in the area have fiercely campaigned against the expansion.

In a forward to Boyle's book, Dr. Jonathan King, Professor of Molecular Biology at M.I.T. and a founder of the Council for Responsible Genetics, says the government's "growing bioterror programs represent a significant emerging danger to our own population."

Those who cannot fathom how or why the government could kill almost 3000 citizens, including police and firefighters, on 9/11 need look no further than the anthrax attacks, which provide solid proof that criminal elements within the structure of authority are in operation and don't give a damn about who they kill to achieve their goals of social control.

There are countless examples of the US government having illegally tested and used bio-weapons on its own citizens. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, The Program F fluoride study, Project SHAD which we are now learning used live toxins and chemical poisons on American servicemen on American soil, spraying clouds of bacteria over San Francisco, releasing toxic gases into the New York subway, holding open-air biological and chemical weapons tests in at least four states in the 1960s, the list goes on.

The Pentagon's biowarfare program has long been in operation and US citizens have never been spared from experimentation. To get more of a taste for just how hideous the secret biowarfare program is, click here and go to Rense.com, which has a lengthy (but by no means a comprehensive) list of previous known bio-experiments conducted on the population by the criminal elite.

[KrisKras]

http://www.dagnyscloset.com/content/view/103/3/

Immortal Technique - The Cause of Death

zeer goed nummer over NWO.

[parcifal]

Van de Vrt-website vandaag :
Complottheorïen blijken vals na een (echt) onderzoek.
Wat zullen de 'believers' hierop zeggen?
Alweer een gefaked onderzoek met honderden agenten die dubbelspel spelen (net zoals de fransen) zeker?

"De dood van Diana was géén complot"

do 14/12/06 - De dood van prinses Diana in 1997 was een tragisch ongeluk, veroorzaakt door haar dronken chauffeur die bovendien te snel reed. Van samenzweringstheorieën is geen sprake. Dat besluit de Britse politie na een onderzoek dat drie jaar lang heeft geduurd.

De 36-jarige prinses Diana overleed op 31 augustus 1997 in een tunnel in Parijs, samen met haar vriend Dodi Al Fayed en haar chauffeur Henri Paul.
Al snel doken geruchten op dat de populaire prinses om het leven was gekomen na een moordcomplot of een samenzwering.
Maar de Franse politie stelde in een eerder onderzoek al dat er van die complottheorieën niets aan is. De Britse politie heeft die stelling nu bevestigd.


"Geen sprake van een samenzwering"

De Britse speurders hebben drie jaar lang zo'n 20.000 documenten en 1.500 getuigenverklaringen bestudeerd en 400 interviews gedaan.

Daaruit besluiten ze dat Diana om het leven kwam in een tragisch ongeluk dat veroorzaakt werd door haar chauffeur Henri Paul.

Die had twee maal het toegelaten alcoholpercentage in zijn bloed en reed met een snelheid van ongeveer 100 kilometer per uur. In de verkeerstunnel mag maar half zo snel gereden worden.
"Er is geen sprake van samenzwering en moordcomplotten", zegt Lord Stevens, die het onderzoek heeft geleid. "Tijdens ons onderzoek was er ook geen enkele poging om informatie achter te houden."
"Ik hoop dat de publicatie van dit rapport kan helpen om een moeilijke periode af te sluiten."
De prinsen William en Harry hebben laten weten dat ze hopen dat er nu aan einde komt aan alle speculaties over de dood van hun moeder.

Diana was niet zwanger

Mohammed Al Fayed, de vader van Diana's vriend Dodi, heeft altijd geloofd in een complot van de Britse koninklijke familie, die zou willen vermijden dat Diana en Dodi zouden trouwen.

Ook nu nog blijft hij bij die stelling. Hij noemt de bevindingen van het rapport "schandalig" en suggereert dat Lord Stevens gechanteerd werd door de Britse inlichtingendiensten, opdat hij kwaad opzet zou uitsluiten.
Al Fayed, de eigenaar van warenhuis Harrods, heeft ook altijd beweerd dat Diana net voor haar dood zwanger was. Ook dat wordt door het Britse onderzoek tegengesproken.

[lezer]

Is er een link met de NWO?

[Heftruck]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door AEvanLoon

Bouw eens een toren van 100 verdiepingen en haal halverwege die toren over een hoogte van 3 ?* 4 aangrenzende verdiepingen resp. 15 % ("externe") en 23 % (interne) dragende kolommen weg. Steek vervolgens die opengereten verdiepingen in brand en let op wat er met uw gebouw gebeurt.

1. De branden bevonden zich in de bovenste verdiepingen (op iets van een 72% en 86%)
2. Het gaat inderdaad om 15% en 23% van een relatief klein aantal verdiepingen op een basis van 110 verdiepingen, als dusdanig verwacht ik dat je begrijpt hoe relatief klein de beschadiging is?
3. Blijkbaar faal je te begrijpen hoe de constructie van de WTC-torens werkte (ik heb het specifiek over de distributie van gewicht en krachten).

Meer heb ik eigenlijk niet te zeggen. Ik ben het zowat beu die dingen opnieuw en opnieuw te moeten posten. Men zou verwachten dat je je op zijn minst informeert. (Overigens moet je mij eens uitleggen hoe je verdiepingen die "opengereten" zijn in brand steekt?)

[Heftruck]

Overigens:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door John Skilling, Chief Engineer van de WTC torens:

For the perimeter columns: "live loads on these colums can be increased more than 2000% before failure occurs."

"One could cut away all the first story columns of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100mph wind from any direction"

He says, “Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel [from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed.” But, he says, “The building structure would still be there.”

“The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) travelling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.”

[parcifal]

Interessant wat Heftruck hier schrijft.
Speciaal voor hem, een link naar een paper van F. R. Greening die
op (vrij) eenvoudige wijze de fysica achter de instorting van WTC 1 en 2 uitlegt.
Ik heb het gelezen en er geen fouten kunnen in vinden.
Ik nodig bijgevolg Heftruck et alii uit om dezelfde oefening te maken.

Hier vindt je de paper :
http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

Uit de conclusions op pagina 21 :

An analysis of the energetics of the WTC collapse events has shown that the kinetic energy of the aircraft collisions and the subsequent gravitational energy released by the descending blocks of floors were quite sufficient to destroy the twin towers in the manner observed. The use of explosive devices in either of the two towers is not necessary to explain the collapse events and is considered to be highly unlikely

En nog een uitsmijter (van pagina 20) :

One final comment with regard to the causes of the WTC collapse is worth making. It has been stated many times that the WTC towers were designed to withstand the impact of a commercial aircraft with the weight and speed specifications of a Boeing 707 or 767. Indeed, a few observers find solace in the fact that both towers survived the impacts for as long as they did. This has led some commentators to assume that simply because the WTC towers were to be plane crash resistant their collapse been triggered by explosives or some other destructive devise. The logical flaw in this argument stems from the difference between what one may claim to be true and what subsequently proves to be true. Evidently the design calculations on which the crashworthiness of the WTC was based were in error. The infamous Titanic disaster was also an accident that "could not happen". However, even though the Titanic failed to live up to its "unsinkable" billing, no one has seriously proposed that its loss was due to explosives hidden somewhere on board the ill-fated ship. Unfortunately the twin towers had an Achilles’ heel that was finally revealed to the world on September 11th, 2001.

(Btw: @ steve, die 510 miljoen kilo per WTC -toren komt uit dit rapport, pag. 23 waar een overzichtelijke lijst van gegevens wordt gegeven over de torens).

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal

Van de Vrt-website vandaag :
Complottheorïen blijken vals na een (echt) onderzoek.
Wat zullen de 'believers' hierop zeggen?
Alweer een gefaked onderzoek met honderden agenten die dubbelspel spelen (net zoals de fransen) zeker?

Voor iedereen die zich een beetje informeerd over de zaak is die uitspraak gewoon belachelijk. Maarja, wat had je verwacht, dat ze gingen zeggen dat het een complot was en verder spitten en op hooggeplaatsen en het wespennest van intelligence agencies stuiten etc... zo'n schandaal kan men zich niet veroorloven.

[Pindar]

tjonge jonge wat een discussie weer hierboven
Ja, je kan best alles wegredeneren als je wilt, maar zoals we eerder gezegd hebbenis logica alleen niet voldoende, veel mensen weten op een bepaald niveau dat
een en ander hier op deze aardkloot niet klopt.Maar blijkbaar zijn de non-believers wel bereid te discussiereen over wat hier staat (op een oneerlijke manier btw maar daar ga ik verder niet op in, maar kijk ook maar eens naar de discussies van en met illusion.) Maar ik heb bij geen enkele 'non-believer' ook maar een greintje moeite gezien om zelf eens op ontdekkingstocht te gaan.
En echt, de info is er maar, zoals Exodus ook al zegt, echt niet te vinden in
de mainstream. De mainstream is een scherm vol leugens, en je hoeft maar vlinderdun te prikken om te zien dat de meeste mainstream ideen klinkklare onzin zijn. Maar ik denk dat veel 'non-believers" zijn gehersenspoeld door de educatie, de media etc. OF ze hebben een status quo te handhaven.
(belangrijk in deze tijd zeg, de status quo )
Lullig ja, om te ontdekken dat je voorgelogen bent door de politiek, de media,
de educatie systemen, de farmaceutische mafia, en ga maar door.
Tuurlijk is dat pijnlijk! En ik heb hier ook vak gezegd dat je een ander niet effe kan overtuigen over de N.W.O dat moet je zelf doen! En durven natuurlijk, want veel mensen zijn nog emotioneel afhankelijk van huidige (foute) wereldbeeld.
Dus van veel mensen hier verwacht ik helemaal niks, want ik denk dat ze dat persoonlijk niet aankunnen. Dus heeft een ahum..."discussie"...geen enkele zin.
Ik heb al eerder gezegd dat ik hier neerpleur wat de gedachte over de NWO ondersteund, en mensen kijken maar wat ze met de info doen.
Iedereen is vrij om er mee te laten en te doen wat ze willen.

Pin d'Ar

[Pindar]

Zoals eerder gezegd:

‘INDEPENDENT’ SCIENCE …



… WITH CASH ON THE HIP …




'Their primary goal is to throw confusion and conflict into the ‘debate’, to muddy the waters and prevent any clear presentation of the facts. This is done by finding ‘scientists’ who are willing to put the argument that suits the corporations and, although it may have no validity, it dilutes the clarity there would otherwise be.



In this way, warnings about the potential dangers of a food additive, sugar substitute and all these other chemical concoctions are ignored for years, even decades, before unmistakable heath effects become obvious. By then, it’s too late for those who have suffered or died. The corporations use their on-the-take ‘scientists’ to counter the warnings and persuade government agencies that there is no ‘proof’ that a substance will be harmful.'

bron: David Icke's newsletter.


Pin d'Ar

[parcifal]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Voor iedereen die zich een beetje informeerd over de zaak is die uitspraak gewoon belachelijk.

Je legt de lat vrij hoog, beste Exodus.

Ik meen immers dat :

De Britse speurders hebben drie jaar lang zo'n 20.000 documenten en 1.500 getuigenverklaringen bestudeerd en 400 interviews gedaan

En dan vindt jij blijkbaar nog dat die mensen zich niet geïnformeerd hebben.

Ik denk in tegendeel dat jij het bent die onvoldoende geïnformeerd is,
of kan je een beter palmares voorleggen dan die speurders?

En wie maakt dan eigenlijk de belachelijke uitspraak?

[Pindar]

A Generation Is All They Need

One day we will all happily be implanted with microchips, and our every move will be monitored. The technology exists; the only barrier is society's resistance to the loss of privacy.

By the time my four-year-old son is swathed in the soft flesh of old age, he will likely find it unremarkable that he and almost everyone he knows will be permanently implanted with a microchip. Automatically tracking his location in real time, it will connect him with databases monitoring and recording his smallest behavioural traits.
Most people anticipate such a prospect with a sense of horrified disbelief, dismissing it as a science-fiction fantasy. The technology, however, already exists. For years humane societies have implanted all the pets that leave their premises with a small identifying microchip. As well, millions of consumer goods are now traced with tiny radio frequency identification chips that allow satellites to reveal their exact location.
A select group of people are already "chipped" with devices that automatically open doors, turn on lights, and perform other low-level miracles. Prominent among such individuals is researcher Kevin Warwick of Reading University in England; Warwick is a leading proponent of the almost limitless potential uses for such chips.
Other users include the patrons of the Baja Beach Club in Barcelona, many of whom have paid about $150 (U.S.) for the privilege of being implanted with an identifying chip that allows them to bypass lengthy club queues and purchase drinks by being scanned. These individuals are the advance guard of an effort to expand the technology as widely as possible.
From this point forward, microchips will become progressively smaller, less invasive, and easier to deploy. Thus, any realistic barrier to the wholesale "chipping" of Western citizens is not technological but cultural. It relies upon the visceral reaction against the prospect of being personally marked as one component in a massive human inventory.
Today we might strongly hold such beliefs, but sensibilities can, and probably will, change. How this remarkable attitudinal transformation is likely to occur is clear to anyone who has paid attention to privacy issues over the past quarter-century. There will be no 3 a.m. knock on the door by storm troopers come to force implants into our bodies. The process will be more subtle and cumulative, couched in the unassailable language of progress and social betterment, and mimicking many of the processes that have contributed to the expansion of closed-circuit television cameras and the corporate market in personal data.
A series of tried and tested strategies will be marshalled to familiarize citizens with the technology. These will be coupled with efforts to pressure tainted social groups and entice the remainder of the population into being chipped.
This, then, is how the next generation will come to be microchipped.
It starts in distant countries. Having tested the technology on guinea pigs, both human and animal, the first widespread use of human implanting will occur in nations at the periphery of the Western world. Such developments are important in their own right, but their international significance pertains to how they familiarize a global audience with the technology and habituate them to the idea that chipping represents a potential future.
An increasing array of hypothetical chipping scenarios will also be depicted in entertainment media, furthering the familiarization process.
In the West, chips will first be implanted in members of stigmatized groups. Pedophiles are the leading candidate for this distinction, although it could start with terrorists, drug dealers, or whatever happens to be that year's most vilified criminals. Short-lived promises will be made that the technology will only be used on the "worst of the worst." In fact, the wholesale chipping of incarcerated individuals will quickly ensue, encompassing people on probation and on parole.
Even accused individuals will be tagged, a measure justified on the grounds that it would stop them from fleeing justice. Many prisoners will welcome this development, since only chipped inmates will be eligible for parole, weekend release, or community sentences. From the prison system will emerge an evocative vocabulary distinguishing chippers from non-chippers.
Although the chips will be justified as a way to reduce fraud and other crimes, criminals will almost immediately develop techniques to simulate other people's chip codes and manipulate their data.
The comparatively small size of the incarcerated population, however, means that prisons would be simply a brief stopover on a longer voyage. Commercial success is contingent on making serious inroads into tagging the larger population of law-abiding citizens. Other stigmatized groups will therefore be targeted. This will undoubtedly entail monitoring welfare recipients, a move justified to reduce fraud, enhance efficiency, and ensure that the poor do not receive "undeserved" benefits.
Once e-commerce is sufficiently advanced, welfare recipients will receive their benefits as electronic vouchers stored on their microchips, a policy that will be tinged with a sense of righteousness, as it will help ensure that clients can only purchase government-approved goods from select merchants, reducing the always disconcerting prospect that poor people might use their limited funds to purchase alcohol or tobacco.
Civil libertarians will try to foster a debate on these developments. Their attempts to prohibit chipping will be handicapped by the inherent difficulty in animating public sympathy for criminals and welfare recipients — groups that many citizens are only too happy to see subjected to tighter regulation. Indeed, the lesser public concern for such groups is an inherent part of the unarticulated rationale for why coerced chipping will be disproportionately directed at the stigmatized.
The official privacy arm of the government will now take up the issue. Mandated to determine the legality of such initiatives, privacy commissioners and Senate Committees will produce a forest of reports presented at an archipelago of international conferences. Hampered by lengthy research and publication timelines, their findings will be delivered long after the widespread adoption of chipping is effectively a fait accompli. The research conclusions on the effectiveness of such technologies will be mixed and open to interpretation.
Officials will vociferously reassure the chipping industry that they do not oppose chipping itself, which has fast become a growing commercial sector. Instead, they are simply seeking to ensure that the technology is used fairly and that data on the chips is not misused. New policies will be drafted.


Employers will start to expect implants as a condition of getting a job. The U.S. military will lead the way, requiring chips for all soldiers as a means to enhance battlefield command and control — and to identify human remains. From cooks to commandos, every one of the more than one million U.S. military personnel will see microchips replace their dog tags.
Following quickly behind will be the massive security sector. Security guards, police officers, and correctional workers will all be expected to have a chip. Individuals with sensitive jobs will find themselves in the same position.
The first signs of this stage are already apparent. In 2004, the Mexican attorney general's office started implanting employees to restrict access to secure areas. The category of "sensitive occupation" will be expansive to the point that anyone with a job that requires keys, a password, security clearance, or identification badge will have those replaced by a chip.
Judges hearing cases on the constitutionality of these measures will conclude that chipping policies are within legal limits. The thin veneer of "voluntariness" coating many of these programs will allow the judiciary to maintain that individuals are not being coerced into using the technology.
In situations where the chips are clearly forced on people, the judgments will deem them to be undeniable infringements of the right to privacy. However, they will then invoke the nebulous and historically shifting standard of "reasonableness" to pronounce coerced chipping a reasonable infringement on privacy rights in a context of demands for governmental efficiency and the pressing need to enhance security in light of the still ongoing wars on terror, drugs, and crime.
At this juncture, an unfortunately common tragedy of modern life will occur: A small child, likely a photogenic toddler, will be murdered or horrifically abused. It will happen in one of the media capitals of the Western world, thereby ensuring non-stop breathless coverage. Chip manufactures will recognize this as the opportunity they have been anticipating for years. With their technology now largely bug-free, familiar to most citizens and comparatively inexpensive, manufacturers will partner with the police to launch a high-profile campaign encouraging parents to implant their children "to ensure your own peace of mind."
Special deals will be offered. Implants will be free, providing the family registers for monitoring services. Loving but unnerved parents will be reassured by the ability to integrate tagging with other functions on their PDA so they can see their child any time from any place.
Paralleling these developments will be initiatives that employ the logic of convenience to entice the increasingly small group of holdouts to embrace the now common practice of being tagged. At first, such convenience tagging will be reserved for the highest echelon of Western society, allowing the elite to move unencumbered through the physical and informational corridors of power. Such practices will spread more widely as the benefits of being chipped become more prosaic. Chipped individuals will, for example, move more rapidly through customs.
Indeed, it will ultimately become a condition of using mass-transit systems that officials be allowed to monitor your chip. Companies will offer discounts to individuals who pay by using funds stored on their embedded chip, on the small-print condition that the merchant can access large swaths of their personal data. These "discounts" are effectively punitive pricing schemes, charging unchipped individuals more as a way to encourage them to submit to monitoring. Corporations will seek out the personal data in hopes of producing ever more fine-grained customer profiles for marketing purposes, and to sell to other institutions.
By this point all major organizations will be looking for opportunities to capitalize on the possibilities inherent in an almost universally chipped population. The uses of chips proliferate, as do the types of discounts. Each new generation of household technology becomes configured to operate by interacting with a person's chip.
Finding a computer or appliance that will run though old-fashioned "hands-on"' interactions becomes progressively more difficult and costly. Patients in hospitals and community care will be routinely chipped, allowing medical staff — or, more accurately, remote computers — to monitor their biological systems in real time.
Eager to reduce the health costs associated with a largely docile citizenry, authorities will provide tax incentives to individuals who exercise regularly. Personal chips will be remotely monitored to ensure that their heart rate is consistent with an exercise regime.
By now, the actual process of "chipping" for many individuals will simply involve activating certain functions of their existing chip. Any prospect of removing the chip will become increasingly untenable, as having a chip will be a precondition for engaging in the main dynamics of modern life, such as shopping, voting, and driving.
The remaining holdouts will grow increasingly weary of Luddite jokes and subtle accusations that they have something to hide. Exasperated at repeatedly watching neighbours bypass them in "chipped" lines while they remain subject to the delays, inconveniences, and costs reserved for the unchipped, they too will choose the path of least resistance and get an implant.
In one generation, then, the cultural distaste many might see as an innate reaction to the prospect of having our bodies marked like those of an inmate in a concentration camp will likely fade.
In the coming years some of the most powerful institutional actors in society will start to align themselves to entice, coerce, and occasionally compel the next generation to get an implant.
Now, therefore, is the time to contemplate the unprecedented dangers of this scenario. The most serious of these concern how even comparatively stable modern societies will, in times of fear, embrace treacherous promises. How would the prejudices of a Joe McCarthy, J. Edgar Hoover, or of southern Klansmen — all of whom were deeply integrated into the American political establishment — have manifest themselves in such a world? What might Hitler, Mao or Milosevic have accomplished if their citizens were chipped, coded, and remotely monitored?
Choirs of testimonials will soon start to sing the virtues of implants. Calm reassurances will be forthcoming about democratic traditions, the rule of law, and privacy rights. History, unfortunately, shows that things can go disastrously wrong, and that this happens with disconcerting regularity. Little in the way of international agreements, legality, or democratic sensibilities has proved capable of thwarting single-minded ruthlessness.
"It can't happen here" has become the whispered swan song of the disappeared. Best to contemplate these dystopian potentials before we proffer the tender forearms of our sons and daughters. While we cannot anticipate all of the positive advantages that might be derived from this technology, the negative prospects are almost too terrifying to contemplate.

http://www.illuminati-news.com/2006/1211a.htm

Pin d’Ar

[Pindar]

Illuminati Shuts Down Insider's Web Site To Protect New World Order Secrets


High Level Illuminati whistleblower reopens web site in Italy. Leo Zagami says his free speech rights were violated and he is already being harassed in Italy only one day after opening his controversial insider web site exposing Vatican and Masonic corruption leading all the way to the White House.


he fascist Vatican, European Union and U.S. government powers are clamping down on free speech as former Illuminati insider Leo Zagami's web site has been shut down after only two months of trying to tell the inside story of how the New World Order really operates.

Zagami was notified Monday by Anthony Casalena of Squarespace, Inc., the company hosting Illuminati Confessions, several complaints had recently been filed due to sensitive content and personal information accusing people of being Satanists.

Leo Zagami

The site was subsequently shutdown, but friends of Zagami saved much of the content, transferring it immediately to an Italian web host. Zagami returned online Tuesday afternoon at www.illuminaticonfessions.webfriend.it.

Here is the email by Casalena that caused Zagami's cite to be shut down. Zagami claims high level Illuminati pressure from Norway and other parts of Europe and America who want their evil secrets kept secret caused a clamp down on his free speech rights. Further, Zagami's site was becoming extremely popular in America, as a refreshing outlet to people starved for the truth by the corrupt U.S. controlled media.

Here is the email from his former web host:

Zie verder op:zie verder


Pin d'Ar

[Pindar]

US CIA engineered coup that brought General Pinochet to power in Chile

Former Chilean dictator General Augusto Pinochet’s death in Santiago on Sunday at the age of 91 was celebrated with champagne by many people in Chile.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=35377

Nuff said

Pin d'Ar

[parcifal]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door lezer

Is er een link met de NWO?

Yep.

[KrisKras]

ff vraagje,

heeft iemand hier toevallig al 'frredom to fascism' gezien?

http://politics.netscape.com/story/2...om-to-fascism/

[AEvanLoon]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Heftruck

1. De branden bevonden zich in de bovenste verdiepingen (op iets van een 72% en 86%)
2. Het gaat inderdaad om 15% en 23% van een relatief klein aantal verdiepingen op een basis van 110 verdiepingen, als dusdanig verwacht ik dat je begrijpt hoe relatief klein de beschadiging is?
3. Blijkbaar faal je te begrijpen hoe de constructie van de WTC-torens werkte (ik heb het specifiek over de distributie van gewicht en krachten).

Meer heb ik eigenlijk niet te zeggen. Ik ben het zowat beu die dingen opnieuw en opnieuw te moeten posten. Men zou verwachten dat je je op zijn minst informeert. (Overigens moet je mij eens uitleggen hoe je verdiepingen die "opengereten" zijn in brand steekt?)

U schrijft zelf dat er in elke WTC-toren 110 verdiepingen waren. Dat betekent dat boven de opengereten 3 ?* 4 verdiepingen er nog een kolossale massa van resp. ca. 15 en 28 verdiepingen (ter vergelijking: de Antwerpse Boerentoren telt slechts 25 verdiepingen) op die beschadigde of doorgeknakte kolommen hingen te wegen - wat uiteraard geen uren geduurd heeft.

Voor dat in brand steken: probeer het eens met een tankje kerosine en enkele liters olie. Een efficiënte molotov-cocktail...

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal

Je legt de lat vrij hoog, beste Exodus.

Ik meen immers dat :


En dan vindt jij blijkbaar nog dat die mensen zich niet geïnformeerd hebben.

Ik denk in tegendeel dat jij het bent die onvoldoende geïnformeerd is,
of kan je een beter palmares voorleggen dan die speurders?

En wie maakt dan eigenlijk de belachelijke uitspraak?

Ze kunenn zeggen wat ze willen, of denk je dat zo'n officiële onderzoeksorganen niet kunnen liegen?