In November of 2008, millions of American voters went to the polls and voted for “change.” Many are beginning to realize that very little has actually changed. When those who run the state apparatus begin to realize a lack of confidence in their abilities to control, drastic measures are often employed.

For two consecutive election cycles, 2006 and 2008, the American electorate voted against the illegal, immoral wars of the Bush administration. Now that we have a Bush clone in a darker skin tone, no one seems to care about the killing, maiming and torturing. To the hypocritical voters in America, the crime is irrelevant, it only matters whose criminal is pulling the trigger.

The “change” since the election, as I see it, is: a much larger national debt, ever expanding wars in the Middle East, a greater threat to personal liberty, a huge increase in gun sales, a national shortage of ammo, and rapidly increasing fuel prices. Is that the “change” Americans voted for?

The control the state is able to maintain over its citizens is directly proportionate to its ability to create fear in those citizens. Therefore, to defeat the war on terror, all we have to do is stop being afraid of the state’s villain du jour. To increase our personal freedoms and liberty, we must stop fearing the state. When one ceases to look through eyes clouded with fear, the state and its weaknesses are exposed.

The government spends billions of taxpayer dollars creating and sustaining a perpetual fear level, with the mainstream media (MSM) more than a willing partner.

Recently, we were inundated through the government and MSM with the possible threat of a pandemic associated with “Swine Flu.” This threat gained very little traction with the populace.

The FBI and NYPD have informed us we have been saved from another terrorist attack by their great work. The shills in the MSM will never examine the dynamics of this case. First, we have a group of people angry because the fedgov is killing people they care about with their illegal and immoral wars. Agents of the fedgov then infiltrate this group. Obviously, to become trusted by this group, these agents must profess to share the group’s feelings, emotions, and dedication of purpose. These agents then offer to provide the explosives and weapons necessary to carry out a terrorist attack. Did the fedgov agents choose the targets and tactics as well? Just how much of the entire plan was that of the agents involved as opposed to those they duped? Members of the group are provided (inert) explosives and weapons by these agents and then promptly arrested for having them and attempting to carry out the act the agents participated in creating; a classic case of entrapment.

The entire purpose of this case was to create fear in the population and the (mistaken) belief we are being protected by the state, a classic case of creating a problem and then appearing to be the solution.

Three incidents that created enormous fear of the boogeyman du jour were the Oklahoma City Bombing, TWA 800, and of course, 9/11. I will not discuss the issue of whether the government was involved in either of the above, but there is credible evidence here, here, and here that the government’s version of the events are highly suspect and certainly would not hold up under the scrutiny of a totally independent (non-governmental) investigation.

Many believe the government incapable of conducting, or being involved in, any false-flag operation involving the possible deaths of American citizens. I offer as exhibit (A) Operation Northwoods, and Exhibit (B) evidence from the 1993 WTC bombing.

The state has one powerful tool at its disposal to control the masses: fear. A minority can control and enslave a majority only as long as the majority fears the minority. The state will do whatever it takes to maintain that control. The state lied about the circumstances of the attack on Pearl Harbor; they lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident; they lied about the Oklahoma City bombing; they lied about TWA 800; they lied about Ruby Ridge; they lied about Waco and they lied about 9/11. The very essence of government is fear and the lie.

There will be another event such as those mentioned above when the state feels it is beginning to loose control of Boobus, it needs the premise for a new war, or reason to expand the ones it now has. When it happens, will you run their lies up the flagpole, or demand the truth, refute the lies, and expose the liars?

Source: LewRockwell

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Like Iraq, the “Facts” Regarding 9/11 Were “Fixed Around the Policy”

41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11

9/11 Conspiracy? Pentagon Missile Defense Failure

Self-Confessed 9/11 “Mastermind” Also Falsely Confessed to Crimes He Didn’t Commit

Scientists find active ’super-thermite’ in WTC dust

A Washington state man who was incorrectly identified as a suspect in an assault on May 10, is now clinging to life in critical condition.

Christopher Harris, a 29-year-old Edmonds man is in a coma, with skull fractures after being pushed into a wall by a King County sheriff’s deputy working the Metro Transit overnight shift on foot patrol. Harris had started to run after deputies ordered him to ’stop,’ and sustained his injuries after deputies caught up with him near a Seattle ‘Cinerama.’ It remains unclear why Harris decided to run.

After Harris is slammed into the wall, the deputy then drags him away from the wall by one arm, and attempts to handcuff him before seeming to realize the seriousness of Harris’ injuries and calling for help.

The King County sheriff’s department released a surveillance video, along with their internal investigation results of the incident last week. The investigation of their deputy found in a preliminary review that he ‘appeared’ to have acted lawfully. SeattlePI reports:

A Metro Transit police officer appears to have acted lawfully when he plowed into an Edmonds man during a foot pursuit in Belltown this month and caused the man’s head to slam against a wall, the King County Sheriff’s Office reported Thursday.

Christopher Harris, 29, has been in a coma since May 10, the day that he inexplicably ran from two police officers who were incorrectly told that Harris was involved in a robbery at a convenience store at Second Avenue and Bell Street.

After announcing the investigation’s results, the Sheriff’s Office released video from three security cameras that captured the chase, including the final seconds when Deputy Matt Paul overtook Harris and shoved him into a wall at the Seattle Cinerama Theater at Fourth Avenue and Lenora Street.

A Sheriff’s Office spokesman said that upon a preliminary review, the deputy’s conduct appears to be lawful. The investigation, however, will be reviewed by the Prosecutor’s Office, Sheriff’s Sgt. John Urquhart said during a news conference at the alley where the chase started.

“We’re looking at this as a tragic accident. Nothing more than that,” he said.

The sheriff’s department is expected to conduct another investigation to determine if the deputy involved followed departmental policies, and is continuing to seek more witnesses in the case.

The following Youtube video was released by Sky News on May 23, 2009:

The following video was released by the King County Sheriff’s Department on May 21, 2009, and made available by SeattlePI:

Source: Raw Story

Other Stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Police shoot juvenile with a toy gun

Colorado Police Plan to Take Blood from “Uncooperative Suspects”

Charged with a Felony give us you DNA (Remember charged not convicted)

In a press release issued on May 19, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine released a position paper calling for a moratorium on genetically modified foods. These foods–primarily corn, soy, canola and cotton, most of which are used in production of oils and animal feed–are linked, they claim, to mutagenic and other undesirable effects in not only the plants themselves but in those consuming them. Citing a lack of long term study of the modified plants (often referred to as GMO, or genetically modified organisms), the doctors of this organization want the food and agricultural industries to further study the impact of genetic engineering on the internal organs, reproduction, and disease resistance of animals fed such foods.

Another matter of concern in regard to GMO is the aspect of farmers’ rights to use seed from their crops. In many third world nations agriculture depends on this practice. When crops are the result of genetically engineered seeds, however, the company issuing the seeds has control over them as an intellectual property. They ensure the seeds are sterile, thus necessitating the purchase by farmers of more seed annually. This defeats the purpose hoped for by those who believe GMO crops will help feed hungry nations. In fact it further impoverishes farmers who simply cannot afford to keep buying seed every year. In an article on food safety by the World Health Organization–”20 Questions on Genetically Modified (GM) Foods”– this concept was part of twenty questions that arise from the practice of genetically altering food crop seeds:
Q17. Are there implications for the rights of farmers to own their crops?
Yes, intellectual property rights are likely to be an element in the debate on GM foods, with an impact on the rights of farmers. Intellectual property rights (IPRs), especially patenting obligations of the TRIPS Agreement (an agreement under the World Trade Organization concerning trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights) have been discussed in the light of their consequences on the further availability of a diversity of crops. In the context of the related subject of the use of gene technology in medicine, WHO has reviewed the conflict between IPRs and an equal access to genetic resources and the sharing of benefits. The review has considered potential problems of monopolization and doubts about new patent regulations in the field of genetic sequences in human medicine. Such considerations are likely to also affect the debate on GM foods.
Hopefully this suggested moratorium will get attention from the government, particularly the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture. Before the food industry goes any further with genetic alteration, there are a lot of issues that need to be settled to the satisfaction of both the farmers and consumers.

For the entire position paper by the AAEM, see:
http://aaemonline.org./gmopost.html (paper)

For the WHO article, “20 Questions on Genetically Modified (GM) Foods”, see:www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/index.html

Source: Detroit Alternative Medicine Examiner

Other Health Stories At We Are Change Colorado Springs

Vaccines in your GMO corn?

Chicago bans sale of baby bottles, sippy cups with dangerous chemical

World Health Organization Investigating Claims Swine Flu Virus May Have Came From A Lab

The Pentagon is prepared to leave fighting forces in Iraq for as long as a decade despite an agreement between the United States and Iraq that would bring all American troops home by 2012, the top U.S. Army officer said Tuesday.

Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, said the world remains dangerous and unpredictable, and the Pentagon must plan for extended U.S. combat and stability operations in two wars. “Global trends are pushing in the wrong direction,” Casey said. “They fundamentally will change how the Army works.”

He spoke at an invitation-only briefing to a dozen journalists and policy analysts from Washington-based think-tanks. He said his planning envisions combat troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for a decade as part of a sustained U.S. commitment to fighting extremism and terrorism in the Middle East.

Casey’s calculations about force levels are related to his attempt to ease the brutal deployment calendar that he said would “bring the Army to its knees.”

Casey would not specify how many combat units would be split between Iraq and Afghanistan. He said U.S. ground commander Gen. Ray Odierno is leading a study to determine how far U.S. forces could be cut back in Iraq and still be effective.

President Barack Obama plans to bring U.S. combat forces home from Iraq in 2010, and the United States and Iraq have agreed that all American forces would leave by 2012. Although several senior U.S. officials have suggested Iraq could request an extension, the legal agreement the two countries signed last year would have to be amended for any significant U.S. presence to remain.

As recently as February, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reiterated the U.S. commitment to the agreement worked out with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

“Under the Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government, I intend to remove all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011,” Gates said during an address at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. “We will complete this transition to Iraqi responsibility, and we will bring our troops home with the honor that they have earned.”

The United States currently has about 139,000 troops in Iraq and 52,000 in Afghanistan.

Obama campaigned on ending the Iraq war as quickly as possible and refocusing U.S. resources on what he called the more important fight in Afghanistan.

That will not mean a major influx of U.S. fighting forces on the model of the Iraq “surge,” however. Obama has agreed to send about 21,000 combat forces and trainers to Afghanistan this year. Combined with additional forces approved before former President George W. Bush left office, the United States is expected to have about 68,000 troops in Afghanistan by the end of this year. That’s about double the total at the end of 2008, but Obama’s top military and civilian advisers have indicated the number is unlikely to grow much beyond that.

Casey said several times that he wasn’t the person making policy, but the military was preparing to have a fighting force deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan for years to come. Casey said his planning envisions 10 combat brigades plus command and support forces committed to the two wars.

When asked whether the Army had any measurement for knowing how big it should be, Casey responded, “How about the reality scenario?”

This scenario, he said, must take into account that “we’re going to have 10 Army and Marine units deployed for a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Casey stressed that the United States must be ready to take on sustained fights in the Middle East while meeting other commitments.

Casey reiterated statements made by civilian and military leaders that the situation in Afghanistan would get worse before it gets better. “There’s going to be a big fight in the South,” he said.

Casey added that training of local police and military in Afghanistan was at least a couple years behind the pace in Iraq, and it would be months before the U.S. deployed enough trainers. There’s a steeper curve before training could be effective in Afghanistan, requiring three to five years before Afghanis could reach the “tipping point” of control.

He also said the U.S. had to be careful about what assets get deployed to Afghanistan. “Anything you put in there would be in there for a decade,” he said.

As Army chief of staff, Casey is primarily responsible for assembling the manpower and determining assignments. He insisted the Army’s 1.1-million size was sufficient even to handle the extended Mideast conflicts.

“We ought to build a pretty effective Army with 1.1 million strength,” Casey said. He also noted that the Army’s budget had grown to $220 billion from $68 billion before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

He said the Army is two-thirds of the way through a complete overhaul from the Cold War-era force built around tanks and artillery to today’s terrorist-driven realities. The Army has become more versatile and quicker by switching from division-led units to brigade-level command.

Casey said the Army has moved from 15-month battlefield deployments to 12 months. His goal is to move rotations by 2011 to one year in the battlefield and two years out for regular Army troops, and one year in the battlefield and three years out for reserves. He called the current one-year-in-one-year-out cycle “unsustainable.”

Source: AP

Related stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Iraqi PM tells Pelosi: We don’t need US troops in our cities

Former U.S. soldier bragged about Iraqi rape, deaths

Iraq wants American troops to withdraw on time

Guardian Writer Followed By Undercover Police At Bilderberg

BILDERBERG AGENDA EXPOSED

Demonstrations against the secret meeting of the Bilderbergs in “Aster Palace” hotel