How the West was Conquered

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 28, 2012

The existence of society as we know it today is not a random event of nature or anything of the sort. Today’s society is a direct reflection of the gigantic plans for social engineering that were put in place and gradually imposed on the people. Globally, people have gone from being independent, self-sufficient beings to becoming dependent sheep who need their big corporate-controlled government to provide them with everything they need to survive. That was the plan from the beginning. Now, people are at the mercy of large multinational corporations — mainly banks — who turned them into their slaves by using governmental agencies to impose their policies. But it doesn’t stop there. To add insult to injury, the masses believe they actually are free and that they have choices, as supposed to being livestock, which is what reality demonstrates.

For many decades, this phenomenon was widely unknown by most people who were dependent on the system. But after the elites behind the social engineering became more arrogant than usual and started to speak openly about their plans, a minority of the people found out about it. Today, a larger minority is knowledgeable about the plans of the elites, but the masses are still ignorant or in denial. The main cause of this denial is the fact that the masses are those people who for decades and decades have benefited from big explicit or hidden socialist policies which are tools to get people hooked on their dope. As many already know, letting go of an addiction is pretty hard, especially when such an addiction is everything you’ve known. Try asking a homeless person to stop sniffing shoe glue to calm down his hunger without showing him a warm meal. That is exactly what it would be like. Of course there are those who prefer their dependency and enslavement to independence and self-governance. Those are the societies where most people, regardless of their low income and lousy conditions are conformed to keep on living in slums and receiving the miserable help that their governments provide them, as if that was the way it is supposed to be. Clear examples of these societies include Venezuela, Cuba, Brazil, to cite a few, where people stand behind dictators or candidates who assure them that their welfare checks will continue to come, instead of providing adequate market conditions for them to pick themselves up from the filth they live in.

But how did the technocrats manage to get everyone into the barn? They’ve always managed to stay in control. They’ve always owned the money, the resources, the politicians and the governments, and therefore the people of the world. They worked by taking control of the poorest and most devastated regions of the world with their government-sponsored, although corporate-financed programs to keep billions of people under their boots. After setting roots there, they succeeded when implementing their centralized control policies in developing countries i.e. Argentina in 1990’s, slowing their path to development and in most cases stopping them to a halt. Their success in poor countries leveraged them to impose their programs in developing countries, which they did for the past 50-100 years. With a firmer footstep in most of the planet, the controllers brought their system to the more sophisticated nations, the developed world, which they had purposely supported in order to legitimize their colonizing and conquering schemes.

That is where we are now. Currently, countries that had strong potential to become developed nations, as well as industrialized ones, are suffering the consequences of opening the door to the men who were always in control on the outside. Their success lies in their ability to convince or otherwise penalize or buy off those who hadn’t opened their doors. For this penalties and buy offs to work, they had to create an external “legitimate” system of control that could impose their policies on the sovereign nations so that they could be attacked, invaded and destroyed to later be absorbed. From these plans is where emerged organizations such as the League of Nations, the United Nations, the World Health Organization, The World Trade Organization, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, The European Union, the African Union, the North American Union, Mercosur, the G-20, the G-8, and so on. These entities were established by the technocrats and are supported by people who were bought off or convinced to join their system. These people are infiltrated in all strata of society, from education, to academia, finance, religion, the scientific community, the government agencies and of course those who work for large corporations.

In order not to raise questions, the elites also created foundations and philanthropic organizations which they finance and control and which helped them implement their policies, always for the sake of the common good. This collectivist way of thinking is perhaps the most successful tool when convincing the masses that it was better to think collectively, to steal from Peter to support Paul. Then came the term social justice which worked as another hook to attract more supporters because of its collectivist origin. Most people changed their way to see the world. Instead of supporting individual rights and liberties, they became cheerleaders for big government to decide what was best for them and their peers. This marked the appearance of centralized government at the local, state and national levels and the creation of laws and policies that gave government control over individual rights and responsibilities such as private property, security, food availability, free speech, healthcare and others. A central entity suddenly “knew better” about how to manage local resources than the people themselves. The power of the people shrank as the big governments grew out of control and behind them, the elites amassed more and more power right in front of the unsuspecting masses. The Welfare State, the Socialist State, the Communist State — all a creation of the globalists — were at the gates waiting to take over. In order to impose these systems of government then created conflicts among countries with secret destabilizing attacks or by practicing the Hegelian Dialect of Problem, Reaction Solution.

When the sovereign nations resisted the attacks of the elitists through their supranational organizations or their corporate-controlled governments, they used military force usually backed up by fake intelligence or false events in order to invade those nations “to democratize them” and “bring peace”. These military actions were and continue to be supported by false threats or by the abuses committed by dictators that were put in place by the globalists themselves. This way, the technocrats managed to consolidate power by further controlling governments or puppet governments as well as to rob nations from their natural resources. All the riches of the planet became property of the corporations who invaded former independent nations at the behest of their puppet governments right after the wars ended. The consequence of their successful economic, political and military conquest campaigns was the end of the nation-states, which the globalists had as one of their main objectives when they started their crusades decades and decades ago. Additional success for the elites was spurred by their well-established controlled opposition movements — World Economic Forum, World Social Forum — in which they involved community leaders in order to swindle the people into believing that their representatives could actually make a difference by joining these corporate funded organizations. But how could they help fight those they deemed their opposition when the very same forces were at the head of such “alternative movements”? They couldn’t.

But perhaps the last nail on the coffin in favor of the globalist take over was the campaign orchestrated by the main stream media — also in the pocket of the corporations — that sought to blame Capitalism for the current global economic depression. This campaign is not new. The globalists, through their economic, financial and media operations have been very clear that their plan was always to build up society in order to extract as much riches as possible so that they could later implode the global economy and with it western society.  Right now, the globalists are leading a charge to swallow countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal, and others in Europe, after they successfully  took control of the United States, Mexico, Canada, most of the Middle East, Oceania and much of Africa through their proxy governments and puppet presidents. It rests to see if the people of the world, the informed minority that everyday grows larger, will do what minorities have always done throughout history: to save the ignorant majority as well as themselves from the technocrat elite that is very close to completing their long-awaited plans to destroy the world as we know it today.


The BP Oil Spill Conspiracy Continues in the Gulf of Mexico

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
July 10, 2011

There is not a big scandal that lasts more than a few weeks on the main stream media’s scope of attention. In the case of the BP oil catastrophe, it is incredible that after the size of the deadly disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, neither the main stream media nor the alternative news media followed up on what has been going on there. What has been going on there is inaction, and the BP oil conspiracy continues to develop.(1)

As we now know, the BP explosion that cost the lives of several workers was not an accident, but negligence at best and a conspiracy at worst. The direct result of the Deepwater Horizon’s explosion was the massive destruction of life through miles of coastline. The less than adequate cleanup, which helped worsened the disaster, condemned the area to living with tons of toxic chemical dispersants that simply destroyed the eco systems and negatively affected the health of the thousands of people who lived nearby and millions of others who directly and indirectly depended on the fishing, tourism and natural beauty of the marine life, wildlife and environment.

The greatest impact was felt immediately on the health, environmental and economic side of things. Regardless of what Obama and the U.S. government says, the Gulf Coast has not been the same ever since the BP explosion occurred.

This oil sheen can only be coming from fresh oil, newly coming out of the seabed.

Perhaps the most surprising fact is that the spill continues to exist, despite government and main stream media reports that the worst is over. As recently taken pictures show, there are still large amounts of oil floating around the Gulf of Mexico. This is not oil that remains from the original explosion, but fresh oil. Airplanes continue to spray toxic chemicals on the Gulf, which continue to sicken people and animal life there. Recent spraying was done as early as March 15th, 2011, even though the EPA said that no more dispersants had been applied since July 23, 2010. According to the Gulf Rescue Alliance, aerial photos taken between March 19, 2011 and April 21, 2011, reveal new “massive amounts” of oil floating on Gulf’s waters. (2)

Analysis conducted to test the consequences of using Corexit show that the chemical helps the oil dissolve into the water. These chemicals (volatile contaminants) would otherwise evaporated if the oil had been left
sitting on the surface. Laboratory tests conducted with Corexit 9500, saltwater and oil show the same foam found on Gulf waters after the application of the toxic chemical. For the most recent images of the newest oil leaks as well as military airplanes spraying chemicals in the Gulf with detailed dates and places see the PDF report titled Fresh Oil in the Gulf (Pages 4-21)

“Photos taken by Denise Rednour, John Wathen and Bonnie Schumacher prove that the Macondo well and / or the fractured seabed around the well was never fully plugged”. One of the most recent reports titled Fresh Oil in the Gulf includes a press release from NOAA that details its findings about the detection of limits of toxic chemicals, which the organization establishes at 100 parts per million for finfish and 500 parts per million for shrimp. However, chemist Bob Naman who works at the Analytical Chemical Testing lab in Mobile, Alabama tested samples from several places in the Gulf and his results do not match those of NOAA. According to Naman’s calculations, toxic chemical levels are around 5 parts per billion.

EPA Not Coming Clean

In another report titled Questioning EPA Fraud, a group of Gulf residents compiled what they say amounts to clear proof that the Environmental Protection Agency lied and continues to lie about the health impact on Gulf residents, contaminated beaches, water and seafood. According to the report there is an alarming difference between the levels of exposure to toxic chemicals considered as “safe” back in 1999 and those emitted more recently by the EPA, which are “thousands of times higher”. Part of the report relates how much easier would it be for governmental organizations to claim that no chemicals were detected while the health and lives of the residents are gravely put in danger. (3)

Government agencies have been caught giving false statements about the state of affairs in the Gulf of Mexico. In one occasion, government official said they were “not sure of the effect of utilizing dispersants, sub sea,” and on the surface in this volume, but that the use of such chemicals were a necessary risk. Unfortunately, those very same official failed to detailed the very same risks  they knew existed once the spraying of Corexit began on Gulf waters. They also admitted that more studies on the actual effects need to be performed.

According to the document titled Questioning EPA Fraud, sub sea test performed in the North Sea near Norway by major oil companies showed that the oil was split into fractions and left the most toxic parts (PAH’s) suspended throughout the water. These parts cause grave adverse effects to the marine species. “Over 60% of marine species normally thrive in those sub sea strata of ocean waters”, cites the study.

Still a Public Health Crisis

The Gulf Rescue Alliance, a coalition composed by Scientists, Doctors, Attorneys, Seafood and Tourism Industry Professionals, Civic and Government Leaders, Non-profits, and Citizens, documents the current health crisis that began back on the day of the BP oil disaster and that continues to get worse on a daily basis.  The Alliance’s claims are supported by, among other documents, a report from the American Medical Association entitled Health Effects of the Gulf Oil Spill that explains how the toxic chemicals used in the supposed cleanup of the Gulf caused innumerable cases of disease in local residents.

“The main components of crude oil are aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons.1 Lower-molecular weight aromatics—such as benzene, toluene, and xylene—are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and evaporate within hours after the oil reaches the surface. Volatile organic compounds can cause respiratory irritation and central nervous system (CNS) depression. Benzene is known to cause leukemia in humans, and toluene is a recognized teratogen at high doses.” (4)

Although the EPA and the CDC have downplayed the consequences of continuous exposure to the toxic chemicals in the Gulf, citing only minor health problems such as temporary eye, nose, or throat irritation, nausea, or headaches, and “are not thought to be high enough to cause long-term harm” BP’s own website warns that current conditions are dangerous for both offshore workers and local residents. According to the JAMA report,  temperatures pose a risk of heat-related illness exacerbated by wearing coveralls and respirators.

The report continues to point out that when in contact with dispersants and other chemicals now present in the Gulf, people can suffer adverse health effects that may end in dermatitis and secondary skin infections. “Some people may develop a dermal hypersensitivity reaction, erythema, edema, burning sensations, or a follicular rash.”  But the health conditions now being experienced by residents and wildlife are not the only problems that remain in the heads of the citizens in the coast. There are a number of long-term health risks that not highlighted now, but that will appear later.

Although visible effects such as contamination, floating oil and dispersants as well as the death of the eco systems are some of the problems we see now, more pressing consequences are still to come. One of those consequences is the accumulation of chemicals that will remain with Gulf residents for years. The exposure to these chemicals will continue to endanger people generation after generation unless they are properly cleaned up. Because the Gulf of Mexico is one of the most important sources of seafood for the United States, the chemicals found on that seafood will potentially contaminate consumers with toxins such as cadmium, mercury, and lead that can accumulate over time in fish and shellfish. (5)

Fishing through oil and dispersant. Photo taken March 19th, 2011.

It is undoubtedly the damage to human health what worries most residents of the Gulf coast, though. Some of the most serious effects on humans are reflected on red blood cells. Exposure to the toxic chemicals people and marine life are now swimming in causes hemolysis. This happens because the fat of the cells’ membrane is dissolved and as a result the membrane breaks down. Another health problem is hematuria, or the appearance of blood in the urine and the feces. This happens as a result of kidney damage. If untreated, this damage can progress and lead to kidney failure.

“The chemicals extend their damage to other body parts such as the spleen, the bones in the spinal column, and bone marrow (where new blood cells are formed) and the liver, where chemicals are detoxified (broken down for easy excretion from the body). Chronic exposure can cause anemia, and lead to insufficient blood supply, cold extremities, and necrosis (a condition basically akin to flesh rot.) Females may exhibit more sensitivity to fore-stomach necrosis, ulceration, and inflammation occurring at half the dose required to cause the same problems in males. (6)

In women, fertility could also be reduced due to embryo mortality. Women are considered to be more likely to suffer from ocular damage. Some bodily injuries of that kind include severe damage to the eye such as retinal detachment, photoreceptor degeneration and occlusion resulting from multiple thrombosis of the blood vessels in the eye.

Reaching out to the Government

Marine Toxicologist, Riki Ott

In a letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Marine toxicologist and Exxon Valdez survivor, Riki Ott, details how the organization was ignorant about the effects of using dispersants in an area that went from Louisiana to Florida. The agency and other government organization were unaware of the existence of “subsurface oil-dispersant plumes and sunken oil on ocean and estuary water bottoms”, said Ott. He also asked for proof that it was a violation of existent law to spray sinking agents such as the ones BP had been using.(7)

Although under EPA rules BP had been banned from using Corexit on Gulf waters due to its toxicity and the reactions it caused when in contact with the oil, the company continued spraying the chemical after the March 19, 2010 warning to stop using the product. “By July 30, the congressional Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment reported the USCG on-scene commander (OSC) had approved 74 exemption requests to spray dispersants between May 28 and July 14”, cites the document.

The Sane Available Solution

On section four of the The Gulf of Mexico A Crisis That Must Be Resolved document, a proposal is presented to end the tragedy known as the BP Gulf Oil Spill. Under the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR 40), it is stated that in the event of environmental disasters such as the one in the Gulf of Mexico, the agencies in charge could use non-toxic products called “bio remediation” products. Bio remediation is the use living micro organisms to  enhance the rates of biodegradation of oil. The the use of bio remediation results in the appearance of organic substances such as carbon dioxide, water, biomass, and benign substances. This process, transforms oil into non-toxic products and the environmental impact is almost zero. It is basically the same process mother nature uses to clean itself, but performed at an accelerated pace. It speeds up the process.

Under the bio remediation category, there seems to be only one product left, from a total of 11 that existed in the near past. It is called OSE II. This product, as requested by government regulators, does not introduce foreign microbes into any body of water. OSE II can be used on refined or unrefined hydrocarbons or hydrocarbon-based compounds. This product was shown to EPA and other government representatives at least 14 times in laboratory experiments and on-location. Every single time, OSE II proved its capacity to detoxify the oil and dispersant in a matter of hours. “After getting in contact with the oil, it turns it into water and CO2 within 2 to 4 weeks, which is its defined end result.”

OSE II is used in 35 countries where the use of dispersants is prohibited or simply a non starter. In the United States, the EPA prevented the use of this product even though its manufacturer has provided it  to the U.S. military for 21 years.

References:

(1) The BP Oil Spill Conspiracy You Didn’t Hear About

(2) Fresh Oil in the Gulf Of Mexico and Fresh Chemical Dispersant Being Sprayed

(3) Summary of EPA/NOAA Fraud Regarding the Testing for Safety of Gulf Seafood, Water, and Sediment

(4) Public Health Crisis in the Gulf of Mexico as a Direct Result of the Inadequate Response to the Deepwater Horizon Oil Blowout Disaster

(5) University scientist’s seafood sample results were “hundreds of times higher than the levels the government tests found”

(6) General Overview of Symptoms Related to Exposure to Dispersed Oil and Toxic Chemical Dispersants

(7) The Gulf of Mexico A Crisis That Must Be Resolved

The BP Oil Spill Conspiracy You Didn’t Hear About

POR LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | DECEMBER 16, 2010

Big corporations are responsible for the destruction of the environment, that is just a fact. If you don’t believe it and don’t believe in conspiracy theories, hold on to your pants and hat because this article is going to blow them far, far away. Everyone still remembers the British Petroleum (BP) oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. It is still fresh in my head and in the heads of many people who saw it first hand, who were displaced by it, or who are sick today because of it. Just like the disaster caused by hurricane Katrina and the attacks the United States suffered on september 11th, 2001. Everyone remembers…

Rumors went and came about the motives or causes behind the oil spill, the largest disaster in environmental history, no doubt. But time, only time can provide the answers that everyone seems to be looking for after tragedy strikes. Only time and very deep researching reveal what was and is still behind an oil spill that was called a “disaster”, but that is much more than that. This time, the answers and the reality they present seem to go beyond what any decent human being can think of. Only an evil mind could figure it out. Reality is stranger than fiction, people say. With the oil spill, it is not the exception. And it is not only stranger, but also more diabolical than what any fiction producer or director could imagine, because it has to do with human existence.

Displaced after Hurricane Katrina. The levees did not stop the water.

In a 43 minute television documentary investigation supported by documents, testimonies, visual proof and first hand straight forward lies from BP, the program Conspiracy Theory hosted by former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura pulled the curtain off the cover up and revealed that the oil spill was not only an accident, a disaster, a tragedy, but it was in fact a carefully crafted event to bring about coastal mass depopulation, death, sickness and control of resources; all on behalf of corporations. The documentary not only reveals one of the largest conspiracies I have ever learned about, but also points out how the oil spill is part of a series of test events to cause the depletion of the gulf area in order to cause the mandated migration of at least 17000 families, many of which have lived there for over 100 years. The depopulation plans are not limited to the coastal areas or the Gulf of Mexico. It extends to as far inland as Louisiana.

But the issues are more serious than mass migration. How would the oil disaster be related to global cooling or an ice age that impaired most of the northern hemisphere, cause food shortages, potentially the death of millions, spurring the highest demand of oil in the history of humankind while it is all in the hands of corporations? Please remain seated. If you can’t wait to read the whole article to know what the conspiracy is all about, let me give it to you straightforward. The government of the United States has a program to depopulate the Gulf coast region backed up with US40 billion to turn the coast into a deserted area so that they can simply handed it to big oil. If you cannot believe that, keep on reading.

Before entering into details, though, let’s put out some factual information that anyone can confirm. BP was founded in 1909 as the Anglo-Persian Company. It was involved in the destruction of Iran as the country was on its way to becoming a First World Nation. The Iranians simply did not want to surrender their natural resources to BP, so the company used its connections to turn Iran into what it is today. As it is known today, BP is owned in part by JP Morgan Chase Bank that holds almost 29% of its shares. Both Halliburton and Transocean operated on the oil rig that exploded and caused the disaster. BP knew, way ahead of time that the oil rig was in danger and could explode as it did. That is the conclusion reached by investigative journalist Sherri Kane who has written multiple articles about the oil spill, but none has reached the main stream media. Her investigation provides explanations as to what happened months before the conspiracy took place. For starters, millions of dollars in BP stock were dumped by their holders, weeks before the oil spill. Among those who dumped the stock was BP CEO Tony Hayward, who sold a third of his shares on March 17, and made millions in the process. It is just his tip, for standing by and letting it happen.

The investigation began right on ground zero, to use a familiar term. As it is pointed out on the documentary, BP could not have done it alone. They had help from Transocean, the largest off-shore contractor in the world. Although BP was the owner of the 194 million gallons spilled into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, Transocean was the owner of the rig. Transocean’s stocks opened with a special “put option” for insiders to basically bet against the company. A “put option” is something like buying insurance in case ‘something’ happens. That would allow anyone with foretold knowledge about the explosion to buy insurance before it happened. Say for example, the owners of Transocean who made billions after the disaster took place. But wait, more help was on the way; from Halliburton. This company was contracted to reinforce the oil well for Transocean and indirectly for BP before it blew up. Additionally, Halliburton decided to buy Boots & Coots, just 11 days before the oil spill happened. Boots & Coots was a former subcontractor for Halliburton and it’s specialty is, you guessed it, oil disaster clean-ups.

According to Sherri Kane, the Gulf’s oil disaster is an example of something she called Crisis Capitalism, but that I would like to call Problem, Reaction Solution, because it has nothing to do with real Capitalism, although it has a lot to do with corporate greed and mass depopulation. Under this circumstance, Ms. Kane assured governor Ventura that BP had indeed planned the whole thing because there is more money to make on the clean-up that there is in the extraction of oil. Proof of this is that Halliburton’s profits exploded to 83 percent during the oil spill disaster. “Their god is money and power,” concluded Kane. It is important to remember that Halliburton moved his headquarters from Houston Texas to Dubai, away from any possible criminal investigation, extradition or government oversight. In other words, they committed murder; literally, and got away with it.

Environmental Attorney Mike Papantonio, a resident of Pensacola, Florida concurs with Sherri Kane’s investigation that BP knew the disaster would happen. “They knew weeks before the oil spill that the blow-up preventer was malfunctioning,” says Papantonio. The disaster, says the environmental attorney, could have prevented by having an acoustic switch, which is a device that ignites the blow-up preventer from a distance. “If everything goes wrong on an oil rig, anyone from a distance can hit a button to cause the blow-up preventer to engage.” According to Papantonio, this is a standard device that all rigs must have, but not in the United States. Former Halliburton executive and U.S. vice president, Dick Cheney, made sure big oil was given many passes on what they had to comply with in order to extract oil from the ocean floor. One of those things they avoided doing was to install an acoustic switch. “Unfortunately, in America we treat criminals differently. If they are in a three-piece suit, they kill people and get away with it,” added Papantonio.

In Houma, Louisiana, governor Ventura met with Adam Dillon, a former police officer hired by BP to keep an eye everywhere, while the oil disaster unfolded. Mr. Dillon oversaw every single detail that related to the Gulf’s spill. While on the job, he learned details BP did not want him to tell. “I didn’t realize the magnitude of the spill until I got out there,” said Dillon. “For every drop of oil on the surface of the Gulf, there were thousands more under the surface.” Mr. Dillon learned that the numbers being put out by BP and the government simply did not add up. After he took pictures from a plane that showed the real magnitude of the disaster, he was intimidated and then fired. The clean-up was all a lie. “As a former soldier in Iraq and former police officer I know what an interrogation looks like, and that is what I was put through”, says Dillon. After stationing their vehicles in front of BP’s headquarters in Houma, Louisiana, governor Ventura and Adam Dillon confirmed that local law enforcement was there to protect BP, not the people of the region. “I have been in military installations that do not have as much security as this place has,” added Dillon. Former Houma resident, George Harrison, moved out of the area as BP moved in. But before that, he took photos and videos of the operation. In his video, there appears to be local police and U.S. military working not with BP, but for BP. Their main task was to provide security to the complete BP staging area.

After being sort of confronted by local law enforcement who once again were working for BP, governor Ventura was invited by a BP worker to take a trip along the Gulf, so he could see for himself what a great job the company was doing. It was precisely that interview what gave Jesse Ventura the opportunity to face BP’s public relations team and to expose them and their lies. The main attraction of this trip was to show Ventura how Corexit, a toxic chemical banned almost everywhere in the world was aiding BP in the clean-up effort. The only problem is that Corexit does not clean the oil, it only breaks it apart in smaller parts which then fall to the ocean floor. The oil is still there, but it is now invisible to the human eye. Gene Dominique, a BP spokesman, was quick to point out the cleaning crews had been working on removing those smaller particles of oil, left behind after applying the toxic Corexit to the Gulf’s water. He denied the clean-up would take years and added that mother nature would eventually do its part to return the Gulf back to normal.

Corexit was sprayed over the Gulf regardless of its high toxicity.

When questioned about the toxic nature of Corexit, Dominique said he could not tell whether it was as bad as we all know it is. So, for those of you who don’t know what Corexit is, let’s review. Corexit is a mixture of Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Zinc and Cyanide. When questioned about the toxicity of the ingredients, a BP spokesman simply said: “They are approved by the EPA”. When governor Ventura asked the spokesman if BP had continued to use Corexit, after the very same EPA asked the company to stop, he responded: “To be best of my knowledge, no.” Of course, we all know what that means. It means plausible deniability. In fact, BP has continued to spray Corexit over the Gulf, but now they do it with the aid of darkness. Their planes take off at night and spray the toxic chemical while most in the area are asleep.

David Arnesen, a fisherman and clean-up worker was a first hand witness to what Corexit can do. “I’ve been out there since the efforts began and I’ve been sick the whole time,” says Arnesen. “I’ve had sinus problems and just non-stop earaches. For the best part of the last three months, I’ve had brown stuff coming out of my ears.” In regards to people getting sick because of Corexit, Gene Dominique said BP had not had any reports on ill workers. “If our industry does not come back soon enough, we’ll have to move elsewhere to find work,” concluded Arnesen.

Although BP was asked to stop using Corexit due to its high toxicity, the company decided to continue spraying the product over the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, with the added consequence that Corexit was carried by the wind into the coastal areas and beyond. But why did BP decided to continue using the toxic product, even though the government requested to stop? Well, because BP has a very strong connection to Corexit and the company that produces it. BP has strong ties to NALCO, the producer of Corexit through the exchange of top executives between the two companies. Board members of NALCO occupied high positions in BP, that is why the oil company insists on using the toxic chemical instead of other EPA approved products that are less harmful.

But let’s get back to the health effects of Corexit. For as long as BP airplanes continue spraying Corexit, it will continue spread through the air over the residents of Louisiana. “It is like we’re being attacked by terrorists,” says Kindra Arnesen. I think they are out there to destroy us… They are set to protect the corporations.” The neighbors are right to be concerned. Almost everyone who participated in the clean-up of the Exxon Valdez oil disaster in 1989 has either died or suffers from horrible diseases today. Their life expectancy, after evaluated was set to about 51 years of age.

But why would a government do what the corporations want, and not what is best for the people it was elected by? I think by now it is easy to figure the answer to that. Money, Greed, and an insatiable desire to get rid off the average individual who gets on the way of their plans. What is behind the BP oil spill is an attempt to depopulate the Gulf region in order to turn it into the largest oil refinery in North America. And for that, they need to get everyone out of there; voluntarily or otherwise in plastic coffins. This oil refinery area would give big oil plenty of freedom, and zero regulation to explore and extract any and every drop of oil in the Gulf of Mexico. This scenario was confirmed by lawyer and environmentalist Alfred Webre down in New Orleans. The Katrina disaster, the oil spill in the Gulf and everything it entailed are just pieces of a gigantic master plan.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were two of the main pawns of the Elite.

Katrina was a test or a run through… The ultimate goal is to turn this area into a petroleum servicing area”. He then added: “People like Dick Cheney and George W. Bush serve an international racketeering organization that are in favor of subservient people.” When governor Ventura asked him if current president Barack Obama was part of that too, he responded: “Since the 1980’s Barack Obama has worked for the Central Intelligence Agency.” But was he an agent? “He was what they call a CIA asset. He was enrolled by Zbiniew Brzesinski, the head of the Trilateral Comission.” (See our article titled: Obama’s Deep Connections to the CIA Revealed). He went on to say that both Barack Obama and George W. Bush had the same policies in mind and that their only difference is that one was taught to govern from the Left while the other was shown how to do it from the Right. But if this is true, where is the proof BP has the government in its pocket? Webre was even more thorough this time. “BP gave a US$500 million grant to doctor Steven Chu, while he worked at the National Laboratory. He then was named Obama’s Secretary of Energy and with him came a BP insider as his undersecretary; a guy known as Steve Koonin. BP is running the Department of Energy of the United States,” Webre said.

Where would an ice age come from in anything related to the BP oil spill disaster? It turns out that the leakage of crude has slowed down the north atlantic current. If this current stops, the result would be a mini Ice Age. According to governor Ventura’s documentary, satellite data shows that the oil spill has halted the current known as the engine of the Gulf Stream, the warm ocean current that flows north through the atlantic. The Gulf Stream helps warm up the climate of Northern Europe. “If the BP dump is successful in braking the normal circulation of the gulf stream to the North Atlantic current, that may cause a mini Ice Age as we had it in the 1700’s,” reports Alfred Webre. A mini Ice Age as the documentary explains would play enormously well for big oil, as more of the crude will be in their oily hands when it occurs. “They are messing with out climate, our food supply and their intent is to starve us to death.”

Where is the proof for all this, you may be thinking. Here comes the paper that talks. An official document from the United States Corps of Engineers reveals a US$1.2 billion plan to effectively depopulate the Gulf region. This plan is part of a larger US$40 billion plan to extend the work into Louisiana. For this, governor Ventura met with Dr. Susan. I. Rees, a member of the Corps, who the investigation labels as the architect of the depopulation plans. She was straightforward and did not even lie about the existence of the plan. “We have a comprehensive program where we will relocate people.” When questioned about whether the oil companies would leave the area as well, Dr. Rees said the plans were strictly for the people, not the companies. Patrick Robbins, another member of the Corps of Engineers tried to wash his hands by saying that along with the depopulation there were a lot of environmental projects to improve the region. However, let’s remember that this is the same Corps of Engineers blamed for the poor management of the Katrina disaster. It is the same organization that built the levees that collapsed when they were supposed to protect the cities from the incoming waters.

The United States Corps of Engineers first denied that plans existed to depopulate the Gulf region, then admitted it. They claimed the plan amounted to only US$1.2 billion and not US$40 billion, but later admitted to the second number. So there you have it. The plans exist to depopulate the Gulf of Mexico region, the financing for it exists and the consequences of the oil spill are already manifesting themselves. Starvation, death, depopulation, corruption and YES maybe a new Ice Age. So if you did not believe in government conspiracies I hope this article helped change your mind. Because it does not matter whether you believe them or not; they do exist.

Costa Ricans Massively against U.S. Military Invasion

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
August 16, 2010

In the latest survey released by a Costa Rican polling firm, it is confirmed that most of Costa Rica does not welcome on arrival and permanence of U.S. troops in their country. In recent weeks, the Congress of Costa Rica agreed to allow the arrival of military ships, planes and thousands of American marines to ‘aid’ in the war against narcotics trafficking in the Americas, which is largely driven by the U.S. and Colombia.

In the survey, whose partial results were published in a local newspaper, Costa Ricans expressed unfavorable views of the U.S. occupation. Of all respondents, 32 percent believe that the occupation is detrimental. The newspaper did not explain why, or if polled respondents were questioned as to why their opinion was such. Meanwhile, another 38 percent of respondents expressed concern that the arrival and permanence of Americans violates Costa Rican sovereignty.

Overall, 70 percent of ‘Ticos’ demonstrated their dissatisfaction with the arrival and permanence of foreign troops until December 2010. But it is the 38 percent number that sounds the bell, more than any other number. The reason is that more than one third of Costa Ricans are aware that the U.S. invasion is a violation of their sovereignty, a position that until a few weeks ago was unknown. Thus, the 57 per cent who welcomes the country’s militarization pales in comparison to the 70 percent who disapproves -32 percent who see as harmful the arrival of the Americans and the 38 percent who disapprove due to the violation of sovereignty.

Although the majority of Costa Ricans disapprove the arrival of the Americans, for the reasons mentioned above, 57 percent approval makes it clear that there is considerable support. The reason for the support, although not explained in the publication, can be easily be connected to the insecurity that the ‘Ticos’ experience daily in their neighborhoods and cities. The insecurity has been allowed to grow freely for several decades by many governments that believed the fallacy that Costa Rica was the Switzerland of Central America and that nothing would change that. Years later, the underworld, the drug lords, both locals and from abroad, gained control of the streets in the country. Drug cartels now control large areas in southern, northern and the Caribbean regions. The failure of a bureaucracy that purposely let crime grow out of control, now presents the militarization as a solution with the arrival of 7,000 troops, warships and military aircraft and helicopters, which is seen as an exageration and a threat to the sovereignty of Costa Rica. But this is not new. It is the well known modus operandi and Hegelian practice of problem, reaction, solution.

In fact, the cooperation agreement between Costa Rica and the United States did not improve at all the drug trafficking situation in the country. During the execution of this agreement, more and more drugs continue moving through Costa Rican land and waters to their northern destinations of Mexico and the United States. In South America, the treaty known as Plan Colombia did not resul in anything positive, either. Millions of dollars of U.S. taxpayers are ‘invested’ in a war regarded as a failure because it has failed to accomplish its only goal: ending the drug trade in South, Central and North America, where the largest consumer market of cocaine, crack, heroin and other drugs -made in clandestine laboratories with mixtures of pharmaceutical ingredients- is located.

In response to growing drug trafficking, the U.S. pursued a policy of ‘cooperation’ that includes the invasion of sovereign territories to supposedly stop the flow of drugs across the continent, but neither the navy nor the army, -under the guidance of the Southern Command (SOUTHCOM )- scattered across the continent have achieved that goal. People have to wonder why.

The results so far provided by the pollster UNIMER, not only reveal the overwhelming opposition of the people in Costa Rica to the occupation, but also the fatigue of the ‘Ticos’ to the ‘business as usual’ policy of their government. Although the new president arrived with great fanfare, as they all arrive, she was not able to recognize the lack of leadership from the previous governments and project a clear plan on what to do about insecurity in the country. Mrs. Chinchilla preferred to extend the policy of accepting gifts and even sacrifice the sovereignty of Costa Rica to participate in a drug war that has proved a complete failure due to the fact it is driven by corruption and not by a desire to end the drug trafficking scheme.

Another conclusion that emerges from the survey is that 57 percent of ‘Ticos’ who support military intervention ignore the failure of the current war on drugs, which is largely responsible for the bankruptcy of the United States. The policy of occupation emptied the coffers of the government, which in itself did not even have any money. Similarly, history shows that countries who sacrifice freedom and sovereignty in exchange for ‘security’, end up losing both. What this 57 percent should demand is a clear policy against crime, not the acceptance of royalties. Although the democratic system is a hedious one, as it subjects large amounts of citizens to the wishes of others, hopefully in the case of Costa Rica the voice of the majority, -which this time seems to be wiser than before- will be heard louder than ever, to wake up the minority from their sleep in the arms of ignorance.

Related Articles:

Costa Rica Occupied by U.S. Military *UPDATE*

Costa Rica Occupied: Congress Surrenders Sovereignty to U.S. Army

HSBC, Wachovia, Bank of America Launder Mexican Drug Money

Mossad in South America

OPERATION GULF GREASE: Problem, Reaction, Solution to implement Agenda 21?

newswithviews.com

In the days prior to the Gulf drilling operation and ensuing environmental catastrophe, I remember thinking just how odd and out of

What is the United Nations' Law of the Sea Treaty? Click image and read the details.

character it was that Barack Obama had announced his approval for more offshore drilling. On April 1st, The Washington Post quoted Interior Secretary Ken Salazar as saying the administration had broached “a new direction” in energy policy. [1]

Had Obama lost his mind? Had he had some sort of religious experience? This was a president who campaigned against traditional energy sources in favor of so-called “sustainable” alternatives such as wind, solar, etc. This was a president who banned offshore drilling as one of his first acts in executive office.[2] This was a president who admitted in a meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle in January of 2008 that it was his plan to use a Cap and Trade system to cause energy prices to “necessarily skyrocket” in order to force people to transition to “green” technologies. “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,” Obama stated as documented in a YouTube video. [3]

Hence, the shock at the sudden “turnabout” in energy policy. True, the vast majority of Americans do support drilling for oil as a counterweight against increasing dependence upon the perpetually troubled Middle East and its OPEC cartel. But since when has any president in recent history paid attention to the opines of their electorate?

Now, as the days turn into weeks, and weeks into months — and the oil continues to gush in the Gulf with no sign of ever letting up — Obama has used the crisis as an excuse to not only ban offshore drilling,[4] but also to clamor for passage of his “cap and trade” energy bill.[5] Politico has cited opinion polls that suggest public support for drilling may be eroding.[6]

Was this the Hegelian plan all along? To foment a crisis in the Gulf to condition the masses that the world must adopt Agenda 21 “sustainable development” as its model for energy or pay the environmental consequences? Before you dismiss this notion as insanity, there are many troubling questions that demand answers. Questions that imply foreknowledge and planning. Questions of “coincidence.”

For example, is it “coincidental” the numerous incredible financial and business transactions that took place in the days, weeks, and months prior to the rig explosion?

We know the ties between British Petroleum and Goldman Sachs run deep. Peter Sutherland, the chairman of Goldman Sachs International also served as chairman of BP right up until last year, according to a 2009 bio on the site of the Trilateral Commission. It says,

“Peter Sutherland is chairman of BP plc (1997 – current). He is also chairman of Goldman Sachs International (1995 – current). He was appointed chairman of the London School of Economics in 2008. He is currently UN special representative for migration and development. Before these appointments, he was the founding director-general of the World Trade Organization. He had previously served as director general of GATT since July 1993 and was instrumental in concluding the Uruguay GATT Round Negotiations.”[7]

On April 30th, The Huffington Post published a satire piece about Goldman Sachs, who was embroiled in a Congressional probe over the present and pending financial meltdown just days before the Gulf disaster stole the headlines. The spoof article titled, Goldman Sachs Reveals It Shorted Gulf of Mexico, was actually mistaken by some as a legitimate news story. Written by a comedian, the satirical article said,

“In what is looming as another public relations predicament for Goldman Sachs, the banking giant admitted today that it made ‘a substantial financial bet against the Gulf of Mexico’ one day before the sinking of an oil rig in that body of water.”[8]

After this gag piece was published, various independent researchers began checking into the financial transactions of Goldman. What they found turned out to be a case of art imitating life.

Sterling Allan reported in The Examiner on May 5th,

“It turns out that Goldman Sachs really did place shorts on TransOcean stock days before the explosions rocked the rig in the Gulf of Mexico sending stocks plunging while GS profits soared — benefitting [sic] once again from a huge disaster, having done the same with airline stocks prior to 911 then again with the housing bubble.”[9]

It’s important to note the cozy relationship between Goldman Sachs and the Obama administration. According to McClatchy, while Goldman Sachs was under fire from the Securities and Exchange Commission, and their lawyers were in negotiations with the regulatory agency, Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein was a repeated visitor to the White House. He attended events with Obama and met with Larry Summers, Obama’s top economic advisor. Obama’s 2008 campaign benefited from $994,795 worth of campaign donations from Goldman employees and their relatives.[10] The Gulf disaster, coming on the heels of the Congressional hearing and SEC “investigation,” served to distract attention from the ongoing financial fraud and economic meltdown caused by Goldman and others.

We now know from John Byrne at Raw Story that prior to the Gulf oil mess, not only did Goldman Sachs short shares of TransOcean, the owner of the failed Deepwater Horizon rig, they also ditched 4,680,822 shares of BP stock, worth $250 million and representing 44% of their holdings. “Goldman’s sales were the largest of any firm during that time,” writes Byrne. “Goldman would have pocketed slightly more than $266 million if their holdings were sold at the average price of BP’s stock during the quarter.”[11]

Byrne also noted other financial institutions that also dumped BP holdings.

“Other asset management firms also sold huge blocks of BP stock in the first quarter — but their sales were a fraction of Goldman’s. Wachovia, which is owned by Wells Fargo, sold 2,667,419 shares; UBS, the Swiss bank, sold 2,125,566 shares.”[12]

If that weren’t enough of a “coincidence,” we also had The Telegraph out of London reporting that the chief executive of BP, Tony Hayward, also sold 223,288 shares, worth £1.4 million of stock in his own company (over $2 million) on March 17th — only weeks before the BP Gulf mess. The paper noted that by doing so he “avoided losing more than £423,000 ($614,449) when BP’s share price plunged after the oil spill began six weeks ago.”[13] He took the money and paid off the mortgage on his family mansion in Kent.

At this point, a question should be coming to mind: What did these people know that the rest of us didn’t? How is it that stock in BP and Transocean suddenly seemed so unattractive to those closest to the disaster? Ah, the coincidences! But it gets even better.

On April 10th, The Houston Chronicle reported that Halliburton — the company of which former Vice-President Dick Cheney was CEO — was in the process of acquiring Boots & Coots. Reuters reported that the deal was announced on Friday, April 9th — just eleven days prior to the explosion.[14] The Chronicle noted that “Boots & Coots has become well known for putting out some of the world’s largest oil and gas fires.”[15] The company’s website lists services they provide, including “deepwater application and well inspections, as well as blowout prevention and control counsel or assistance…”[16] According to the Orlando Sentinel, their expertise is already being put to use in the Gulf, as they are “one of two primary companies designing relief-well strategies for the BP blowout.”[17]

So when the acquisition deal is formerly approved by the government, Halliburton — the company famous for profiting from no-bid government contracts in war zones — will have collected for themselves yet another “slick” profit.

This is especially intriguing in light of the fact that, according to NPR, Halliburton’s cementing work — completed only hours prior to the explosion — has become a “central focus” of the Congressional investigation.[18] The Wall Street Journal quotes unnamed “experts” as saying the timing of the cementing in relation to the blast “points to it as a possible culprit.”[19]

But Halliburton isn’t the only company that stands to make a killing off the crisis. The Times Online out of the UK reported that TransOcean itself took out a $560 million insurance policy on the Deepwater Horizon rig. The dollar amount was well above the rig’s value. According to the paper, insurance payouts amounted to a $270 million profit from the disaster.

“The windfall, revealed in a conference call with analysts, will more than cover the $200m that Transocean expects to pay to survivors and their families and for higher insurance costs.”[20]

A number of people have questioned why Corexit — a chemical banned in the UK[21] and is much more toxic than the oil itself — was used as a dispersant in the Gulf. Assuming for the moment that chemical dispersants had to be used, the New York Times reported on May 13th:

“Of 18 dispersants whose use EPA has approved, 12 were found to be more effective on southern Louisiana crude than Corexit, EPA data show. Two of the 12 were found to be 100 percent effective on Gulf of Mexico crude, while the two Corexit products rated 56 percent and 63 percent effective, respectively. The toxicity of the 12 was shown to be either comparable to the Corexit line or, in some cases, 10 or 20 times less, according to EPA.”[22]

Yet, despite the EPA data ranking it “far above dispersants made by competitors” for toxicity, BP chose to dump more than 400,000 gallons of Corexit into the Gulf, order 805,000 more gallons with plans of hundreds of thousands of additional gallons should the spewing continue. Why?

The answer may lie in the fact that not only has Corexit production benefited BP and Exxon Chemical Company, it also has ties to the very same banking company that somehow knew to sell nearly half its holdings in BP stock just prior to the disaster — Goldman Sachs. Cassandra Anderson of Morph City connects the dots to the economic ties between the oil industry and the bankers.

“Corexit is produced by NALCO, originally named the National Aluminate Corporation, which formed a limited partnership with Exxon Chemical Company in 1994. Ondeo Nalco was purchased by Goldman Sachs, Apollo and Blackstone in 2003 and is currently a publicly traded company. Given NALCO’s business ties, it seems that safe and natural cleanup methods were avoided in the Gulf to pursue an economic agenda. The use of Corexit in Alaska, after the Exxon Valdez disaster, resulted in toxicity to humans that included respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders.”[23]

They say that history repeats itself. We know from wire reports that all 125 fishing boats had to be recalled from Gulf cleanup efforts after workers aboard began “experiencing nausea, dizziness, headaches and chest pains.”[24]

What’s going on here? Is the Gulf being poisoned on purpose to enhance corporate profits? Or has this crisis been orchestrated by the illuminists in order to force the United States to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) which would cede control of the oceans — over 70 percent of the planet’s surface — to the United Nations?

One must always keep in mind that Agenda 21 is the game plan for all that happens in the world today. The Hegelian dialectic is the means by which that game plan is implemented — creation of a crisis to condition the minds of the people that an undesired change is necessary, creation of their own controlled opposition to the crisis, finally the introduction of their pre-determined solution.

Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 deals with “Protection of the Oceans, all Kinds of Seas, Including Enclosed & Semi-enclosed Seas, & Coastal Areas & the Protection, Rational Use & Development of their Living Resources.” Who will determine what constitutes “rational use” of the oceans and their resources? If the LOST is ratified, it will be the United Nations.

In July 2009, State Department official Margaret Hayes told the New York Times that the Obama administration was in the process of working to “craft a plan to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.”

“President Obama is strongly in favor of the United States becoming a party to the Law of the Sea Convention,” Hayes was quoted as saying. “There is discussion going on as to the exact timing of when they might have a hearing and when they might proceed to have the full Senate consider accession.”[25]

The Times goes on to report that the administration is continuing a multi-year mapping of the sea floor in the Arctic in preparation to stake a claim under the LOST.[26]

Furthermore, the World Ocean Council, an alliance of multi-national businesses that are dedicated to ocean “sustainability,” is having its “Corporate Ocean Responsibility” meeting this month — conveniently on the heels of a major maritime disaster. The Sustainable Ocean Summit is described as “the first international, cross-sectoral ocean sustainability conference for the private sector – [that] will catalyze the growing interest among ocean businesses for more effective leadership and collaboration in addressing ocean environmental challenges.”[27] It just so happens that two of the founding members of the World Ocean Council are ExxonMobil and TransOcean.[28]

That the crisis in the Gulf may have been planned and executed with the intention of profiting from it while pushing an environmental control agenda, might explain the pathetic federal response after the disaster. [NWV POLL: Was the Gulf oil spill deliberately created?]

Three days after learning of the Gulf gusher, the Interior Department Chief of Staff Tom Strickland left for the Grand Canyon with his wife and went white water rafting.[29] The Department of the Interior is charged with the task of coordinating federal response to a major oil spill. Yet, Strickland’s priorities were elsewhere.

The “In-Situ Burn” plan was developed by the federal government in 1994 to deal with oil spill disasters in the Gulf, and calls for the immediate use of fire booms. Had the plan been followed, it might have prevented oil from reaching the shoreline. A single fire boom can burn up to 1,800 barrels or 75,000 gallons an hour. Yet, despite the plan, not one fire boom was available anywhere in the Gulf at the time of the incident.[30] [31]

On May 11th, ABC News reported that the U.S. Coast Guard conducted operations in the Gulf, simulating a major oil spill and practicing federal response to it a mere three weeks prior to the real disaster.[32] What was the purpose of the simulation? Obviously, it wasn’t to improve federal response.

In 2002, there was a similar practice operation which ABC describes as “eerily similar” to the current disaster. Lack of experience, poor communications, conflicting roles, and a need for new technology were cited. None of the recommendations were ever put into place.[33]

Wire reports from the Associated Press have said that workers aboard the rig were forced to sign statements that they hadn’t witnessed the explosion. They were told they couldn’t go home, nor could they make phone calls and talk to their friends and family until they signed the statements indicating they had no “first hand or personal knowledge” of the incident.[34]

We now have private military contractors deployed from Wackenhut — the military contractor infamous for its employees’ drunken brawls and vodka shots taken out of each other’s backside — guarding the perimeter of the Deepwater Horizon Unified Command.

Respected attorney Ellen Brown has written about empty Wackenhut buses with prison bars on the windows being driven around for no apparent reason in Arizona. Your writer has personally talked to other people who have seen these buses. Ellen wrote last year:

“The new Wackenhut operation is shrouded in mystery. It has been running its fleet of empty prison buses night and day, apparently logging miles on a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contract. Multiple buses can be seen driving all over town and even on remote desert back roads. Oddly, except for the driver and one escort guard seated in front, these buses appear to be empty.”[35]

Network news media have been complaining of being harassed and threatened by the security contractors for shooting video of the coast,[36] [37] which we’re told may soon become uninhabitable. Will Wackenhut buses be utilized to relocate mass numbers of people out of the coastal states?

It’s shaping up to be an interesting summer.