Greece chooses neo-Nazi to occupy Council of Europe position

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | JANUARY 25, 2013

The presence of Eleni Zarulia, a member of the Golden Dawn neo-Nazi party (18 seats) as Greek representative at the Council of Europe has provoked a storm of criticism over the ambiguous position of the Government of Athens. European anti-racist groups have criticized the executive for failing to veto the participation of Zarulia, who once described immigrants as “subhuman”.

Zarulia, wife of the leader of the ultra, Nikos Mijaloliakos, spoke last year about the qualities “subhuman” immigrants, of which she said “have invaded the homeland”, to then “fill it with diseases.”

Several lawmakers showed opposition Zarulia’s presence in the European body, as well as that of Hungarian Tamas Gaudi Nagy, from antisemitic party Jobbik. They raised the possibility of expelling party delegates who were “racist and anti-Semitic”, in allusion to both.

The Italian Christian Democrat Fiamma Nirenstein recalled Monday that the values ​​of these formations, and the opinions of both-are inconsistent with the Council, but the Procedures Committee finally approved their credentials on Tuesday, stressing that its acceptance “should not be interpreted as an expression of support or recognition for their actions, ideals or political positions, which are different from those supported by the Parliamentary Assembly in its 63 years of existence. ”

Founded in 1949, the Council of Europe – no relation to the European Union – the European States have 47 members and is responsible for issues such as legal standards, human rights, democratic development and cultural cooperation.

But the incongruity splashes especially the Greek executive, whose main party, the conservative New Democracy (ND), had pledged in December to its coalition partners to exclude Zarulia as Greek delegate. In a statement released Wednesday, the European anti-racist organization EGAM described the decision by the Greek government as “indefensible” and a double game of the prime minister, the conservative Andonis Samaras, for allowing the presence of neo-Nazis in the Assembly.

After his initial commitment, Samaras changed his mind and, in a motion filed by the other two members of the government, the socialist PASOK and the moderate left Dimar, Samaras’s party abstained, allowing Zarulia, along with delegates from other Greek formations represented in parliament to be part of the pan-European body.

Samaras’ abstention may have to do with the the support of PASOK and SYRIZA. ND and SYRIZA are locked in a political brawl that worsens by the second, following acts of violence that have dotted the country in recent weeks: homemade bombs against five journalists and the brother of a government’s spokesman, an attack with Kalashnikov against ND headquarters and the explosion of a handmade explosive device on Sunday at Mall of Maroussi (Athens), the largest mall in the country. ND accuses SYRIZA of not condemning the violence sufficiently and Samaras of distracting from the crisis, which enters its sixth year.

The last chapter of this bitter and open warfare is a video in which a Syriza deputy presumably calls the Greeks to take arms. The video was aired on Wednesday by New Democracy, and in it, viewers can see Vangelis Diamantópulos suggesting that citizens should arm themselves in response to the crisis. ND accused SYRIZA of taking phrases out of context.

The Real Agenda encourages the sharing of its original content ONLY through the tools provided at the bottom of every article. Please DON’T copy articles from The Real Agenda and redistribute by email or post to the web.

When Firearms are Confiscated, Innocents are Betrayed

JPFO | DECEMBER 27, 2012

In the history of the 20th Century, there were zero wars between what we would term “democratic” countries. The wars that killed so many millions involved either (1) non-democratic vs. democratic countries, or (2) non-democratic vs. nondemocratic countries.

Governments mass murdered their own citizens, or civilians under their control (as with occupation), in numbers exceeding 170,000,000 in the 20th Century alone. Over 95% of those killed were murdered by nondemocratic governments.

The mass murder of at least 70,000,000 (perhaps many millions more) civilians (men, women and children) by governments in the 20th Century occurred in nations where “gun control” ideas and laws had taken a strong hold.

Three Elements For Human Suffering Hold the above facts in mind, and consider this three-element formula for horrific human suffering:

(1) Evil exists in the world. This concept sounds obvious, but actually there are legions of people, many of them highly-educated and highly-placed, who believe that “bad things happen because there is too much inequality of wealth and not enough education.” Many of these people cannot accept the idea that Evil exists and that people are capable of doing Evil. They prefer the “poverty, disease, and ignorance” explanation
for bad behavior.

If the concept of Evil needs proof, then consider just a few examples of terrible things done by people who are not poor and not ignorant: (a) when government leaders develop written plans to persecute and exterminate a disfavored group, and then carry them out; (b) when a parent methodically goes from room to room strangling or drowning or stabbing several children; (c) when a young adult straps on a bomb and boards a city bus carrying people to work or school, detonates the bomb, and kills dozens of the people
and seriously maims dozens more.

(2) Imbalance of Power Creates Opportunities for Evil. This point should be obvious, too. On the micro level, consider the Carlie Bruscia case. Remember how a security video camera caught the act of the predator contacting Carlie, then grabbing her by the wrist and taking her away. This is just one example, but it makes the point. Carlie was 12. The predator was 35 or so and a strong male. The predator was probably three times a strong as Carlie, plus he had a plan and a motivation. Carlie had much less strength and no plan for defense. It was nearly a sure thing that the predator would win.

Carlie was brutally raped and murdered.

Consider the recent case where Iraqi terrorists shot down in cold blood a whole bus load of women and children. The victims were powerless compared to the terrorists. All it took then was an Evil idea, and the victims being selected. The power advantage of the aggressors made the rest easy.

Now on the macro level. The Framers of the U.S. Constitution worked to ensure that there was no great imbalance of power among the branches of government. In each branch of our Constitutional government there are checks and balances. Where government systems have checks and balances, and where these operate with open discussion and competition for votes, you have the sort of “democratic” society that rarely makes war on another “democratic” society. As Professor Rummel pointed out, unbalanced political power within nations is a major factor in the outbreak of wars between nations.

(3) Betrayal of Trust Multiplies the Results of Evil. This point is much more subtle because most of us do not want to think about it. It’s too painful. On the micro level, consider the doctor or nurse or medic who starts killing the patients. One doctor in Britain was believed to have murdered some 35 patients (he killed himself in jail). A male nurse in the Pacific Northwest also terminated dozens of patients. How could this happen?

Notice: in addition to the Evil idea and the imbalance of power, these victims had put themselves into a position of dependence. The patients submitted themselves willingly to the potential killer. They trusted the doctor or nurse – they willingly gave up their self defense – they created the imbalance of power – and placed their lives at the mercy of the supposed caregiver and protector. When an Evil idea formed in the minds of the caregivers and protectors, then the killing was next.

This terrible result is worse than just murder because it involves the evil of taking advantage of someone who has placed his or her trust in the killer. Many of the Jews who boarded trains bound for death camps in Nazi Germany could not allow themselves to believe that their own countrymen, their own police and army, would betray them so fatally. Children and teens often fail to even try to resist a child molester or kidnapper, because the children cannot grasp that a trusted adult could turn against them.

The Effects of Civilian Disarmament Ideas

Now you have the basic groundwork. Next, consider “gun control” ideas and laws. To the extent that “gun control” causes any results, those results are:

(1) The non-evil, peaceful, law-abiding people will be discouraged from owning, carrying, using, and even learning more about or practicing with firearms. “Gun control” laws act to discourage firearms ownership and use by making it more expensive, embarrassing, difficult, or legally risky to have and use guns.

(2) “Gun control” laws do not decrease the incidence of Evil – not one bit. Gun control laws discourage people, or impose costs on people – but they do not affect evil minds and evil intentions.

(3) “Gun control” laws encourage people to render themselves less powerful. Turn in guns, not own guns, avoid guns, learn little or nothing about guns. “Gun control” laws work only in the direction of causing law-abiding people to reduce their personal defense power.

(4) “Gun control” laws thus make it necessary for people to rely upon their government or private defense providers. For most people, hiring a private body guard or other security service that would come anywhere close to the effectiveness of being personally armed, is too expensive. So most people depend upon their government police and upon dialing Emergency 911.

(5) The more Draconian the “gun control” laws and policies, the more it is likely the civilians are unarmed.

(6) When a government takes power with evil intentions, and extensive “gun control” laws are in place, then you have the set-up for destruction. Most of the people have obeyed the laws and placed their self-defense trust in their governments. The people are relatively we ak. Meanwhile, the aggressors are mostly undeterred by gun control laws. The aggressors would include street criminals, organized crime, and government agencies (e.g. the Nazi SS, the Soviet KGB, various death squads). In fact, the government agencies are usually specifically exempted from the “gun control” laws.

So, there are deliberate programs of persecution by government, as in Nazi Germany or in Soviet Russia / Ukraine or in Cambodia. There are cultures of civilian powerlessness as in China during the Japanese invasion and rape of Nanking in 1937. There is the malign neglect that allows armed parties to raid and attack defenseless people, as in El Salvador and Uganda. In all cases, the imbalance of power, coupled with the people’s helpless dependence upon the same entity that doesn’t mind if they get killed or enslaved, produces the worst human suffering imaginable.

How Can An Armed Society Help?

Now, you may ask: “Yes, but what difference would it make if the people were armed?” The answer is pretty simple: even evil people calculate the costs. Bad guys rob convenience stores and pizza delivery guys whom they know are unarmed. Bad guys do not rob gun stores nor do they burgle police stations, because the criminal’s personal risk of getting caught and killed is too high.1

It is known that Nazi Germany did not invade Switzerland largely because the Nazis did not want to invest a lot of machinery and manpower to subjugate a nation that was civilian-armed to the teeth.2 Similarly, historians tell us that the Imperial Japanese military leaders did not want to invade the United States during World War II because they knew they would encounter fierce resistance from armed citizens.3

Remember that human beings are the ones who carry out orders. People calculate risks. Even though there is a lot of crime and lots of criminals infesting certain parts of Los Angeles, New York and Washington, D.C. (for example), the police will not go to those parts of town without backup. And in some areas, they will not go at all –certainly not at night.

We learn from all of these examples that armed civilians can deter even armed government functionaries.
Likewise, in the Iraq War, the American military chooses to deploy its forces in a manner less likely to result in American casualties. Thus, the American military does not blindly attempt to move into some towns and regions where they know the civilian resisters (“insurgents”) are armed and dangerous.

We therefore learn from modern military history that even powerful armies steer clear of armed and motivated civilian populations. All of these facts and observations suggest the following conclusion:
When a civilian population widely possesses firearms such as rifles, shotguns and handguns, along with ammunition for them, and the population has the training with the weapons along with the ethic of self defense, then the population is very unlikely to be conquered and persecuted either by their own government or by an invading force.

This conclusion means that lives are saved and human suffering is avoided when the population generally undertakes to prepare for its own armed defense. Stated simply: an armed population saves lives.
The data from the 20th Century suggest that millions of non-combatant lives were lost to genocide and persecution, because (a) the afflicted populations were tremendously underpowered compared to the killers, (b) the population relied solely upon their government to protect them, and (c) the government protectors either failed or actively turned against the populations.

Can All Evil Be Prevented?

Is an armed population absolutely safe from all invasion and persecution? No. But we have to consider the incentives of the aggressors. The better question is: will an invader or persecutor be more likely or less likely to attack an armed civilian population? Or, given a choice, would an invader or persecutor more often choose to afflict an armed population or an unarmed population?

It is possible to imagine scenarios where an armed population cannot do anything to protect itself against nuclear attack, for example. Such scenarios suggest only that no defense strategy is perfect, and that Evil can find a way to hurt and kill people. Overall, however, an armed population stands a much better chance of freedom from attack, persecution and slaughter than does an unarmed population.

History shows that Evil forces look for populations to enslave and annihilate. Evil selects those populations where it can operate with the least cost to itself. It is thus both a moral and practical imperative for populations to possess and learn to effectively use firearms for defense of self, family, community, and nation.

We hope this answers your question about the need and effectiveness of widespread private ownership of firearms.

Watch the film Innocents Betrayed below:

Resources

(1) Innocents Betrayed – the video documentary – makes a strong case because it presents the pictures and the flesh and blood reality of how the powerful can so easily destroy the powerless. It shows also how “gun control” laws are instrumental in paving the way for destruction.

(2) Death by Gun Control: The Human Cost of Victim Disarmament is our book upon which Innocents Betrayed is based. The book does not talk about the Second Amendment – it talks about the problem of disarmed citizens vs. powerful forces, and it develops further how the rhetoric of “gun control” leads to a deadly physical and moral paralysis.

(3) Death by Government, by Professor R.J. Rummel, takes a different tack from our book. While our book focuses on the civilian disarmament issues, Prof. Rummel looks at the political systems that create the situations that make genocides and mass persecutions possible … even inevitable.

Um Novo Reichstag norte-americano Está Chegando

Por Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
18 agosto de 2011

Isso é o que os comentários do governo dos Estados Unidos parecem sugerir. Algumas semanas atrás, informamos sobre como um vídeo do Departmento de Seguranca Nacional(DHS) incitava o medo sobre os terroristas brancos de Al-Qaeda. Apenas um dia após a publicação, Anders Breivik explodiu um prédio do governo em Oslo, Noruega.

O governo dos EUA está pregando a idéia de que um novo ataque ao estilo de Oklahoma City está chegando.

Depois de Oslo, o mesmo Departamento de Segurança Nacional lançou um anúncio em que os suspeitos são, mais uma vez, cidadãos brancos. O Americano branco é uma ameaça. De alguma forma o Governo dos Estados Unidos encontrou uma maneira de mover a ameaça dos fundamentalistas islâmicos aos cidadãos que apoiam o constitucionalismo.

No anúncio, o DHS mostra “rostos brancos” e pede ao mesmo tempo um alto grau de vigilância do público para reportar qualquer atividade “suspeita” ou “incomum”. Como antes, não existe uma definição clara de atividade “suspeita” ou “fora do comum”. Esta técnica, como já relatado anteriormente, é uma operação psicológica para fomentar o medo e a desconfiança do público, não só para aceitar a mensagem do governo, mas para que o público espie nos seus vizinhos e membros da família e acusem seu questionamento das políticas governamentais.

No passado, o infame Partido Nazista, liderado por Adolf Hitler, usou a falsa ameaça de uma força estrangeira que planejava atacar a Alemanha a fim de que o público aceitasse a sua tomada do poder, a qual terminou com a morte de judeus, cristãos e qualquer outro membro de grupos que se opunham a suas políticas. Hitler só não conseguiu amassar poder em toda Europa e o mundo, porque os seus controladores já tinham alcançado seu objetivo de criar o movimento que produziu o conflito entre Hitler e as forças militares estrangeiras.

A ameaça de um ataque no estilo “lobo solitário” como aconteceu em Oklahoma City é então a solução para salvar a presidência. Se você acha que isso é loucura, confira este artigo no Financial Times de Londres, onde Robert Shapiro, ex-conselheiro da Casa Branca com Bill Clinton sugere que a menos que um ataque terrorista aconteça, a administração Obama está fadada ao fracasso. Devemos acrescentar a própria avaliação de Barack Obama, incluindo seu pensamento de que os EUA poderia absorver um novo ataque terrorista da magnitude do 11 de setembro.

Ontem, Barack Obama reforçou ainda mais a alegada ameaça de terrorismo doméstico durante uma entrevista na CNN. Em resposta a um comentário de Wolf Blitzer, Obama identificou a possibilidade de que uma pessoa possa causar um grande ataque terrorista. “Estamos em alerta e monitorando constantemente a ameaça de um ataque terrorista … O risco está sempre lá … O risco que nos interessa agora é um ataque estilo “lobo solitário”, uma única pessoa com uma arma, alguém que é capaz de realizar o tipo de ataque que vimos recentemente na Noruega.” Obama mentiu mais uma vez, porque já foi demonstrado que Anders Breivik não agiu sozinho. Na verdade, inclusive a mídia corporativa informou que Breivik chamou a polícia para se render antes de realizar os ataques.

Alguns dias atrás, o escritor do New York Times, Paul Krugman, sugeriu que os EUA se beneficiaria muito se uma nova ameaça, como uma invasão alienígena acontecesse porque permitiria que o governo lançasse uma nova guerra, e assim, reviver a economia. Esta linha de pensamento seria engraçada se não fosse porque o que sugere Krugman é exatamente o programa realizado durante a Primeira e Segunda Guerra Mundial. Após a crise econômica, os Globalistas decidiram enfrentar as nações umas contra as outras para esconder a verdadeira razão da crise e estimular a produção de máquinas de guerra, criar empregos no complexo militar-industrial e começar do zero após o fim da guerra. Mas a que custo humano?

O que faz o novo anúncio DHS significa?

Continuando onde tinham deixado no seu discurso há algumas semanas, o Departamento de Segurança Nacional, dirigido pela Secretária Janet Napolitano, continua sua campanha de alarmismo para que as pessoas aceitem o grande ataque terrorista e as medidas de Estado Policia que virão.

No vídeo, o DHS mostra um homem branco e jovem dirigindo um táxi. Ele para na frente do que parece ser uma estação de ônibus ou trem, abre o porta-malas do táxi e ativa o que parece ser um dispositivo explosivo. Ao mesmo tempo, dois passageiros dentro da estação vêem uma mulher de aparência suspeita caminhando pela estação. E adivinhem? Ela é branca, também. Um homem branco que observa o motorista do táxi, em seguida, aparece conversando com um policial em uma suposta tentativa de avisar sobre as atividades suspeitas.

O que podemos deduzir? Quando você olha em mais de uma dimensão, é claro que mais uma vez, o DHS pretende retratar brancos como pessoas perigosas, especialmente a classe média branca. Para entender este truque, conecte o anúncio para a atual situação financeira, onde os mais afetados são em sua maioria de classe média e os pobres (taxistas e passageiros de transporte público) quem foram roubados do seu futuro. Em todo o mundo, é a classe média e os pobres que estão se levantando contra a tentativa dos Globalistas de consolidar ainda mais o poder econômico e militar. Após que Anders Breivik supostamente atacara o prédio federal em Oslo, as autoridades reforçaram a segurança na capital e outras cidades na Noruega. Após os motins em Londres, em um outro esquema Problema, Reação, Solução, um grupo de criminosos atacou negócios e residências. O governo britânico decidiu usar a tecnologia de reconhecimento facial nas ruas para digitalizar e armazenar imagens de qualquer pessoa que “agir de forma suspeita.” Antes dos ataques, a polícia deixou os saqueadores fazer o que queriam e agora querem fazer coletar imagens dos rostos de aqueles que eles achem suspeitos.

Voltando para EUA a mídia prostituta está ecoando o discurso de Obama sobre a ameaça de um ataque estilo “lobo solitário”. Na terça-feira, CBS disse que o próximo ataque não viria de terroristas islâmicos, mas um membro do movimento de “cidadãos soberanos” nos Estados Unidos, ou cidadãos que estão exigindo o fim da Reserva Federal, as guerras, a recuperação econômica, a adoção de políticas fiscais e monetárias sanas e o fim da intervenção e manutenção do império americano. A julgar pelas pesquisas recentes, este grupo de pessoas sendo agora rotulado como “perigoso” pelo governo federal, inclui uma minoria poderosa que está armado e pronta para defender seu direito à liberdade de expressão, a possuir e portar armas para se proteger e suas famílias do aumento do crime, o seu direito ao protesto público contra as políticas do governo, etc. O grupo identificado por agências como o FBI como “perigoso” também inclui qualquer um que apoia o candidato presidencial Ron Paul, que está liderando a maioria das pesquisas de intenção de voto, e qualquer um ou qualquer coisa que cheira a Constitucionalismo.

Naturalmente, o governo sabe que não é necessaria uma maioria para retornar o governo de volta para as pessoas, mas uma minoria bem educada e armada para expulsar os invasores que tomaram o governo dos Estados Unidos da América, bem como todos os outros países do mundo ocidental. É por isso que o governo está avançando discretamente iniciativas para proibir o direito constitucional de possuir armas e realizam operações em feiras de armas e invadem propriedade privada em busca de armas de fogo legalmente possuídas. O próprio Obama é um protetor falso do direito de estar armado. Também sao Rick Perry, e Mitt Romney. Em abril, o jornal Star-Tribune informou que o FBI está espionando os cidadãos em Wyoming para monitorar o uso de armas de fogo. A agente do FBI Kathy Wright disse que “o escritório tem mantido um olho sobre o movimento, porque alguns soberanos acreditam na ilegitimidade do sistema atual e podem agir violentamente contra ele.”

O que poderia resultar de uma situação em que uma sociedade desarmada é incapaz de proteger-se de crime e o abuso do governo? Peca uma explicação para as famílias de pessoas que sobreviveram as atrocidades nazistas, pergunte ao povo de Oklahoma City, os alunos da Virginia Tech, o povo de Nova York e, mais recentemente, na Noruega. O que poderia resultar de uma sociedade educada que livremente têm armas de fogo para se defender? Peca uma opinião aos cidadãos da Suíça e Texas.

 

El Próximo Reichstag Estadounidense está por Llegar

Por Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
18 de agosto 2011

Eso es lo que comentarios provenientes del gobierno de los Estados Unidos parece sugerir. Hace unas semanas, informamos sobre la forma en que un vídeo del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) incitaba el temor sobre terroristas blancos de Al Qaeda y sólo un día después de la publicación, Anders Breivik hizo explotar un edificio gubernamental en Oslo, Noruega.

El gobierno de EE.UU. está predicando la idea de que un nuevo ataque al estilo de Oklahoma City está por venir.

Después de Oslo, el mismo Departamento de Seguridad Nacional ha lanzado un nuevo anuncio de servicio público en el que una vez más acusa el peligro de una ataque terrorista que puede ser llevado a cabo por miembros blancos de Al-Qaeda. El blanco americano es la amenaza. De alguna manera el Gobierno de EE.UU. encontró una forma de mover la amenaza de los fundamentalistas islámicos a los estadounidenses que apoyan el constitucionalismo.

En el anuncio, el DHS presenta “caras blancas” y pide al mismo tiempo un alto grado de vigilancia de parte de la ciudadanía para informar de cualquier actividad “sospechosa” o “fuera de lo común”. Como en ocasiones anteriores, no existe una definición clara de actividad “sospechosa” o “fuera de lo común. Esta técnica, como hemos informado antes, es una operación psicológica para instigar miedo y desconfianza en el público para que no sólo acepten el mensaje de temor del gobierno, sino también a su vez que espíen sus vecinos y miembros de la familia y acusen su cuestionamiento de las políticas del gobierno.

En el pasado, el infame partido nazi, al mando de Adolf Hitler utilizó la falsa amenaza de una fuerza extranjera planeando atacar Alemania con el fin de que el público aceptara su toma de poder que terminó con la muerte de judíos, cristianos y cualquier otro miembro de grupos que se oponían a sus políticas. Hitler sólo no pudo apoderarse de Europa y del mundo, porque sus financistas ya habían logrado su objetivo de crear el movimiento guerrillero de Hitler que produjera conflicto contra otras fuerzas militares.

La amenaza de un ataque realizado por un “lobo solitario” al estilo de Oklahoma City es entonces la solución para salvar la presidencia. Si usted piensa que esto es una locura, eche un vistazo a este artículo en el Financial Times de Londres, donde Robert Shapiro, ex asesor de la Casa Blanca con Bill Clinton sugiere que a menos que un ataque terrorista ocurra, el gobierno de Obama está condenado al fracaso. Tenemos que añadir a esto la propia evaluación de Barack Obama, que incluye su pensamiento de que Estados Unidos podría absorber otro ataque terrorista de la magnitud del 11 de Setiembre.

Ayer, Barack Obama reforzó aún más la supuesta amenaza de terrorismo interno, durante una entrevista en la CNN. Al responder un comentario de Wolf Blitzer, Obama identificó la posibilidad de que una sola persona puede causar un ataque terrorista importante. “Estamos alerta y monitoreando constantemente la amenaza de un ataque terrorista … El riesgo siempre está ahí … El riesgo que nos preocupa ahora es un ataque estilo ‘lobo solitario’, una sola persona con un arma, alguien que es capaz de llevar a cabo el tipo de masacre que vimos en Noruega hace poco.” Por supuesto, se ha demostrado que Anders Breivik no actuó solo. De hecho, incluso los medios de comunicación corporativos informaron que Breivik llamó a la policía parar entregarse antes de los ataques.

Un par de días atrás, el escritor del New York Times, Paul Krugman sugirió que Estados Unidos se beneficiaría enormemente si una nueva amenaza, como la invasión de extraterrestres sucediera, ya que permitiría al gobierno lanzar una nueva guerra, y por lo tanto, reactivar la economía. Esta línea de pensamiento sería divertida si no fuera porque lo que sugiere Krugman es exactamente el programa llevado a cabo en las Guerras Mundiales I y II. Tras la crisis económica evidente, los globalistas decidieron enfrentar las naciones unas contra otras con el fin de esconder la verdadera razón de la crisis y estimular la fabricación de máquinas de guerra, crear puestos de trabajo en el complejo militar-industrial y empezar de cero otra vez después de que las guerras terminaran. ¿Pero a qué costo humano?

¿Qué significa el nuevo anuncio del DHS decir?

Continuando donde habían dejado su discurso hace unas semanas, el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional encabezado por la secretaria Janet Napolitano, continúa con su campaña de alarmismo para que la gente acepte el próximo gran ataque terrorista y las medidas de Estado Policía que se derivan de este.

En el video, el DHS muestra a un hombre blanco joven conduciendo un taxi. Se detiene por lo que parece ser una estación de autobuses o de tren, abre el maletero del taxi y activa lo que parece ser un artefacto explosivo. Al mismo tiempo, dos pasajeros en el interior de la estación ven a una mujer de aspecto sospechoso caminando dentro de la estación. Y ¿adivinen qué? Ella es blanca, también. Un hombre blanco que observa al conductor del taxi aparece entonces hablando con un oficial de policía en un supuesto intento de denunciar las actividades sospechosas.

¿Qué podemos deducir de esto? Cuando lo analizamos en más de una dimensión, es claro que una vez más, el DHS tiene la intención de retratar a los blancos como gente peligrosa, sobre todo la clase media blanca. A fin de comprender este truco, hay que conectar el anuncio a la situación financiera actual, donde los más afectados están siendo en su mayoría de clase media y los pobres (los taxistas y los usuarios del transporte público) despojados de su futuro. En todo el mundo, es la clase media y los pobres los que se levantan contra el intento de los Globalistas de consolidar aún más el poder económico y militar. Después que Anders Breivik presuntamente atacó el edificio federal en Oslo, las autoridades reforzaron la seguridad en la capital y otras ciudades de Noruega. Después de los disturbios en Londres, en otro esquema de Problema, Reacción, Solución, un grupo de delincuentes atacó negocios y viviendas. El gobierno británico decidió entonces utilizar tecnología de reconocimiento facial en las calles para escanear y almacenar las imágenes de cualquier persona que “pueda ser o actuar de manera sospechosa”. Antes de los ataques, la policía dejó que los saqueadores hicieran lo que querían y ahora quieren escanear las caras de todos.

De vuelta en Estados Unidos los medios prostitutos de comunicación siguen haciendo eco del discurso de Obama sobre la amenaza de un ataque estilo “lobo solitario”. El martes, CBS dijo que el próximo ataque no vendría de los terroristas islámicos, pero de un miembro del movimiento de “ciudadanos soberanos” en los Estados Unidos, o sea, los ciudadanos que están pidiendo el fin de la Reserva Federal, el fin de las guerras, la reactivación de la economía, la adopción de políticas fiscales y monetarias sanas y el fin del intervencionismo y la manutención del imperio estadounidense. A juzgar por las últimas encuestas, este grupo de personas que ahora es etiquetado como “peligroso” por el gobierno federal, incluye una poderosa minoría que está armada y listo para defender su derecho a expresarse libremente, tener y portar armas para protegerse a sí mismos y a sus familias ante el aumento de la delincuencia, su derecho a la protesta pública contra las políticas gubernamentales. El grupo identificado por agencias como el FBI como “peligroso” también incluye cualquiera que apoye al candidato presidencial Ron Paul quien está liderando casi todas las encuestas y cualquier persona o cosa que huela a Constitucionalismo.

Naturalmente, el gobierno sabe que no se necesita una mayoría para devolver el gobierno de nuevo a la gente, pero una minoría muy bien educada y armada para expulsar a los invasores que se apoderaron del gobierno de Estados Unidos de América, así como todos los otros países en el mundo occidental. Es por eso que el gobierno sigue avanzando iniciativas para prohibir discretamente la segunda enmienda y realiza operaciones en ferias de armas e invade propiedades privadas en busca de armas de fuego poseídas legalmente. El propio Obama es un falso protector del derecho a estar armado. También lo son, Rick Perry, y Mitt Romney. En abril, el periódico The Star-Tribune informó que el FBI está espiando a los ciudadanos en Wyoming para vigilar su uso de armas de fuego. La agente del FBI Kathy Wright, dijo que “la oficina ha mantenido un ojo en el movimiento debido a que algunos soberanos han dado el paso lógico de creer en la ilegitimidad del sistema actual para actuar violentamente contra ella.”

¿Qué podría resultar de una situación en la que una sociedad desarmada es incapaz de protegerse de la delincuencia y los abusos del gobierno? Pida una explicación a los familiares de personas que sobrevivieron a las atrocidades nazis, pregunte a la gente de la ciudad de Oklahoma, los estudiantes de Virginia Tech, los habitantes de Nueva York, y más recientemente de Noruega. ¿Qué podrían derivarse de una sociedad educada que libremente posee armas de fuego para defenderse? Pida una opinión a los ciudadanos de Suiza y de Texas.

 

Is a New American Reichstag in the Works?

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
August 17, 2011

That is what chatter coming from the United States government seems to suggest. A few weeks ago, we reported on how a video from the Department of Homeland Security(DHS) incited fear of ‘white Al-Qaeda’ terrorists and just a day after publication, Anders Breivik blew up a government building in Oslo, Norway.

The U.S. government is preaching the idea that a new Oklahoma City style attack is coming.

Since Oslo, the very same Department of Homeland Security has put out a new Public Service Announcement where they go at it again. The white American is the threat. Somehow the U.S. Government found a way to move the threat from Islamic fundamentalists to Americans who support Constitutionalism.

In the new ad, DHS presents new ‘white faces’ while calling for a high state of vigilance from the part of the citizenry to report any ‘suspicious’ or ‘out of the ordinary’ activity. As in previous occasions, no clear definition of ‘suspicious’ or ‘out of the ordinary’ is given. This technique, as we reported before, is a psychological operation to instigate fear and distrust on the public so that they not only accept the government’s message of fear, but also turn against their neighbors and family members and tattle tale about their questioning of government policies.

Back in the days of the infamous Nazi party, Adolf Hitler used the false threat of a foreign force planning to attack Germany in order to push the public to accept his insane power grab, that ended in the death of Jews, Christians, and any other members of groups that opposed his policies. Hitler only failed on his attempt to take over Europe and the world, because his handlers had already achieved their goal to ramp up the war movement by playing Hitler against other military forces.

The threat of a ‘lone wolf’ style terror attack in the United States then is the solution to save the drastically faded Obama presidency. If you think this is insane, take a look at this article on the Financial Times of London, where Robert Shapiro, a former White House aide to Bill Clinton suggested that barring a terror attack, the Obama administration was doomed. We must add to this Barack Obama’s own assessment which included his thought that the United States could absorb another terror attack of the size of 9/11.

Yesterday, Barack Obama came out to reinforce even more the supposed threat of homegrown terrorism during an interview on CNN. While responding to a comment from Wolf Blitzer, Obama identified the possibility that a single person could cause a major terror attack. “We are vigilant and constantly monitoring the threat of a terrorist attack… The risk is always there… The risk we are concerned now is the ‘lone wolf’ threat, a single person with a weapon, someone being able to carry out the type of massacre we saw in Norway recently.” Of course, it has been proven that Anders Breivik did not act alone. In fact, even main stream media reports confirm that Breivik called police several times to turn himself in before the attacks.

A couple of days ago, New York Times writer Paul Krugman came out and suggested the United States would benefit greatly if a new threat such as the invasion of aliens happened because it would allow the government to launch wars and therefore revive the economy. This train of thought would be funny if it wasn’t because what Krugman suggested was exactly the agenda carried out in World Wars I and II. Upon the evident economic crisis, the Globalists decided to play nations against nations in order to spur manufacturing of war machinery, create jobs within the military industrial complex and start fresh again after the wars were over. But at what human cost?

What does the new DHS Ad say?

Picking up where they left off a few weeks ago, the Department of Homeland Security headed by Secretary Janet Napolitano, continues its fear mongering campaign to get people to accept the next big terrorist attack and the Police State measures that will stem from it.

In the video, DHS shows a white young man driving a cab. He stops by what seems to be a bus or train station, opens the trunk of the cab and activates what appears to be an explosive device. At the same time, two passengers inside the station see a suspicious looking woman walking inside the station as she flies by them. And guess what, she’s white, too. A white man who observes the white taxi driver walking away from the cab is then shown talking to a police officer in a supposed attempt to denounce the suspicious activity.

What can we get from this? When looked at it in more than one dimension, it is clear that once again the DHS intends to portray whites as dangerous, especially white middle class people. In order to understand this trick, one needs to connect the ad to the current financial situation, where mostly middle class and the poor (taxi drivers and public transportation users) are being robbed of their future. Everywhere in the world, it is the middle and poor class the ones rising up against the Globalist attempt to further consolidate economic and military power. After Anders Breivik allegedly attacked the federal building in Oslo, authorities beefed up security in the capital and other cities in Norway. After the last riots in London, in another Problem, Reaction, Solution scheme, a crowd of criminals attacked local businesses and homes. The British government decided to use face recognition technology on the streets to scan and store imagery from anyone who “may be or act suspicious”. Previous to the attacks, police stood down and let the looters do whatever they wanted and now they want to scan everyone’s faces.

Back in the United States the corporate prostitute media continues to eco Obama’s speech about the threat of a ‘lone wolf’ attack. On Tuesday, CBS News said the next attack would not come from Islamic terrorists, but from a member of the “Sovereign Citizen” movement in the United States, that is everyone calling for the end of the Federal Reserve, the end of the wars, the reactivation of the economy, the adoption of sound fiscal and monetary policies and the end of interventionism and empire building. Going by the recent polls, this group of people now labeled as “dangerous” by the federal government, includes a powerful minority who is armed and ready to defend their rights to speak freely, own and carry weapons to protect themselves and their families from rising crime, public protest against insane government policies and anyone who supports Ron Paul and anyone and anything that smells like Constitutionalism.

Naturally, the government knows that it does not take a majority to get the government back to the people, but a really well-educated and armed minority to eject the current invaders who occupy the United States of America, or for that matter every other country in the western world. That is why the government continues to move initiatives to discretely ban the second amendment carrying out stings in gun shows and invading private property to look for legally held fire arms. Obama himself is an “in the closet” gun grabber. So are Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. In April, the newspaper the Star-Tribune reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is spying on citizens in Wyoming to keep tabs on their use of fire arms. FBI agent Kathy Wright said that “the bureau has kept an eye on the movement because some sovereigns have taken the logical step from belief in the illegitimacy of the current system to acting violently against it.”

What could come from a situation where a disarmed society is unable to protect itself from crime and the abuses of government? Ask relatives of people who survived the Nazi atrocities, ask the people of Oklahoma City, the people from Virginia Tech, from New York, and more recently from Norway. What could stem from an educated society that freely carries fire arms to defend itself? Ask the citizens of Switzerland and Texas.