posted 01-16-2003 04:39 PM            

WASHINGTON--A Pentagon antiterrorism plan to link databases of credit card companies, health insurers and others--creating what critics call a "domestic surveillance apparatus"--is encountering growing opposition on Capitol Hill.

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisc., is planning to introduce a bill on Thursday to halt the Pentagon's Total Information Awareness program. A representative said on Wednesday that if passed, the legislation would suspend the TIA program until Congress can "review the data-mining issues."

Even if Congress never acts on Feingold's proposal, the unusual step of trying to suspend a military program may prompt the Defense Department to review the TIA program in a way few other tactics could. The bill will also provide TIA critics with a focal point for activism.

If fully implemented, TIA would link databases from sources such as credit card companies, medical insurers and motor vehicle departments for police convenience in hopes of snaring terrorists. It's funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

Over the last two months, scrutiny of TIA has been growing, with newspaper editorials claiming that one of the project's leaders, Adm. John Poindexter, is unfit for the job because of his participation in the Iran-Contra scandal in the 1980s. As a protest gesture, activists and critics of TIA have posted Poindexter's personal information online, which may lie behind the removal of information from the TIA Web site on at least three occasions.

On Tuesday, a coalition of civil liberties groups sent a letter to Congress asking that hearings be convened to investigate TIA.

"Why is the Department of Defense developing a domestic surveillance apparatus?" the letter asked. "What databases of personal information would TIA envision having access to?"

In a statement posted last month on the TIA Web site, the Defense Department defended the project as privacy neutral.

"The DoD recognizes American citizens' concerns about privacy invasions," the statement said. "To ensure the TIA project will not violate the privacy of American citizens, the Department has safeguards in place. In addition, (we) will research and develop technologies to protect the system from internal abuses and external threats. The goal is to achieve a quantum leap in privacy technology to ensure data is protected and used only for lawful purposes."

Last week, Feingold and two fellow Democrats--Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Maria Cantwell of Washington state--sent a letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft asking him to disclose how the Justice Department and the Defense Department were using TIA or similar programs.

One person with knowledge of the situation said Republican senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa has been approached as a cosponsor of the TIA moratorium. The endorsement of a Republican would lend the moratorium measure additional heft.

"There are many questions surrounding data-mining initiatives of the government," said Jim Dempsey, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Democracy and Technology. "Sen. Feingold's bill would impose a moratorium on data-mining activities by the Department of Defense or the Department of Homeland Security until the program is justified, assuming it can be justified, and assuming the privacy concerns are satisfied, assuming they can be satisfied."

David Sobel, general counsel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, suggests an inquiry into whether the TIA program would violate federal privacy laws or the U.S. Constitution. Sobel said the Feingold bill is "a way to begin a legislative debate on the legality of TIA and other data-mining initiatives."

Sobel pointed to executive order 12333, which regulates the operation of U.S. spy agencies. It says that those agencies may collect information on Americans "only in accordance" with specific procedures.

posted 01-17-2003 01:26 AM            

Dallas County is setting up a surveillance system a Commie would love

BY JIM SCHUTZE
Mark Andresen

Dallas County is spending $40 million on a computer system that will put a French multinational in charge of your voting records.

This is Dallas, a conservative bastion. But the county government is setting up a system for spying on private citizens that would have turned old Joe Stalin green with envy.

The county has signed a $40 million contract with a French multinational corporation to take over all of its information technology, from property tax payments to court files to election records. The company, SchlumbergerSema of Paris, is an international pioneer in the technology of "smart cards"--chips embedded in plastic ID cards and in machinery, even surgically embedded, to enable the minute monitoring of individual behavior.

Schlumberger is one of several companies competing to develop smart cards that will marry biometrics with miniprocessors. The goal is a chip containing the bearer's photograph, fingerprints, lip kiss prints, iris recognition image, even DNA. The chip would exchange information about the bearer with reader machines connected to vast national databases.

In a New York press release announcing the agreement, Schlumberger promised it would help make Dallas "Homeland Security compliant, providing both physical and logical [information] security.

"For example," the company said, "SchlumbergerSema is creating a bio-terrorism tracking system, which will help gather and disseminate information for the county. Furthermore, SchlumbergerSema is streamlining the county's law enforcement/court system with a new system designed by SchlumbergerSema."

SchlumbergerSema said it would talk to me about its contract but then backed out after I breathed the word "privacy." Dallas County officials said they would provide a copy of the contract then changed their minds after a similar conversation.

That left me to do some reading on my own about the state-of-the-art smart cards and about the federal government's push for "Total Information Awareness" as an anti-terrorism tool. Let's play this out in simple terms:

Imagine that two years from now Schlumberger, whose primary business is oilfield services, hits a really bad patch financially and finds a way to avoid ruin by aggressively marketing some of the data it has mined as an IT consultant to companies and governments. Imagine that your own longtime employer is on hard times as well. And let's imagine that you are four years from retirement and have been diagnosed with a very early cancer that is affecting your kidneys.

Your company decides it needs to deep-six anybody who's going to incur major medical expenses any time soon. They drop a nickel in the Schlumberger information jukebox, and out pops the fact that you have been flushing your toilet a lot between 3 a.m. and 5 a.m.

They also notice that you've been making cell calls to an oncology practice. But the really irritating thing they find is that last year, after you were told to vote for the Work, Family and Discipline candidate for governor, you voted for that weak-kneed Republican they hate.

Too weird? Some of it's real right now. The rest is just around the corner.

The Jacksonville, Florida, Electric Authority, called JEA, which serves 350,000 electric customers and 227,000 water customers in northeast Florida, is under contract with Schlumberger to set up wireless metering of all residential accounts. The system, under construction as we speak, will send in reports on an individual home's electric and water consumption every five minutes. An article in City and County magazine gushes that "The wireless fixed network will allow engineers and planners to take an instant true-load snapshot by house, by area or by town."

Right now they can minutely monitor the load for your whole house. Tomorrow they will put chips in every outlet and at each faucet.

Smile. You're on Candid Camera.

During the 2001 Super Bowl in the Ybor City district of Tampa, Florida, Tampa police tried to use a biometric system based on facial characteristics to monitor vast crowds. Computers were to search for matches between faces in the crowd and a database of bad people. The system didn't work at all, because of problems with lighting and anomalies that occur when people change their hairdos or alter their facial expressions.

But they'll get there. How long ago was it that you almost had to stop your car at the Tollway so that the machine could read your tag? Now you can do it at 70 mph, right?

When these systems are perfected, you will be asked to expose your eye to an iris recognition reader, or to press your fingerprint against a pane of glass, or submit a fluid, or perhaps kiss a portrait of your corporate leader: When the reader agrees that you are the proper bearer of your card, and when the card agrees that it works for the reader, then the card and the reader will exchange all sorts of information about you. You will not know what they're talking about.

You could be sitting at the loan officer's desk, and the message on his computer screen might be telling him, "...applicant makes late-night cell calls to fellow worker of opposite sex; also buys expensive gifts, which fellow worker, unbeknownst to sap applicant, returns for cash."

I spoke to John Hennessey, Dallas County's chief information officer, as well as to the administrator for the county Commissioners Court, about the scope of the Schlumberger contract in general. I asked specifically whether the new arrangement might include some introduction of a smart-card identification system for access to county buildings and records. Hennessey said the contract with Schlumberger "is flexible enough that it [a smart-card system] could be a part of this agreement."

Much of the thinking about smart cards seems to be aimed at universalizing them less through mandatory requirements than through incentives. The federal government is exploring the use of smart cards for "safe travelers"--people who agree to be checked out in advance, once and for all, and who then will be able to step around long security lines by presenting their smart cards. Retailers are beginning to offer smart cards as "loyalty cards"--frequent shopper cards--with some sort of discount attached.

It is by no means inconceivable that the county, under Schlumberger's tutelage, would require or encourage people seeking access to its computer systems to carry smart cards. And there is a hitch to which I as a reporter happen to be especially sensitive. I was a reporter before PCs existed.

In the days when records were kept in great big hand-logged ledger books, I don't think I ever entered a single South Texas or rural Michigan courthouse and asked to see a public record without getting grilled.

"Well, who are you? Are you a lawyer? Do you have some ID? Why do you want to see our records? Whose records in particular are you looking for?"

And, of course, I had a right--not as a reporter but as an American citizen--to see public records, my records, records I owned as a citizen, without telling anybody who I was or what I was doing. That was often the point: Two-thirds of getting the goods is in the sneaking up.

You allow somebody to put a smart card between you and the records, those days are over. Count on it. Start checking on a legislator's voting record, and his staff will know who you are and which terminal you're on.

Some people don't care that President Bush's guru in charge of anti-terrorist data mining, John Poindexter, was convicted in 1990 of lying to Congress on behalf of a terrorist state in Iran. I guess this is the "nobody's perfect" theory of civil virtue. But in recent months civil libertarians from all points of the political spectrum have been pointing out that the people attracted to data mining too often are typified by the dark figure of Poindexter, a man who never saw a secret he didn't want to keep. Or use.

Nat Hentoff of the Village Voice has been especially eloquent in arguing that anxiety over terrorism has coupled with an explosion of technical capacity to threaten American liberties as never before. American cities from the liberal Northwest to arch-conservative Arizona have been forming "Bill of Rights Defense Committees" to resist federal encroachments on constitutional rights in the wake of 9/11. As many as two dozen cities have passed resolutions directing local officials to question or closely examine federal information-gathering techniques before cooperating.

Hentoff not included, most of us in the press probably harp too hard on our own right to know while harboring an unattractive disdain for everybody else's right not to be known. Somewhere at the far extreme is the ugly idea that there is no such thing as true or ultimate privacy. Whether it's President Clinton's sex life or Martha Stewart's diary, the notion is that someone, acting on some theory, has a right to scour any or every individual clean of privacy.

It almost doesn't matter where that idea resides--in the media, in government, in banks, in organized religion, who cares? The idea itself is fundamentally totalitarian and inimical to the American way. Privacy is liberty. The ability to scrape people bare of their privacy is exactly what Joe Stalin wanted all along. Scrape them or kill them, whichever comes first.

County government here is not signing away its trust as custodian of our records because people in county government want to see us stripped of our liberty. They're doing it because: 1. They haven't thought it through; 2. They're typical people older than 25 who have way too much faith in computers; and 3. You and I have not told them that we care deeply about our privacy.

But if it were ever going to come, if Big Brother were ever going to slip the hood over America's head, it would arrive not as a plot but as a big lazy puddling accident. Either way, the hood is dark.

dallasobserver.com | originally published: January 16, 2003

posted 01-19-2003 05:40 PM            

BUSH PROMOTES BIG GOVERNMENT DESPITE CAMPAIGN PROMISES. ANATOMY OF A NEO-CON

Posted on Sun, Jan. 19, 2003
Despite campaign rhetoric, Bush is promoting big government
By David S. Broder
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/4984290.htm

WASHINGTON - When George W. Bush was running for president, he did not campaign as an enemy of the federal government. But he claimed that he would limit its growth and power. And he derided his opponent, Al Gore, as an advocate of "big government."

In a speech to California Republicans, Bush said he shared former President Ronald Reagan's belief that "you can't be for big government and big bureaucracy and still be for the little guy." He promised that if he won, Washington would "give options, not orders. At its best," he added, "government can help us live our lives, but it must never run our lives."

Bush didn't stop there. In placing himself squarely in the conservative tradition that holds that limited government is the best guarantee of freedom, he called for a return to a concept of federalism respectful of states' rights and local authority. When it comes to education, he said, he would fight any scheme that would transfer power from parents and teachers to "some distant central office." Asked about the economy, he said he would keep government modest, because "the surest way to make sure prosperity slows down is to expand the role and scope and size of the federal government."

A different tune

That was then. Now that Bush is running the federal government, its size doesn't bother him so much. Two years after taking office, Bush is presiding over the biggest, most expensive federal government in history. He has created a mammoth Cabinet department, increased federal spending, imposed new federal rules on local and state governments and injected federal requirements into every public school in America.

Meanwhile, the U.S. military is expanding, too, and not only because it is scouring the world for Sept. 11-style threats. It now seeks to fulfill a more expansive vision of America's role that mirrors Bush's more expansive vision of government in general.

Gone is the Bush who spoke of "humility" in foreign affairs and warned against "nation-building" and overextending America's military. Now the administration talks about meeting America's "unparalleled responsibilities" as it maintains a quarter-million troops abroad, garrisons in more than two dozen countries and smaller detachments in 114 others. As it does so, the administration must reinforce the military and intelligence infrastructure here to help sustain missions abroad.

Money is one measure of the new era of big government. Federal spending, measured as a share of the gross domestic product, declined every year from fiscal 1991, when the Cold War ended, through fiscal 2000, the final full year of the Clinton administration. It fell from 22.3 percent of GDP to 18.4 percent in that decade, but began edging back up in the first year of Bush's presidency and is projected to hit 19.6 percent this year. Some of the Bush increases are tied to legislation adopted under Clinton, but the Bush administration has not turned back the tide.

More than 9-11

While the administration and Congress have fostered the impression that the war against terrorism is to blame for rising federal spending, Fortune magazine writer Jeff Birnbaum has observed that "only about a third of the additional spending this year can be attributed to the war on terror. The rest is testament to a fact that predates Sept. 11: The era of big government has returned."

The growth of the federal government's influence cannot be measured in terms of money alone. The promulgation of a sweeping set of standards for America's schools has triggered a widening protest from state and local officials, who complain that the Bush administration is interfering with their own education reform efforts and usurping what has traditionally been a jealously guarded realm of state and local initiative. And this from the party that once vowed to eliminate the Education Department.

The emerging blueprint for homeland security has also riled state officials. Its potential for commandeering local public health and safety agencies has prompted the conservative Republican governor of Utah to try to rally colleagues from both parties to turn back what he and others see as a genuine threat to the constitutional balance of authority within the federal system. "Because the call for protecting our people is so powerful," says Gov. Mike Leavitt, Republican, "we could be on the verge of remaking our whole system of government."

Administration officials dismiss these criticisms as exaggerated and say that Bush has simply responded to changing circumstances and urgent national needs. They note that the president has tried with considerable success to reduce the tax burden and ease regulation of the environment and industries such as communications.

Nonetheless, the government that Bush cedes to his eventual successor seems certain to be one that will be playing a more expansive, aggressive and intrusive role than the very big government he inherited.

Education

Take education. The hallmark of Bush's domestic policy has been his drive to raise the standards and improve the performance of America's schools through a major piece of social legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act. It sounds noble enough, but the law has produced a tug of war. On one side, there are those who want to set rigorous goals for reading and math, backed by stiff tests for every student. On the other, there are those who fear such a regimen would stifle teachers' creativity, infringe on local control of schools and threaten to label so many public schools as failures that support would build for private school vouchers.

That fight is raging more strongly than ever - with many in the states saying that Big Brother in Washington is winning. "Everything is tipping toward (federal) pre-emption," says Paul Houston, executive director of the National Association of School Administrators, a major education group. "So you're getting a lot of friction and frustration and some outright resistance."

A letter from Education Secretary Rodney Paige to state school superintendents last October raised many hackles. While thanking those "who have accepted the challenge" of the No Child Left Behind Act, he complained that "some states have lowered the bar of expectations to hide the low performance of their schools."

In what was taken as a clear warning shot, Paige said, "Those who play semantic games or try to tinker with state numbers ... stand in the way of progress and reform. They are the enemies of equal justice and equal opportunity. They are apologists for failure. And they will not succeed ..."

A test case seems to be developing in Nebraska, an overwhelmingly Republican state whose education commissioner, Doug Christensen, says, "I hear the rhetoric about local control and flexibility, but I don't see that. What I see are regimentation and uniformity."

A recent meeting with Education Department officials left Christensen balking at the requirement for annual reading and math tests for every student in the third through eighth grades. "Our classes in those grades range from 15 to 18 students," he says. "Our teachers know how well every child is doing, and every school has its own system for measuring that. We don't want to impose an outside standard that is not necessary. The responsibility for educating our kids is ours, and I am not going to defend some federal requirement unless we think it is good for our kids."

Asked what he has heard from the federal officials, Christensen replies: "They said, 'You have work to do.' "

There have been similar disputes in states ranging from Vermont to Louisiana and from Michigan to North Carolina. "This is a fundamental shift," Houston says. "It is a huge federal intrusion in an area that traditionally has been a matter of state and local responsibility. The American people haven't realized it yet, because it came out of a Republican administration, from a group of people that normally says, 'Hands off. Keep the bureaucrats out.' "

Homeland security

Homeland security is the newest arena of big government growth. The anti-terrorism campaign spawned the largest bureaucracy Washington has seen since the birth of the Department of Defense - the new Homeland Security Department. Moreover, anti-terrorism has been used to justify bold intrusions into the privacy of individuals and extraordinary security measures that tread upon some generally accepted rights.

Already, critics of the Justice Department have charged that expanded wiretaps and the detention and arrest of aliens have violated civil rights. The American Civil Liberties Union has been joined by such staunch conservatives as former House majority leader Dick Armey in expressing alarm at the breadth of authority that Attorney General John Ashcroft has claimed in what Ashcroft calls an "unrelenting" campaign against terrorism.

The Homeland Security Department also may threaten federal pre-emption of some of the most basic functions of local and state government, including those of the police, public safety and public health departments. "The further down you drill in this whole area of homeland security," says Utah's Leavitt, a political ally of Bush, "the more potential you see for it recasting the whole federal system."

Driver's licenses

Leavitt says he has been thinking about one of the most routine, ministerial functions of state government - issuing driver's licenses. "Until now, all we've had to do is to give an exam that satisfies us that you are competent to operate a motor vehicle on the roads of Utah. But now a driver's license has become a national identity card. One of my aides went to the airport with an expired driver's license and was not allowed to board the plane.

"Now the federal government wants us to be able to certify that if we give you a driver's license, you really are who you say you are, you live where you say you live and your birth date is what you claim it is. Then the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) will get involved, and insist that we determine you are in the country legally. Pretty soon, our driver's license division has become a federal agency."

Tom Ridge, the White House homeland security chief (soon to be head of the new department), says he has sought to reassure Leavitt. "The executive order of the president assigned the Office of Homeland Security to develop a national strategy for safeguarding the country - not a federal strategy," Ridge says, "and that means we have a strategic interest in developing and sustaining a working partnership with state and local governments."

Still, Ridge says that as far as driver's licenses are concerned, states should standardize the formats and procedures for issuing these documents. "There ought to be a minimum set of standards for what has become a standard form of identification."

Leavitt fears that "the need for coordination will almost inevitably result in centralization." Ridge concedes that if states do not comply voluntarily, a future Congress might threaten to withhold a portion of the highway funds from the naysayers. "That is Plan B," he says.

A larger concern for Leavitt and other governors is that the need for "inter-operability," the capacity of computer-driven information systems to share records, will end up with Washington dictating what equipment local sheriffs or police chiefs must install and what portion of the data they must share. "If the systems all lead to some computer in Washington, then local control is eroded," Leavitt says.

Ridge says there will be national standards for information systems - "that is an important role for the department" - but insists that states and local governments want guidance on what to buy. "They will still be doing the job. They are the first responders."

Leavitt says history argues otherwise. Welfare offices are local, he says, but for 60 years - until the reform of 1996 - "the federal government was really running them, because it set all the rules and it furnished some of the money. The same thing could happen with homeland security."

Already examples are cropping up of federal pre-emption of traditional roles. Recently, The New York Times reported that many local health departments say they fear they will have to curtail services, such as cancer and tuberculosis screening and children's dental examinations, to meet the demands of Bush's federal smallpox vaccination program.

There is a long history of Washington imposing its wishes on state and local governments, through the rules it writes and the money it distributes. But Republicans generally have resisted that tendency as much as Democrats have embraced it.

Bush as a candidate gave few hints that he would be different or that he would extend the authority of the federal government both at home and overseas. But in all these areas - from peacekeeping in Kabul to school testing in Nebraska to health screening in Arizona - the length of his reach is overriding the conservative rhetoric of the Bush presidency.

Big government is back - with a Republican label.

posted 01-19-2003 08:22 PM            

Global Governance for a New Global Union

By Mary Louise

Last week (1/6/03) we explored Dick Cheney's "Project for a New American Century", which is related to the widespread school of global thought or ideas that has permeated and infected society in general. In a speech to the Council of the Americas (COTA) on May 6, 2002 filmed by C-Span, Cheney said that everything is on schedule for completion by January 2005, of the "Free Trade Area of the Americas" (FTAA). The FTAA will become the "American Union"

At this time and there will no longer be a Constitution and Bill of Rights. The old "Fast Track Legislation" has been renamed the "Trade Promotion Authority". They often change the names when people catch on to throw us off the track, in addition to disseminating conflicting, confusing, and false information through the media and other organizations. The globalists couldn't get the support they needed for the League of Nations so they just called it the United Nations instead and so it is with the New World Order, which has now become the New Global Union.

With the European Union (formerly European Economic Community) already established, one of the milestones of completing the American Union will be to outlaw private ownership of firearms by U.S. citizens. To prepare for the anticipated resistance and protests, the Elite have created the Office of Homeland Security to control law-abiding gun owners who are stirred up about gun confiscation, not to protect us from terrorists. They have already previously established concentration camps on military bases in almost every state, to confine resisters to the transition of the American Union. Then they will change the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), created by George H.W. Bush in 1989, to the new name "Asian Union" around 2010, which during this time the former "Soviet Union" will be resurrected under direct control of the Elite. Around 2015 or sooner, the governing body will assume full command over all four of the Global Regions, controlled by the same secret cabal. By this time, if all goes as planned by the globalists who conspire continually, national sovereignty of all nations will be a thing of the past and all people will be enslaved under the strict Global Elite.

The U.N. document entitled "Our Global Neighborhood", is a report of the "Commission on Global Governance" (CGG) published in 1995 by Oxford University Press and available through local bookstores. The CGG report says, "The development of global governance is part of the evolution of human efforts to organize life on the planet..." and was unveiled at the "U.N. World Summit for Social Development" in Denmark (March '95). This was a keystone event in the accelerating campaign agenda of the global socialists to ratify an already prepared historic pact. Then anticipating a reaction of concern by many, they attempted to ease the pain by deceptively stating in the report, "As this report makes clear, global governance is not global government. No misunderstanding should arise from the similarity of terms. We are not proposing movement toward world government." That is a conspicuous LIE and obvious chicanery! Global government is exactly what they are proposing, as they well know and anyone with eyes can see.

The "U.N. Human Development Report" in 1994, contains an essay by Nobel prize-winning Jan Tinbergen called "Global Governance for the 21st Century" where he comes right out with his true intent by saying, "Mankind's problems can no longer be solved by national governments, what is needed is a 'World Government' that should have a 'World Police' and a program for the redistribution of world income." In 1992 Mikhail Gorbachev, who was appointed to head the CFR's "Global Security Project", called for "Global Government" and said it is time to consider putting, "Certain national armed forces at the disposal of the Security Council, making them subordinate to U.N. military command." The worldwide Elite oligarchy includes anyone who is or ever has been a member of the Bilderbergs, CFR, and/or Trilateral Commission, accomplishing their self-serving goals through an endlessly intertwined network of clandestine organizations, clubs, societies, associations, and institutions. They also control the UN, NATO, NSA, CIA, FBI, BATF, Pentagon, Senate and House of Representatives, our courts, and law enforcement agencies either directly or indirectly.

"Who's Who of the Elite" is designed to inform the public about the Wheelers and Dealers of our lives, to better arm themselves with the knowledge of what's happening and going wrong in the world. This book lists the members, organizations, and affiliations to reveal the stranglehold they have over our government, banks, media, industry, universities, think tanks, financial institutions, labor unions, etc. including the real facts about the true ownership of the Federal Reserve System. The Global Elite have left no stone unturned and there is precious little that has not been tampered with. These organizations go to a lot of effort and expense to remain secret, of which the Bilderbergs are the most secretive as the 'High Priests of Globalisation', though the information gets out in spite of the attempts to suppress it. The Bilderbergs decide when wars should start and end and who the players will be, they own the central banks and Federal Reserve System, they are in a position to determine money supply levels, prices of gold and other precious metals, and tightly control what countries should receive loans. They also decide who will be allowed to run for offices of President, Prime Minister, Chancellor, Governor General, or other titles of leaders.

In 1989, then-President Bush and Gorbachev shook hands on a "Unity Through Diversity" doctrine, indicating a convergence of aristocratic Black Arts Occultism with Socialist atheism. Any word ending in 'ism' is a clue that the globalists are behind it, whatever it may be. This policy doctrine is accepted because it appears to be for peace and prosperity, but later it will show itself as violent when the majority have accepted it. This new system of government and religion is falsely presenting itself as the "Great Humanitarian" and the "Master of Peace" that is actually pushing for the 'hive mentality' of collective consciousness and harmonic convergence of oneness of mind and purpose, with no room for personal opinion or individual thought process. Scientologists, satanists, atheists, and futurists are all welcome to merge into the NWO or New Global Union while Jews, Christians, Muslims, and indigenous peoples are marked for extermination. True patriots and Christians are the main targets of the media and new generation of super electronic, nuclear, and biological weapons that have been created. Colonel John Alexander and Dave Alexander openly state in their "The Warrior's Edge", "Future Warrior", and "Tomorrow's Warrior" series, that the main enemy of Globalization is American Constitutionalists and Christians, of whom E.L.F. weapons are designed to wipe out. Colonel Alexander was commander of Los Alamos and leader of the DOD's Non-Lethal Weapons Division, in charge of products that can control your mind, stop your heart, or fry you by microwave.

The "Age of Cataclysm" by Alfred Weber and Philip Less calls for a New Constitution and Federalist Manifesto with a one party system - the World Federalists, eliminating the Congress, the Constitution, and world population for a NWO and Lucifer One World Religion. It lays out the plan to set up a one world electronic mind-controlled totalitarian police state system of slavery and tracking, committing mass genocide to save nature (Gaia) and cleanse the earth of unwanted humans and animals, with the ultimate objective of offering human sacrifices to Lucifer in a high-tech occult Luciferian Age. These same people who claim they want to save nature will destroy it with HAARP, ELF, GWEN, and other WMD's. This book was promoted by the World Federalist Association and World Future Society. The Masons, Club of Rome, World Future Society (WFS), World Federalist Associations (WFA is U.S.), World Federalist Movement (WFM is International), the Global Society, and Global Policy Forum as well as many secret societies along with all intelligence agencies, who are also in alliance with Nazis hired by the CIA through Operation Paperclip, are socially engineering all societies on earth and pushing for it to happen before 2013. The Epilogue of the "Age of Cataclysm" includes a statement from"The Next Development in Man" by Lancelot Law Whyte, to create a unified-science-religion and Webre, a futurologist, goes on to deal with moving entire populations into specific areas. The Global Social Engineers insist that more than 50% of the lands must be "off limits" in order to save nature, resulting in one third of the U.S. population being moved out of rural areas while their media twists the minds of the masses to believe something other than reality. In 1989, plans were made to inter up to 21 million Americans in internment camps and truckers have been transporting snap-together 'tiger cages' to FEMA.

According to the book "The Messiah and the Second Coming", the goals of the World Federalists, The World Future Society, and the U.N. are the same as Masonry and the New Age Movement. The Psychic Agenda is the same as the World Federalist Agenda, which is the same as the U.N. Agenda, which is the same as the FEMA Agenda, and the same as the New Constitution of the U.S. Agenda. World Federalism claims to be the most effective way to organize governance while the U.N. is continuing to implement its agenda to create a world religion and global government. The major thrust is to restructure the global financial system to shift all economic power to the Bank for International Settlements, controlled by private central banks throughout the world. The Millennium Project: Global Future Studies and Research of the American Council for the U.N. University is a global participatory futures research think tank of futurists, scholars, business planners, government, corporations, universities, and policy makers who work for international and non-profit organizations. The WFM is in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the U.N. and receives financial support from dues, supporters, foundations, and government grants.

Barbara Marx Hubbard is an author, futurist, social engineer and architect, co-founder of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution, founding member of the World Future Society, and Society for the Universal Human. She co-founded the Committee for the Future in Washington, D.C., created the multi-media presentation "Theatre for the Future", and hosted a TV series called "Potentials". Hubbard also designed and co-chaired large Soviet-American Citizen Summits, including organizing the 1988 Soviet-American Citizens' Summit in Alexandria, Virginia, coordinated with the Soviet Peace Committee, a creature of the Soviet Central Committees International Department established by Stalin to carry out penetration and subversion of foreign countries. This busy activist claims to be establishing Evolutionary Circles throughout the world to support small groups, in their emergence as universal humans and founders of a global civilization.

The World Future Society is hosting an event at the Hyatt Regency in San Francisco on July 18-20 (registration by 2/28/03), called "World Future 2003: 21st Century Opportunities and Challenges". Their conferences have been described as a "global village in microcosm". Then there is the website of the Boston Chapter of the WFS - www.lucifer.com hosted by WFS board member Alexander "Sasha" Chislenko who left Leningrad in 1989 and has founded the Institute of Memetic Engineering (unregistered). He has studied cybernetics, futurology, memetics itself, novel theories such as Ideas Futures and morphogenetic fields hypothesis, semantics in space, etc. and has compiled an extensive list of links to other futurist type organizations.

The New American articles entitled "A Plague of Power" and "Global Gorby" are very enlightening, worth reading, and the source for some of my information: http://thenewamerican.com/tna/1995/vo11no07/vo11no07_overview.htm and http://thenewamerican.com/tna/1995/vo11no22/vo11no22_gorby.htm.

The organizations and material mentioned in this article can be verified on search engines, so please check out what the global futurists are up to and how far they have progressed with their frontierish scientific, technological, political, and philosophical futuristic concepts. It will explain why so many people get that glazed look in their eyes and act strangely when informed of truthful facts. Those are the ones who have been hypnotized or are willingly going along into the Luciferian Age of deception, destruction, and bondage.

IN YOUR FACE, WORLD-WIDE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!

YOU BETTER WAKE UP!!!!

posted 01-21-2003 09:48 AM            

>>>“See, even when he gets pissed on, he doesn't get pissed off! I can't think of a nicer president and a more genuinely good and decent human being. I thank God Bush is president. I thank God every day it wasn't Gore.”<<<

That's all I said, but you sure seem to read a lot into it.

posted 01-21-2003 12:32 PM            

Uh, in order for this statement to be true, you surely can back it up with actual evidence, can't you? Show me where I've said this ANYWHERE in this thread or on this forum. If you cannot, then you must be a liar.

>>>Seeker and I disagree on many things, but we try to keep things civil. You, on the other hand, are looking for a fight, and you're getting one.<<<<

And how, in your twisted thought process, do you interpret my thanking God for Bush as looking for a fight? It seems to me that you have demonstrated extreme paranoid and delusional tendencies here. This demonstrated tendency also probably goes a long way in explaining your belief in chemtrails as well. You are seeing things that aren’t there.

posted 01-21-2003 04:41 PM            

Would you consider yourself PRO-America then?

posted 01-21-2003 05:37 PM            

Here's the gripe. Clinton and Bush have indirectly conspired to make it miserable for both conservatives and liberals. They both are former/current cocaine fiends, so they have holes in their brains. It's the government that is the problem. They are whores for big corporate interests, and you and I mean nothing to them. The goal of the game is to make cons and libs argue over ideals, while they get further and further into our lives. Liberals want the guns. Conservatives want our rights. They are in this together. Some people I know have moved out of the country. They will not do that to me. I am an American. Period.

When I say fascist, it is the classic sense, with a new Friendly Face. Government growing huge, with no accountability.. I thought Bush was a conservative, who believes in smaller government. This is the biggest, nastiest regime in perhaps US history. If you actually study the parallels to both Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia to current US, you'd be surprised. I'm sure we don't want either of those two forms of government to control our life. So, don't call us Communists and we won't call you a Fascist, Deal?

To be Continued..........