Bad Boy Chris Brown Pleas Guilty -- No Jail Time
Chris Brown has copped a plea in his assault case. He won't do jail time, but he will spend 6 months doing things like road cleanup. He's also been ordered to stay 50 yards clear of Rihanna.
He'll spend 180 days doing community labor (8 hours a day -- 1440 hours total) -- which is, in effect, hard labor. He'll do his service in Virginia which is where Brown lives. A Virginia law enforcement officer told us Brown will be picking up trash, pulling weeds and washing fire trucks.
He gets 5 years probation for FELONY assault -- he pled guilty. He'll get supervised probation. He'll have to come back to court every three months.
He must enroll in a domestic violence counseling program.
This is interesting ... the judge said if Brown and Rihanna are at the same public events, the 50-yard stay away turns into 10 yards. The stay away order lasts 5 years.
The judge said she wanted to make sure that Chris Brown "was treated as any other person who comes through this court."
Death toll rises to 9 in D.C. Metro crash
"It's impossible to know what will disappear first - the enriched Uranium or their poor government," the president said, adding that "the hope is that the government will disappear first."
The president also attacked Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has hinted that Israel and the US were behind the pro-Mousavi riots in Teheran.
Iranian Elections: The 'Stolen Elections' Hoax
The Electoral Fraud Hoax Western leaders rejected the results because they ‘knew’ that their reformist candidate could not lose…For months they published daily interviews, editorials and reports from the field ‘detailing’ the failures of Ahmadinejad’s administration; they cited the support from clerics, former officials, merchants in the bazaar and above all women and young urbanites fluent in English, to prove that Mousavi was headed for a landslide victory. A victory for Mousavi was described as a victory for the ‘voices of moderation’, at least the White House’s version of that vacuous cliché. Prominent liberal academics deduced the vote count was fraudulent because the opposition candidate, Mousavi, lost in his own ethnic enclave among the Azeris. Other academics claimed that the ‘youth vote’ – based on their interviews with upper and middle-class university students from the neighborhoods of Northern Tehran were overwhelmingly for the ‘reformist’ candidate. The Western media relied on its reporters covering the mass demonstrations of opposition supporters, ignoring and downplaying the huge turnout for Ahmadinejad. Worse still, the Western media ignored the class composition of the competing demonstrations – the fact that the incumbent candidate was drawing his support from the far more numerous poor working class, peasant, artisan and public employee sectors while the bulk of the opposition demonstrators was drawn from the upper and middle class students, business and professional class. Moreover, most Western opinion leaders and reporters based in Tehran extrapolated their projections from their observations in the capital – few venture into the provinces, small and medium size cities and villages where Ahmadinejad has his mass base of support. Moreover the opposition’s supporters were an activist minority of students easily mobilized for street activities, while Ahmadinejad’s support drew on the majority of working youth and household women workers who would express their views at the ballot box and had little time or inclination to engage in street politics. A number of newspaper pundits, including Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times, claim as evidence of electoral fraud the fact that Ahmadinejad won 63% of the vote in an Azeri-speaking province against his opponent, Mousavi, an ethnic Azeri. The simplistic assumption is that ethnic identity or belonging to a linguistic group is the only possible explanation of voting behavior rather than other social or class interests. A closer look at the voting pattern in the East-Azerbaijan region of Iran reveals that Mousavi won only in the city of Shabestar among the upper and the middle classes (and only by a small margin), whereas he was soundly defeated in the larger rural areas, where the re-distributive policies of the Ahmadinejad government had helped the ethnic Azeris write off debt, obtain cheap credits and easy loans for the farmers. Mousavi did win in the West-Azerbaijan region, using his ethnic ties to win over the urban voters. In the highly populated Tehran province, Mousavi beat Ahmadinejad in the urban centers of Tehran and Shemiranat by gaining the vote of the middle and upper class districts, whereas he lost badly in the adjoining working class suburbs, small towns and rural areas. The careless and distorted emphasis on ‘ethnic voting’ cited by writers from the Financial Times and New York Times to justify calling Ahmadinejad ‘s victory a ‘stolen vote’ is matched by the media’s willful and deliberate refusal to acknowledge a rigorous nationwide public opinion poll conducted by two US experts just three weeks before the vote, which showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin – even larger than his electoral victory on June 12. This poll revealed that among ethnic Azeris, Ahmadinejad was favored by a 2 to 1 margin over Mousavi, demonstrating how class interests represented by one candidate can overcome the ethnic identity of the other candidate (Washington Post June 15, 2009). The poll also demonstrated how class issues, within age groups, were more influential in shaping political preferences than ‘generational life style’. According to this poll, over two-thirds of Iranian youth were too poor to have access to a computer and the 18-24 year olds “comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all groups” (Washington Porst June 15, 2009). The only group, which consistently favored Mousavi, was the university students and graduates, business owners and the upper middle class. The ‘youth vote’, which the Western media praised as ‘pro-reformist’, was a clear minority of less than 30% but came from a highly privileged, vocal and largely English speaking group with a monopoly on the Western media. Their overwhelming presence in the Western news reports created what has been referred to as the ‘North Tehran Syndrome’, for the comfortable upper class enclave from which many of these students come. While they may be articulate, well dressed and fluent in English, they were soundly out-voted in the secrecy of the ballot box. In general, Ahmadinejad did very well in the oil and chemical producing provinces. This may have be a reflection of the oil workers’ opposition to the ‘reformist’ program, which included proposals to ‘privatize’ public enterprises. Likewise, the incumbent did very well along the border provinces because of his emphasis on strengthening national security from US and Israeli threats in light of an escalation of US-sponsored cross-border terrorist attacks from Pakistan and Israeli-backed incursions from Iraqi Kurdistan, which have killed scores of Iranian citizens. Sponsorship and massive funding of the groups behind these attacks is an official policy of the US from the Bush Administration, which has not been repudiated by President Obama; in fact it has escalated in the lead-up to the elections. What Western commentators and their Iranian protégés have ignored is the powerful impact which the devastating US wars and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan had on Iranian public opinion: Ahmadinejad’s strong position on defense matters contrasted with the pro-Western and weak defense posture of many of the campaign propagandists of the opposition. The great majority of voters for the incumbent probably felt that national security interests, the integrity of the country and the social welfare system, with all of its faults and excesses, could be better defended and improved with Ahmadinejad than with upper-class technocrats supported by Western-oriented privileged youth who prize individual life styles over community values and solidarity. The demography of voting reveals a real class polarization pitting high income, free market oriented, capitalist individualists against working class, low income, community based supporters of a ‘moral economy’ in which usury and profiteering are limited by religious precepts. The open attacks by opposition economists of the government welfare spending, easy credit and heavy subsidies of basic food staples did little to ingratiate them with the majority of Iranians benefiting from those programs. The state was seen as the protector and benefactor of the poor workers against the ‘market’, which represented wealth, power, privilege and corruption. The Opposition’s attack on the regime’s ‘intransigent’ foreign policy and positions ‘alienating’ the West only resonated with the liberal university students and import-export business groups. To many Iranians, the regime’s military buildup was seen as having prevented a US or Israeli attack. The scale of the opposition’s electoral deficit should tell us is how out of touch it is with its own people’s vital concerns. It should remind them that by moving closer to Western opinion, they removed themselves from the everyday interests of security, housing, jobs and subsidized food prices that make life tolerable for those living below the middle class and outside the privileged gates of Tehran University. Amhadinejad’s electoral success, seen in historical comparative perspective should not be a surprise. In similar electoral contests between nationalist-populists against pro-Western liberals, the populists have won. Past examples include Peron in Argentina and, most recently, Chavez of Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia and even Lula da Silva in Brazil, all of whom have demonstrated an ability to secure close to or even greater than 60% of the vote in free elections. The voting majorities in these countries prefer social welfare over unrestrained markets, national security over alignments with military empires. The consequences of the electoral victory of Ahmadinejad are open to debate. The US may conclude that continuing to back a vocal, but badly defeated, minority has few prospects for securing concessions on nuclear enrichment and an abandonment of Iran’s support for Hezbollah and Hamas. A realistic approach would be to open a wide-ranging discussion with Iran, and acknowledging, as Senator Kerry recently pointed out, that enriching uranium is not an existential threat to anyone. This approach would sharply differ from the approach of American Zionists, embedded in the Obama regime, who follow Israel’s lead of pushing for a preemptive war with Iran and use the specious argument that no negotiations are possible with an ‘illegitimate’ government in Tehran which ‘stole an election’. Recent events suggest that political leaders in Europe, and even some in Washington, do not accept the Zionist-mass media line of ‘stolen elections’. The White House has not suspended its offer of negotiations with the newly re-elected government but has focused rather on the repression of the opposition protesters (and not the vote count). Likewise, the 27 nation European Union expressed ‘serious concern about violence’ and called for the “aspirations of the Iranian people to be achieved through peaceful means and that freedom of expression be respected” (Financial Times June 16, 2009 p.4). Except for Sarkozy of France, no EU leader has questioned the outcome of the voting. Paradoxically, US commentators (left, right and center) who bought into the electoral fraud hoax are inadvertently providing Netanyahu and his American followers with the arguments and fabrications: Where they see religious wars, we see class wars; where they see electoral fraud, we see imperial destabilization. | |
James Petras is a frequent contributor to Global Research.  | |
| Obama Administration Defends Response to Iranian Crisis | |
23 June 2009 |
U.S. officials have defended the Obama administration's handling of the Iranian election crisis, as critics say the U.S. president is not taking a strong enough stand on the issue.
 |
| White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs (undated photo) |
Iranians should decide
Deputy U.S. Secretary of State James Steinberg said he does not agree with the criticism that Barack Obama has reacted too cautiously to the Iranian violence. Steinberg said some influential voices in Congress from both the Republican and Democratic parties "have recognized, as the president has said, that this issue is about the Iranians and is for the Iranians to decide."
Republican U.S. lawmakers, including former presidential candidate John McCain, say President Obama, a Democrat, has been too timid on the issue.
McCain criticizes Obama's response
 |
| US Sen. John McCain, (file photo) |
White House Spokesman Gibbs also said Mr. Obama has been "moved" by the television images of people protesting in Iran, particularly those of women who have stood up for their rights to speak out and be heard.
Western interference?
Iranian officials have accused Britain and other Western nations of stoking the post-election unrest in Iran - a charge Western nations have denied.
Iran's Interior Ministry issued a statement condemning what it called "Britain's interference." Still, the ministry underscored that it refused to grant a permit to a student group that wanted to stage a pro-government / anti-Britain rally Tuesday outside the British Embassy in Tehran.
Iranian media said Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani called for a review of Iran's ties with Britain in a speech to parliament Monday. And London said it is evacuating family members of its diplomatic staff stationed in Iran, while leaving staff members themselves in place.
BBC, VOA accused of bias
Iran expelled the British Broadcasting Corporation's permanent correspondent in Tehran after accusing the BBC and the Voice of America of "engineering the ongoing post-election riots."
VOA Director Dan Austin has rejected Iran's accusations.
Separately, the Czech presidency of the European Union invited EU member states to summon Iranian envoys to protest the violent response of government forces to anti-government demonstrators.
Syria warns against interference
In Syria, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem warned the West against intervening in Iran's internal affairs, saying it could harm talks between Iran and the United States.
In another development, Italy's foreign minister said he believes Iran has declined an invitation to attend a meeting of the world's top industrialized countries later this week in the city of Trieste on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Franco Frattini told an Italian television station he reached that conclusion because Iran did not respond to the invitation by the end of the day Monday.
NWO – The Master Plan – The Balfour Declaration
THE IMPACT OF CHRISTIAN ZIONISM ON AMERICAN POLICY AND WORLD POLICY
Christian Zionists lobby for US attack on Iran
Christian Right, Longing the Ultimate War
Oh, and it doesn't hurt that you lust for war with Iran. ... But that reaction ignores the fact that Christian Zionists like Hagee are increasingly trying ..Israel 'Hasbara' (advocacy) that Hurts
http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2009/06/israel-hasbara-advocacy-that-hurts.htmlTurning Zionists into Al-Qaida type fanatics is not going to help the cause of Israel.
Israel 'Hasbara' (advocacy) that Hurts
Israelis and supporters of Israel are angry over Barack Obama's treatment of Israel. A poll shows that only 6% of Jewish Israelis think that Obama is pro-Israel, about 50% think he is pro-Palestinian, and 36% think he is neutral.
Despite Obama's talk about the "unbreakable bond" between Israel and the United States, it appears to Israelis that he and his administration are going out of their way to snub Israel and to isolate Israel as an "obstacle to peace." Obama did not stop in Israel on his recent trip to the Middle East. Obama administration policies seem to exert pressure unilaterally on Israel. The administration offers no solution to the problem of Hamas domination in Gaza other than encouraging Palestinian unity and pressuring Israel to reward Hamas by opening Gaza to importation of cement and other materials that will allow them to rebuild their underground bunkers. Obama did not ask Palestinians to give up their demands for right of return, nor did he confront their refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish people to self determination. Obama did not even try to bring off the symbolic gesture of getting Red Cross visitation rights for kidnapped soldier Gilead Schalit, let alone getting him freed.
All the pressure is on Israel, and it is exerted in often ugly and in-your-face ways by administration officials, especially the supposedly pro-Israel Hillary Clinton. If Barack Obama is trying to project an image of "even handedness" in order to win over Muslim and Arab opinion, he certainly succeeded in Israel. Whether or not he succeeded in the Arab and Muslim worlds remains to be seen. Is it likely Muslims will forgive American bombing of civilians in Afghanistan if Israel implements a settlement freeze, or that al-Qaeda will approve of democracy, gay marriage, teaching of evolution and Bikinis ifIsrael gives up Jerusalem?
Proof: Israeli Effort to Destabilize Iran Via Twitter
World Messenger: ILLUMINATI: The Satanic House the Rothschilds built
It took many years for the Rothschilds to finally create Israel . ... The method that theHouse of Rothschild used to gain influence, was the same that Royalty had used for ... CO-MASTERS OF THE WORLD--connections to secret societies ...
Zionist déjà vu over Iranian Election 09
People Power only works when supported by the elite?
the rothschild, illuminati
10 min - May 5, 2008 -
political
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouZeUt8brRs -
YouTube - Was Hitler a Zionist NWO Illuminati? Who Funded The ...
Understanding Hitler's Secret Relationship to the House of ...
Simply put…the shift from the House of Rothschild to the House of Morgan. ... intriguing hypothesis” but downplays the Rothschild connection saying, ...... Israel Founded on Nazi Forgeries · Meet the Real Adolf Hitler ...
CIA has Distributed 400 Million Dollars Inside Iran to Evoke a Revolution
Israel 'Hasbara' (advocacy) that Hurts
http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2009/06/israel-hasbara-advocacy-that-hurts.htmlTurning Zionists into Al-Qaida type fanatics is not going to help the cause of Israel.
Israel 'Hasbara' (advocacy) that Hurts
Israelis and supporters of Israel are angry over Barack Obama's treatment of Israel. A poll shows that only 6% of Jewish Israelis think that Obama is pro-Israel, about 50% think he is pro-Palestinian, and 36% think he is neutral.
Despite Obama's talk about the "unbreakable bond" between Israel and the United States, it appears to Israelis that he and his administration are going out of their way to snub Israel and to isolate Israel as an "obstacle to peace." Obama did not stop in Israel on his recent trip to the Middle East. Obama administration policies seem to exert pressure unilaterally on Israel. The administration offers no solution to the problem of Hamas domination in Gaza other than encouraging Palestinian unity and pressuring Israel to reward Hamas by opening Gaza to importation of cement and other materials that will allow them to rebuild their underground bunkers. Obama did not ask Palestinians to give up their demands for right of return, nor did he confront their refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish people to self determination. Obama did not even try to bring off the symbolic gesture of getting Red Cross visitation rights for kidnapped soldier Gilead Schalit, let alone getting him freed.
All the pressure is on Israel, and it is exerted in often ugly and in-your-face ways by administration officials, especially the supposedly pro-Israel Hillary Clinton. If Barack Obama is trying to project an image of "even handedness" in order to win over Muslim and Arab opinion, he certainly succeeded in Israel. Whether or not he succeeded in the Arab and Muslim worlds remains to be seen. Is it likely Muslims will forgive American bombing of civilians in Afghanistan if Israel implements a settlement freeze, or that al-Qaeda will approve of democracy, gay marriage, teaching of evolution and Bikinis ifIsrael gives up Jerusalem?
Proof: Israeli Effort to Destabilize Iran Via Twitter
World Messenger: ILLUMINATI: The Satanic House the Rothschilds built
Zionist déjà vu over Iranian Election 09
People Power only works when supported by the elite?
the rothschild, illuminati
political
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouZeUt8brRs -
YouTube - Was Hitler a Zionist NWO Illuminati? Who Funded The ...
Understanding Hitler's Secret Relationship to the House of ...
CIA has Distributed 400 Million Dollars Inside Iran to Evoke a Revolution
Is Modern Israel in Bible Prophecy? Anti-Semitism Define -
Thousands expect Israel to play a major role in God’s future plan for earth. What is the Biblical evidence? Many people today consider the restoration of the Jewish nation in Palestine to be a direct and dramatic fulfillment of Bible prophecy.
Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth, a phenomenal best seller of the last few decades, and Jerry Jenkins and Tim Lahaye’s Lift Behind, along with Bishop T.D. Jakes declares that the end of the world will come within the lifetime of the generation that saw the founding of the Israeli state in 1948, hereby applying the words of Jesus: “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” (Matthew 24:34)
Coupled with this fascination with Israel is a novel teaching regarding the return of Jesus, called the “secret rapture.” These books and many other speaks for many today who expect God secretly to take the “church” to heaven prior to the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple on its old site where the sacred Muslim shrine, the Dome of the Rock, now stands. According to this position, after the “church” is “raptured” to heaven, there will be seven years of the worst period of famine, bloodshed, and pestilence ever experienced by man. During this great tribulation the focus will be on God’s dealings with the Jews, who are again given the responsibility for the evangelization of the world.
According to secret-rapture preachers, the battle of Armageddon will climax the end of the seven-year tribulation as the nations of the earth take sides over the future of Israel. When mankind teeters on the brink of incinerating the world, Jesus will return gloriously and save man from self-extinction. At that time Jesus will set up a literal one-thousand-year reign on earth with Jerusalem functioning as the spiritual capital of the world.
Most evangelical periodicals and pulpits teach this view today, and to those who do not know better, it might appear that this prophetic scenario, known as pretribulationism, has been the traditional teaching of the Christian church since New Testament days. Nothing is further from the truth. Be not deceived.. Did the architects of the creation of modern day Israel have any thing to do with the development of the rapture theory? Where did the Rapture theology originate? Is the crisis in the Middle East and the war in the Iraq have anything to do with the erroneous rapture theory?
Is there a master conspiracy at work
According to dispensationalists John Hagee, Jack van Impe, Ken Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, John Walvoord, Grant Jefferies, Tim Lahaye, Benny Hinn, Clarence Larkin, H. Caldwell, TD Jakes and others who teach and preach about the Rapture, Israel has two dispensations, or time periods, in which they functions as God’s special instrument of salvation. Between these two periods of time comes the dispensation of the “church”. The church received a heavenly reward at the time of the rapture, while Israel received an earthly reward at the end of the tribulation.
There is no support in the New Testament for such an erroneous view.
The chief reason why the modern state of Israel has no prophetic significance is that after the Jews as a body rejected Jesus as the Messiah, God gave to the Christian church the special privileges, responsibilities, and prerogatives once assigned to the ancient Jews. No longer were the Jews to be His special people with a prophetic destiny.
Rom.2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; vs.29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.
All the promises of a glorious kingdom on earth once given through the Jewish prophets to the Jewish people became void because the Jewish people as a nation did not fulfill the conditions of these prophecies. Failing to receive the glory that could have been Israel’s is probably the saddest story in literature. Placed at the crossroads of the ancient world, God furnished them with every facility for becoming the greatest nation on the earth. God wanted to reward Israel with every physical and spiritual blessing as they put into practice the clear-cut principles that He had graciously taught them through His prophets (Deuteronomy 7, 8, 28).
The Old Testament records the sad story of how the vineyard of Israel produced, not the mature fruit of a Christ-like character, but “wild grapes,” a misinterpretation and perversion of what the God of Israel was really like. “What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes?” (Isaiah 5:4 RSV).
Even when the Jewish nation was suffering the bitter consequences of disobedience during the Babylonian captivity, God mercifully promised that a restored Israel was possible and that there was yet time to recover its special role as His representative on earth – if it would honor His law and submit to His principles. Even then the Jews could have become, if faithful, the head and not the tail, in matters physical and spiritual; all nations would have looked upon Jerusalem as not only the center of wisdom but also the spiritual capital of the world (see Isaiah 45:14; 60:1 – 11).
When the Jews returned to Palestine after the Babylonian captivity, the promises given to Abraham and expanded through the writings of Moses and other prophets would have been fulfilled; the whole earth would have been alerted for the first advent of Christ, even as the way is being prepared for His second coming today.
Missed Their Last Opportunity.
These Old Testament prophecies that picture Israel dwelling in peace and prosperity, with all nations beating a path to her doors, could have been fulfilled 2000 years ago if they had indeed prepared the world for the first coming of Jesus (see Zechariah 8:14). But instead of fulfilling their greatest assignment they missed their last opportunity, and Jesus their Lord finally had to pronounce with irrevocable judgement: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not Behold your house is forsaken and desolate” (Matthew 23:37, 38 RSV).
Those who regard the establishment of the modern state of Israel as a fulfillment of those Old Testament prophecies overlook the fact that these promises were made either prior to their release from Babylonian captivity or during the rebuilding days soon after their return. God would have fulfilled these promises if Israel had been faithful and obedient to the conditions on which the promises were made.
Although God promised a “second chance” to Israel after their failure leading up to the Babylonian captivity, He promised no “third chance” to them after their final rejection when their Lord Himself “came to his own home, and his own people received him not” (John 1:11 RSV)
But God did not give up, even though Israel as a nation had failed Him. Although corporate Israel no longer was to function as God’s special agent, the individual Jews who received and obeyed Jesus Christ would constitute the new organization through which He would now work.
Paul describes this remarkable transition in Romans 9 to 11, where he appeals to individual Jews (such as himself) to respond to God through Jesus, join those Gentiles who have found in Him the solution to their anxious, sinful condition, and together arouse the world to the simple fact that God wants to make an end to sin and its misery by setting up His eternal kingdom composed of those who have found in Jesus the promised Saviour.
House of Rothschild – NWO – Israel and Masonry
“Netanyahu’s speech closed the door to permanent status negotiations,” he said. “We ask the world not to be fooled by his use of the term Palestinian state because he qualified it. He declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel, said refugees would not be negotiated and that settlements would remain.”
Nabil Abu Rdeneh, another Palestinian official, called on the U.S. to challenge Netanyahu “to prevent more deterioration in the region.”
“What he has said today is not enough to start a serious peace process,” he added.
Netanyahu also came under criticism from within his own government _ a coalition of religious and nationalistic parties that oppose Palestinian independence.
Zevulun Orlev, a member of the Jewish Home Party, said Netanyahu’s speech violated agreements struck when the government was formed. “I think the coalition needs to hold a serious discussion to see where this is headed,” he told Israel Radio.
Israeli media speculated that Netanyahu might turn to the centrist Kadima Party, which heads the parliamentary opposition, to shore up his government if the coalition falls apart.
History of AIDS – Eugenics and Population Control – Rothschilds Dynasty and Illuminati Timeline
HIV/AIDS THE UNTOLD STORY. GENECIDE
5:23“WORLD WAR AIDS: THE THIRD WORLD WAR” BY DR. BOYD E …
AIDS is man-made – Interview with Dr. Boyd Graves
Boyd Graves displays the 1971 HIV Flow Chart after urging UN AIDS officials to …Boyd Graves(BG): The 1971 Flow Chart is the blueprint for the development of AIDS.…
CNN Covers Elite’s Depopulation Program. CNN Covers Elite’s Depopulation Program.Do the Elite, through government and private sector scientists, create and distribute deadly viruses to world populations … (more)
8:13AIDS: White Supremacist Plot? (Part 1)**YOU ARE WATCHING PART 1** In this highly revealing interview, renowned
“AIDS, NIXON AND
AMERICA’S FUTURE: PL91-213“AIDS CREATED IN US GOVERNMENT LABORTORY – NIXON SIGNED LAW
“AIDS, NIXON and AMERICA’S FUTURE: PL91-213” by Boyd E. Graves, J.D.. It is hard to believe the public law that authorized AIDS will be thirty one years old
“AIDS, NIXON and AMERICA’S FUTURE: PL91-213″
by Boyd E. Graves, J.D.
It is hard to believe the public law that authorized AIDS will be thirty one years old next week. Even more remarkable, that in a score and a half, no one has ever read it! On March 16, 1970, following significant world events both in medicine and politics, President Richard Milhouse Nixon signed into law the U.S. policy to protect America’s future by “stabilizing” the population of Sub-Sahara Africa. The history leading to the politics is relevant in our further presentation of the “research logic” Flow Chart of the federal virus program. On April 4, 1969, President Richard Nixon did not want to be late. He had been there many times before, but today was special. He wanted the scientific and medical communities from around the world to hear and see his presence as our military scientists and doctors announced, ‘they could effectively make AIDS.’ It was Fort Detrick, Maryland and the ethnic nature of the work would not be printed until November ‘70. Unbeknownst to the American people, the Special Virus program had been underway since November, 1961. In a real sense, the current trillion dollar ‘tax’ “give back” to U.S. taxpayers, is in essence the benefit of our sharpened ability to kill humans for a better tomorrow for our financial investment in our trust in God. The 1971 Flow Chart proves the United States sought to co-mingle animal viruses (Visna) that had never before been seen in human disease. Thus, at what point did the population projections of Africa necessitate this “long standing secret virus program?” It appears that shortly after WW2, and the importation of the German (Operation Paperclip) and Japanese biological experts, the U.S. State Department wrote a top secret memo under the pen of George W. McKennan. The United States knew in 1948 it had to ‘devise a scheme’ to implant the German Visna in the human population and assist the Black population in copulating itself into extinction. Why? Why? Why would the ’so-called’ greatest “people-oriented” country in the history of the world have an Oz-like curtain behind which reveals a twisted, evil social structure so contrary to the very fabric of the core Constitutional foundations? As Zbigniev Brezinski says in his classic 1978 National Security Council Memorandum #46: “Africa’s resources remain our “highest priority”"! (Translation: If we allow the Africans to use of all their own diamonds and gold, we won’t have anything physical to show that we are not available for sex for others.) So what we have done over the last fifty three years is come up with a way to make it appear that Africa’s people are “sexually nasty”. Thus African deaths are palatable. These people are dying solely because of their behavior. Sort of the same thing that happened to homosexuals. In other words, we are going to secretly make AIDS and not tell you, so if you never stray from ‘monogamous missionary’, you won’t have anything to worry about. Yeah, yeah, mr. government, please give us more concocted social skills tests that end in state death. Even though you can’t see it now, we will all be crucified. But as it was, Nixon helicoptered back down to the Wh— House and got busy. They were going to do it. No more White on White crime, we are going to get those darkies. Adolph was wrong, why check for foreskins to determine who your enemy is when you need only look toward his (face). Wasting no time to get to waste Blacks, in May 1969, Nixon authorized the United Nations Association of the United States of America to issue the first of the U.S. policy decisions carving out a U.S future world with Africa’s resources void her people. On June 9, The Pentagon informed the U.S. Congress and presto, there it is. The trickster’s manifesto as to why we would quickly need something like AIDS (which we had just made). President Nixon’s “Special Message to the Congress on Problems of Population Growth” 7/18/69 is the crown jewel of the ideology of eugenics and racism. Again, though, who could possibly have known and have been able to see through this government matrix? Reflect back that we were distracted frequently throughout the entire decade of the 60’s and 70’s. Kennedy, King, Kennedy (KKK) and Vietnam. A very strong case builds that the desire to introduce Visna (wasting) into humans is the direct result of the true tilt of the ethnic/social landscape to the detriment of racial and social minorities. With Nixon’s law authorizing eugenics czar, John D. Rockefeller, III to lead the charge to cull the Black population, the U.S. Congress is dog-tied from citizen overview of the Population Commission (”COMMISSION”). AIDS is official U.S. policy. However, it is only outlined until the end of the 20th Century. Our call for review is just, it is our union which is imperfect. Join our petition call for immediate review of the 1971 Flow Chart and 15 progress reports of the U.S. federal virus program, the Special Virus.
- AIDS – Lawrence A. Davis – Depopulation Commission Members
- Commission on Population Growth and the American Future
March 27, 1972To the President and Congress of the United States:
I have the honor to transmit for your consideration the Final Report, containing the findings and recommendations, of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, pursuant to Sec. 8, PL 91-213.
After two years of concentrated effort, we have concluded that, in the long run, no substantial benefits will result from further growth of the Nation’s population, rather that the gradual stabilization of our population through voluntary means would contribute significantly to the Nation’s ability to solve its problems. We have looked for, and have not found, any convincing economic argument for continued population growth. The health of our country does not depend on it, nor does the vitality of business nor the welfare of the average person.
The recommendations offered by this Commission are directed towards increasing public knowledge of the causes and please=”" acknowledge=”" and consequences of population change, facilitating and guiding the processes of population movement, maximizing information about human reproduction and its consequences for the family, and enabling individuals to avoid unwanted fertility.
To these ends we offer this report in the hope that our findings and recommendations will stimulate serious consideration of an issue that is of great consequence to present and future generations.
Respectfully submitted for the Commission,
John D. Rockefeller 3rd, Chairman
Lawrence A. Davis
President, Arkansas Agricultural, Mechanical & Normal College
10:24The AIDS cure: Patent #5676977 (Part 1 of 4)Dr. Boyd Graves discusses the origin of AIDS as well as the United States’ patented
Boyd E. Graves, J.D. Research Archives
WORLD POPULATION CONTROL: THE ROCKEFELLERS
“In the 1950s, the Rockefellers reorganized the U.S. eugenics movement in their own family offices, with spinoff world population control and abortion groups. The Eugenics Society changed its name to the Society for the Study of Social Biology, its current name. “The Rockefeller Foundation had long financed the eugenics movement in England, apparently repaying Britain for the fact that British capital and an Englishman-partner had started old John D. Rockefeller out in his Oil Trust. “In the 1960s, the Eugenics Society of England adopted what they called Crypto-eugenics, stating in their official reports that they would do eugenics through means and instruments not labeled as eugenics. “With support from the Rockefellers, the Eugenics Society (England) set up a sub-committee called the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which for 12 years had no other address than the Eugenics Society. This, then, is the private, international apparatus which has set the world up for a global holocaust, under the UN flag.” - Rockefeller and Mass Murder
WORLD POPULATION CONTROL: AIDS
Investigate the AIDS, world population control connection… “July 1, 1970—Senate Appropriations hearings are held for the Department of Defense and refer to eminent biologists who believe that within 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent (infective micro-organism), an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired. “Hearings in the British House of Commons from April 8 to May 13, 1987 regarding AIDS will include the following: “Every biological scientist who has dispassionately studied the virus and the epidemic knows that the origins of the virus could lie in the developments of modern biology….Some who know perfectly well what has happened are deliberately fudging scientific data to keep the heat off them and fellow members of their molecular biological ‘club’.” -
Dialectics, Rockefellers, and Population Control
“In fact, it (the HIV virus) is created by a scientist for biological warfare at an Army research facility in MD. Why has there been so much secrecy about AIDS? When you ask where did the virus come from, it raises a lot of flags. That makes me suspicious.” – Wangari Maatha of Kenya, first African woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize
