noworldsystem.com


Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination

Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0qnsT8JhaA

hhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b1WXPFFGMw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSc7pdK8GwE

 

Advertisements


Air Force to Use Smear Campaign Against U.S. Citizens

U.S. Air Force to Use Smear Campaigns Against Government’s Political Enemies

Darlene Storm
Computerworld
February 28, 2011

Does a code of ethics still exist in Intelligence firms? Does it disappear behind closed doors, dirty deeds done in the dark and used against the American people who are supposed to be free to express themselves?

It’s recently been revealed that the U.S. government contracted HBGary Federal for the development of software which could create multiple fake social media profiles to manipulate and sway public opinion on controversial issues by promoting propaganda. It could also be used as surveillance to find public opinions with points of view the powers-that-be didn’t like. It could then potentially have their “fake” people run smear campaigns against those “real” people. As disturbing as this is, it’s not really new for U.S. intelligence or private intelligence firms to do the dirty work behind closed doors.

EFF previously warned that Big Brother wants to be your friend for social media surveillance. While the FBI Intelligence Information Report Handbook (PDF) mentioned using “covert accounts” to access protected information, other government agencies endorsed using security exploits to access protected information.

It’s not a big surprise that the U.S. military also wants to use social media to its benefit. Last year, Public Intelligence published the U.S. Air Force social media guide which gave 10 tips for social media such as, “The enemy is engaged in this battlespace and you must engage there as well.” Number three was “DON’T LIE. Credibility is critical, without it, no one cares what you have to say…it’s also punishable by the UCMJ to give a false statement.” The Air Force used the chart below to show how social media influences public opinion.

Read Full Article Here

The Scientific Manipulation of Our Reality

Army Propaganda Unit Ordered To Illegally Target US Senators With Psy-Ops Propaganda

 



Chinese Protesting Lawless Dictatorship in China

Chinese Protesting Lawless Dictatorship in China

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6OvvKBgHm8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzKsqw8u2v4

China rounds up 100 activists to rapidly quash pro-democracy ‘Jasmine Revolution’ organised online

 



Obama’s $3.7 TRILLION Dollar Budget

Obama’s $3.7 TRILLION Dollar Budget: A Complete and Total Joke

Michael Snyder
February 15, 2011

Is Barack Obama trying to play a joke on all of us? The budget that the Obama administration has submitted for fiscal 2012 is so out of touch with reality that it may as well be a budget for “Narnia”, “Fantasy Island”, “Atlantis” or some other mythical land. You can view the hard numbers for Barack Obama’s 2012 budget right here. Obama’s budget assumes that the U.S. will experience economic growth of over 5 percent for most of the coming decade. That is so far-fetched that “optimistic” is not the right word for it. It also assumes that U.S. government income (primarily made up of taxes on all of us) will more than double over the next ten years. For 2011, the budget projects that the U.S. government will take in a total of 2.1 trillion dollars, and for 2021 the budget projects that the U.S. government will take in a total of 4.9 trillion dollars. For the Obama administration to assume that the federal government will be able to drain an extra 2.8 trillion dollars per year out of the American people by the year 2021 is ridicul0us beyond belief. In his new budget Barack Obama does propose some very, very modest spending cuts that he knows have no chance of getting through Congress. Barack Obama’s budget for 2012 also does not even attempt to make any cuts to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare. In essence, you can sum up Barack Obama’s budget proposal for 2012 by saying that it is a complete and total joke. This budget is so delusional and so out of touch with reality that it is hard to imagine anyone taking it seriously.

Oh, but Obama is really trying to sell it hard. When Obama unveiled this new $3.7 trillion budget for 2012 at a middle school in Baltimore, he insisted that his plan will make it “so that every American is equipped to compete with any worker anywhere in the world.

Well, that is a nice sound bite, but as I have written about previously, unless Barack Obama suddenly finds a way to stop multinational corporations from paying slave labor wages to their workers on the other side of the globe the job losses in America are going to continue.

But that is a topic for another day. Getting back to the 2012 budget, Obama is proposing to cut more than a trillion dollars from federal budget deficits over the next ten years.

That sounds really good until you figure out that means that the cuts only amount to about $100 billion a year. Considering the fact that Obama’s budget is projecting that we will have a $1.6 trillion budget deficit this year alone, that really is not a whole heck of a lot to be cutting.

The truth is that Barack Obama should be proposing spending cuts that are at least ten times as large if he was actually serious about addressing our budget woes.

But at least Obama is not proposing an increase in spending.

Oh wait, he actually is.

In fact, under Obama’s budget, U.S. government spending will soar from 3.8 trillion dollars this year to 5.6 trillion dollars in 2021.

But the mainstream media is solely focusing on the budget cuts that Obama is proposing.

Apparently they are trying to cast him as some sort of “fiscal conservative”.

Try not to laugh.

But the modest cuts that Obama is proposing are at least some place to start.

Under Obama’s budget, approximately half of all government agencies will have their funding decreased from 2010 levels.

In fact, approximately 33 billion dollars would be saved by scaling back or shutting down 200 federal programs.

Of course Obama’s fellow Democrats in Congress will never go along with many of these cuts, but at least it is something.

However, this is where most in the mainstream media stop their analysis.

They don’t take a closer look at the numbers in Obama’s budget.

They don’t question the wacky economic growth assumptions.

They don’t question the bizarre government income projections.

But even with the Obama administration’s crooked numbers, the federal deficit still never drops below 600 billion dollars over the next decade and a total of 7.2 trillion dollars is still added to the national debt over the next decade.

If economic growth ends up being much lower, or if the U.S. government is not able to get twice as much money out of the American people by the end of the decade then the projections would look much, much different.

So where does the Obama administration assume all of that extra money for the government is going to come from?

Oh, from raising taxes of course.

The Obama budget assumes that there will be significant tax increases starting in the year 2013.

A recent article on CNBC summarized some of the tax increases that the Obama budget calls for….

    The plan unveiled Monday includes tax increases for oil, gas and coal producers, investment managers and U.S.-based multinational corporations. The plan would allow Bush-era tax cuts to expire at the end of 2012 for individuals making more than $200,000 and married couples making more than $250,000.

    Wealthy taxpayers would have their itemized deductions limited, including deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions and state and local taxes.

There are many liberals (such as my friend Gary) that would love to see these tax increases go into effect, but Obama knows that there is no chance that they will ever see the light of day unless the Democrats retake the House of Representatives.

But most of Obama’s budget for 2012 is based on things that simply never even have a chance of happening.

The reality is that Obama’s budget for 2012 is a great work of fiction.

Meanwhile, the U.S. government continues to accumulate staggering amounts of debt.

In fact, Obama’s budget admits that we will witness the biggest one year debt increase in history this year.

In 2011, the gross federal debt with surpass 15 trillion dollars. In fact, it is being projected by some analysts that this will be the year when the debt finally becomes larger than the size of the entire U.S. economy.

Ouch.

But Obama insists that he is taking this debt problem very seriously.

Obama insists that he is committed to making “deep” cuts.

In fact, as he announced this new budget Obama stated that these budget cuts hit “many programs whose mission I care deeply about, but meeting our fiscal targets while investing in our future demands no less.”

Do any of you actually believe him?

Not that the Obama administration is in an easy position. The truth is that the U.S. government (both Republicans and Democrats) have been horribly irresponsible with our money for decades.

The 14 trillion dollar national debt problem that we have now did not develop overnight.

Neither will it be solved overnight.

But Obama is not even trying to address the tough issues such as Social Security and Medicare.

The truth is that the federal debt problem cannot be solved without addressing our out of control entitlement programs.

So why didn’t Obama address them in his budget?

Well, the reality is that Obama is not stupid. Social Security and Medicare are political sacred cows. Obama is not going to do anything at this point that would cost him millions of votes in 2012.

So Barack Obama ignored most of the $4 trillion in budget cuts recommended by the White House-appointed deficit commission.

It kind of makes you wonder why Obama ever appointed a “deficit commission” in the first place.

One area that Obama does attempt to cut in his new budget is military spending. Obama’s budget for 2012 sets military spending at 5 percent below what the Pentagon requested for 2011.

In fact, Obama’s defense budget would slash military spending by $78 billion over the next five years.

His budget also assumes that we are not going to get involved in any more wars, which is not necessarily a safe assumption.

So will these military spending cuts actually get through Congress?

Not likely.

The Republicans control the House of Representatives, and they are not likely to take too kindly to large cuts to the defense budget.

In fact, the truth is that not too many of Barack Obama’s spending cuts are likely to survive in Congress.

As a recent article on CNN explained, Barack Obama’s budget plan must navigate a vast array of congressional committees in the coming months and by the time it emerges it is likely to be radically changed from its current form….

    Before it gets back to Obama’s desk for a signature, the spending blueprint will go through no less than 40 congressional committees, 24 subcommittees, countless hearings and a number of floor votes in the House and Senate.

As our Congress critters have demonstrated over and over and over, they love to spend our money on some of the most wasteful things imaginable.

For example, a total of $3 million has already been granted to researchers at the University of California at Irvine so that they can play video games such as World of Warcraft.

Something seems to happen to people who get elected to Congress. Almost all of them seem to develop an addiction to spending our hard-earned money.

Let us hope that something changes in that regard, because right now government debt is completely and totally out of control.

In fact, the U.S. national debt is currently increasing by approximately 4 billion dollars every single day.

In the end, if something is not done about all this debt it will destroy the entire U.S. financial system.

But our politicians just keep putting it off and putting it off.

Eventually we will reap what we have sown. Debt is a very cruel master, and nobody can run from it forever – not even the U.S. government.

Obama Pencils In $37 Billion Budget Increase For DHS, Naked Body Scanners

 



IRS Propaganda Campaign to Promote ObamaCare Taxes

IRS Propaganda Campaign to Promote ObamaCare Taxes

Pajamas Media
February 16, 2011

The Tatler has learned that Obamacare government auditing of American society has begun at the Internal Revenue Service.

New details about the IRS budget were released this afternoon by Senator John Barrasso (who also is an MD). Quoting from the IRS budget document, he reveals that for the IRS, ObamaCare “represents the largest set of tax law changes in more than 20 years, with more than 40 provisions that amend the tax laws.”

More than $93 million has been budgeted by the IRS to assure that the public complies with the new tax rules. Among other new IRS activities, the agency will spend $11.5 million to promote compliance by tanning salon owners who will be asked to impose a new 10% excise tax on their customers. Originally the tax was supposed to be on those who offered cosmetic surgery, but their upscale customers defeated the tax and shifted it to those who own storefront tanning beds.

The IRS will not only audit Americans, they intend to be helpful too. They are requesting more than $34 million for something called “information reporting,” $15 million for a call center to help confused citizens to deal with the new Obamacare tax laws, and $22 million to “assist taxpayers in understanding new provisions.”

In a Tatler interview with Senator Barrasso, he called the IRS budget “irresponsible” and that it “empowers the IRS to begin to audit Americans’ health care.”

He also told the Tatler, “Adding hundreds of new jobs and millions of dollars to the IRS isn’t going to make care better or more available for anyone. I will continue to fight to repeal and replace Obamacare with patient centered reforms that help the private sector – not the IRS – create more jobs.”

 

Theft By Deception – Deciphering The Federal Income Tax

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIaGEy9zpWQ

Microchipping Americans Found in Health Care Bill

IRS to Force Americans to Buy Health Insurance

Obamacare To Be Enforced By Armed Thugs

IRS to Make Sure Americans Buy Health Insurance

IRS to Force Americans to Buy Health Insurance

 



Justice Department wants all web surfing tracked

Justice Department seeks to have all web surfing tracked

Raw Story
January 25, 2011

The US Justice Department wants Internet service providers and cell phone companies to be required to hold on to records for longer to help with criminal prosecutions.

“Data retention is fundamental to the department’s work in investigating and prosecuting almost every type of crime,” US deputy assistant attorney general Jason Weinstein told a congressional subcommittee on Tuesday.

“Some records are kept for weeks or months; others are stored very briefly before being purged,” Weinstein said in remarks prepared for delivery to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security.

He said Internet records are often “the only available evidence that allows us to investigate who committed crimes on the Internet.”

Internet and phone records can be “crucial evidence” in a wide array of cases, including child exploitation, violent crime, fraud, terrorism, public corruption, drug trafficking, online piracy and computer hacking, Weinstein said, but only if the data still exists when law enforcement needs it.

“In some ways, the problem of investigations being stymied by a lack of data retention is growing worse,” he told lawmakers.

Weinstein noted inconsistencies in data retention, with one mid-sized cell phone company not keeping records, a cable Internet provider not tracking the Internet protocol addresses it assigns to customers and another only keeping them for seven days.

Law enforcement is hampered by a “legal regime that does not require providers to retain non-content data for any period of time” while investigators must request records on a case-by-case basis through the courts, he said.

“The investigator must realize he needs the records before the provider deletes them, but providers are free to delete records after a short period of time, or to destroy them immediately,” Weinstein added.

The justice official said greater data retention requirements raise legitimate privacy concerns but “any privacy concerns about data retention should be balanced against the needs of law enforcement to keep the public safe.”

John Morris, general counsel at the non-profit Center for Democracy & Technology, said mandatory data retention “raises serious privacy and free speech concerns.”

“A key to protecting privacy is to minimize the amount of data collected and held by ISPs and online companies in the first place,” he said.

“Mandatory data retention laws would require companies to maintain large databases of subscribers’ personal information, which would be vulnerable to hackers, accidental disclosure, and government or other third party access.”

Kate Dean, executive director of the Internet Service Provider Association, said broad mandatory data retention requirements would be “fraught with legal, technical and practical challenges.”

Dean said they would require “an entire industry to retain billions of discrete electronic records due to the possibility that a tiny percentage of them might contain evidence related to a crime.”

“We think that it is important to weigh that potential value against the impact on the millions of innocent Internet users’ privacy,” she said.

 



McChrystal: Americans Must Serve the State

McChrystal: Americans Must Serve the State

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
January 26, 2011

For anyone who might have thought General Stanley McChrystal and Barack Obama no longer saw eye to eye, it might surprise them to read McChrystal’s recent article, “ Step Up For Your Country,” published in the January 31 issue of Newsweek. For all the hype having to do with McChrystal being relieved of command, it seems the General and the President have more in common than the average television watcher might think. That is, at least when it comes to implementing civilian labor programs along the lines of Joseph Stalin or Mao. The illustration to the right is an interesting choice to represent McChrystal’s article in Newsweek, as it echoes the very same work camp and civilian service propaganda posters of former totalitarian regimes.

In his op-ed piece for Newsweek, McChrystal makes the case for the creation of a national civilian service program and laments the fact that we have “allowed the obligations of citizenship to narrow.”

McChrystal writes, “’Service member’ should not apply only to those in uniform, but to us all . . . the concept of national service is not new, nor is it outdated.” Of course, the General is correct in this assessment, as dictators from all political backgrounds have found “national service” to be an indispensable tool of tyranny.

He goes on, “All of us bear an obligation to serve – an obligation that goes beyond paying taxes, voting, or adhering to the law. America is falling short in endeavors that occur far away from any battlefield: education, science, politics, the environment, and cultivating leadership, among others.”

This obligation, which McChrystal defines as “community responsibility,” goes beyond merely providing services to the community. In the end, he writes, “ . . . we must understand that our real objective must be in shaping Americans. We must build into our society, and into ourselves, a sense of ability and responsibility.”

One would be justified in asking who is this “we” whose real objective is shaping Americans? To be sure, if Americans wanted to shape themselves they would be able to do so without their government forcing them wouldn’t they? If Americans have decided that, as a country, they would prefer not to accept these “responsibilities,” then their government would be operating openly against the will of the people. Either way, it is clear that “we” does not mean “we the people” and, instead, “we the controlling elite.”

If one were wondering exactly what this “community responsibility” would entail, McChrystal provides a definition. He writes:

    We must recognize that service is typically doing things that you would not choose to do, but that must be done. It can be rewarding; it can also be difficult, onerous, and even dangerous. It cannot rely on short-term volunteers any more than our independence could be won by the people Tom Paine termed ‘summer soldiers and sunshine patriots.’ It must have people with a firm commitment, backed by a society that values their contribution.

First, it should be pointed out that in the quotation McChrystal utilizes, Tom Paine was in no way referring to forcing Americans to engage in work projects. In fact, Paine’s position was quite the opposite of the McChrystal’s.

Second, McChrystal’s definition of service is steeped in Orwellian doublethink. If service is “doing things that you would not choose to do,” then it is no longer service. Serving without one’s choice or consent is therefore slavery. Interestingly enough, the term service is derived from the Latin servus which means “slave.”[1]

Third, it is important to note McChrystal’s claim that service can be “difficult, onerous, and even dangerous.” This sounds a bit different than Habitat for Humanity or teaching in low-income communities. One must wonder exactly what kind of “service” McChrystal has in mind for the useless eaters that will be working beneath him.

Barack Obama famously called for a program of national civilian service in a campaign speech two years ago that drew a great deal of attention. Obama’s former Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel echoed his desire for a domestic work and re-education program as well.

McChrystal concludes his article by claiming that “we” will realize “we” have succeeded when “new graduates of high schools and colleges talk with each other about how, not whether, they will serve America.” In this statement, Gen. McChrystal is quite correct. Unfortunately, we will know that America has officially been turned into a tyrannical and dictatorial state who is as dead and lifeless as all of its historical and current parallels.

You Will Serve Obama’s Civilian Army

Obama’s New National Military Draft