The Real Swine Epidemic

There’s a lot of money to be made in the ending of human civilization. Money in print, in movies, artwork, and blogging (not me, the other guys). But the most money is in the hype and hysteria fostered by the international news agencies that serve as nothing more than a new entertainment media. It really seems that they have decided t stop serving news altogether and are now just the puppets of their corporate masters. In evidence of this fact I offer the following.
Between the initial outbreak of SARS and the it’s mysterious “disappearance”, eg. It stopped evolving and died suddenly and unexpectedly, SARS killed seven hundred and fourty-four people. Swine Flu has to date only infected nine hundred people. While there was a certain amount of hysteria that surrounded this outbreak, the deaths were spread across the globe. Were schools closed? No. Did it enjoy 24/7 media coverage? No. Was it billed as a frightening crisis? Yes. But it killed hundreds of people.

The national hysteria that is being touted on American media outlets is an atrocity to genuine journalism, and tantamount to a blind, ignorant, and blissfully content public to swallow whole the giant turd that the politico-corporate establishment is dropping down their throat. So to what ends do we get a completely vaporous pandemic of ludicrous proportions? I don’t know. But it bugs me. Maybe they just want to distract you from the other billions of problems you’re facing and get you back on track to the “well at least you’ve got your life” mentality, rather than taking it as a given and continuing to bitch and whine, like Texas threatening to secede. While teetering on the edge of a depression, do we really need to battle a disease that is only life threatening when correct medical attention isn’t supplied? No.

The real Swine epidemic here isn’t the flu, it’s the rash of clumsy and irresponsible journalism. Judging by the hype they’re attempting to peddle, they would have us believe we’re on the edge of oblivion, when really this information wouldn’t have even made the cover of a high school newspaper in an environment permeated with legitimate journalism. Shame on the networks, shame on all of the people who have spun this hysteria nearly out of control, and shame on their corporate masters whatever agenda they’re attempting to forward with this nonsense. When the swine flu disappears you won’t hear about it. Why? Because there’s no money in you knowing it’s ok. Relief doesn’t sell commercials.

The "Normalization" of the UFO Phenomena

It has come to my attention that more and more accounts of UFO sightings are creeping into mainstream media outlets like CNN more recently physorg . From an admitted UFO "believer", this sends an odd message. The events discussed in the above articles are by no means isolated incidents in and of themselves (a dude (who happens to be the former governor of Arizona) who saw the phoenix lights, and a group of airline pilots demand disclosure), so why are they news?

Are they news because there just isn't enough happening in the world, and these events are worth noting? Or are they news to serve a broader, more sinister purpose? Could it be that the presidential candidate who said he saw a UFO has opened up discussion a bit for intelligent debate? Or are these just more status quo fluff pieces intended to incite and indulge?

Maybe a little bit of all of that. All that I know is I am seeing an increase in the general acceptance of ET's by the general public, and this is showing in our media. Is this to suggest that disclosure may be somewhere down the pipe? Are we being warmed up to the fact that we are not the only intelligent life form in the universe?

I once was talking about aliens with an elderly gentleman, the conversation went something like:

"You know, if I were ET I would find the most populated area, land, get out and wave. There wouldn't be any of this cloak and dagger conspiracy stuff people talk about"

To which he replied, "Let's think for a moment that you weren't shot down landing on the white house lawn. You're a being who can travel galaxies in an instant. You're capable of things that you and I on earth can't even imagine. Now what, if anything is an inbred race of half-apes going to offer you? What do you gain? Company? Nothing is what you get. A big fat nothing."

The truth of these words has haunted me the majority of my life. We have little to offer this universe that it probably doesn't already have, yet we have all of our own self-important busybody tasks like fearmongering, politics and war.

Aliens, if they exist, have little reason to land on our white house lawn (that is if they aren't there already), but they are creeping into our media and will eventually invade our policy decisions. Are we starting to wisen up to them? Or is it just the next big threat that's going to keep the fear machine lubed up and rolling? We'll see.

Re-Post: A Phone Call With the Federal Reserve

This article was on Digg and the site that hosted it mysteriously crashed. I'm crediting the original author, but I really feel that this should be out there, indexed and read by as many people as possible.

Included in the comments of the original article, I'm including this link to an important video on the subject.


A Phone Call With The Federal Reserve
From WikiProtest ~ The Wiki of the Revolution

by Written by Daniel Doyle Benham

Tuesday, 09 January 2007

Who owns the Federal Reserve Bank? A phone conversation about the unseen operations of the Federal Reserve System


The following is a conversation with Mr. Ron Supinski of the Public Information Department of the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank. This is an account of that conversation.

CALLER - Mr. Supinski, does my country own the Federal Reserve System?

MR. SUPINSKI - We are an agency of the government.

CALLER - That's not my question. Is it owned by my country?

MR. SUPINSKI - It is an agency of the government created by congress.

CALLER - Is the Federal Reserve a Corporation?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Does my government own any of the stock in the Federal Reserve?

MR. SUPINSKI - No, it is owned by the member banks.

CALLER - Are the member banks private corporations?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Are Federal Reserve Notes backed by anything?

MR. SUPINSKI-Yes, by the assets of the Federal Reserve but, primarily by the power of congress to lay tax on the people.

CALLER - Did you say, by the power to collect taxes is what backs Federal Reserve Notes?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - What are the total assets of the Federal Reserve?

MR. SUPINSKI - The San Francisco Bank has $36 Billion in assets.

CALLER - What are these assets composed of?

MR. SUPINSKI - Gold, the Federal Reserve Bank itself and government securities.

CALLER - What value does the Federal Reserve Bank carry gold per oz. on their books?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't have that information but the San Francisco Bank has $1.6 billion in gold.

CALLER - Are you saying the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco has $1.6 billion in gold, the bank itself and the balance of the assets is government securities?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes.

CALLER - Where does the Federal Reserve get Federal Reserve Notes from?

MR. SUPINSKI - They are authorized by the Treasury.

CALLER - How much does the Federal Reserve pay for a $10 Federal Reserve Note?

MR. SUPINSKI - Fifty to seventy cents.

CALLER - How much do they pay for a $100.00 Federal Reserve Note?

MR. SUPINSKI - The same fifty to seventy cents.

CALLER - To pay only fifty cents for a $100.00 is a tremendous gain, isn't it?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - According to the US Treasury, the Federal Reserve pays $20.60 per 1,000 denomination or a little over two cents for a $100.00 bill, is that correct?

MR. SUPINSKI - That is probably close.

CALLER - Doesn't the Federal Reserve use the Federal Reserve Notes that cost about two cents each to purchase US Bonds from the government?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes, but there is more to it than that.

CALLER - Basically, that is what happens?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes, basically you are correct.

CALLER - How many Federal Reserve Notes are in circulation?

MR. SUPINSKI - $263 billion and we can only account for a small percentage.

CALLER - Where did they go?

MR. SUPINSKI - Peoples mattress, buried in their back yards and illegal drug money.

CALLER - Since the debt is payable in Federal Reserve Notes, how can the $4 trillion national debt be paid-off with the total Federal Reserve Notes in circulation?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't know.

CALLER - If the Federal Government would collect every Federal Reserve Note in circulation would it be mathematically possible to pay the $4 trillion national debt?

MR. SUPINSKI - No

CALLER - Am I correct when I say, $1 deposited in a member bank $8 can be lent out through Fractional Reserve Policy?

MR. SUPINSKI - About $7.

CALLER - Correct me if I am wrong but, $7 of additional Federal Reserve Notes were never put in circulation. But, for lack of better words were "created out of thin air " in the form of credits and the two cents per denomination were not paid either. In other words, the Federal Reserve Notes were not physically printed but, in reality were created by a journal entry and lent at interest. Is that correct?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Is that the reason there are only $263 billion Federal Reserve Notes in circulation?

MR. SUPINSKI - That is part of the reason.

CALLER - Am I mistaking that when the Federal Reserve Act was passed (on Christmas Eve) in 1913, it transferred the power to coin and issue our nation's money and to regulate the value thereof from Congress to a Private corporation. And my country now borrows what should be our own money from the Federal Reserve (a private corporation) plus interest. Is that correct and the debt can never be paid off under the current money system of country?

MR. SUPINSKI - Basically, yes.

CALLER - I smell a rat, do you?

MR. SUPINSKI - I am sorry, I can't answer that, I work here.

CALLER - Has the Federal Reserve ever been independently audited?

MR. SUPINSKI - We are audited.

CALLER - Why is there a current House Resolution 1486 calling for a complete audit of the Federal Reserve by the GAO and why is the Federal Reserve resisting?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't know.

CALLER - Does the Federal Reserve regulate the value of Federal Reserve Notes and interest rates?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes

CALLER - Explain how the Federal Reserve System can be Constitutional if, only the Congress of the US, which comprises of the Senate and the House of representatives has the power to coin and issue our money supply and regulate the value thereof? [Article 1 Section 1 and Section 8] Nowhere, in the Constitution does it give Congress the power or authority to transfer any powers granted under the Constitution to a private corporation or, does it?

MR. SUPINSKI - I am not an expert on constitutional law. I can refer you to our legal department.

CALLER - I can tell you I have read the Constitution. It does NOT provide that any power granted can be transferred to a private corporation. Doesn't it specifically state, all other powers not granted are reserved to the States and to the citizens? Does that mean to a private corporation?

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't think so, but we were created by Congress.

CALLER - Would you agree it is our country and it should be our money as provided by our Constitution?

MR. SUPINSKI - I understand what you are saying.

CALLER - Why should we borrow our own money from a private consortium of bankers? Isn't this why we had a revolution, created a separate sovereign nation and a Bill of Rights?

MR. SUPINSKI - (Declined to answer).

CALLER - Has the Federal Reserve ever been declared constitutional by the Supreme Court?

MR. SUPINSKI - I believe there has been court cases on the matter.

CALLER - Have there been Supreme Court Cases?

MR. SUPINSKI - I think so, but I am not sure.

CALLER - Didn't the Supreme Court declare unanimously in A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. vs. US and Carter vs. Carter Coal Co. the corporative-state arrangement an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power? ["The power conferred is the power to regulate. This is legislative delegation in its most obnoxious form; for it is not even delegation to an official or an official body, presumptively disinterested, but to private persons." Carter vs. Carter Coal Co...]

MR. SUPINSKI - I don't know, I can refer you to our legal department.

CALLER - Isn't the current money system a house of cards that must fall because, the debt can mathematically never be paid-off?

MR. SUPINSKI - It appears that way. I can tell you have been looking into this matter and are very knowledgeable. However, we do have a solution.

CALLER - What is the solution?

MR. SUPINSKI - The Debit Card.

CALLER - Do you mean under the EFT Act (Electronic Funds Transfer)? Isn't that very frightening, when one considers the capabilities of computers? It would provide the government and all it's agencies, including the Federal Reserve such information as: You went to the gas station @ 2:30 and bought $10.00 of unleaded gas @ $1.41 per gallon and then you went to the grocery store @ 2:58 and bought bread, lunch meat and milk for $12.32 and then went to the drug store @ 3:30 and bought cold medicine for $5.62. In other words, they would know where we go, when we went, how much we paid, how much the merchant paid and how much profit he made. Under the EFT they will literally know everything about us. Isn't that kind of scary?

MR. SUPINSKI - Yes, it makes you wonder.

CALLER - I smell a GIANT RAT that has overthrown my constitution. Aren't we paying tribute in the form of income taxes to a consortium of private bankers?

MR. SUPINSKI - I can't call it tribute, it is interest.

CALLER - Haven't all elected officials taken an oath of office to preserve and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic? Isn't the Federal Reserve a domestic enemy?

MR. SUPINSKI - I can't say that.

CALLER - Our elected officials and members of the Federal Reserve are guilty of aiding and abetting the overthrowing of my Constitution and that is treason. Isn't the punishment of treason death?

MR. SUPINSKI - I believe so.

CALLER - Thank you for your time and information and if I may say so, I think you should take the necessary steps to protect you and your family and withdraw your money from the banks before the collapse, I am.

MR. SUPINSKI - It doesn't look good.

CALLER - May God have mercy on the souls who are behind this unconstitutional and criminal act called the Federal Reserve. When the ALMIGHTY MASS awakens to this giant hoax, they will not take it with a grain of salt. It has been a pleasure talking to you and I thank you for your time. I hope you will take my advice before it does collapse.

MR. SUPINSKI - Unfortunately, it does not look good.

CALLER - Have a good day and thanks for your time.

MR. SUPINSKI - Thanks for calling.

University scientist claims people can know the future

Professors at the University of Amsterdam are convinced that they have collected enough evidence to conclude that it is possible for humans to see the future. I wonder if they've heard of James Randi's Challenge

Frankly, I think this announcement lends far too much legitimacy to a field that is rife with scammers and charlatans. I would really have liked to see more depth in the story speaking to what the test conditions were and what criteria subjects were appraised with in order to arrive at the conclusions they did.

It almost seems like the reality we are shaping is the result of the fiction that we have created. I think in a lot of ways we are attempting to delude ourselves in the belief that we can define our own rules for the naturalistic world, rather than play by the rules of the reality that surrounds us.

We no longer dare to dream, we go far beyond that. We look at the universe through the lense of fiction rather than reason. I am seeing an alarming trend of bad science leading to even worse conclusions. People who claim scientific data must garner their data from a skeptical and hopefully peer-guided viewpoint. This is not to say that rebels or people who go against the grain are always wrong, quite the contrary it is usually these folks who make a difference. However. A hyperdrive will unlikely be a reality in the coming century, much less the coming decade. Free energy will only exist when wire is free, and Psychics are (probably) not real.

It's a Bird! It's a Plane! Er... It's an Asteroid?

Tracking the Sky for near-earth objects is a difficult task indeed. The resources required to scan, decipher and predict stellar activity that may result in catastrophic effects are more than you might imagine. At this point, the closest object that we know of that could take us out Armageddon style is Apophis. Its actual trajectory is unknown but it is possible that Apophis will collide with our planet in 2036, destroying most of us humans and making a general mess of things.

That would totally suck! What can we do? Well, that's exactly what the Planetary Society has decided to throw a competition for.

The prize is $50,000 for the winning idea. Not a bad pay day if you have a good imagination with a good science background.

Hype? Or Drive....

I "dugg up" an amazing article today on the New Scientist about a real live hypdrive

According to the paper, this hyperdrive motor would propel a craft through another dimension at enormous speeds. It could leave Earth at lunchtime and get to the moon in time for dinner.

The article has an excellent level of depth, without drowning you in tedium. It brings to light another spin on gravity and dimensional space, bringing with it a LOT of confusion and even more well-deserved trepidation. The paper itself won an award from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and is based on Heim Theory.

Anti-Gravity and gravity reduction schemes seem to be cornerstones of all the modern armchair physicists and wearing-aluminum-foil-on-the-head weirdos wandering the tubes. I guess they reckon if they can reduce, or eliminate, the mass of an object, it will no longer require an infinite amount of energy to propel the object past the speed of light, making interstellar space flight a possibility.

My only problem with this is that it seems to be a rehash of what all the "free energy" quacks have been claiming for years! You would think if there was anything to these crackpot theories that something would have come to fruition; an advance, an invention, something!

Where's the Beef, Steorn?

While Steorn desperately tries to legitimize itself with the world scientific community, we wait and wonder: Where's the beef?

I wouldn't sell your oil short just quite yet....