Türk Siyaseti ve Türkiye Siyasi Tarihi - Video Projesi - Türk ve İslam Tarihi - Türk Dna'sı

Ebedi Barış İçin Ebedi Savaş

Birinci Dünya Savaşının galibi İngiltere'dir. İngiliz devletini yöneten unsur kraliyet hanedanlığıdır. Bilindiği gibi İngilizler, Almanlar, Hollandalılar ve Fransızlar gibi Cermen milletinin bir mensubudurlar.
Birinci Dünya Savaşından sonra Dünyayı yöneten unsurun Birinci Dünya Savaşının galibi ve baş aktörü olan ülkenin olduğunu anlamamız gerekir.
İşte bu İngiltere devleti, kendisinin bir uzantısı olan Amerikan devleti ve Almanya devletindeki bazı aile şirketlerini, şeytani tarikatları ve hükümet nezdindeki önemli kişileri kullanarak(ve ayrıca onları büyütüp, ünlü yapıp, sahneye çıkartıp ve sonrasındada besleyip), Devlet+Mafya-Tarikat-Gladyo sistemini İkinci Dünya Savaşı öncesinde ve sırasında kurmaya çalışmak istemiştir ve başarılı olmuştur.
Nasıl başarılı olmuştur ve bu Devlet+Mafya-Tarikat-Gladyo sisteminin içinde kimler var?
Devlet: İngiltere-Amerika.
Devleti Yöneten Hanedan(İngiliz/Cermen Milletine Hizmet Ediyor): Windsor(İngiliz Cermen Kökenli) ve Rothschild(Hazar Türk Kökenli) sülalelerinin karışımı
Mafya: Rockefeller-Rothschild-JP Morgan gibi sülale şirketleri
Tarikat: İlluminati, Mason, Bilderberg gibi şeytani tarikatlar
Gladyo: İngilizlerin kontrolünde olan Faşist İktidarlar: İngiliz Ajanı Kukla Hitler ve Kukla Nazi Devleti/Hükümeti, ve İngiliz Ajanı Kukla Stalin ve Lenin'in Sovyetler Birliği'nin Yıkımını Amaçlayan Yeni Sovyet Devleti/Hükümeti.
Bu konu hakkında ayrıntılı bilgileri bu forumdaki başlıklarda bulabilirsiniz.

Ebedi Barış İçin Ebedi Savaş

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 05 May 2011, 22:05

PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL PEACE

Trilaterals have a fondness for declaring "war" on world problems. We have a "war on cancer," a "war on crime," a "war on drugs," a "war on AIDS" and so on.
What we find within these "wars" are policies designed to advance Trilateral world objectives. Peace and individual freedom are certainly not the objectives, nor in many cases do we identify any contribution to human welfare.

In this chapter we consider (a) the "war on AIDS" and (b) the "war on drugs." In each case we unearth a story very different from the establishment media official line intended for public consumption.

THE WAR ON AIDS

According to Dr. Robert Gallo and other establishment AIDS researchers, this deadly disease with the capability to wipe out the world originated with a little green monkey in Africa who bit a native with disastrous results. Believe it or not, establishment scientists either push this absurd, unproven argument or dismiss origins as irrelevant.

There is another argument, backed by hard evidence and reflected in five books by respected medical doctors. Briefly, this argument is that AIDS is a man-made disease developed by the U.S. Army as part of a biological warfare program, funded by Congress and released by elitist fanatics to eliminate specific segments of the world's population.

Horrific as genocide by global fanatics may appear, there is more evidence for this interpretation than for the little green monkey theory.
Even more horrendous, this argument takes us right to Trilateralist Robert S. McNamara, former Secretary of State and Chairman of the World Bank. It was McNamara who approved funding for development of an artificial AIDS virus later funded by Congress.

Here's the story based on the research of these five doctors which we supplemented with our own research for documentary evidence.
We previously published our assessment in THE PHOENIX LETTER edited by this author in November 1992 and December 1993.1 We reprint the following from the December 1993 issue. Further documentation may be found in the November 1992 issue.

Fort Detrich Biological Programs In The '60s

Fort Detrich in Maryland is the U.S. biological warfare base. Originally called U.S. Army Biological Laboratories it is now labeled U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID).
The Army maintains a Special Operations Division (SOD) on the Fort Detrich base with a formal operating agreement with CIA (memorandum signed in May 1952). Both CIA and Army have covered their tracks well but some original documents survive to outline a horrific story.
In the early '60s U.S. Army SOD personnel used specially designed suitcases to spray unsuspecting American civilians with bacillus subtilis at the Greyhound Bus Terminals in Washington, Chicago and San Francisco.

1 Available from THE PHOENIX LETTER, Suite 216C, 1517 14th Street West, Billings, MT 59102; $87 for one year. THE PHOENIX LETTER, now in its 12th year, is a report on abuse of power.

Similar operations were conducted at airports in Washington D.C., New York, Boston and Los Angeles. The number of one way tickets sold at time of release was used to estimate distribution of the bacterial agents. (Bacillus subtilis can be bought at biological supply houses. It is not listed as a pathogen, but can cause respiratory infections, blood poisoning and food poisoning.)

According to declassified Army documents the Greyhound terminals in San Francisco and Chicago were the location for "six operatives to launch covert attacks" spread over 7 days. Specially designed suitcases sprayed bacteria into crowded terminals for maximum exposure. Photographs were taken and other Army personnel "covertly collected air samples in close proximity to the passengers" to determine if the civilians had been infected (See photographs.)
Later tests were repeated with smallpox agents, grown in large quantities and converted to a lethal powder for spraying.

Senate investigation in 1975 revealed close cooperation between SOD and CIA:

"CIA associaiton with Fort Detrich involved the Special Operations Division (SOD) of that facility. This division was responsible for developing special applications for biological warfare agents and toxins. Its principal customer was the U.S. Army. Its concern was with the development of both suitable agents and delivery mechanisms for use in paramilitary situations. Both standard biological warfare agents and biologically derived toxins were investigated by the division."

The Senate Committee found the CIA had covered its tracks to conceal this unconstitutional activity from the American public. The Senate Committee stated, "Although some CIA originated documents have been found in the project files it is clear that only a very limited documentation of activities took place."
An extract from a U.S. Army report details why smallpox was selected as the "agent of choice."

Its "attractive" features are listed as:

1. Smallpox is highly infectious with close contact It spreads readily from an infected person to susceptible individuals.
2. A long incubation period of relatively constant duration permits the operatives responsible to leave the country before the first case is diagnosed
3. The duration of illness for those who recover is relatively long.

Although the Federal Government claims that the 1972 treaty banning biological weapons stopped further use of Fort Detrich we know that the U.S. Army applied for $1.4 million appropriation to EXPAND germ warfare testing ability in the early 1980s. Senator James Sasser objected and it is unlikely that the appropriation went through. It could have been handled on the "black budget."

The Originator of AIDS

In July 1969 Dr. MacArthur, Director of the U.S. Army Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA) appeared before Congress (the Appropriations Committee of the House) and stated: "within a period of 5-10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.

This synthetic agent is AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency syndrome virus or HIV-1). ARPA requested $10 million to develop AIDS, 10 years before the virus was identified in the field.

Dr. MacArthur added, "It is a highly controversial issue and there are many who believe such research should not be undertaken lest it lead to another method of massive killing of large populations."

From 1961 to 1968 while this artificial biological agent was under discussion in the Pentagon, Trilateral Robert McNamara was Secretary of Defense. Clark Clifford (of BCCI notoriety) took over as Secretary in 1969. (Emphasis added.)

On October 2, 1970, just 15 months after Dr. MacArthur requested an appropriation for AIDS development, Robert McNamara, now World Bank President, made a speech to international bankers in which he identified population growth as "the gravest issue that the world faces over the years ahead."

In his speech to the bankers, McNamara argued that population growth was leading to instability, that a 10 billion world population would not be "controllable."
Said McNamara, "It is not a world that any of us would want to live in. Is such a world inevitable? It is not sure but there are two possible ways by which a world of 10 billion people can be averted Either the current birth rates must come down more quickly or the current death rates must go up. There is no other way."
In brief, Robert McNamara was in the final decisionmaking role for development of AIDS at the very time he was contemplating the idea that "world death rates must go up." This is more than coincidence.

Our conclusion is that Trilateralist Robert McNamara knowingly encouraged development of AIDS as a means to reduce the world's population. It is difficult to arrive at any other conclusion,

Soviet Union Charges Pentagon With AIDS Development

This information became known to the Soviets and in October 1985 the Soviet Union mounted a worldwide propaganda campaign, AIDS had been manufactured at Fort Detrich, Maryland by the Pentagon, The initial information was planted in a Soviet-backed newspaper in India and then surfaced in more than 30 media sources worldwide. The report was backed by an East German report by Professor Jacob Segal of Humbolt University, East Berlin. Segal argued that the AIDS virus is "the product of an abortive experiment carried out at a laboratory to develop biological warfare means." This Soviet propaganda campaign was discounted in the West (this editor included). It was beyond the realm of rationality that the U.S. would develop a killer agent such as AIDS. Professor Segal appears to hold the view that it was "accidental," i.e. an "abortive experiment." This position we also held for a while, until the McNamara speech of October 1970 surfaced.

In any event, in the late 80's the U.S. State Department ran a rebuttal campaign to the Soviet charges. However, State was unaware that the Congress had published Dr. MacArthur's requests and statements so the rebuttal fell flat on its face. The State Department, for example, claims the U.S. Army had never used Fort Detrich as a biological warfare base. This is just not true. Further, State apparently had no knowledge of the McNamara contemplation of raising death rates by design.

Conclusions

1. CIA-U.S. Army undertook field tests with bacillus subtilis and smallpox against American civilians.
2. There is no question that the Army received funds from Congress for AIDS development and this was probably undertaken at Fort Detrich.
The AIDS release could have been accidental but we discount this for several reasons. Initial cases came from Africa and Haiti, not the United States. Second, Robert McNamara had simultaneously called for increase in world death rates. This suggests a deliberate policy of controlled release of the AIDS virus.
3. The Soviets obtained the information and used it for a propaganda campaign. The State Department rebuttal was ineffective because State had no idea how much information had already been made public.

Extract from House of Representatives Department of Defense Appropriations for 1970 Hearings Part 5, 1969

129 - Tuesday, July 1,1969 SYNTHETIC BIOLOGICAL AGENTS


There are two things about the biological agent field I would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise. Molecular biology is a field that is advancing very rapidly and eminent biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.

MR. SIKES. Are we doing any work in that field?
DR. MACARTHUR. We are not.
MR. SIKES. Why not? Lack of money or lack of interest? DR. MACARTHUR. Certainly not lack of interest.
MR. SIKES. Would you provide for our records information on what would be required, what the advantages of such a program would be, the time and the cost involved?
DR. MACARTHUR. We will be very happy to.

(The information follows:)

The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular biology led us to investigate the relevance of this field of science to biological warfare.

A small group of experts considered this matter and provided the following observations:

1. All biological agents up to the present time are representatives of naturally occurring disease, and are thus known by scientists throughout the world. They are easily available to qualified scientists for research, either for offensive or defensive purposes.
2. Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.
3. A research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 6 years at a total cost of $10 million.
4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program. Molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientists in the field. Almost all are in university laboratories, and they are generally adequately supported from sources other than DOD. However, it was considered possible to initiate an adequate program through the National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council (NAS-NRC).
The matter was discussed with the NAS-NRC, and tentative plans were made to initiate the program. However, decreasing funds in CB, growing criticism of the CB program, and our reluctance to involve the NAS-NRC in such a controversial endeavor have led us to postpone it for the past 2 years.
It is a highly controversial issue and there are many who believe such research should not be undertaken lest it lead to yet another method of massive killing of large populations. On the other hand, without the sure scientific knowledge that such a weapon is possible, and an understanding of the ways it could be done, there is little that can be done to devise defensive measures. Should an enemy develop it there is little doubt that this is an important area of potential military technological inferiority in which there is no adequate research program.

Pravda: October 31, 1986

"The AIDS virus, a terrible disease with no cure was, according to western researchers, created in Pentagon laboratories." (SPID = AIDS)

THE WAR ON DRUGS

The war on drugs is a farce. The "war" has had no effect on the supply of drugs, has not reduced demand for drugs, but has definitely been used to fund covert programs not authorized by Congress and to line individual official pockets.
Under the Bush and Clinton administrations, the national "war on drugs" is a shoot-from-the-hip stumbling failure and a waste of taxpayer funds. This is not only a personal conclusion, it is a conclusion reached by police chiefs, medical researchers, sociologists, psychologists, syndicated columnists and even by politicians. One can be excused if the conclusion is reached that the "war" is designed to fail

What went wrong?

• No one in any administration bothered to identify the problem in a realistic manner. . . each administration reacted in panic from a public outcry, unthinking and too late.
• The drug abuse problem involves perhaps 20 million Americans. Tsar Bennett wanted to build prisons to accommodate these 20 million errant citizens. . .but without facilities for cures. Additionally Bennett proposed gun control, curtailing civil rights and foster homes for children of abusers.
• Two-thirds of the drug fighting budget is spent on military excursions... in Latin America and Colombia. . . also in Humboldt County, California, where for the first time possibly since the Civil War American troops have been used against Americans.
• Of every ten aircraft intercepted, only one is a drug runner. . . the other nine are innocents.
• A war of words is fought with incomplete, sometimes false, research information.
• The end result of the Bush-Clinton war has been more violence, more homicides, an increase in drug use. . . and of course an increase in headline-catching drug busts.

Some capsule comments:

Washington D.C. Police Chief Isaac Fulwood:


"Bennett spends his time talking, not doing anything. Bennett's approach is absolutely wrong. I don't even know if he has an approach."

Washington D.C. Police Executive Research Forum (a think tank reflecting major city police chiefs):

"A clear need exists to expand and intensify the inquiry into both the medical aspects of drug abuse and the efficacy of our current policy."
If we had space we could print scores of critical comments from the medical side.

Here's a couple of typical comments:

Medical drug specialists are caustic in their criticism of ongoing programs.

Says Dr. Lester Grinspoon of Harvard Medical School:

"These ads (anti-drug ads) are totally irresponsible and they're scaring kids. When kids realize they've been had and not been told the truth, they'll backfire."

The general assessment is that the program is a failure:

Statistician Susan Nissenbaum (California Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs), "The general consensus is that we're beginning to see an increase in the heroin problem."

The latest medical research suggests that certain brain irregularities make some people much quicker to become addicted than others. . . and much harder to cure. Extensive well-controlled research suggests that some addicts take drugs to repair a defective brain chemistry, that persons subject to depression, anger, restlessness find the first dose of the drug immensely reinforcing, i.e. they are biologically pre disposed to a specific drug. Reports Ralph Tarter, a psychologist at the Western Psychiatric Institute in Pittsburgh, many recovering drug abusers "tell me the moment I took my first drug I felt normal for the first time."

The New York Times (June 26, 1990) had an extensive article on biological predisposition.

More generally, Newsweek (January 29, 1990) commented:

"After nine months the model for national action has turned out to be only a nasty battle of words."

A predictable by-product of the Bennett war has been a distinct increase in violence and a dramatic increase in drug-related homicides. The undeniable increase in drug-related homicides is reported from New York, Miami, Houston, Phoenix, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Oakland, California, for example, tabulated 88 homicides by July 1990 (as opposed to 148 for all 1989) and 37 percent were drug related

Another neglected aspect is that valium and codeine, legally prescribed, are among the most addictive drugs and cause as many medical problems as illegally acquired drugs.

An increasing reaction has been a demand for legalization ... to place cocaine and heroin on a par with cigarettes and alcohol, freely available with tax revenues going to the government instead of the dope dealers.
This would certainly put the dealers out of business, and there would be no supply side left for the military excursion tactic.

However, it would not solve the medical problem:

if certain people are biologically disposed to drugs, then given the existing totally inadequate cure facilities we would end up with a medical overload instead of a legal enforcement overload

Here the information is inadequate... we just don't know too much about how business losses are generated in relation to drugs. Is it the pressure to obtain money for drugs that leads to theft, embezzlement and inefficiency or do the drugs themselves make for the inefficiency?

This is a significant point: in one case legalization would lead to fewer business losses, in the other it would lead to even more inefficiency.

In brief:

the shoot-from-the-hip Bush-Clinton approach wholly underestimates the complexity of the drug abuse problem.
However, the program does achieve what has long been feared. . . curtailment of human rights and constitutional rights, military action against Americans by Americans, prison camps for large numbers of Americans, domestic street violence... all under the name of fighting drug abuse.

What's Happening at the Street Level

IF the Bush-Clinton anti-drug crusade had been successful, supply would have dried up at the street level and prices skyrocketed This has not come about.
COCAINE is in plentiful supply. Police Departments around the country confirm this finding. Price dropped right after Bennett was appointed (as suppliers emptied their pipelines). Prices have now stabilized.

Police Chief Fulwood (Washington, D.C.) states:

"We haven't seen any decrease in availability of drugs." A continent away from Washington D.C, this author was walking along Market Street, San Francisco, and saw a stocky white male at the corner of Powell and Market, where the tourists congregate for cable cars. . . who was shouting, "Powder, Rocks" (i.e., cocaine "powder" and crack "rocks"). This in broad daylight!
HEROIN supply has increased and price has dropped substantially.

Here's a chart from Drug Enforcement Agency:

MARIJUANA can be bought openly on the COCAINE PRICES FALL street in any large U.S. city.
AMPHETAMINES of domestic manufacture have increased in supply.

PRICE OF COCAINE (per kilogram inside United States)
SOURCE: Drug Enforcement Agency, Field Intelligence Reports

Resim

The war on drugs has squeezed a balloon at a billion dollar cost. The effect has been to partly shift the drug of choice among users, away from cocaine to heroin.

Street violence has increased. We have overwhelmed police departments, the court system and our prisons. . . for what? For every dealer jailed another opens up shop... 70 percent of our prison population is drug related. Supply curtailment is a failure.
In November 1993 the CBS-TV program 60 Minutes produced dramatic evidence that our analysis is right on. DEA officials, including former DEA Chief Judge Bonner charged the CIA with importing one ton of pure cocaine in a single transaction from Venezuela. This was sold on American streets.
This same CIA operation created the drug trafficking network in Haiti with "intelligence network" used as a cover and operating under General Cedras.
One thousand pounds of the 1990 Venezuelan shipment was seized at the Miami Airport. DEA and Customs investigators were ordered to back off because the cocaine was imported with the approval of the United States Government.

Moreover, Department of Justice knew about the shipment and did nothing. Senator Boren (Skull & Bones) knew about the shipment and did nothing. A Senator who represents the people of the United States closed his eyes.

Only a few officials at DEA did their job! Culminating in the 1993 CBS program.
(No U.S. newspaper printed this information until New York Times 11/20/93. Phoenix Letter picked up some facts years ago, including information not on the CBS program, through the Caracas, Venezuela newspaper El Universal)

The point is this, if one has knowledge of a drug shipment going to the United States, then legally one is required to report the facts. That means every one of these knowledgeable officials in CIA, Justice and State, plus Senator Boren, are guilty of trafficking.
The street dealers who sold this one ton of pure cocaine were no doubt routinely picked up and sentenced. The officials should also go to jail. After all, if a $20 street sale earns a prison sentence then so should importing one ton of pure cocaine.
What has happened? You guessed it! Nothing.

The White House is protecting everyone, which, given Trilateralist Clinton's involvement in Mena, Arkansas cocaine trafficking, should not surprise us. Senator Boren is protected by fellow Senators. We don't hear any calls for investigation of the Boren role.
The ranking CIA official, Mark McFarlin, resigned. No charges filed.

The assistant CIA official in charge of the shipment was "disciplined," no charges filed. All State and Justice officials have been protected.
What's the law?

Here it is, as outlined by a Senior DEA official:

"If you are part of a drug shipment, and you have knowledge that it is going to the United States, you are culpable."

"Culpable?" Yes, culpable of drug trafficking.
So where is Attorney Janet Reno? Do we have a Constitution or have we become just another Banana State petty dictatorship? One rule for the peasants and another for the privileged?

Phoenix Letter has reported scores of government criminal activities over its 14 year history. Omaha child abuse, suppressed technology, taxpayer rip-offs, BCCI murder and corruption, prominent officials involved in corruption and bribery, unsafe aircraft design, weather control, government lies, treason, unconstitutional political policies and so on.
We do not recall any instance where government has acted honestly and brought right and honesty into the equation. The reaction has always been more cover up until the victim becomes the culprit.

Today the United States is governed by a bunch of amoral whining money grubbers whose only concern is to keep intact their position at the public trough.
The key point for Trilaterals Over America is that almost one-third of the American members of the Trilateral Commission have been appointed by Presidents from Carter to Clinton.

The dominant policy influence since the 1970s has been a Trilateral influence. These people have a written policy for guidance. The credit for all U.S. policies in the past several decades, including these absurd "wars" on problems, is definitely with the Trilateral Commission.
There is significant evidence published over the last two decades that the U.S. Government is involved in drug trafficking and that this trafficking is more than an accident.

The largest cocaine laboratory in Bolivia was built and operated by CIA. Lt. Colonel "Bo" Gritz has charged and produced evidence that the Golden Triangle, largest producer of heroin, has ties to Washington, D.C.1 We know that CIA financed the Afghan rebels and the Nicaraguan "contras" through drug sales. There are in fact scores of such instances .... in brief, a large portion of trafficking is operated under official Washington approval.
And we have demonstrated that Washington, D.C, since the 1970s, has been under the control of Trilateralists. . . and not coincidentally the "drug problem," the so-called "war on drugs," has been with us since the late 1970s.

It was Trilateralist Henry Kissinger who developed "crisis management" — that crises can be used to move the world to New World Order. The multibillion dollar "war on drugs" is a brilliant example of "crisis management" — and will continue until the voting public insists that the "war" be closed down and the multibillions wasted are returned to the taxpayers.

Kaynakça
Kitap: Trilaterals over America (1995)
Yazar: Antony C Sutton
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Dön İngiltere ve Amerika Birliği Faaliyetleri: 2. Dünya Savaşı ve Türk Soyumuzun Baş Düşmanı olan Cermen Menfaat Merkezi'nin Kuruluşu

Kimler çevrimiçi

Bu forumu gezen kullanıcılar: Hiç bir kayıtlı kullanıcı yok ve 1 misafir

cron