Guess Who Leads the Bribery World?
The USA is the most corrupt country in the world and I have 10,000 posts that point heavily to that fact…

It Is Conclusive December 10, 2011


December 10, 2011

by legitgov

ShareThis

It Is Conclusive – 9/11 Aircraft Airborne Well After Crash –United 93 in vicinity of Fort Wayne, IN and Champaign, IL at time of alleged crash By PilotsFor911Truth.org 06 Dec 2011 More information has surfaced which conclusively demonstrates the aircraft reportedly used on 9/11, were airborne well after their alleged crashes. This article supplements our last, “ACARS Confirmed – 9/11 Aircraft Airborne Long After Crash,” in which the ACARS system is explained as well as how to determine if a message were received by the aircraft, along with how ground stations are selected through Flight Tracking Protocol based on messages routed to United 175, N612UA. We now have further evidence which places United 93, N591UA, in the vicinity of Champaign, IL, 500+ miles away from the alleged crash site in Shanksville, PA.

Comments (0)

ACARS Confirmed


December 10, 2011

by legitgov

ShareThis

ACARS Confirmed – 9/11 Aircraft Airborne Long After Crash  –United 175 in vicinity of Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, PA By PilotsFor911Truth.org 01 Dec 2011 Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft… ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier?

Comments (0)

De Niro to play disgraced Madoff November 8, 2011

De Niro’s Tribeca Productions will make the film

Robert De Niro is to play disgraced financier Bernie Madoff in an HBO movie he will produce, according to reports.

Laurie Sandell’s book, Truth and Consequences: Life Inside the Madoff Family, will be used as source material, The Hollywood Reporter says.

Diane Henrique’s best seller, The Wizard of Lies: Bernie Madoff and the Death of Trust, will also be used.

Madoff is in prison for fraud in the US after conning £41bn from thousands of investors.

The film will be written by John Burnham Schwartz, who wrote the novel Reservation Road, which was turned into a film in 2007 starring Joaquin Phoenix.

Sandell’s book was written with the co-operation of Madoff’s son Andrew and other family members.

Andrew and his mother Ruth helped promote the book on TV, including an in-depth interview on CBS programme 60 Minutes.

In 2009, Bernie Madoff admitted defrauding investors through a Ponzi scheme, which paid out using their money rather than any profits.

He said the scheme had been running since the early 1990s.

Comments (0)

Blackwater killer gets 30 months, Newburgh 4 get 25 years June 30, 2011

Before a federal court room this week, US Attorney Neil MacBride was rather blunt about what actions a former Blackwater security guard undertook while working in Afghanistan in 2009.

“Justin Cannon opened fire with an AK-47 at the rear of a retreating vehicle and took the life of an innocent Afghan,” is all he needed to say. For that unjust murder, however, Cannon was handed down a sentence yesterday of only 30 months in jail.

If that cold blooded killing is costing Cannon barely two years behind bars, you would think that the US court nowadays would be a bit more lenient in cases where, say, no one was harmed. On the contrary, three of the men linked to the Newburgh 4 plot to allegedly blow up a New York City synagogue were senteced to 25 years in prison today.

James Cromitie, David Williams and Onta Williams have been convicted of plotting to blow up worship houses in the Bronx and shoot down planes at Stewart Air National Guard Base. Defense attorneys, however, argued that the three men are the victims of an immense entrapment perpetrated by the FBI.

The defense claims that an FBI informant posed as a recruiter for a terrorist organization and offered the men special Stinger missiles to take down planes at Stewart. Attorneys attest that the introduction of Stingers in the case calls for a minimum sentence of 25 years, the highest minimum the three men face out of all eight of the charges brought against them.

“The government, not the defendants, chose Stewart Air Force base, and the government, not the defendants, introduced and supplied the missiles,” writes one of the attorneys for the defense.

Their legal team also attests that Shahed Hussain worked with the FBI and purposely picked the men up and drove them into Connecticut to obtain weapons to be used in the attacks. FBI Special Agent Robert Fuller has explicitly stated during the trial that they picked the Connecticut warehouse solely to get the Newburgh 4 to cross state lines.

“The entire trip to Connecticut and the missiles were introduced by the government for the singular purpose of securing a 25-year minimum sentence,” say defense attorneys.

Meanwhile, 200 miles from that New York City courtroom, Cannon’s “reckless behavior,” as US Attorney MacBride calls it, will have him back on the streets in mere months. Cannon’s killing was in cold blood. And the Newburgh 4? They are guilty of falling for a trick enacted by their own government.

Cannon had also been charged with fatally shooting an Afghan passerby while overseas while the man walked his dog. Along with another Blackwater guard, Cannon was acquitted of charges stemming from that case.

Speaking to RT hours after the sentencing of the three men today, Alicia McWilliams-McCollum, the aunt of ones of the convicted men, says it is common knowledge that the government used ex-offenders to manufacture a plot.

“Who holds the government accountable?” she asks. “We know it’s government misconduct.” The sentencing, she says, is just another example of “a miscarriage of justice.”

In the meantime, she urges people to speak out on the matter. “Nobody wants the truth,” she says, and urges that “the community needs to come out”

Comments (0)

Pastor Suspended 20 Days for Marrying Lesbians June 24, 2011

MILWAUKEE (AP) — A Methodist pastor was suspended Thursday for 20 days for officiating at a lesbian wedding, a modest victory for traditionalists in a growing rift over the role of gay and lesbian partnerships in the church.

The Rev. Amy DeLong of Osceola never denied marrying the couple, an act that prompted a church trial this week in Kaukauna. A jury of clergy convicted her Wednesday by a 13-0 vote.

That same jury could have chosen to defrock DeLong, but limited the penalty to suspension. It also demanded, however, that DeLong draft and present a document outlining issues that harm the United Methodist Church’s clergy covenant, and said if she does not she will be suspended for a year, according to the Rev. Scott Carlson, a DeLong supporter who was in the courtroom for the final phase.

DeLong and the Rev. Tom Lambrecht, the Greenville pastor who represented the church against her, did not immediately respond to telephone messages.

The case has been watched closely by Methodists around the nation.

Methodist pastors in areas including Illinois, Minnesota, New York and New England have begun defying the ban on marrying gay couples, saying it violates the church’s teaching of inclusion.

Church officials counter that the prohibition is consistent with Christian teaching, and that God’s love doesn’t necessarily equate to acceptance of all behaviors.

DeLong, 44, had faced two charges: marrying a same-sex couple and being a “self-avowed practicing homosexual.”

The second charge, on which she was acquitted 12-1, refers to a Methodist term allowing gays to serve as clergy as long as they remain celibate. The not guilty verdict appeared to be based on the fact that DeLong declined to answer in court about whether her relationship involved sexual contact.

Her suspension contrasts with some previous decisions. In 2005, a minister from Germantown, Pa., was defrocked for being in a lesbian partnership. A senior pastor in Omaha, Neb., was defrocked in 1999 for performing a same-sex union.

Delong’s trial arose at the same time that a body of Methodist pastors is growing more vocal about overturning the church rule prohibiting clergy from marrying same-sex couples or conducting blessing ceremonies for same-sex unions.

Their calls have increased the pressure for the church to join other mainline Protestant denominations that have become more accepting of openly gay leaders.

But those pastors represent a small proportion of the church’s clergy, and the chances that the ban would be reversed are questionable.

Rule changes must be approved by delegates at the church’s worldwide General Conference, held every four years. Because a growing number of delegates come from Africa and other theologically conservative regions, voting patterns reflect strong resistance to change.

An advocacy group for conservative Protestants said DeLong’s outcome means the ban won’t end anytime soon. Mark Tooley, president of The Institute on Religion and Democracy, said the fact that DeLong was convicted in a fairly liberal region suggests that delegates to the 2012 conference in Tampa, Fla., won’t be looking to reverse the rule.

“The church’s liberal faction likely does not face a very bright future,” he said.

The Rev. Richard Harding doesn’t see it that way. The 86-year-old retired pastor in Massachusetts has been defying the same-sex-wedding ban for more than 10 years without drawing any complaints. He said the ban only drives away talented clergy along with younger members who think the policy is out of touch.

DeLong never denied marrying the lesbian couple. While she avoided discussing her own lesbian relationship in local church settings, she said her efforts to live halfway in the closet and halfway out took such a toll that she finally decided to break her silence.

“I would be lying if I said this process hasn’t been difficult, but I also feel called to break the silence and tell my own truth regardless of the consequences,” she said a few days before the trial began. “When I entered (the ministry) I did not suspend my conscience. It’s incumbent on me not to perpetuate its unjust laws.”

___

Online:

United Methodist Church: http://www.umc.org

Amy DeLong trial news: http://loveontrial.org

___

Dinesh Ramde can be reached at dramde(at)ap.org.

© Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Comments (0)

Shariah Is a Rejection of Western Freedoms June 17, 2011

Recent opinion pieces nationwide have naïvely downplayed the threat of Shariah, Islamic law, in America.

A USA Today Op-Ed called the idea that it is infiltrating U.S. courts a “myth”; a Mother Jones piece on legislation aimed at banning the use of Shariah in state courts called the sponsors of such bills “kind of clueless”; and a Murfreesboro Daily News Journal editorial termed worry over creeping Shariah “McCarthyism.”

Unfortunately for the writers of such pieces, the truth about Shariah is far more frightening than their version of reality.

A 2009 World Public Opinion survey found the majority of people in so-called “moderate” Muslim countries want to see a total rejection of Western values, an al-Qaida-like form of Shariah imposed, and a caliphate replace national sovereignty.

Following this survey, in 2010 Pew conducted its own poll among “moderate” Muslim countries and found that most people favored Shariah’s criminal punishments, including death for those who wish to exercise freedom of worship by leaving Islam (i.e., apostasy).

Ironically, writers who opine on the innocuousness of Shariah and liken bills aimed at banning it to witch hunts and the Red Scare have the privilege of exercising their First Amendment right. In a world dominated by Shariah, were they to critique the status quo, they’d simply be dead.

David Yerushalmi is general counsel for the Center for Security Policy.

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Comments (0)

Some Gay-rights Foes Claim They Now Are Bullied June 12, 2011

NEW YORK (AP) — As the gay-rights movement advances, there’s increasing evidence of an intriguing role reversal: Today, it’s the conservative opponents of that movement who seem eager to depict themselves as victims of intolerance.

To them, the gay-rights lobby has morphed into a relentless bully — pressuring companies and law firms into policy reversals, making it taboo in some circumstances to express opposition to same-sex marriage.

“They’re advocating for a lot of changes in the name of tolerance,” said Jim Campbell, an attorney with the conservative Alliance Defense Fund. “Yet ironically the tolerance is not returned, for people of faith who don’t agree with their agenda.”

Many gay activists, recalling their movement’s past struggles and mindful of remaining bias, consider such protestations by their foes to be hollow and hypocritical.

“They lost the argument on gay people and now they are losing the argument on marriage,” said lawyer Evan Wolfson, president of the advocacy group Freedom to Marry. “Diversions, scare tactics and this playing the victim are all they have left.”

He added: “There’s been a shift in the moral understanding of people — that exclusion from marriage and anti-gay prejudice is wrong. Positions that wouldn’t have been questioned in the past are now being held up to the light.”

Among the recent incidents prompting some conservatives to complain of intolerance or political bullying:

—Olympic gold medal gymnast Peter Vidmar stepped down as chief of mission for the 2012 U.S. Olympic team in May following controversy over his opposition to gay marriage. Vidmar, a Mormon, had publicly supported Proposition 8, the voter-approved law passed in 2008 that restricted marriage in California to one man and one woman.

—After coming under fire from gay-rights groups in April, the Atlanta-based law firm King Spalding pulled out of an agreement with House Republicans to defend the federal ban on same-sex marriage.

—In New York, state Sen. Ruben Diaz, a Democrat from the Bronx, contends he’s received death threats because he opposes legislation to legalize same-sex marriage. The alleged threats were cited last week by the New York State Catholic Conference, which also opposes gay marriage.

“We are unjustly called ‘haters’ and ‘bigots’ by those who have carefully framed their advocacy strategy,” wrote the conference’s executive director, Richard Barnes. “The entire campaign to enact same-sex marriage is conducted under a banner of acceptance … Yet behind that banner of tolerance is another campaign — of intimidation, threats and ugliness.”

—Apple Inc. recently withdrew two iPhone apps from its App Store after complaints and petition campaigns by gay-rights supporters.

One app was intended to publicize the Manhattan Declaration, a document signed in 2009 by scores of conservative Christian leaders. It condemns same-sex marriage as immoral and suggests that legalizing it could open the door to recognition of polygamy and sibling incest.

The other app was for Exodus International, a network of ministries which depict homosexuality as a destructive condition that can be overcome through Christian faith.

In both cases, gay activists celebrated the apps’ removals, while the apps’ creators contended their freedom of expression was being unjustly curtailed.

“The gay-rights groups have shown their fangs,” wrote Chuck Colson, the Watergate figure turned born-again Christian who helped launch the Manhattan Declaration. “They want to silence, yes, destroy those who don’t agree with their agenda.”

Exodus International president Alan Chambers, who says he changed his own sexual orientation through religious counseling, said he was alarmed by the aggressive tactics of “savvy gay activists.”

“We have seen individuals, ministries and even private corporations that dare to hold to a biblical worldview on sexuality bullied into a corner,” Chambers wrote in a blog.

However, Wolfson said the Exodus app deserved to be removed. “They were peddling something that’s been repudiated as crackpot quackery.”

The campaign that pressured King Spalding to withdraw from the Defense of Marriage Act case was criticized by a relatively wide range of commentators and legal experts, not just conservative foes of gay marriage.

“To think it’s a good idea to attack lawyers defending unpopular clients — I don’t have words for how stupid and wrong that is,” said Wendy Kaminer, a lawyer and writer who formerly served on the board of the American Civil Liberties Union.

However, the gay-rights activists involved in pressuring King Spalding were unapologetic.

“If we made it such that no law firm would defend the indefensible, then good for us,” said Fred Sainz, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president for communication. “When you have people talking about the fact that it’s no longer politically correct to be anti-equality, it’s a show of progress.”

Sainz said it was important for activists to pick their targets carefully.

“We understand there are goodhearted Americans in the middle who are still struggling with these issues,” he said. “Different activists have different ways of getting to the same end, and some of those are bound to make certain people feel uncomfortable.”

Though same-sex marriage is legal in only five states, it has for the first time gained the support of a majority of Americans, according to a series of recent national opinion polls. For some gay activists, this trend has fueled efforts to make their opponents’ views seem shameful.

“Their beliefs on this issue are very quickly becoming socially disgraceful, much in the way white supremacy is socially disgraceful,” wrote Evan Hurst of the advocacy group Truth Wins Out. “They are certainly entitled to cling to backwoods, uneducated, reality-rejecting views … but their ‘religious freedom’ doesn’t call for the rest of us to somehow pretend their views aren’t disgusting and hateful.”

However, some gay-rights supporters see the public opinion shift as reason to be more magnanimous.

“The turn we now need to execute will be the hardest maneuver the movement has ever had to make, because it will require us to deliberately leave room for homophobia,” Jonathan Rauch, a writer and guest scholar at the Brookings Institution, wrote recently in The Advocate, a gay-oriented news magazine.

“Incidents of rage against ‘haters,’ verbal abuse of opponents, boycotts of small-business owners, absolutist enforcement of anti-discrimination laws: Those and other ‘zero-tolerance’ tactics play into the ‘homosexual bullies’ narrative,” Rauch wrote. “The other side, in short, is counting on us to hand them the victimhood weapon. Our task is to deny it to them.”

As ideological foes spar over these issues, the American Civil Liberties Union is confronted with a delicate balancing act. Its national gay rights project battles aggressively against anti-gay discrimination, but, as a longtime defender of free speech, the ACLU also is expected to intervene sometimes on behalf of anti-gay expression.

For example, the ACLU pressed a lawsuit on behalf of the fundamentalist Westboro Baptist Church, which has outraged mourning communities by picketing service members’ funerals with crudely worded signs condemning homosexuality. The ACLU said the Missouri state law banning such picketing infringes on religious freedom and free speech.

Some critics — such as Wendy Kaminer — have contended that the ACLU now tilts too much toward espousing gay rights, at the expense of a more vigorous defense of anti-gay free speech.

However, James Esseks, director of the ACLU’s gay rights project, said the First Amendment protection of free speech only comes into play when a government entity is seen as curtailing speech rights — which did not occur in the Vidmar or King Spalding cases.

“What we have there is simply the push and pull in public policy discourse … which is sometimes rough and tumble,” Esseks said. “Being stigmatized for expressing unpopular views is part of being in a free society. There’s nothing wrong with that.”

Robert George, a conservative professor of jurisprudence at Princeton and one of the co-authors of the Manhattan Declaration, shared Esseks’ view on the often sharp-elbowed nature of public debate in America.

“Democratic politics is a messy business and sometimes it’s a contact sport,” said George, a co-founder of the National Organization for Marriage, which campaigns against same-sex marriage. He suggested that those who hold cultural power — in academia, the media and elsewhere — are inevitably going to try to impose their viewpoints.

“The power to intimidate people, to make them fear they’ll be called a bigot or denied opportunities for jobs, only works if people allow themselves to be bullied,” George said. “Conservatives who make themselves out to be victims run the risk of playing into the hands of their opponents, suggesting that their opponents’ cultural power is so vast that there’s no way it can be resisted.”

To professional free-speech advocates — such as Joan Bertin, executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship — the gay rights vs. free expression cases are fascinating and often difficult.

“It’s very volatile — it requires you to parse the issues very closely,” she said. “I’m of the school of thought that you should know your enemy. You need to know what people are thinking.”

___(equals)

David Crary can be reached at http://twitter.com/CraryAP

© Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Comments (0)

WashPost Fact Check: Tune Out Political Medicare Ads June 10, 2011

Perhaps voters should just make a refrigerator run when political ads involving Medicare appear on their televisions. Both parties are waging war with “half-truths, misleading claims and outright lies,” The Washington Post concluded in a fact check of competing ads.

The Post derideded ads from both the Democrats and Republicans four Pinocchios for the whoppers they tell. The Post noted that, although it didn’t have a chance to fact check the Medicare ads that Rep. Kathy Hochul, D-N.Y., ran in her upset winning campaign in a special election, many of them “would have merited three or four Pinocchios under our scale.”

The Post did assign many Pinocchios to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathy Sebelius and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., for mischaracterizing Wisconsin GOP Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan to remake Medicare.

The National Republican Campaign Committee now is running ads targeting nine Democrats, saying that they would “decimate” Medicare. Hochul used the same word in campaign news releases, the Post reported.

“Washington Democrats already cut $500 billion from Medicare with their government takeover of health care, and [insert name of Democrat X] is making it worse,” the script says, according to the Post.  “[Democrat X] backs a partisan plan that the media says would quote ‘decimate Medicare.’ The [Democrat X]-backed plan will cut Medicare benefits by 17 percent and lead to ‘political rationing’ of health care . . . taking personal health care choices away from seniors.”

The Post’s fact checker commented: “One certainly can argue whether the ideas are good or bad — or go far enough — but it is disingenuous for Republicans to claim that either a) there is no Democratic plan or b) the Democrats want to steer Medicare on a course toward bankruptcy.

“The best advice to voters might be to mute the sound whenever a Medicare ad by either party comes on television,” the Post concluded. “If the Hochul campaign or this NRCC ad are any indication, the battle will be waged with half-truths, misleading claims and outright lies. Four Pinocchios to the NRCC and to [belatedly] Hochul.”

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Comments (0)

Geithner Should Resign as Treasury Secretary… April 21, 2011

timgeithner

The biggest headline in the news so far this week has been S&P’s decision to downgrade their U.S. credit outlook to negative. After S&P made their announcement, almost everybody in the mainstream media proclaimed it to be a “wake up call” for the U.S. government, saying that if they don’t make a real effort to cut the budget deficit, a fiscal disaster awaits. Despite lowering the U.S. credit outlook to negative, S&P left the U.S. credit rating at AAA.

The real story in the media this week should be, how is it possible that the U.S. credit rating remains AAA? After all, AAA is the highest rating possible. Shouldn’t a AAA credit rating be reserved for countries with budget surpluses, low levels of debt, and low levels of price inflation? Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was quick to say after S&P’s announcement that there is “no risk” of the U.S. losing its AAA rating. NIA respectfully asks Mr. Geithner to resign from office for making those comments. How could there be “no risk” of the world’s largest debtor nation losing its AAA rating?

As NIA first exposed in its critically acclaimed documentary ‘Meltup’, S&P, along with Moody’s, rated mortgage-backed securities AAA during the mortgage crisis that didn’t just decline in value, but went to zero. In our opinion, the credit ratings agencies have absolutely no credibility left and will be out of business in a few years. S&P and Moody’s still rate U.S. debt AAA because they fear the negative backlash that would come immediately if they lowered its rating, which would undoubtedly include calls from members of Congress to take away their licenses to be ratings agencies in this country.

NIA believes the U.S. credit rating should be junk. Including unfunded liabilities and the backing of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, the U.S. currently has a real national debt that is five times higher than our GDP. There is no chance of the U.S. ever paying back its debts without printing the money and creating hyperinflation. There is no chance of the U.S. ever balancing its budget, without eliminating the so-called untouchable entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Our nation has reached a point where it is paying out 90% of the money it raises each month from the sales of U.S. treasuries, just to pay back the holders of maturing U.S. treasuries their principle and interest earned. The U.S. needs to continuously sell larger amounts of new debt, just to stay afloat, so there is no conceivable way that any unbiased organization can possibly give the U.S. a credit rating of AAA. The only reason we haven’t defaulted on our debts is the Federal Reserve’s ability to create monetary inflation and the world’s willingness to hoard U.S. dollars due to its status as the world’s reserve currency.

Despite the euro-zone debt crisis with nations like Greece defaulting on their debt, over the past ten years, the U.S. dollar has fallen from being 70.7% of foreign exchange reserves down to 61.4%, while the Euro has risen from being 19.8% of foreign exchange reserves up to 26.3%. The other currency category, which includes currencies like the Canadian dollar and Australian dollar, has risen during the past decade from 1.2% to 4.4%. The world is clearly diversifying out of the U.S. dollar.

Not only is the demand for dollars declining as a percentage of foreign exchange reserves, but there are now calls for our largest creditor nation China to reduce their total foreign exchange reserve holdings. China’s foreign exchange reserves have increased by $200 billion this year to over $3 trillion and are mostly invested in U.S. dollars. Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the People’s Bank of China, said this week that, “Foreign exchange reserves have exceeded our country’s rational demand, and too much accumulation has caused excessive liquidity in our markets, adding to the pressure of the central bank’s sterilization.” In other words, China is likely to begin selling their U.S. dollar reserves and accumulating real assets like gold and silver with this money. The biggest ever rally in precious metals is just around the corner, which means the U.S. dollar’s purchasing power is about to plummet.

NIA constantly receives emails asking us if Paul Ryan’s proposed budget were to be implemented instead of Obama’s, would the U.S. be able to prevent hyperinflation. The truth is, both Obama’s budget and Ryan’s budget would leave us with just about the same national debt five years from now. The constant battles between the Democrats supporting Obama’s budget and the Republicans supporting Ryan’s budget are simply being used to distract Americans from the real issue, the Federal Reserve’s monetization of our debt and the record $1.4 trillion in excess reserves that are currently parked at the Fed.

The Federal Reserve’s balance sheet has just reached a record $2.65 trillion. However, excess reserves parked at the Fed are now rising even faster than the Fed’s balance sheet. NIA believes that come later this year, the Federal Reserve is likely going to stop paying interest on excess reserves banks have parked at the Fed, in an effort to push this money into the economy. This high-powered money will multiply by as much as ten times as it circulates throughout the U.S. economy, increasing our money supply by $14 trillion. A rapid increase of our money supply by $14 trillion could potentially cause a run on the dollar, with the world rushing to dump their U.S. dollar reserves for just about any real asset they can get for them.

Inflation is beginning to spiral out of control even by the U.S. government’s artificially low calculations. The Bureau of Labor Statistics just reported that the consumer price index (CPI) rose in March by 2.68% over a year ago, compared to the February increase of 2.11% and the November increase of 1.1%. Year-over-year CPI increases have risen 144% since November as a direct result of the Fed’s destructive policies, yet the Fed continues to say that inflation is not a problem. Even though inflation is now way above the Fed’s informal inflation target of 1.5% to 2%, the Fed continues to ignore the CPI and only looks at core-CPI, which excludes food and energy and is mainly based off of rents. All gains in U.S. retail sales are now solely due to inflation and all U.S. economic growth is phony. Any temporary decline in the unemployment rate is only a result of the distortions caused by the Fed’s printing of money.

Gold has just surpassed $1,500 per ounce and silver has now broken $45 per ounce. These latest movements in gold and silver prices indicate that there is a major risk of hyperinflation breaking out as soon as the second half of 2011. Average U.S. gas prices are now $3.84 per gallon and are rapidly approaching the all time high of $4.12 per gallon from June of 2008. Unlike 2008, there are no leveraged up hedge funds buying oil futures contracts today. Oil prices are rising as a direct result of the Federal Reserve’s zero percent interest rates and quantitative easing. Unless the Federal Reserve acts now to dramatically raise interest rates, $5 per gallon gas is possible by the end of 2011.

When gas prices reach $5 per gallon, there won’t be a drop off in demand. It will only encourage the Federal Reserve to print more money so that Americans can afford $5 per gallon gas, which could push gas prices to $6 or $7 per gallon in 2012. Saudi Arabia is reducing oil production because they have to, their oil reserves have been overstated by 40% and they are past peak oil production. As bad as rising gas prices are for all Americans, they will be hurt by rising food prices even more. Inventories of gas are not as tight as food inventories, which are now at record lows for such agricultural commodities as corn. NIA has been warning about low agriculture inventories since its first documentary ‘Hyperinflation Nation’ and accurately predicted this past year’s record rise in agricultural commodity prices in its October 30th, 2009, article “U.S. Inflation to Appear Next in Food and Agriculture”.

NIA predicts the next major inflation crisis will be in college tuition prices. We are about to experience a record rise in student loan defaults as a result of rapidly rising food and gas prices. College tuitions are the one area of the U.S. economy, besides healthcare, that did not experience any decline during the financial crisis of 2008. Despite rapidly rising college tuition prices, the value of a college degree is declining at an even faster rate. NIA believes that by the year 2020, we will conservatively see 20% of American colleges and universities close its doors with enrollments in remaining colleges and universities declining by between 15% and 30%. NIA will expose the facts and truth about the upcoming American college education crisis in its upcoming documentary, ‘College Conspiracy’. We are almost done producing ‘College Conspiracy’ and will be releasing more information about the hour long movie in the days and weeks to come.

It is important to spread the word about NIA to as many people as possible, as quickly as possible, if you want America to survive hyperinflation. Please tell everybody you know to become members of NIA for free immediately at: http://inflation.us

National Inflation Association | 96 Linwood Plaza #172 | Fort Lee, NJ 07024

Coffee Talk!

Comments (0)

Why We Don’t Care? We Kill and Kill… April 19, 2011

163441141

At least 30 people were killed and wounded as security forces opened fire on anti-government protest in Syria’s third largest city of Homs overnight, Al Jazeera TV channel said Tuesday.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20110419/163592900.html

We care about Libya but all the rest just kill and kill and kill and kill…

The truth is that more have died in most other countries than Quaddafi began to kill in Libya…

Besides we the West have killed more civilians in Libya than Quaddafi has…

Coffee Talk!

Comments (0)

Want to Know How we Know Fukushima is as bad as Chernobyl? April 13, 2011

Q&A: Is Fukushima as bad as Chernobyl? CNN

Because the Western press is telling us that it is all OK!

That is how. Just remember the opposite is the truth. The Western press does nothing but lie…

Coffee Talk!

Comments (0)