5-10-05

The Bad Guys' Plan Is To Destitute Social Security

Little George's press conference Thursday, April 29 was called to drum up support for zioni$t supporter, war monger and James Baker fan and buddy, John Bolton, the bad guys' nominee for US Ambassador to the United Nations. Why do the bad guys want John Bolton our UN Ambassador?The bad guys feel the United Nations is interfering with their plans for the USA and Japan to invade Iran, Syria, Taiwan and North Korea and put the world at war to turn the planet in to their personal zioni$t communi$t police state. John Bolton has said over and over in so many words that he hates the UN and feels the destruction of the United Nations would be no loss to the world. comrade Little George said he wants Bolton our United Nations' Ambassador to reform the UN. Make sense? Well, maybe in Bushspeak

Other Bushspeaks

"It's in our country's interests to find those who would do harm to us and get them out of harm's way." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 28, 2005

An appropriate copy cat? It's in our country's interest to find those who would harm the the United Nations and get them out of John Bolton's way.

May 9, 2005 Jude Wanniski wrote on John Bolton as UN Ambassador in a letter to Richard Lugar which I copy bits and pieces of it to support my opinion that John Bolton will be responsible for killing many of our fine kids in Uniform if the Senate confirms him USA's UN Ambassador.

I tell you John Bolton is a true force of darkness
Bolton is a protégé of Richard Perle "The Prince of Darkness." Both are masters of misinformation
it is not in their nature to be straight, and both men will always advise the use of force rather than bother with diplomacy. They loathe and despise the United Nations.

I've been watching Bolton from a distance from the earliest days of the administration, knowing of his associations with Perle and the neocons at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), which I have long characterized as the HQ of what President Eisenhower called "the military-industrial complex."

A long quote from Dr. Gordon Prather, the chief army scientist in the 1980s, regarding Bolton:

"John Bolton, the State Department warhawk, is probably the unnamed Western diplomat who claims the IAEA's recent report on Iranian uranium enrichment proves Iran is seeking a nuke capability. Says Gordon Prather, who forwarded me this piece, 'Up until now, Bolton et al. have been claiming that the Iranians intend to produce weapons-grade plutonium in the Bushehr light-water power plants. The notion that Iran could produce weapons-grade Pu [plutonium] in Bushehr under the noses of the Russians and the IAEA is ridiculous. By continuing to insist that they could and would, Bolton has lost all credibility, and his usefulness in Vienna – the home of the IAEA-NPT-NSG regime – is at an end. He should resign. Or fall on his sword.'"

I wrote to Colin Powell:

"You began your diplomatic service in 2001 by showing a willingness to engage Pyongyang at a time when it showed every sign of finally opening up. But that did not fit with the Pentagon's aim of tackling 'The Axis of Evil,' a term you should have never permitted to go into the president's State of the Union address. The president himself went even further with his gratuitous personal insults of North Korea's president. It has been downhill ever since. Every opportunity Pyongyang has offered for peaceful resolution of the nuclear issue has been shot down by your neocon 'minder' at State, John Bolton. It has been embarrassing to hear you defend Bolton's belligerent blusterings when you should have been telling the president you want him replaced."

Here is Hersh:

"A few months after George Bush took office, ...But, Thielmann told me, 'Bolton seemed to be troubled because INR (State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research) was not telling him what he wanted to hear.' Thielmann (Greg Thielmann, an expert on disarmament with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research) soon found himself shut out of Bolton's early-morning staff meetings. 'I was intercepted at the door of his office and told, "The undersecretary doesn't need you to attend this meeting anymore."' When Thielmann protested that he was there to provide intelligence input, the aide said, 'The undersecretary wants to keep this in the family.'"

Here were my observations in early November 2003:

By now, though, it is clear to Pyongyang that the warhawks in the Pentagon – and their stooge, John Bolton at State – don't want compliance and never have. They want a nice little war. Secretary of States Colin Powell has been trying to work things out with Pyongyang, but every time he makes a diplomatic move, his Undersecretary Bolton has a press conference and calls Kim Jong Il a rat fink. His big boss, the president, now and then has a press conference and calls Kim Jong Il a rat fink?

The following article discusses United States Korean military base closings. Little George and the bad guys are closing US bases in Korea for the purpose of opening the door for North Korea to attack and kill our remaining fine kids in the military in Korea. Smaller US military presence in Korea combined with Bolton and Little George name calling of Pyongyang and Wolfowiz financing and Israel supplying nukes to Pyongyang will result in many more of our kids getting killed, which of course is all the racist zioni$t communi$t neocon bad guys want.

Seven bases scheduled to close in Korea in 2005

By Teri Weaver, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Sunday, May 8, 2005

YONGSAN GARRISON, South Korea — Seven U.S. military bases will permanently close in South Korea this year as part of a long-range plan to downsize and consolidate American forces here, according to a U.S. Forces Korea news release.

Eight U.S. bases have already closed, according to the release, and the land from two of those bases has been returned to the South Korean government.

Overall, USFK plans to trim troops levels here by 12,500 from the current 32,500 service members on the peninsula, officials have said.

Changes also include closing many smaller camps, especially north of Seoul near the border with North Korea, and consolidating those forces in the central part of the country.

Here is the list of base closures announced by USFK on Friday:

Closed and returned to South Korea in 2004:

Camp Bonifas (Demilitarized Zone)
Camp Liberty Bell (Demilitarized Zone)
Closed in 2004, returning to South Korea in 2005:

Camp Edwards (Paju)
Camp Gary Owen (Paju)
Camp Greaves (Paju)
Camp Giant (Paju)
Camp Howze (Paju)
Camp Stanton (Paju)
Closing and returning to South Korea in 2005:

Camp Page (Chuncheon)
Closing in 2005 and returning to South Korea in 2006:

Camp Falling Water (Uijeongbu)
Camp LaGuardia (Uijeongbu)
Camp Sears (Uijeongbu)
Camp Nimble (Dongducheon)
Camp McNab (Chejudo)
UNC Compound Seoul

zzzzzzzzzzzz

A change in subject. We know the bad guys' democracy is created by putting their kind in office with the use of Diabold type rigged electronic voting machines and any and all Karl Rove type dirty tricks. Does it not stand to reason the bad guys may have rigged Tony Blair's recent election victory in the UK?

zzzzzzzzzzzzz

Why the Bag Guys want a Trillion dollars from Social Security Put in the Stock Markets?

Why haven't the stock markets crashed even though the global economy is slowing and there is high unemployment (unreported in many cases)? There is more cash going in the stock markets than coming out. Little George has been told when the stock market alligator is not fed, cash, stock markets crash. Feeding the stock market cash is why Alan Greenspan lowered interest rates in some cases to less than 1 percent. Feeding the stock market cash is why lenders have re financed home mortgages. Feeding the stock markets is why credit cards are all over everywhere in the United States. Feeding the stock markets is why the bad guys gave us September 11. Feeding the stock markets is why Cheney's oil and gas commission gave us the Enron and California natural gas holocausts and price fixes gasoline and natural gas prices unreal high today. Feeding the stock markets cash is why we have NAFTA. Feeding the stock markets cash is why Little George wants his trade agreement with Central America. Alan Greenspan has turned the United States and the global economy into one huge Ponzi economy which lives on cash. Just as Bostonians found out with Ponzi in the 1920s, and today's investors in stock markets will find out, when you stop feeding a the zioni$t$ stock markets cash, they crash.

The bad guys want the stock markets to crash and know one day the stock markets will crash. However if the stock markets crash now there are people out there
with enough cash to punish the bad guys responsible for allowing Greenspan to create a global Ponzi economy.

The bad guys want Social Security totally and completely destroyed and for the people to be totally and completely destitute after Greenspan's Ponzi economic bubble bursts. their reasoning. If everyone is penniless and destitute the people will be too weak to punish them.

Why do I know Little George and the bad guys want Social Security in the stock markets for the purpose to destitute the people and Social Security? Logic. The zioni$t$ and bad guys have used the stock markets for generations as a scam to steal money. Little George Social Security plan is too good to be true. Little George said Social Security was designed to give people enough money to live after they retire. Social Security is what the name implies, security for society. Little George said he wants the money workers put in to Social Security to be theirs. You can't have both.
AARP understands you can't have workers building nest eggs for themselves and paying social security benefits to the elderly at the same time. Senior citizens and those with Social Security benefits understand you can't have workers building nest eggs and paying social security benefits to them at the same time. It is voodoo economics to tell Americans they can build a nest egg for themselves and pay social security benefits at the same time.

There is a very important question Americans must learn the answer. Why is the President of the United States touting a voodoo Social Security system? My opinion is that he and the bad guys want Social Security money in the stock markets to keep Greenspan's Ponzi economy afloat a while longer and the bad guys want Social Security destroyed and the people destitute when Greenspan raises interest rates to 30 perent or so.

Little George said he wants workers to invest and be owners of stocks because stockholders will earn a greater rate of return. There are millions of Americans who have put their last bottom dollar in the stock markets since 1973 and have lost every penny to the zioni$t$. Many stock markets go under and never return. Many companies go bankrupt and owners of their stock loose every penny.

Why should people believe me when I say Little George and the bad guys want Social Security money in stock markets to feed Alan Greenspan's Ponzi global economy and to destitute the people and money in Social Security.

As I get ready to talk about myself in glowing terms it reminds me of a saying my father told me, probably when I was patting myself on the back. Don't sprain your wrist patting yourself on the back.

Well. I have been pretty darn accurate. While on the phone to my friend Robin while she was telling me a plane had flown into a NYC building September 11, I told her then it was the work of home grown zioni$t and bad guys. A relative told me she was traveling to NYC a couple of days after September 11 and I told her she was running a health risk ( I knew their were bombs in the buildings which exploded and that their would be radiation in the air and I have been proven true by the large number of sick and suffering firefighters who were on the 911 scene .) I wrote something around 15 articles in 2000 which I claimed a US submarine blew up the Russian sub Kursk, and boy was I alone in my theory then, and I am going to include an article which supports my theory with this article.

Boy am I proud of my Kursk theory. A giant question which goes along with the sinking of the Kursh is a huge "why" ? Probably Big George and the zioni$t communist bad guys ordered the Kursk sunk to occupy Russia's spies with the why and get Russian spies away from Big George and the zioni$t bad guys September 11 horrible dirty deed plans and operations. Also the Omegas Agency's ordering the sinking of the Russian sub Kursk may have been intended to be used as a threat to Russia, don't snitch on Big George and the bad guys September 11. Back to the writing.

I wrote that the planes flown September 11 were flown by remote control. Aren't there something like 6 billion people on this planet and I am the only person who said the planes were flown September 11 by remote control and that the US blew up the Russian sub Kursk way early, when I said so.

• 9-13-00 - US Sinks Russian Sub Kursk?
• 9-14-00 - FBI Director Visits Moscow, Apologizes for Sinking Kursk
• 9-15-00 - Article Pulled - FBI Director visits Moscow
• 9-22-00 - US Sinks Russian Sub?
• 9-25-00 - US Sinks Kursk, tanker seized to divert news away from Kursk?

Because of my accurate track record, maybe, just maybe, I am right as can be that the bad guys want Social Security money in the stock markets to keep Greenspan's global economy afloat a while longer and for the purpose of destroying Social Security and destitute the people when the zioni$t$ and Greenspan trigger the destruction of the global economic system. It would also be cool if I am right when I say I think I am The Returning Christ in the Book of Revelations.

zzzzzzzzzzzzz

US 'torpedoed Kursk nuclear sub'
Daniel Stacey, London
May 09, 2005
A FORMER British military official has backed a sensational claim that the Russian nuclear submarine, the Kursk, was torpedoed by US forces in August 2000.

An official inquest concluded that the disaster – in which all 118 crew drowned in the Barents Sea, 135km off the Russian coast – was caused by an accidental explosion of an onboard torpedo.

But Maurice Stradling, a former torpedo engineer and a key figure in the original investigation, believes a new French documentary, The Kursk: A Submarine in Troubled Waters, should change world opinion on the sinking.

"On the balance of probabilities, the Kursk was sunk by an American MK-48 torpedo," said Mr Stradling, formerly a senior member of the British Defence Ministry.

BBC editor Nick Fraser called the claim a "pack of lies" and has refused to air the documentary, which attracted a record audience of more than 4 million when it screened on French TV.

The BBC used Mr Stradling as its main authority for a documentary it made in 2001 – What Sank the Kursk?, in which Mr Stradling theorised that the sinking was caused by the malfunctioning of an old-fashioned HTP torpedo.

Mr Stradling, who also appears in the new French documentary, said: "At the time (2001), that was a perfectly reasonable film, given the facts as we knew them then, when there seemed to be no third-party involvement,"

The new explanation for the Kursk's downing is based on film footage of a hole in the side of the vessel, and evidence placing US submarines in the area at the time it was sunk.

The French film shows stills of the Kursk raised above the water after being salvaged, with a precise circular hole in its right side. The hole clearly bends inwards, consistent with an attack from outside the submarine.

A US military source in the documentary declares the hole to be the trademark evidence of an American MK-48 torpedo, which is made to melt cleanly through steel sheet due to a mechanism at its tip that combusts copper.

The film suggests the attack happened while two US submarines, the Toledo and Memphis, were shadowing the Kursk in a routine military exercise.

The documentary says the Toledo accidentally collided with the Kursk, at which point the Russian submarine opened its torpedo tubes, leading to an attack from the Memphis, which was protecting the damaged Toledo while it retreated.

The cause of the sinking was covered up at the time in an act of diplomacy between then US presidents Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin – a deal that included the cancellation of $US10 billion ($12.5 billion) of Russian debt, the film states.

After the documentary received its only public broadcast in Britain, some claimed the Russian navy had drilled the hole and fed doctored footage to the film-makers to create a false impression.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits

Submitted by: Anonymous "
by Jim Heikkila
Saturday August 17, 2002

Two of the aircraft exceeded their software limits on 9/11.

The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.

They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's, I repeat, one and one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking grandma's neck.

No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.

The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.

The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.

There is only one way this can happen.

As well as fully autonomous flight capability, the 767 and 757 are the ONLY COMMUTER PLANES MADE BY BOEING THAT CAN BE FLOWN VIA REMOTE CONTROL. It is a feature that is standard to all of them, all 757's and 767's can do it. The purpose for this is if there is a problem with the pilots, Norad can fly the planes to safe destinations via remote. Only in this flight mode can those craft exceed their software limits and perform to their actual physical limits because a pre existing emergency situation is assumed if this mode of flight is used.

Terrorists in fact did not fly those planes, it is totally and completely impossible for those planes to have been flown in such a manner from the cockpit. Those are commuter aircraft, not F-16's and their software knows it.

Another piece of critical evidence: the voice recorders came up blank.

The flight recorders that were recovered had tape that was undamaged inside, but it was blank. There is only one way this can happen on a 757 or 767. When the aircraft are commandeered via remote control, the microphones that go to the cockpit voice recorder are re routed to the people doing the remote controlling, so that the recording of what happened in the cockpit gets made in a presumably safer place. But due to a glitch in the system on a 757/767, rather than shutting off when the mic is redirected the voice recorder keeps running. The voice recorders use what is called a continuous loop tape, which automatically re passes itself past the erase and record heads once every half hour, so after a half hour of running with the microphones redirected, the tape will be blank. Just like the recovered tapes were. Yet more proof that no pilot flew those planes in the last half hour.

Eight of the hijackers who were on those planes called up complaining that they were still alive. I'd bet you never heard about our foreign minister flying to Morocco and issuing an official apology to the accused, did you? No, terrorists did not fly those planes, plastic knives and box cutters were in fact too ridiculous to be true. Any of the remaining accused have certainly been sought out and killed by now.

Our information IS controlled

The cell phone calls from the aircraft could not have happened. I am a National Security Agency trained Electronic Warfare specialist, and am qualified to say this. My official title: MOS33Q10, Electronic Warfare Intercept Strategic Signal Processing/Storage Systems Specialist, a highly skilled MOS which requires advanced knowledge of many communications methods and circuits to the most minute level. I am officially qualified to place severe doubt that ordinary cell phone calls were ever made from the aircraft.

It was impossible for that to have happened, especially in a rural area for a number of reasons.

When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a max transmit power of five watts, three watts is actually the norm. If an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will not be able to 1. Contact a tower, 2. Tell the tower who you are, and who your provider is, 3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to communicate with, and 4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before it passes out of a five watt range. This procedure, called an electronic handshake, takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete upon initial power up in a roaming area because neither the cell phone or cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this handshaking can occur. Though it is sometimes possible to connect during takeoff and landing, under the situation that was claimed the calls were impossible. The calls from the airplane were faked, no if's or buts.

I hope I made sense, if you have questions I will respond if possible. If I do not respond, please research this out yourself, search the boeing site, search the DARPA site, search were you have not searched before. Some of the information is classified and leaked by individuals, and it is also being scoured from the net. I have all of the original documents on my computer to safeguard against this.

Please do not ignore this, because only Norad has the flight codes for those aircraft, we did 911 to ourselves. Hitler had the Reichstag, we have 911. If 911 proves to not be enough to make the US citizenry set aside its rights for safety, the people who did 911 most certainly have access to nuclear material. 911 must be exposed for what it was before that material is used. "