• Free subscription via e-mail!

  • Support the site!

  • Join me on Facebook!

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • June 2008
    S M T W T F S
    « May   Jul »
  • Top Posts

  • RSS Farm Wars


  • RSS The PPJ

  • Meta

  • Advertisements

Bay Area Spraying Stopped, Phony Program Revealed!

The LBAM “infestation” and resultant “emergency situation” is a manufactured “threat” so that the CDFA and pesticide maker can get a whole lotta MONEY.

From The Monterey County Herald

1. The LBAM is not a threat to agricultural products because it has no history of doing extensive crop damage.

2. The only threat to growers is a trade quarantine that exists only because the U.S. Department of Agriculture made poor decisions decades ago and could correct the problem with a policy change.

3. Fear has been falsely planted by Kawamura, causing the Monterey County Farm Bureau and state Chamber of Commerce to act hastily on misinformation. Not only is eradication unnecessary, but some scientists say it is impossible.

Won’t the LBAM damage hundreds of crops? Evidence and some scientists say “No.”

In Santa Cruz County, which has more LBAMs than the rest of the state, zero crop damage has been found.

In New Zealand, the LBAM has become a minor pest. A report by Dr. Daniel Harder, adjunct professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of California-Santa Cruz, and Dr. Jim Walker, technical research scientist for Hort Research in New Zealand, said, “Hawkes Bay horticultural researchers report that … if LBAM were controlled,

… the maximum damage caused by LBAM would be 1 percent or less of crops.”Isn’t the quarantine real and valid? It may be real, but not valid.

The USDA protected U.S. growers by incorrectly classifying the LBAM when it was in Australia and New Zealand. Now Canada and Mexico follow the USDA zero-risk trade policy, refusing to buy some U.S. products. The advice of UC-Davis entomology professor James Carey to the California Assembly’s Committee on Agriculture was to “consider more realistic trade policy, consider non-zero risk.”

Fear, in the form of gross exaggeration of the LBAM problem, caused growers to believe the LBAM must be eradicated. Carey is the author of three books on insect demography. In his testimony to the Assembly Ag Committee on March 12, he said, “The population growth model presented by the (state agriculture department) would not be taken seriously by any editor of any entomology or ecology journal in the world.” By the state estimate, Carey said there would already be 50 moths per square inch in Berkeley, a total of two thousand trillion moths. Nevertheless, he said that eradication with or without spraying pheromones is impossible and that ground crews should be used to “control” the LBAM. This is a repeat of what happened in New Zealand, following widespread reaction against the conduct of the aerial spraying plan. We should learn from New Zealand’s experience.

Because the state threat is exaggerated, can be removed by a USDA policy change, and cannot succeed, Californians must demand that the state terminate any plans to spray.   

Evidently, current plans to spray have been stopped thanks to public resistance! Can we say, GOTCHA?

A reader just sent the following compilation, which details the amount of funds the CDFA can access if it “is able to establish and maintain an emergency status and resulting eradication effort for this moth.”    



LBAM Eradication Program – A Fraudulent Program.


1. The Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM) is not a significant pest.

any more than thousands of other insects including 300 moths in California that are routinely monitored, but do not require any treatment, unless some balance goes out of control, generally caused by a pesticide induced kill-off of their predators.  European Union doesn’t even monitor LBAM.  They just live there like ants or crickets live here, and like over 80 other moths in LBAM’s exact family that already live here too.  After 30-50 years we see that LBAM is already well balanced in nature being eaten by the same predators as its cousins: birds, earwigs, spiders, beetles, etc.


2. The Light Brown Apple Moth has been in California about 30-50 years.

Looking at location spread and population density of the LBAM in California and scientifically comparing it to other moth movement and then adjusting for specific LBAM characteristics.


3. LBAM has done NO damage in California

CDFA confirms that, courts have ruled that, no one denies it.


4. LBAM in California requires NO treatment, certainly not eradication.

Based on #3 and #4 above, and so much supporting independent scientific information.



5. If the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is able to establish and maintain an emergency status and resulting eradication effort for this moth, the CDFA will be able to access approximately $500 million of emergency funding over the next five years, increasing its annual budget approximately 40%.  And with control of delivery and monitoring for such a program, they will almost certainly be able to substantiate continuing the program for at least another five years at about another $100 million per year.


6. It is impossible to eradicate the LBAM and there is no reason to.

Maybe, if all the people were moved out of the entire state of California and all remaining life in California was exterminated, that might do it, but even that is not certain as such an experiment has never been performed.  It would be similar to trying to eradicate ants or cockroaches.  It simply cannot be done.


7. The CDFA created a huge charade using science like a shell game.  There is probably not a single independent Entomologist in the state that thinks that LBAM can be eradicated from California.  CDFA handpicked a group of people on their Technical Working Group.  Most are willing to consider only the information that CDFA provides them and many have an interest in the program proceeding.  Independent Scientists with alternate known opinions were intentionally and aggressively left off.  The University of California recently offered a panel of experts to look at the eradication program of LBAM, but CDFA refused. 


8. There is no problem managing LBAM as 100’s of other pests.  New Zealand has shown how successful that is given they are forced to ship their goods to the U.S. with a zero tolerance for LBAM.  They successfully use modern safe integrated pest management techniques, so their methods control LBAM, while they are controlling many other more significant pests.


9. But CDFA needs an “Eradication program to obtain the emergency funding.


a. That included an aerial spray of pesticide over populated areas.

b. CDFA claimed aerial spray as a state of the art technology using pheromones, a less toxic alternative that the people had asked for.

c. True, toxic synthetic pheromone based pesticides are preferred in agriculture fields to the more toxic WWII derivatives, but not sprayed over people and intentionally left to stay time released into the air for 24 hours per day every day until they spray again.

d. Tens of thousands got sick of which over 643 managed to get an illness report filed when no one wanted to accept a report.  An 11-month-old boy, perfectly healthy son of an air force major, went into respiratory arrest following the spray.  He was airlifted out and his life was saved at a Stanford Hospital and he will likely be on steroid cocktails now for the rest of his life to keep his airway clear.

e. CDFA had reports done using only the information that the CDFA gave to the analysts and then the results were manipulated to tell the public that there were no links found between the spray and the illnesses, when in fact, the relationships between the spray and the illnesses could not be disproved by even their own manipulated reports.

f. CDFA claimed that the window for eradication was only months and that they could not wait to do an Environmental Impact Report.

g. CDFA claimed that aerial spray was the ONLY method of eradication.

h. Stewart Resnick had recently purchased the chemical company that won the contract for the aerial spray pesticide.  Resnick, a life long democrat, had given Governor Schwarzenegger $144,600 for his reelection campaign, and Resnick is connected to previous USDA reviews of this same moth that worked in Resnick’s favor.


10. After Santa Cruz and Monterey Superior Courts ruled CDFA had violated the emergency exemption of CEQA law, after 31 cities representing 2.4 million people passed resolutions against the spray, after 90 additional labor unions, school boards and other organizations passed resolutions against the spray, after almost all elected officials in the region took positions against the spray, after bills to stop the spray finally made it through committee, after the governor did a 180 degree turn and requested that they not use the spray, the CDFA created another lie and on June 19 announced: based on a sudden science breakthrough, they were now going to discontinue the aerial spray over populated areas and instead use a release of sterile moths.


a. Up to that moment, only aerial spray was possible to eradicate the LBAM per CDFA.

b. Sterile release of moths has never been successful eradicating a moth on this earth.

c. CDFA announced the sterile release testing will start in 2009 and be fully operational in 2011, but CDFA never mentioned that was inconsistent with their previous information that their window of opportunity to eradicate the moth was just months.

d. Sterile moth release has never eradicated any moth, and for LBAM, there are even further reasons it cannot possibly work:

– LBAM males guard over female pupae and mate when the female matures to a moth.

– LBAM females are promiscuous mating multiple times.

– LBAM females will live longer to successfully mate in order to produce their eggs.

– This method has never been tested.

– To rely on this method, therefore, is beyond absurd in science.

e. Releasing 20 million sterile moths per day could interfere with the natural balance involving predators and ultimately cause serious problems with unlimited numbers of other insects and pests.


11. CDFA needs a full-speed-ahead eradication program to keep the money flowing.


a. CDFA needs lots of activity and hoopla to substantiate just this years approximate $100 million that was already allocated to the LBAM emergency within the aerial program.

b. Previously, every item of CDFA’s fraudulent eradication program that was documented was refuted by qualified independent scientists.

c. Now, after the announcement of the sterile moth scientific breakthrough, and to avoid independent scientist review, CDFA is representing their eradication as a tool box of methods containing many tools that they alone know which one to use under which circumstance, and they are no longer detailing or documenting any of them.  This strategy successfully avoids scientific review, since scientists generally want to review a written document rather than verbal statements made by PR people to the media, etc.

d. At least one tool in their box, splatting, is more toxic than the aerial spray.  Combinations of permethrin and synthetic pheromone attached to 3,000 fixed objects in each square mile of populated areas, such that the chemicals permeate the same air children breath 24 hours per day, and maintained that way with repetitive applications.

e. This means that people will live between 0 and 45 feet away from a poison source 24 hours of their day, whether they are at home, work, school, the park, the playground, the pool, etc.  The air is permeated from these poison sources.  The poison source is cancer causing and a reproductive effector in that it affects the ability to reproduce, and it impacts newborn survivability and impacts pregnancy loss.  It can cause genetic damage as demonstrated in a lab study using human cells and women on farms using permethrin get asthma at higher rates than those not exposed to permethrin; and permethrin is more dangerous for children than adults.  These problems do not include the effects of toxic synthetic pheromone pesticide or the effects of the two in combination, the manner in which they will be deployed.

f. Mobile fogging is totally unknown to the public at this time, but there is no limit that the CDFA will put on themselves, nor is there any amount of dishonesty, intentional deception or harm to children and people generally that they will avoid to accomplish garnering the funds that an emergency eradication can provide them.

g. A proper management program of LBAM and other insects will simply not bring any additional funds to their normal annual budget.  The LBAM “Eradication” represents a potential increase in their annual funding of approximately 40%.


Recent videos relating to the newly packaged fraudulent LBAM eradication program:



1. State Drops Plan For Bay Area Moth Spraying  3 minutes, 1 second June 19, 2008 first video. 

2. Daniel Harder, Ph.D. Executive Director, The Arboretum, University of California at Santa Cruz.  LINK June 23, 2008.  14 minutes, 2 seconds 



What the Second Amendment Really Means – And What the Supreme Court Really Means

Today’s Supreme Court ruling on the Second Amendment – the first of its kind in our history – has been hailed in the corporate media as a “victory” for the Second Amendment and its defenders. It is anything but. In fact, it is a resounding defeat of our constitutionally guaranteed right to defend our lives and liberty from an increasingly despotic government.

When the founders wrote the Second Amendment, their intent was clear: in order that we, the people, may be able to ensure the future of our liberty, we must have the means to defend our most basic and fundamental of all rights: the right to life.

Much obfuscatory ado has been made about the language of the amendment being “confusing,” and to the majority of today’s dumbed down public, it probably is. However, for anyone with the ability to think critically, the language is clear enough. The main point of the amendment is stated quite clearly in its second clause, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The preceding verbiage is really irrelevant to an understanding of what the amendment says.

One has only to consider that the Constitution was written, not to grant rights to the people and the states, nor to enumerate all of those rights, but to spell out the limitations of the government’s powers. It does so by clearly listing several existing rights that were recognized by the founders as necessary conditions of human life and that, among these is the right to keep and bear arms. Once one understands the purpose of the document, its “interpretation” is no mystery at all: the government cannot, under any circumstances, infringe upon the rights outlined and those left open to us by the Tenth Amendment.

By merely “considering” the Second Amendment and ruling on it, the Supreme Court has violated the very spirit, if not the exact letter of the Constitution, itself. The Constitution is the founding document of our nation, the only written guarantee we have of our freedom in the face of a corrupt and tyrannical government. For the Supreme Court to even assume that it has the power to revise, alter, or even reconsider what the Constitution says is, on its face, an act of high treason. By doing so, they have said, in effect, that the Constitution is null and void and that they will tell us what the law is.

The Supreme Court is not the law of the land – the Constitution is. It was intended to be followed to the letter, used as a guide by the court to determine whether any law or action is allowed or disallowed by the Constitution. That is the sole duty and responsibility of the Supreme Court and its own powers are also limited by the Constitution.

Having said all that, there is no way this “decision” – made in smoke filled corporate boardrooms, the White House and Congress and then handed down to the court as its instructions – is in any way a “victory” for the people. The actual language used by the court in rendering its opinion says that, while it acknowledges the people do have an individual right to own firearms, the court has added the terms, “within reasonable limitations.”

Let that sink in for a moment. What this really means is that, yes, you do have the right to own a gun, but the government will tell you under what conditions you can own and use it. It does nothing to strike down the existing plethora of gun control laws that have been accumulating on the books since 1933, and because it doesn’t, it also doesn’t really strike down the so-called D.C. handgun ban, as the media would have us believe. Think about it. If they have left the door open for further regulation, then the ban – being regulation, itself – does not “infringe” on your Second Amendment right, according to the Supreme Court’s twisted logic.

In other words, now that they have told us that further regulation of gun ownership is part of what the Second Amendment really means, then, by their interpretation, further regulation of any kind and to any extent or degree they choose to force upon us will be perfectly “constitutional.” After all, the Supreme Court has said so and who are we to question its infinite wisdom?

So, the end result of this devastating ruling is that, not only will our fundamental right to defend ourselves continue to be whittled away until it no longer is recognized at all, but so will all the other rights our constitution protects, now that the legal precedent has been set to allow the Supreme Court to dictate to us what the Constitution really means.

Gary Rea © 2008

The Rockefeller File

The Rockefeller Files by G. Allen  


The Rockefeller File  

by Gary Allen


Table of Contents                           


1 – The Multi-Billion Dollar Myth

2 – The Saintly Sinner                                                           

3 – The Family That Preys Together

4 – Profit x Philanthropy = Power

5 – Yes, Virginia, There Is An Establishment

6 – The Rockefeller Mediacracy

7 – Surrender By Consent

8 – Surrender By Conquest

9 – Building The Big Red Machine

10 – The People Planners

11 – The Great Energy Swindle

12 – The Eternal Power Behind The Throne

13 – Was Nixon Watergated?




This book is available online in its full length version.  Valuable reading for those who wonder who is pulling the strings behind the scenes.  LINK    

Marti Oakley/PPJG



Massachusetts to Vote on Eliminating State Income Tax?





Legislators: Voter anger may lead to end of income tax


A weak economy, soaring gasoline prices and a frustration with government could cause voters to approve a ballot initiative to wipe out the state income tax, legislators said Thursday.

The legislators said they think the move is too drastic and would cripple state services, but believe voters are looking for a way to lower their costs and lash out at government.

“I think people are frustrated and are looking at a way of expressing it,” said state Rep. John Lepper, R-Attleboro.

State Rep. Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro, agreed.

“There is a great deal of frustration out there regarding the cost of everything going up,” she said. “I have constituents who say they cannot afford the gas to get to work. I would not be surprised if it passed.”

A group calling itself Committee for Smaller Government is sponsoring the move and has collected enough signatures to get it on the November ballot.

If passed, it would end the state income tax, which accounts for $11 billion, or almost 40 percent of state revenue.

“We want to save the people and the businesses of Massachusetts from economic ruin caused by high taxes and big government,” said Carla Howell, leader of the group.

“We want low taxes to attract business, jobs and talent into the state, rather than allowing high taxes to drive them out of state. We want taxpayers to get back an average or $3,600 every year to save, spend, or give away as they see fit,” she said. “With more tax dollars back in the hands of the workers who earned it, people in need will have a real chance to better their lives through private charity that is effective, dignified and humane.”

A number of groups and individuals have lined up against the measure, including social services advocates, legislative leaders and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

Even lawmakers who traditionally advocate for lower taxes, such as Lepper, say they oppose the measure as too extreme.

Lepper said service for the disabled would “disappear” and other services would be greatly scaled back.

Poirier said cities and towns are hurting now with tight budgets, but the current situation is nothing compared to what would happen if the income tax was eliminated.

“Can you image a 40 percent cut?” Poirier said. “I advocate for judicious cuts, but not with reckless abandon.”

Howell said she wants state government to cut the entire 40 percent if the measure passes, and not replace the income tax with increases in other taxes.

“Politicians like to threaten to cut services people care most about so they can distract attention away from the pork, waste and sweetheart deals that they dish out to their special interest friends. But ending the income tax will force the legislature to cut the waste, which is why they oppose it so fiercely,” she said.

Rep. Richard Ross, R-Wrentham, said the cuts advocated by Howell would be “disastrous.”

He said he would favor reasonable cuts in waste and taxes.

Both Ross and Poirier said voter anger might not be as great if the state kept its promise from years ago and lowered the income tax rate to 5 percent. It is now 5.3 percent.

They also said state government has to take steps to earn the trust of voters.

In the meantime, legislators said the ballot initiative has an excellent chance of passing, considering a similar proposal got 45 percent of the vote in 2002.

Poirier said voters feel there is nothing they can do to lower gasoline or food costs and may see wiping out the income tax as the only step they can take to save themselves money.

Reprinted from The Sun Chronicle


Congress to mandate use of China’s mercury-filled Compact Flourescent Bulbs?

Yeah, I thought it was crazy too. Until I watched the following video of Representative Ted Poe actually giving it to the House regarding the hazards of Compact Flourescent (CFL) bulbs, and how Americans should not be forced to use them.

Check out my article titled “CFLs: Are We Insane?” This video, a great follow-up to my article, was posted by BrasscheckTV, and made by CSPANJunkie.

A Texas Congressional Representative actually gets it! Outlawing incandescent light-bulbs and mandating that the public use toxic, mercury-filled CFLs that are only manufactured in China might just be a tad on the insane side!



HAARP: Altering weather patterns and creating devastation

Hurricane Katrina Even if you don’t read this article, which is surely just my opinion, at least take the time to read this report prepared for the Air Force in 1996 and ask yourself if you can honestly conclude that the bizarre weather that has struck in all parts of the U.S in the last four to five years might not really be the result of intentional weather disruption and creation.


The experimentation with the HAARP program emanating from Alaska has gone on unabated and largely ignored by the MSM for at least 15 years. Ice sheets melting at an alarmingly fast rate in the Arctic seem not to be newsworthy, as are the deaths of indigenous animals and marine life in that area. Just call it global warming and let the war of words and theories begin. But! Whatever you do, never, ever mention HAARP. 


Centralized in Gokona, Alaska, HAARP became functional in 1992 using high-powered transmission antennas that blast enormous waves of electrical energy into our outer atmosphere called the ionosphere. These blasts will and do cause changes in the temperature of the ionosphere, at times heating it to extreme temperatures which directly affects changes in temperatures on earth. If reflected back to earth, these same energy bursts can disrupt the rhythm of internal organs not only of animals but also of humans. 


Excerpted from the original document:


Weather As A Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025



“It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.” (end excerpt)


Our DoD in collusion with military sponsored scientists has acquired the ability to alter weather patterns, at will. The Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) is connected to the “Star Wars” Strategic Defense Initiative. Raytheon Corporation owns the HAARP patents along with the US Air Force and British Aerospace Systems (BAES) and as of 2004 Raytheon has received the contracts to construct more advanced antenna’s capable of producing even more devastation around the globe not only causing great segments of populations to die from famine, but also from thirst, flood, tsunami’s, tornado’s, hurricanes and even earthquakes.


Mentioned in the report is the use of nano-technology, a virtually new and experimental technology in 1996. Today in 2008, nano-technology is common knowledge. 




“Nanotechnology also offers possibilities for creating simulated weather. A cloud, or several clouds, of microscopic computer particles, all communicating with each other and with a larger control system could provide tremendous capability. Interconnected, atmospherically buoyant, and having navigation capability in three dimensions, such clouds could be designed to have a wide-range of properties. They might exclusively block optical sensors or could adjust to become impermeable to other surveillance methods. They could also provide an atmospheric electrical potential difference, which otherwise might not exist, to achieve precisely aimed and timed lightning strikes. Even if power levels achieved were insufficient to be an effective strike weapon, the potential for psychological operations in many situations could be fantastic. (end excerpt)

Artificial Weather

“While most weather-modification efforts rely on the existence of certain preexisting conditions, it may be possible to produce some weather effects artificially, regardless of preexisting conditions. For instance, virtual weather could be created by influencing the weather information received by an end user. Their perception of parameter values or images from global or local meteorological information systems would differ from reality. This difference in perception would lead the end user to make degraded operational decisions.

One major advantage of using simulated weather to achieve a desired effect is that unlike other approaches, it makes what are otherwise the results of deliberate actions appear to be the consequences of natural weather phenomena. In addition, it is potentially relatively inexpensive to do. According to J. Storrs Hall, a scientist at Rutgers University conducting research on nanotechnology, production costs of these nanoparticles could be about the same price per pound as potatoes.52 This of course discounts research and development costs, which will be primarily borne by the private sector and be considered a sunk cost by 2025 and probably earlier. “ (end excerpt)  http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2025/v3c15/v3c15-1.htm


When I consider the bizarre and cataclysmic weather events that have happened in just the last three years all around the globe, I can’t really come to the conclusion that “global warming” caused by human activity as told to us, is the cause. The conclusion I am coming to is that what is being warmed is the ionosphere, and that is being done intentionally by humans wearing military uniforms and those in our government who seek world domination and want to begin that domination right here at home. What better way to make the rest of the world beg for mercy and submit voluntarily, than to destroy the population of the once greatest and most prosperous society and nation on earth? If we fall, it will have a domino affect. 


If this report does nothing else, it should wake you up to the reality that the government of the United States is the greatest enemy of the people. Gone is the time when we could afford ourselves the romantic notion that our government existed only to benefit and to defend us; that this nation was comprised of honorable individuals in our government who loved our country as much as we, the common citizens, do. Our government is comprised of narcissistic monsters who believe only a few are qualified to occupy space on this planet and that those who are allowed to exist outside of this closed club of megalomaniacs should exist only in a state of controlled servitude.


The closer I come to this conclusion I have to ask:  When the majority of us are gone, dead from your experiments, your bio-weapons, electromagnetic weapons, your lab created infections and disease, your contamination and destruction of food and water, your wars of greed and your active efforts to commit genocide where ever and whenever possible……what will be left for you to own and control? And when this end comes…..at what point will you turn on each other? 


Copyright 2008, Marti Oakley 



The Great Oil Scam by Marti Oakley

I could have seen this one coming a mile off.  Maybe even further.  CHINA is collaborating with CUBA (gasp!!) to drill for oil in OUR Gulf of Mexico.  Only where they are supposedly going to drill is within the 50 miles of terrirorial waters that belong to Cuba, not the U.S.   And no one mentioned that the plans for drilling are years away not only in implementation, but even more so in production. 

But you’re scared now, right?  Now you’re mad as hell at those enviromentalists that have been blocking the drilling for oil in the gulf, ANWAR, Colorado, Utah, Montana, and Wyoming.  Gosh.  You are so easily duped. 

Even if the ANWAR fields were to begin construction today, it would take ten years to see any production from those fields and there is an estimated one years worth of oil there.  Of course we tax payers would have to subsidize all that construction and drilling, and the Fed would have to give oil cartels billions more in tax breaks.  

There are currently 60 million acres owned by oil producers within the US, known to have vast oil reserves under them.  That’s 60 million acres that could have been under construction and well on their way to refinery.  Of course most of what is owned in Montana and Wyoming is owned at least in part, if not fully, by VP Cheney under one of the multiple corporations he uses to conduct his rape and pillage of the US economy. Of course, this would take another ten years minimally to begin producing. 

OPEC has been bounced around as the reason for high oil prices too.  Only OPEC has not increased their prices; only kept their production at the current rate and refused to increase the amount of oil they put on the market at any one time.  That’s just good business.  All you free-trader’s who think unregulated trade is such a good deal can at least appreciate the supply and demand aspect of this.  And keep in mind, if it was Mobil/Exxon that was refusing to increase supply so that the price remained steady you would think that was just great.  

There is another aspect to this that is more subtle, and most likely more lethal.  By creating an oil shortage and allowing the price of a barrel to exceed its actual real value, many Americans might rethink their opposition to the Iraq war in favor of lower gas prices which could be expected if we just admitted we were there to steal their oil and went ahead and razed the entire country and openly took it over, dispensing with the puppet government we installed.  At a possible $5.00 per gallon of gas…….how many of us would be screaming for war with Iran?  After all, they have some of the largest known oil deposits in the world.  

With oil cartels reporting the largest profits in history of any corporation ever known there is no reason that we have to continue subsidizing them with billions of taxpayer dollars or why they should be receiving billions in tax credits.  In fact, these corporations should be penalized for failing and refusing to build refineries over the last twenty years.  

The current gas prices cannot, and will not be solved by drilling in the Gulf, ANWAR or anywhere else for that matter.  Not drilling in these places has not caused the current hike in gas prices.  Beginning drilling construction in these areas now will not ease the current squeeze on American consumers, and it won’t for many years to come. 

Like the building food crisis and shortage, the oil crisis has been carefully staged.  None of this is accidental and the intent is not to reduce gas prices or to make oil more readily available.  The intent is to collapse the economy of the US.  

We have already seen the collpase of our housing markets.  We are preparing for a created food crisis we are told is coming if not already here. Legislation is pending to take control of our water rights and supplies so that they can be privatized and now we have an energy crisis.  

Housing, food, water and energy.   Basically the foundations of our lives are under assault from within our own country.  All these planned shortages, prices hikes, rigged markets, mortgage frauds, water theft, food shortages and inflated gas prices have been carefully planned and implemented to make us more readily accepting of the North American Union and the New World Order.  

There are those in our government and those behind the scenes who will stop at nothing until they have devastated this country from coast to coast, border to border, and then some.  We are being crushed and destroyed not by terrorists from “over there”, but from those within our own borders who have neither allegiance nor loyalty to the US and Who could care less what we endure. 

To correct the current created crisis I would suggest these things: 


1.  Repeal all tax breaks and subsidies for all oil cartels. 

2.  Institute a Windfall Profits Tax to prevent oil cartels from artificially inflating the market. 

3.  Fine and penalize oil cartels that seem to be able to plan for future shortages but have failed to construct, build or maintain adequate refineries, or to drill oil deposits they already have access to. 

4.  Cap the price per gallon of gas. 


Now I know these suggestions just lit the fires under the “free-traders”.  At some point you have to conclude that free trade is not the same as fair trade in a free market.  Without regulation, without oversight, free trade is devastating our economy and killing off our country.  As gas prices rise, as corporate profits rise even higher our economy will come to a grinding halt.  Exactly what is intended.  

Ask yourself what good a free market without fair trade regulations is to you if you can no longer support yourself or your family because the cost of just living has risen so high?  At some point we have to conclude that remaining viable is far more important than becoming subservient. 


Marti Oakley (c)2008 


%d bloggers like this: