Eve Robinson,against the wall
Why the Federal Reserve is Not What it Says on the Tin
There are two simple things that the name ‘Federal Reserve’ implies: the fact that it is federal and the fact that it is a reserve. The truth of the matter however is that it is neither of these things and has been pulling the wool over the public’s eyes. In reality it is a private company rather than a federal entity, owned by stockbrokers. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution states that only Congress is permitted to issue money and regulate its value, meaning that it is illegal for privately held corporations to do so. The Federal Reserve is therefore in direct breach of the Constitution and relies upon deceiving the masses in order to get away with this.
It has even been proven in a court of law that the Federal Reserve is a private corporation as opposed to an actual federal reserve. In 1982, during the case of John L. Lewis versus United States of America, the court ruled that the Federal Banks are ‘independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations’ and stated that there was insufficient ‘federal government control over “detailed physical performance” and ‘day to day operation”’ of the Federal Bank for it to be classed as a federal entity. In short, the Federal Reserve has more in common with a commercial bank that advertises low interest rates and the cheapest loans than it does with a federal agency. The Centre for Research on Globalisation describes it as a ‘privately owned financial institution’, which is exactly what it is. The Federal Reserve even states on its website that ‘the twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized much like private corporations’.
The fact that the Federal Reserve is a profit-orientated company just like any other means that its primary purpose is to fill the pockets of greedy bankers. The Reserve has even offered banks higher interest rates if they keep their funds parked at the Federal Banks as opposed to loaning the money to the country’s people, which is an incredibly harmful thing to do when there are businesses in the community that are credit-starved. The difference between the greed of the Federal Reserve and the greed of a standard, run-of-the-mill company is that the Federal Reserve has more power over the way in which the American economy performs than any other entity. It controls the supply of money, sets the interest rates and hands out bailouts to banks, meaning that its clout in the financial arena is second to none.
Even more worryingly, foreign banks and governments own significant ownership interests in the member banks that effectively own the Federal Reserve. This means that the company that has the highest level of power over the US economy is influenced by organisations based in foreign countries and is not even fully controlled by the US. The exact ownership shares of the Federal Reserve are yet to be revealed so it is currently unknown to what extent it is foreign-owned but anybody with a modicum of common sense can see that no country can benefit from having the control of its economy dictated in part by people who do not even live there.
The FED is a Dictatorship
You would think that any organisation that possesses this much power would be accountable to the US people but this is simply not the case. The US public are not able to vote those who are in charge of the Reserve out of office if they are not satisfied with what they are doing because the Federal Reserve is not a democracy. Okay so the president might appoint the people that run the Reserve but he is also aware that if he does not stay on their good side then he will be unlikely to get the money that he needs from the big Wall Street banks to fund his next election campaign.
It doesn’t take a genius to work out that the Federal Reserve is conning the US people. It is relying upon their misguided belief that it is a federal agency to take advantage of them and further the interest of its members. At the end of the day, how can anybody trust the FED to take care of the American economy when even its name is fraudulent? It is an organisation run by conmen and swindlers, who are taking the American people for fools.
Were relentlessly told that we must never forget the Six Million victims of Hitler and the Nazis. But we hear far less about the vastly greater number of victims of Lenin and Stalin, and the grim legacy of Soviet Communism. Some 20 million people perished as victims of the Soviet regime, historians acknowledge. Jews played a decisive role in founding and promoting the egalitarian-universalist ideology of Marxism, in developing the Marxist political movement, and in brutally establishing Bolshevik rule in Russia. With the notable exception of Lenin, who was one-quarter Jewish, most of the leading Marxists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews, including Trotsky, Sverdlov, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Radek. The Bolshevik killing of Russias imperial family is symbolic of the tragic fate of Russia and, indeed, of the entire West.Were relentlessly told that we must never forget the Six Million victims of Hitler and the Nazis. But we hear far less about the vastly greater number of victims of Lenin and Stalin, and the grim legacy of Soviet Communism. Some 20 million people perished as victims of the Soviet regime, historians acknowledge. Jews played a decisive role in founding and promoting the egalitarian-universalist ideology of Marxism, in developing the Marxist political movement, and in brutally establishing Bolshevik rule in Russia. With the notable exception of Lenin, who was one-quarter Jewish, most of the leading Marxists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews, including Trotsky, Sverdlov, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Radek. The Bolshevik killing of Russias imperial family is symbolic of the tragic fate of Russia and, indeed, of the entire West.Were relentlessly told that we must never forget the Six Million victims of Hitler and the Nazis. But we hear far less about the vastly greater number of victims of Lenin and Stalin, and the grim legacy of Soviet Communism. Some 20 million people perished as victims of the Soviet regime, historians acknowledge. Jews played a decisive role in founding and promoting the egalitarian-universalist ideology of Marxism, in developing the Marxist political movement, and in brutally establishing Bolshevik rule in Russia. With the notable exception of Lenin, who was one-quarter Jewish, most of the leading Marxists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews, including Trotsky, Sverdlov, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Radek. The Bolshevik killing of Russias imperial family is symbolic of the tragic fate of Russia and, indeed, of the entire West.Were relentlessly told that we must never forget the Six Million victims of Hitler and the Nazis. But we hear far less about the vastly greater number of victims of Lenin and Stalin, and the grim legacy of Soviet Communism. Some 20 million people perished as victims of the Soviet regime, historians acknowledge. Jews played a decisive role in founding and promoting the egalitarian-universalist ideology of Marxism, in developing the Marxist political movement, and in brutally establishing Bolshevik rule in Russia. With the notable exception of Lenin, who was one-quarter Jewish, most of the leading Marxists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews, including Trotsky, Sverdlov, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Radek. The Bolshevik killing of Russias imperial family is symbolic of the tragic fate of Russia and, indeed, of the entire West….
The co-pilot of a hijacked Ethiopian Airlines flight surrendered to Swiss authorities in Geneva on Monday after commandeering his aircraft to seek asylum in Switzerland, police said.
The plane’s second-in-command, who was not carrying a weapon, took control of the plane when the pilot left the cockpit to use the toilet. After landing, he left the aircraft via a cockpit window, without harming passengers or crew, police spokesman Pierre Grangean told a news conference.
“Just after landing, the co-pilot came out of the cockpit and ran to the police and said, ‘I’m the hijacker.’ He said he is not safe in his own country and wants asylum,” Grangean said.
As passengers left the plane, which was parked near the end of the runway, they were checked by police as they held their hands on their necks, a Reuters witness said.
source : the guardian
Picture the scene. You’re pottering about on the internet, perhaps idly looking up cake recipes, or videos of puppies learning to howl. Then the phone rings. It’s your internet service provider. Actually, it’s a nice lady in a telesales warehouse somewhere, employed on behalf of your service provider; let’s call her Linda. Linda is calling because, thanks to David Cameron’s “porn filter”, you now have an “unavoidable choice”, as one of 20 million British households with a broadband connection, over whether to opt in to view certain content. Linda wants to know – do you want to be able to see hardcore pornography?
How about information on illegal drugs? Or gay sex, or abortion? Your call may be recorded for training and monitoring purposes. How about obscene and tasteless material? Would you like to see that? Speak up, Linda can’t hear you.
The government’s filter, which comes into full effect this month after a year of lobbying, will block far more than dirty pictures. That was always the intention, and in recent weeks it has become clear that the mission creep of internet censorship is even creepier than campaigners had feared. In the name of protecting children from a rotten tide of raunchy videos, a terrifying precedent is being set for state control of the digital commons.
Pious arguments about protecting innocence are invariably marshalled in the service of public ignorance. When the first opt-in filtering began, it was discovered that non-pornographic “gay and lesbian” sites and “sex education” content would be blocked by BT. After an outcry, the company quickly changed the wording on its website, but it is not clear that more than the wording has been changed. The internet is a lifeline for young LGBT people looking for information and support – and parents are now able to stop them finding that support at the click of a mouse.
Sexual control and social control are usually co-occurring. Sites that were found to be inaccessible when the new filtering system was launched last year included in some cases helplines like Childline and the NSPCC, domestic violence and suicide prevention services – and the thought of what an unscrupulous parent or abusive spouse could do with the ability to block such sites is chilling. The head of TalkTalk, one of Britain’s biggest internet providers, claimed that the internet has no “social or moral framework”. Well, neither does a library. Nobody would dream of insisting a local book exchange deployed morality robots to protect children from discovering something their parents might not want them to see. Online, that’s just what’s happening, except that in this case, every person who uses the internet is being treated like a child.
1. “In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.” Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.
2. “The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of “liberalism” they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” Norman Thomas, for many years U.S. Socialist Presidential candidate.
3. “Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government – a bureaucratic elite.” Senator William Jenner, 1954
4. “We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991
5. “The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.” A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, l933
6. “The depression was the calculated ‘shearing’ of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market….The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.” Curtis Dall, FDR’s son-in-law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father-in-Law
7. “The New Deal is plainly an attempt to achieve a working socialism and avert a social collapse in America; it is extraordinarily parallel to the successive ‘policies’ and ‘Plans’ of the Russian experiment. Americans shirk the word ‘socialism’, but what else can one call it?” H.G. Wells The New World Order 1939
8. “Ultimately, our objective is to welcome the Soviet Union back into the world order. Perhaps the world order of the future will truly be a family of nations.” President George Bush Texas A&M University 1989
9. “Under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not the character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner. . . .” Fabian Socialist Bernard Shaw in his Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at email@example.com.
11. “National Socialism will use its own revolution for establishing of a new world order.” Adolph Hitler during World War II
12. “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.” President Woodrow Wilson 1916
13. “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” – Henry Ford
14. “The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining super capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control…. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.” – Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets
15. “Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” – David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 405
16. “It is the system of nationalist individualism that has to go….We are living in the end of the sovereign states….In the great struggle to evoke a Westernized World Socialism, contemporary governments may vanish….Countless people…will hate the new world order….and will die protesting against it.” – H.G. Wells, in his book, “The New World Order”, 1940 17. “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas.” – Brock Adams, Director UN Health Organization
18. “We need a program of psychosurgery for political control of our society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who deviates from the given norm can be surgically mutilated. The individual may think that the most important reality is his own existence, but this is only his personal point of view. . . Man does not have the right to develop his own mind. . . . We must electronically control the brain. Someday armies and generals will be controlled by electronic stimulation of the brain.” Dr. Jose M.R. Delgado, Director of Neuropsychiatry, Yale University Medical School, Congressional Record, No. 26, Vol. 118, February 24, 1974.
19. “One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order.” From The National Educator, K.M. Heaton
A new law proposed by the European Commission would make it illegal to “grow, reproduce or trade” any vegetable seeds that have not been “tested, approved and accepted” by a new EU bureaucracy named the “EU Plant Variety Agency.”
It’s called the Plant Reproductive Material Law, and it attempts to put the government in charge of virtually all plants and seeds. Home gardeners who grow their own plants from non-regulated seeds would be considered criminals under this law.
The draft text of the law, which has already been amended several times due to a huge backlash from gardeners, is viewable here.
“This law will immediately stop the professional development of vegetable varieties for home gardeners, organic growers, and small-scale market farmers,” said Ben Gabel, vegetable breeder and director of The Real Seed Catalogue. “Home gardeners have really different needs – for example they grow by hand, not machine, and can’t or don’t want to use such powerful chemical sprays. There’s no way to register the varieties suitable for home use as they don’t meet the strict criteria of the Plant Variety Agency, which is only concerned about approving the sort of seed used by industrial farmers.”
Virtually all plants, vegetable seeds and gardeners to eventually be registered by government
All governments are, of course, infatuated with the idea of registering everybody and everything. Under Title IV of the proposed EU law:
Title IV Registration of varieties in national and Union registers The varieties, in order to be made available on the market throughout the Union, shall be included in a national register or in the Union register via direct application procedure to the CVPO.
Gardeners must also pay fees to the EU bureaucracy for the registration of their seeds. From the proposed law text:
The competent authorities and the CPVO should charge fees for the processing of applications, the formal and technical examinations including audits, variety denomination, and the maintenance of the varieties for each year for the duration of the registration.
While this law may initially only be targeted at commercial gardeners, it sets a precedent to sooner or later go after home gardeners and require them to abide by the same insane regulations.
Government bureaucracy gone insane
“This is an instance of bureaucracy out of control,” says Ben Gabel. “All this new law does is create a whole new raft of EU civil servants being paid to move mountains of papers round all day, while killing off the seed supply to home gardeners and interfering with the right of farmers to grow what they want. It also very worrying that they have given themselves the power to regulate and licence any plant species of any sort at all in the future – not just agricultural plants, but grasses, mosses, flowers, anything at all – without having to bring it back to the Council for a vote.”
As a hint of the level of insane bureaucracy that gardeners and vegetable growers will be subject to under this EU law, check out this language from the proposed EU law:
Specific provisions are set out on the registration in the Union variety register and with regard to the possibility for the applicant to launch an appeal against a CPVO decision. Such provisions are not laid down for the registration in the national variety registers, because they are subject to national administrative procedures. A new obligation for each national variety examination centre to be audited by the CPVO will be introduced with the aim to ensure the quality and harmonisation of the variety registration process in the Union. The examination centre of the professional operators will be audited and approved by the national competent authorities. In case of direct application to the CPVO it will audit and approve the examination centres it uses for variety examination.
Such language is, of course, Orwellian bureaucraticspeak that means only one thing: All gardeners should prepare to be subjected to total government insanity over seeds, vegetables and home gardens.
RealSeeds.co.uk warns about any attempt to actually try to understand the law by reading it:
You cannot just read the first 5 pages or so that are an ‘executive summary’, and think you know what this law is about. The executive summary is NOT what will become the law. It is the actual Articles themselves that become law, the Summary has no legal standing and is just tacked on as an aid to the public and legislators, it is supposed to give background information and set the proposed legislation in context so people know what is going on and why.
The problem with this law has always been that the Summary says lots of nice fluffy things about preserving biodiversity, simplifying legislation, making things easier etc – things we all would love – but the Articles of the law actually do completely the opposite. And the Summary is not what becomes the law.
For example, the Summary of drafts 1, 2 & 3 talked about making things easier for ‘Amateur’ varieties. But the entire class of Amateur vegetables – which we have spent 5 years working with DEFRA to register – was actually abolished entirely in the Articles right from the start. Yet the Summary , and press releases based on it, still talked about how it will help preserve Amateur varieties! The Summary is completely bogus. Do not base your views of the law on it!
So, be warned. By all means, read it yourself. But you have the ignore the Summary as that is not the Law, and does not reflect what is in the Law.
As you might suspect, this move is the “final solution” of Monsanto, DuPont and other seed-domination corporations who have long admitted their goal is the complete domination of all seeds and crops grown on the planet. By criminalizing the private growing of vegetables — thereby turning gardeners into criminals — EU bureaucrats can finally hand over full control of the food supply to powerful corporations like Monsanto.
Most heirloom seeds to be criminalized
Nearly all varieties of heirloom vegetable seeds will be criminalized under this proposed EU law. This means the act of saving seeds from one generation to the next — a cornerstone of sustainable living — will become a criminal act.
In addition, as Gabel explains, this law “…effectively kills off development of home-garden seeds in the EU.”
This is the ultimate wish of all governments, of course: To criminalize any act of self-reliance and make the population completely dependent on monopolistic corporations for their very survival. This is true both in the USA and the EU. This is what governments do: They seize control, one sector at a time, year after year, until you are living as nothing more than a total slave under a globalist dictatorial regime.
An online petition has already been started on this issue and has garnered nearly 25,000 signatures so far.
NOAH’S ARK and 240 other organizations from 40 European countries have also initiated an “open letter” appealing to Brussels bureaucrats to stop the insanity. Click here for a translated version of their petition.
I saw this coming
By the way, I am on the record predicting this exact scenario. Read Chapter Three of my fiction book, “Freedom Chronicles 2026.” (Read it FREE, online.) It depicts a seed smuggler living in a time when seeds are criminalized and people earn a living as professional seed smugglers.
In my book, a woman uses a specially-crafted breast prosthesis to smuggle seeds to “underground gardeners” in full defiance of laws crafted by Monsanto. A vast underground network of grassroots gardeners and scientists manage to put together a “seed weapon” to destroy GMOs and take back the food supply from evil corporations.
Mark my words: Seeds are about to become contraband. Anyone who grows their own food is about to be targeted as a criminal. The governments of the world, conspiring with corporations like Monsanto, do not want any individual to be able to grow their own food.
This is about total domination of the food supply and the criminalizing of gardeners. And this is what big government always does after centralizing sufficient power. All governments inherently seek total control over the lives of everyone, and if you don’t set boundaries and limits for government (i.e. the Bill of Rights), it eventually runs roughshod over all freedoms and liberties, including the freedom to grow your own food.
U.S. and British Intelligence Officials Admit they Don’t Know Whether the Syrian Government Or Rebels Used Chemical Weapons
A U.S. State Department spokesman admitted yesterday that the U.S. doesn’t know whether a low-level, rogue Syrian official is responsible for the chemical weapons attacks.
Today, the wheels came off the war wagon altogether.
An intercept of Syrian military officials discussing the strike was among low-level staff, with no direct evidence tying the attack back to an Assad insider or even a senior Syrian commander, the officials said.
So while Secretary of State John Kerry said Monday that links between the attack and the Assad government are “undeniable,” U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders, or even completely sure it was carried out by government forces, the officials said.
Another possibility that officials would hope to rule out: that stocks had fallen out of the government’s control and were deployed by rebels in a callous and calculated attempt to draw the West into the war.
In other words, the U.S. hasn’t yet ruled out that possibility … but only hopes to.
The New York Times writes:
American officials said Wednesday there was no “smoking gun” that directly links President Bashar al-Assad to the attack
It appears that the public presentation of the Syria evidence will be limited. Instead of the theater of Mr. Powell’s 2003 speech — which included satellite photographs, scratchy recordings of conversations between Iraqi officials and a vial of white powder meant to symbolize anthrax — American officials said the intelligence assessment they are preparing to make public will be similar to a modest news release that the White House issued in June to announce that the Assad government had used chemical weapons “on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year.”
Except that – last time there was a chemical weapons attack in Syria – it turned out to have been the rebels who launched the attack.
Similarly, the Guardian notes that British officials say there is not 100% certainty of who carried out the attacks, and that the conclusion of government culpability is not based on hard evidence, but a series of assumptions.
See this for background on the crisis in Syria
source : oilprice.com
The CIA is worried about the national security implications of climate change, and it’s also concerned about the potential implications of geoengineering—large-scale deliberate intervention in the Earth’s climate system.
The US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has launched a study of geoengineering as a way to fight climate change, bringing together experts and getting the CIA involved as one of the study’s financers.
For the purposes of the NAS study, geoengineering is the process of removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere or reflecting solar radiation away from the Earth to reduce global warming effects.
While this is great fodder for conspiracy theorists who can imagine geoengineering as a weapon of mass destruction, that is exactly one of the CIA’s concerns—so it’s not so far out there.
The mainstream media buzz is that the CIA wants to “control the weather” through geoengineering. But let’s put this into perspective. First of all, this is just a panel of experts intending to produce an in-depth study called “Geoengineering Climate: Technical Evaluation and Discussion of Impacts”. We’re not talking about massive, expensive labs churning out geoengineering tech that can be used by the CIA to reroute geopolitical dynamics. Certainly, nothing more than a study will be produced on the project’s $630,000 budget and within its 21-month timeframe.
There are precedents for government attempts to control the weather, as media is quick to point out, so it’s not exactly a new idea, but what we’re talking about is much bigger than manipulating the weather over Vietnam or ensuring that the Olympics in Beijing aren’t ruined by rain.
The CIA is partially funding the project, along with four other government agencies, including NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). And the research isn’t classified, according to the NAS. “We’re doing an evaluation,” he said. “This is an assessment of what is known in the science literature about some of the proposed engineering techniques–both solar-radiation management and carbon-dioxide removal,” as reported by Fox News.
The fact is that despite the right-wing hesitancy to accept the very notion of climate change, let alone global warming, the CIA considers climate change a potential threat to global security and hence national security. (And it’s not the first time the CIA has attempted to get more involved in the climate change issue. The agency used to have its own research center dedicated to the issue but it was closed down last year because Republican officials thought it a waste of time for the CIA to be involved in this.)
When you throw geoengineering into the mix, it gets potentially more complicated because of the implications of what is essentially weather-controlling technology in the hands of “rogue” states. There are too many variables not to consider the security aspect of climate change and geoengineering. So, involved is exactly what an agency like the CIA should be.
But these are questions for later. Right now all the panel is concerned about is evaluating the technologies that have been proposed, assessing their feasibility and determining the risks of each. Those include:
–Solar radiation management (SRM): the idea of reflecting sunlight in an attempt to block infrared radiation and halt rising temperatures, with one proposed method being the scattering of sulphate aerosols in the atmosphere to reflect the sun’s energy. Some scientists are calling for this to be done, now, in the Arctic, to halt the rapid melt, according to the New York Times.
–Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) techniques, along with which is the idea of storing carbon dioxide in the deep ocean (which risks ocean acidification).
Before we start talking about a CIA conspiracy to control the weather, the real question the NAS study has to answer is whether geoengineering is feasible at all—or whether the cure would be worse than the disease.
Plenty would argue that it’s the climate equivalent of eating bags of chips and then getting liposuction, rather than just dieting and exercising.
By. Jen Alic of Oilprice.com
Merlin Miller talks about the USS Liberty.The lie called war on terror.New party to expell zionist control.Free trade lies.The people still rule
Drone” is a dirty word at this week’s drone industry convention in Washington.
The sector long has opposed use of the term, which, some argue, carries inherently negative connotations and doesn’t accurately describe the awesome technology seen in today’s unmanned vehicles.
Efforts to stop journalists from using the word “drone” have failed miserably over the years, but the industry hasn’t given up trying.
Inside the media room at the Washington convention center, the WiFi password is the not-so-subtle phrase “DontSayDrones.”
The word is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as “an unmanned aircraft or ship guided by remote control.”
At this point, removing the term from the American lexicon — or from future news stories — will be virtually impossible.