Man-made Global Warming Scam is About Creating Climate Billionaires Via Carbon Trading Schemes While Lowering the Standard of Living of Everyone Else

United Nations 'Green Climate Fund,' Which Taxpayers of Developed Countries Are Forced to Fund, Goes Directly into Private Equity Funds of the Financial Elite to Create Climate Billionaires Like Gore and Obama — Poor People of Undeveloped Countries Will Never Reap the Benefit

The people behind this scam are not altruistic environmentalists. They are financiers, investment banks and hedge funds. There is already a Carbon Credit Futures market, carbon credit trading exchanges in European (ECX) and in Chicago (CCX), and carbon credit derivatives products. Sound familiar? This is all about creating billions of dollars, quite literally, out of thin air, based up on a hoax, sold to us by world luminaries and super salesmen like Al Gore, who of course has invested heavily in all things to do with climate change, and is flying around the world in his private jet, peddling his wares. He is set to become the world’s first carbon billionaire, and if the “business” of carbon trading continues expanding, there will be many more to follow. Al Gore is chairman of Generation Investment Management (GIM). David Blood, the former chief executive of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, is the CEO. But the bottom line is that GIM is about making money. GIM owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, and the Chicago Climate Exchange owns half of the European Climate Exchange. So if the United States and Europe adopt a government-enforced "cap and trade" carbon credit trading scheme, Al Gore and his fellow investors will rake in billions of dollars. The man-made global warming scare is the greatest scientific fraud in the history of mankind, and its associated carbon credit trading scam is the greatest hustle. [Source]

Goldman Sachs owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, where the carbon credits will be traded. Moreover, Goldman owns a minority stake in Blue Source LLC, a Utah-based firm that sells carbon credits of the type that will be in great demand if the bill passes. Nobel Prize winner Al Gore, who is intimately involved with the planning of cap-and-trade, started up a company called Generation Investment Management with three former bigwigs from Goldman Sachs Asset Management, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris. Their business? Investing in carbon offsets. There's also a $500 million Green Growth Fund set up by a Goldmanite to invest in greentech … the list goes on and on.

Maurice Strong and the Chicago Climate Exchange

The “privately-owned” Chicago Climate Exchange is heavily influenced by Obama cohorts Al Gore and Maurice Strong. For years now Strong and Gore have been cashing in on that lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming...

The Canadian born Strong is little known in the United States. That’s because he spends most of his time in China where he he has been working to make the communist country the world’s next superpower. The nondescript Strong, nonetheless is the big cheese in the underworld of climate change and is one of the main architects of the failing Kyoto Protocol...

These are the leaders in the Man-made Global Warming Movement... It may be interesting to note that the Chicago Climate Exchange in spite of its hype, is a veritable rat’s nest of cronyism. The largest shareholder in the Exchange is Goldman Sachs. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is its honorary chairman, The Joyce Foundation, which funded the Exchange also funded money for John Ayers’ Chicago School Initiatives. John is the brother of William Ayers...

Even as man-made global warming is being exposed as a money-generating hoax, Obama is working feverishly to push the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme through Congress. Obama was never the character he created for himself in the fairy-tale version in “Dreams of My Father”. He’s the agent of Change and Hope for cohorts making money down at the Chicago Climate Exchange.

The Barbarians are pushing at the gate of the Global Warming fraud, and to borrow a line from children playing Hide and Seek, Here they come, ready or not!

Strong is on the Chicago Climate Exchange board of directors. The CCX “is North America’s only and the world’s first global marketplace for integrating voluntary legally binding emissions reductions with emissions trading and offsets for all six greenhouse gases.”

The more global warming gets hyped, once again by Al Gore, the more green technology is worth. So while Strong may be “a socialist in ideology,” he is definitely a “capitalist in methodology.”

Strong, the architect of the Kyoto Accord, has made millions off of environmentalism, but still finds himself unable to pull America into the snare. But he has a plan for that also. In 2006, he described what he thought was necessary to keep the green movement alive… fear.

Maurice Strong would not shed a tear at the collapse of the American economy or our way of life. He has stated before that “current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.”

In other words, the demise of the American way of life is necessary for the survival of the Earth. This perspective poses little threat from a normal environmentalist. In the hands of the “Michelangelo of networking,” “an international traveling salesman with buts [sic] of paper in his pocket” and “a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli,” it is an all too real threat to America.

Obama and the Chicago Climate Exchange

Carbon tax schemes are predicated on the illusion of anthropogenic climate change. Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history, however, constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history. Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. A large body of scientific research — including a NASA study — suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years, not humans.

Trading carbon credits in carbon markets is the newest investment scheme. Energy traders and Wall Street financiers are at the heart of this scheme. The Chicago Climate Exchange (a carbon trading exchange), which includes some 400 companies, is now the largest cap-and-trade market in the world. The largest shareholder in the Exchange is Goldman Sachs.

While on the board of the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama helped fund the Chicago Climate Exchange, which will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction program he has pushed through Congress as president. In 2000 and 2001, while still a state senator, Obama voted along with other members of the board of the Joyce Foundation to give more than $1.1 million to help the Climate Exchange get off the ground.

The “privately-owned” Chicago Climate Exchange is heavily influenced by Al Gore and Maurice Strong. For years now, Gore and Strong have been cashing in on lucrative carbon trading schemes. [Maurice Strong is known as the “Godfather of the international environmental movement” and the “architect of the Kyoto Protocol.” Both of those are ironic titles for a man who started out in the oil business.]

Gore buys his carbon off-sets from himself—the Generation Investment Management LLP, an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C., of which he is both chairman and founding partner. The Generation Investment Management business has considerable influence over the major carbon credit trading firms that currently exist, including the Chicago Climate Exchange.

Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as “the world’s first, and North America’s only, cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”  Strong, the silent partner (the Canadian-born Strong is little known in the United States), is a former Secretary General of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the much hyped Rio Earth Summit) and Under-Secretary General of the United Nations in the days of an Oil-for-Food beleaguered Kofi Annan. He spends most of his time in China where he has been working to make the communist country the world’s next superpower. The nondescript Strong, nonetheless, is the big cheese in the underworld of climate change and is one of the main architects of the Kyoto Protocol.

The Climate Exchange is the brainchild of Richard Sandor, an economics professor who has worked for both the Chicago Mercantile Association and the Chicago Board of Trade. Known as "Mr. Derivative" for his work in creating interest rate futures markets, Sandor first proposed the creation of the Climate Exchange in 2000, just before the signing of the Kyoto Accord on greenhouse gas reduction. The United States subsequently refused to participate in the accords.

Speaking at the State of Green Business Forum in Chicago in 2010, Sandor urged the attendees to do whatever they could to push for a national cap-and-trade program. After giving a quick history of where value creation for businesses came from in past decades, he said that the next big area for value creation will be in the commoditization of air and water -- they will be made commodities through cap and trade (see the video, "The Story of Cap and Trade," https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYi78LaY8u4). In the case of carbon, that would set quotas for carbon emissions, and those who exceed their quotas can trade those extra cuts to those that are unable to use their own quotas.

Globally, the number of CDM projects (UN-backed clean development mechanism) entering the pipeline is increasing rapidly. The onset of a carbon tax is already underway in numerous countries (the World Bank will be the collection agency for a global CO2 tax). In January 2005, a new system of CO2 emissions trading went into effect in the European Union. David Miliband, the UK's environment secretary, announced that Britain would become the world's first nation to legislate a climate change bill setting legally binding timetables for a low-carbon economy.

This decision affects every British industry, business and household. Britain's former prime minister, Gordon Brown, said:

"My ambition is to build a global carbon market founded on the EU emissions trading scheme and centered in London." 

Every citizen would be issued a carbon "credit card" or "ration card" — to be swiped every time they buy petrol, pay an energy utility bill, or book an airline ticket — under a nationwide carbon rationing scheme (according to a feasibility study commissioned by Miliband).

Under the scheme, everybody would be given an annual allowance of the carbon they could expend on a range of products, probably food, energy and travel. If they wanted to use more carbon, they would be able to buy it from somebody else on a carbon exchange. In the future, each person will start the year with 1,000 carbon credits, for example, on a carbon ration card. Personal carbon rations would cover everyone’s direct use of energy in the household and for personal transport, including air travel. Each time someone fills up their car, for example, they would put the card in a slot on the pump and it will deduct a few points.

The main features of personal carbon rations are:

• An equal annual ration is allocated for each adult, with a smaller one for children.
• Rations are tradable.
• The ration covers the direct energy used in the household and for personal travel.
• A phased year-on-year reducing ration is signaled well in advance.
• The arrangement is mandatory (in order to be effective, carbon rationing would have to be mandatory, just like Obamacare)

From the document, "Kyoto Chip - Awareness raising of personal CO2":

"There is no easy technical way to deal with CO2. The best way to reduce it and the other emissions is to use the car only when it is necessary and to cycle, walk or use public transport where possible. Personal awareness is the other path to follow. It is obvious that not only the choice of which vehicle and its fuel efficiency is important, but also how much use is made of the vehicle.

"The approach suggested in this document aims at creating even greater awareness and an active personal involvement by individual European citizens in their personal level of CO2 emission. Once every driver knows their annual allowance, and how much their vehicle uses, then they can make much better choices about the trips they make and which mode they choose to make them.

"Part of this is already done in the UK where the annual ‘road tax’ is based on the CO2 emissions of the vehicle you own. We believe that the next logical step is to empower citizens by giving them the knowledge and possibility to make a real change based on their choices and behavior.

"The ’Kyoto Chip’ is about CO2 rationing on a personal level and -- doing so- - raising more awareness about personal CO2 use. David Miliband, the UK environment secretary, is keen to set up a pilot scheme to test the idea, and has asked officials from four government departments to report on how it could be done. The move marks the first serious step towards state-enforced limits on the carbon use of individuals, which scientists say may be necessary in the fight against climate change."

"It extends the principle of carbon trading -- already in place between heavy polluters such as power companies and steel makers -- to consumers, with heavy carbon users forced to buy unused allowances from people with greener lifestyles."

http://www.velomondial.net/page_display.asp?pid=29 

Rockefellers and the Carbon Tax

January 10, 2009

Daniel Taylor, Old-Thinker News - The media is hailing Exxon Mobil's announcement in favor of carbon tax proposals as a shocking, unbelievable move. But is it really that surprising? Could well meaning environmentalists be in for a shock to find that a seemingly "grass roots" movement has from the beginning been initiated from the top down?

As the Calgary Herald reports:

"Exxonmobil Corp., the world's largest crude oil refiner, supports taxing carbon dioxide as the most efficient way of curbing greenhouse gas emissions, its chief executive said."

The announcement came from Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil, speaking at the Woodrow Wilson international center for scholars in Washington, which has served as a platform for discussing various globalist initiatives for many years. That Tillerson would make this announcement is interesting, due to the fact that the Rockefeller family, who built Standard Oil [Standard Oil of New York later became Mobil, a predecessor to Exxon/Mobil], recently identified him as "resistant" to "...take the threat of global warming more seriously." Are we to accept this story? Was there any real resistance in the first place?

A May 2008 article from the International Herald Tribune painted a glowing picture of the Rockefeller family in their quest to "press for change at Exxon." As reported:

David Rockefeller, retired chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and patriarch of the family, issued a statement saying, "I support my family's efforts to sharpen Exxon Mobil's focus on the environmental crisis facing all of us."

The Rockefeller family has held a very special interest in environmental matters for decades. Population control and reduction is a central directive of many Rockefeller initiatives. The recent focus on global warming is no different. Steven Rockefeller's Earth Charter is an example.

There are countless real environmental issues such as genetically engineered organisms being released into the environment causing unknown mutations, consuming potentially dangerous cloned animal products, mass honey-bee die offs, etc. However, global warming was identified by the Club of Rome's 1991 report The First Global Revolution as a unifier to funnel the energy of citizens and businesses alike into supporting globalist initiatives. The report states:

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

Many of the "green" proposals to fight global warming will have a direct impact on your standard of living. Obama has admitted that sending "price signals" to change behavior is an option. Obama stated during a 2007 PBS interview:

"We're gonna have to cap the emission of greenhouse gasses. That means the power plants are gonna have to adjust how they generate power. They will pass on those costs to consumers."

Glenn Beck, Crime Inc. and the Nest of Communists

April 26, 2010

Glenn Beck, Fox News - Cap-and-trade: what is it? It’s the trading of puffs of air. Company A pollutes more than Company B. Company A must pay a fine, which is transferred to Company B, who earns a credit. The companies continue to pollute the exact same way, it just costs Company A more and Company B gets rewarded.

If I am going to build this into an industry, I need a to-do list:

• First we have to put together a carbon exchange:

While Obama was on the Joyce Foundation board, the group steered $1.1 million in grants instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange.

• Now we need investors:

Al Gore’s company — Generation Investment Management — is the fifth largest shareholder in the Chicago Climate Exchange. Gore’s company has several former Goldman employees on the roster.

Then Goldman Sachs steps to the plate and buys 10 percent of the combined company.

• Next we need the technology:

Fannie Mae, under the leadership of the Franklin Raines, purchases patent on system to trade residential carbon credits that was described as "how carbon and other pollutants yet to be determined" would be "combined into a single emissions pool" and traded — just as Fannie’s toxic portfolio of subprime mortgages were. It appears Raines wasn’t content with destroying only the housing market.

So you have the same crooked people who have contributed to the financial meltdown — Goldman, Fannie, socialists and out and out crooks — actually trying to "fix" the economy and the environment and, oh boy, believe me the fix is in.

• Now we need the law:

Well, the law is cap-and-trade. Remember when cap-and-trade was supposed to happen right after health care? Well, immigration has Congress’ attention now, so let’s skip ahead to:

• The cover:

Al Gore has been pushing cap-and-trade for quite some time. Obama has been pushing it as well. Many on the progressive left want it. Why? If it’s about the environment, cap-and-trade is a proven failure. It’s been tried it in Europe: failure. Now, a voluntary system — the Chicago Climate Exchange — is tanking. Why? Because you can’t get people to voluntarily buy air, when there’s plenty of air to go around. It’s scam. It’s like being at the beach and selling people a bucket of saltwater. I’m three steps away from the ocean — it’s free.

The entire green movement can’t stand on its own two feet and the only time anything green ever gets money is when it comes from government. Even some of the top scientists who believe in global warming say this won’t do anything to stop companies from polluting. They’ll just be paying a little more for it and companies like Enron were scheming to make money off of it — they even lobbied for cap-and-trade.

Some of the eco groups don’t even do what they promise. The Vatican found this out when they became "carbon neutral," but not one tree was planted in Hungary’s so-called "Vatican forest" for offsets. Who scams the pope? You want to know about warming? I got "eternal warming" for you.

So the question is: Why is it still being pushed? The redistribution of wealth and to enrich the corrupt.

We did a little digging and followed the money and the answers tell a familiar story. And before we get going on this, I just want to warn you: If there’s one thing I’m learning about progressives, they really like creating groups. They’ve got tons of them and it seems they just pass the money from one to the next. It’s almost like money laundering. It’s why health care can pass: You don’t know what the hell anyone is talking about and everyone always sounds so happy. Words and names of groups mean nothing. Unfortunately for them, people’s faces still matter. We know them by reputation.

"Crime, Inc." nest of communists: The Crime Ring Combines the White House, Goldman Sachs, Obama, Al Gore, Emerald Cities Collaborative, Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), George Soros, Valerie Jarrett, Goldman Sachs, Center for American Progress, Franklin Raines, Gerry Hudson, SEIU, Van Jones, AFL-CIO, ACORN, Green for All, Fannie Mae, Enterprise Community Partners, Art Lujan, Jack Hayn, Andy Stern, Phaedra Ellis Lamkins, Joyce Foundation, Livable Cities Initiative and "The Wizard": New Party and Apollo Alliance Founder, Joel Rogers.

The crime ring is robbing us blind. The financial bill will give the FTC new control over the Internet!?! Study the CCX members closely. There are mega companies involved in the international global warming scam.

'Green Climate Fund' Seeks UN-Style Diplomatic Immunity

[There is] an entrenched evil currently running the planet into an abyss. Yes, there is obvious desperation in their moves of late. But the game just seems to continue — ad nauseam — the people who have sheltered and protected the Khazar Banksters while impoverishing the middle class by exporting the American economy and industry based on unending warfare production. Those huge off shore accounts of the ill gotten gains of secret congressional accounts have not been tapped and returned; after all, it is the Rothrocks and the devil agency “Goldman Sucks” that are still running our Wall Steet “Dog and Pony” shows. I still get ridiculed for telling people to really think about the travesty of 9-11 and what it has cost them in terms of freedom. I really want to believe the Bens of this world. The fact that legislation was passed by a majority tells me that these people are either paid for, believe they are part of the 1%, or are afraid to stand up for the common good because they have been threatened with something. We know that the world is run by an unworthy gang of misanthropic inbred elites and their lackey minions. And, yet, through their spoils (and the spoiled), they have amassed great treasure that has no real value. Their moral compass is broken; their political capital is zero; their fiat currency is worthless; and their method of rule has become comical. These thespian thieves have now been pushed toward the gates of the temple to be whipped into the desert of their own creation…” [Source]

March 22, 2012

FOX News - The Green Climate Fund, which is supposed to help mobilize as much as $100 billion a year to lower global greenhouse gases, is seeking a broad blanket of UN-style immunity that would shield its operations from any kind of legal process, including civil and criminal prosecution, in the countries where it operates.

There is just one problem: it is not part of the United Nations.

Whether the fund, which was formally created at a UN climate conference in Durban, South Africa last December, will get all the money it wants to spend is open to question in an era of economic slowdown and fiscal austerity.

Its spending goal comes atop some $30 billion in "fast start-up" money that has been pledged by UN member states to such climate change activities.

A 24-nation interim board of trustees for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) is slated to hold its first meeting next month in Switzerland to organize the fund's secretariat and to get it running by November, as well as find a permanent home for the GCF's operations.

The board expects to spend about $6.7 million between now and June of next year.

But before it is fully operational, the GCF's creators -- 194 countries that belong to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) -- want it to be immune from legal challenges and lawsuits, not to mention outside inspections, much like the United Nations itself cannot be affected by decisions rendered by a sovereign nation's government or judicial system.

Despite its name, the UNFCCC was informed in 2006 by the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs that it was not considered a UN "organ," and therefore could not claim immunity for its subordinate bodies or personnel under the General Convention that has authorized UN immunity since the end of World War II.

A UNFCCC resolution granting similar immunities would need to be "accepted, approved or ratified" by each individual member of the Kyoto Protocol before it took effect, the UN legal office advised.

Even if UNFCCC members decided to ask the UN General Assembly to grant them similar immunity it would require each UN member state to make changes in domestic legislation, the opinion declared.

According to an official of the US Treasury, which strongly supports the existence of the GCF, the full extent of the immunities still remains to be worked out by the fund board, although the wording of various UNFCCC resolutions indicate that immunities like those held by the UN are clearly envisaged.

Obama, in latest climate move, pledges $3 billion for global fund

November 14, 2014

Reuters - President Barack Obama on Friday pledged a $3 billion U.S. contribution to an international fund to help poor countries cope with the effects of climate change, putting the issue front and center of the G20 Leaders Summit in Australia.

The large size of the contribution took climate policy watchers by surprise and doubles what other countries had previously pledged ahead of a Nov. 20 deadline. It would be the second major move on climate change taken by Obama after big Democratic losses in last week's midterm elections.

"Along with other nations that have pledged support, we’ll help vulnerable communities with early-warning systems, stronger defenses against storm surges, and climate-resilient infrastructure," Obama said in remarks ahead of the official opening of the G20 summit.

"We’ll help farmers plant more durable crops. We’ll help developing economies reduce their carbon pollution and invest in clean energy."

The timing of the announcement was seen as putting pressure Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who is hosting the summit and once described climate science as "absolute crap". Abbott had hoped the G20 summit would focus on growth and jobs.

"When most nations are saying we have to finance climate change responses, whatever Australia desires, it has to agree or it risks looking like the spoiler at what should be Australia's moment," Tim Costello, the head of World Vision Australia and the C20, or Civil Society 20, told Reuters.

Highlighting Australia's exposure to climate change, Obama said longer droughts and more wildfires were likely.

"The incredible natural glory of the Great Barrier Reef is threatened. Worldwide this past summer was the hottest on record. No nation is immune and every nation has a responsibility to do its part."

The Green Climate Fund will work with private sector investment and help spur global markets in clean energy technologies, creating opportunities for entrepreneurs and manufacturers including those from the United States.

"The fund will be able to deploy innovative instruments. That is the key distinguishing characteristic of the GCF; it has the opportunity to mobilize significant flows of private capital," Abyd Karmali, managing director of climate finance at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Rich countries had pledged in 2009 to mobilize $100 billion a year by 2020 to help developing countries tackle carbon emissions.

Earlier this week, Obama announced a climate deal with China. The United States will strive to cut total greenhouse emissions by about 25 percent by 2025, while China will aim for a peak in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

In the run-up to the global climate talks in Paris next year, developing nations view finance as a vital part of any deal.

Hela Cheikhrouhou, executive director of the fund, lauded the U.S. pledge as a game-changer. 

"It could have a domino effect on all other contributions," she said.

The U.S. pledge roughly doubles the $3 billion already promised for the fund, which will hold a first donors' meeting in Berlin on Thursday.

Germany and France had earlier pledged $1 billion each, and Mexico, South Korea, Japan and others have pledged smaller amounts.

The UN has set an informal goal of raising $10 billion for the fund before a meeting of environment ministers in Peru, next month. Developing nations have been urging $15 billion.

Some environmentalists were unimpressed by the pledge. Friends of the Earth said $3 billion "falls magnitudes below what is actually needed by developing countries."

Goldman Sachs and the Chicago Climate Exchange (Excerpt)

July 2, 2009

Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone - Goldman Sachs started pushing hard for cap-and-trade long ago, but things really ramped up in 2008 when the firm spent $3.5 million to lobby climate issues. (One of their lobbyists at the time was none other than Patterson, now Treasury chief of staff.)

Back in 2005, when Hank Paulson was chief of Goldman, he personally helped author the bank's environmental policy, a document that contains some surprising elements for a firm that in all other areas has been consistently opposed to any sort of government regulation. Paulson's report argued that "voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate change problem."

A few years later, the bank's carbon chief, Ken Newcombe, insisted that cap-and-trade alone won't be enough to fix the climate problem and called for further PUBLIC INVESTMENTS in research and development. Which is convenient, considering that Goldman made early investments in wind power (it bought a subsidiary called Horizon Wind Energy), renewable diesel (it is an investor in a firm called Changing World Technologies), and solar power (it partnered with BP Solar), exactly the kind of deals that will prosper if the government forces energy producers to use cleaner energy.

As Paulson said at the time,

"We're not making those investments to lose money."

Goldman owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, where the carbon credits will be traded. Moreover, Goldman owns a minority stake in Blue Source LLC, a Utah-based firm that sells carbon credits of the type that will be in great demand if the bill passes.  

Nobel Prize winner Al Gore, who is intimately involved with the planning of cap-and-trade, started up a company called Generation Investment Management with three former bigwigs from Goldman Sachs Asset Management, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris. Their business? Investing in carbon offsets.

There's also a $500 million Green Growth Fund set up by a Goldmanite to invest in greentech … the list goes on and on.

Goldman is ahead of the headlines again, just waiting for someone to make it rain in the right spot. Will this market be bigger than the energy futures market?

Related:

• Deep Ecology – The Hidden Agenda
• The Green Movement Is the One World Religion
• Obama is Owned by 'a Bunch of Fat Cat Bankers'
• A Tiny Elite Owns 80% of the World's Wealth
• Climate Protection Act of 2013 (Boxer-Sanders) Will Increase the Price of Fuel and Other Goods and Services and Will Destroy Manufacturing

Flashback: Robin Hood Tobin Tax is an Transaction-Tax Scam

Robin Hood Tax: Occupy Movement Now Marching Straight into the Globalist Trap

The Robin Hood Tax is an identical transaction-tax scam to the one proposed by globalists at the 2009 UN COP15 Climate Summit in Copenhagen

October 25, 2011

Patrick Henningsen, Infowars.com - It was inevitable that a movement which has struggled to agree on a manifesto, in the end, would do the bidding of the very elite globalist powers that they are demonstrating against to begin with.

Instead of achieving freedom from Central Bank debt enslavement, naive Occupiers appear to have taken the bait, pulling the mob towards endorsing a global taxation system, and one to be administered… by a brand new global government body.

As the Occupy Movement sets its sights on the upcoming G20 Summit in France on November 3-4, its globalist handlers behind the scenes have succeeded in carefully directing its crowds towards the Holy Grail of all socialist super-states — the celebrity supported, trendy “Robin Hood Tax”, also known as a Tobin Tax, a financial transaction tax levied on all transactions involving shares, bonds and derivatives.

It’s likely that such a blanket tax will eventually end up on the end of things like cash withdrawals and the like.

They claim that the resulting funds, counted in the hundreds of billions of dollars per year, would go toward popular Bono-led liberal heart-string fantasy causes like ‘reducing poverty in the third world’, social programs and— surprise, surprise — “combating climate change” and perhaps even saving polar bears — a move that would surely please desperate men like Al Gore (but a complete waste of money seeing that man-made global warming has already been thoroughly discredited).

The rallying cry for this globalist wet dream is coming directly from the supposed brain-child of the Occupy Movement, the globalist foundation-funded organization, Ad Busters, quietly shepherding its flock towards one of the biggest revenue spinning and control scams ever conceived.

Reuters reported yesterday:

“Canada-based Adbusters wants the Occupy Wall Street protest movement against economic inequality to take to the streets to call for a 1 percent tax on such deals ahead of a November 3-4 summit of the Group of 20 leading economies in France.

“Let’s send them a clear message: We want you to slow down some of that $1.3 trillion easy money that’s sloshing around the global casino each day — enough cash to fund every social program and environmental initiative in the world,” the activist group said on its website, www.adbusters.org.

Adbusters put out the initial call for Occupy Wall Street and since protesters set up camp in a park in New York City’s financial district on September 17, they have inspired solidarity demonstrations and so-called occupations around the world.”

In many ways, the Robin Hood Tax is an identical transaction-tax scam to the one proposed by globalists at the 2009 UN COP15 Climate Summit in Copenhagen, where a number of new taxes on financial transactions and new carbon taxes would be put into a giant “slush fund” to be handled by none other than the World Bank.

Ultimately, any Robin Hood Tax will most likely end up in a giant fund to “ensure that banks are adequately capitalized”, and one which will be used to bailout, or insure big bank losses and trillions in gambling derivative bets gone bad.

In reality, a Robin Hood Tax does just the opposite of what its name represents. Rather than stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, it is designed to steal more money through taxation from working people — money which will end up directly in the hands of institutions like the US Federal Reserve and its cartel of Wall Street banks.

Spike in Foreclosures as Banks Ramp Up Repossessions

Foreclosures spike as banks ramp up repossessions

November 12, 2014

CNBC - More than five years after the foreclosure crisis began, the number of borrowers losing their homes is rising again.

Most of the troubled loans are not new; instead, the backlog of homes in the foreclosure process is finally starting to move more quickly. There was, however, a slight uptick in foreclosures on loans made in 2013 and 2014, a troubling turn.

Foreclosure filings, which include default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions, were reported on 123,109 properties in October, according to RealtyTrac, a foreclosure sales and data company. That is a 15 percent increase from September, and the largest monthly increase since the peak of the crisis in March of 2010. The numbers are still down 8 percent from a year ago.

Foreclosure activity usually spikes in the months before the holiday season, as banks want to get as many done before implementing holiday moratoria. Over the past three years there has been an average 8 percent monthly uptick in foreclosure auctions in October.

Read More Mortgage volume stalls with rates

"But the sheer magnitude of the increase this year demonstrates there is more than just a seasonal pattern at work," said RealtyTrac vice president Daren Blomquist. "Distressed properties that have been in a holding pattern for years are finally being cleared for landing at the foreclosure auction."

Since the crisis began, there has been a distinct difference in foreclosure volumes between states that require a judge in the process and those that do not. Now the difference is fading. Foreclosure auctions in judicial states rose 21 percent month-to-month, while those in non-judicial states rose 27 percent.

"There is still strong demand from the large institutional investors at the foreclosure auction in some markets, but even in markets with decreasing demand at the foreclosure auction, banks can be confident in selling REO [repossessed] properties quickly and at a good price," Blomquist added. "That's because there is still strong demand from buyers, particularly in the lower price ranges, combined with a dearth of distressed homes listed for sale."

Read More Full housing recovery may not happen until 2018: Survey

Strong buyer demand at foreclosure auctions has helped stem the number of properties being repossessed by banks. October, again, was an anomaly, with lenders taking ownership of nearly 28 thousand properties, up 22 percent from September. Still, repossessions were down 26 percent from a year ago.

"We see far more opportunity to buy than we have capital," said Laurie Hawkes, president and COO of American Residential Properties, a Scottsdale, Arizona-based, single-family rental REIT in a September interview. "The fallacy is that the buying is over. It's not."

But it is slowing for large institutional investors, especially as home prices continue to rise. In some markets, however, where home prices have risen most in the recovery, banks would rather repossess the homes because they know they can sell them for a good price. As investors slow their buying, banks are getting more aggressive with long-delinquent borrowers.

Among the nation's top 20 metropolitan housing markets, Miami, Tampa, Baltimore, Riverside-San Bernardino and Chicago had the highest foreclosure rates, according to RealtyTrac. Investors have been moving to these markets from former foreclosure hot spots, like Phoenix and Las Vegas.

Read More Home prices and supply map

Most of the loans going through the foreclosure process now have been delinquent for several years, but a particularly troubling sign was the number of newly started foreclosures in October: 56,452 homes. That is a 12 percent jump from September, though down 4 percent from a year ago.This was the largest monthly increase in foreclosure starts since August 2011.

"Many of the mediation programs, loan modification programs and even short sale programs have run their course. Distressed properties that could not be saved by those programs are being placed back on the foreclosure track," noted Blomquist.

JPMorgan Chase Paid Witness $9 Billion to Keep Her from Talking

Alayne Fleischmann is the central witness in one of the biggest cases of white-collar crime in American history, possessing secrets that JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon late last year paid $9 billion to keep the public from hearing. Back in 2006, as a deal manager at the gigantic bank, Fleischmann first witnessed, then tried to stop, what she describes as "massive criminal securities fraud" in the bank's mortgage operations. Because of a confidentiality agreement, she's kept her mouth shut since then. "My closest family and friends don't know what I've been living with," she says. "Even my brother will only find out for the first time when he sees this interview." Six years after the crisis that cratered the global economy, it's not exactly news that the country's biggest banks stole on a grand scale. That's why the more important part of Fleischmann's story is in the pains Chase and the Justice Department took to silence her. She was blocked at every turn: by asleep-on-the-job regulators like the Securities and Exchange Commission, by a court system that allowed Chase to use its billions to bury her evidence, and, finally, by officials like outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder, the chief architect of the crazily elaborate government policy of surrender, secrecy and cover-up. "Every time I had a chance to talk, something always got in the way," Fleischmann says. This past year she watched as Holder's Justice Department struck a series of historic settlement deals with Chase, Citigroup and Bank of America. The root bargain in these deals was cash for secrecy. The banks paid big fines, without trials or even judges – only secret negotiations that typically ended with the public shown nothing but vague, quasi-official papers called "statements of facts," which were conveniently devoid of anything like actual facts. And now, with Holder about to leave office and his Justice Department reportedly wrapping up its final settlements, the state is effectively putting the finishing touches on what will amount to a sweeping, industry-wide effort to bury the facts of a whole generation of Wall Street corruption.

Rolling Stone: The $9 Billion Witness: Meet JPMorgan Chase’s Worst Nightmare

November 10, 2014

Rolling Stone - Author and journalist Matt Taibbi has returned to writing for Rolling Stone magazine with an article profiling JPMorgan Chase whistleblower Alayne Fleischmann. Taibbi is most acclaimed for his books, Griftopia and more recently, The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap. The ACLU of Illinois is pleased to be welcoming Mr. Taibbi as the guest speaker at the first annual ACLU Lunch on April 17, 2015 in Chicago.

The Rolling Stone article reveals what Taibbi refers to as “one of the biggest cases of white-collar crime in American history.” For years, JPMorgan Chase was engaged in a massive scam reselling bad mortgages as above-subprime securities. Taibbi writes about when Fleischmann first became suspicious of the scam:

A few months into her tenure, Fleischmann would later testify in a DOJ deposition, the bank hired a new manager for diligence, the group in charge of reviewing and clearing loans. Fleischmann quickly ran into a problem with this manager, technically one of her superiors. She says he told her and other employees to stop sending him e-mails. The department, it seemed, was wary of putting anything in writing when it came to its mortgage deals.

“If you sent him an e-mail, he would actually come out and yell at you,” she recalls. “The whole point of having a compliance and diligence group is to have policies that are set out clearly in writing. So to have exactly the opposite of that – that was very worrisome.” One former high-ranking federal prosecutor said that if he were taking a criminal case to trial, the information about this e-mail policy would be crucial. “I would begin and end my opening statement with that,” he says. “It shows these people knew what they were doing and were trying not to get caught.”

Read the entire article.

Federal Contractors Demand Collective Bargaining Rights, Higher Pay and Better Benefits Like Those of Federal Employees

U.S. Capitol workers, others strike for higher pay, union

November 13, 2014

Reuters - Hundreds of striking federal contract workers, including for the first time some from the U.S. Capitol, rallied on Thursday to urge President Barack Obama to boost pay and spur unionization.

About 800 striking workers and supporters, including members of Congress, gathered at the Capitol after a march through Washington streets led by a brass band.

The one-day strike by federal contract workers was the 10th organized by the Good Jobs Nation campaign for better pay and benefits since May 2013.

"For the first time in history, workers are on strike at the United States Capitol," rally organizer Joseph Geervarghese told the cheering crowd.

"They don't let people like us in the White House. So we have to protest the rich from the outside."

About two dozen cafeteria workers from the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center joined striking employees from the Smithsonian museums, the Pentagon and other sites, organizers said.

Marchers carried signs saying "Workers need more than the minimum" and "Working women on strike," and chanted, "Mr. President, finish the job." Some protesters wore bandannas over their faces to protect themselves from possible retribution by employers.

The protesters wanted Obama to order improved pay and benefits for federal contract workers. The president has approved $10.10 an hour for workers on new contracts starting in January and has ordered better compliance on contracts but the demonstrators said that was not enough.

"We want more than minimum wage. Who wants a minimum anything? Do you want a minimum marriage?" Representative Keith Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota, said at the rally. He said 70 members of Congress supported the strike.

The strikers and Good Jobs Nation want a presidential order that would give contract preference to companies that pay at least $15 an hour, provide benefits and allow collective bargaining.

The national minimum wage is $7.25 an hour and Republicans in Congress have blocked Obama's proposal to raise it to $10.10. Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia had minimum pay above the federal level as of Aug. 1, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Voters in Alaska, Arkansas, Nebraska and South Dakota last week approved minimum wage increases, and Illinois voters approved an advisory measure, the Conference said.

Saul Alinsky's 'Rules for Radicals' Tells Unions How to Play Dirty

Obama is a communist who sat under Reverend Wright for 20+ years and was under the teachings of Saul Alinsky. In 1998, Saul Alinsky-trained Barack Obama participated on a panel discussion praising Alinsky alongside Heather Booth, herself a dedicated disciple of Alinsky. Mainstream media uses dishonest Alinsky tactics, such as attempting to keep a person from speaking, or attacking a person’s character, instead of addressing the information he/she presents.

Time and again public officials have described their shock and disbelief at what a union had done to them personally during organizing campaigns or labor disputes. Such activity was entirely predictable because it was almost textbook Alinsky. Their response has generally been that if they had only known what to expect, they could have prepared for it and taken steps to neutralize its worst effects. Alinsky emphatically states that the end justifies the means but cautions that extreme means are only justified in certain situations. He also had a set of rules for what he called power tactics" or the means used to "take." He described it as "how the Have Nots can take power away from the Haves." 

Even a cursory review of Alinsky's “Rules for Radicals” reveals that a union activist schooled in them will have no compunction about using almost any tactic in a conflict. In fact, radicals must often create issues to stir up problems in order to radicalize their potential followers. The tactic that seems to shock the most is the personalization of the attack -- union leaders use the "pick it, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it" tactic no matter how distasteful this might be -- Alinsky says that even if the decision is 48% to 52%, once it is made the opposition becomes "100 percent devil." Even if opponents are not willing to respond in kind to this sort of tactic, a great deal can be accomplished, before a conflict, by warning audiences what will happen.

Saul Alinsky, the radical leftist who trained so many union organizers, told his students that they must "make the enemy live up to their own book of rules." This tactic gives the unions a big advantage.Organizers seek out, not avoid, controversy, resorting to lies if necessary. In outlining the principles of community organizing in his book “Rules for Radicals,” Alinsky wrote that an organizer “must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act.” Alinsky said an organizer acts with the “conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” It’s not enough to demonize the opposition: you must also convince us – and perhaps yourself – that heaven is on your side.

The collective bargaining laws have given enormous political power to the public sector unions. No matter what the real intent of these laws, by any objective standard they are not in the public interest. They represent an expression of the selfish self-interest of public sector union organizers and, indirectly, the interest of the politicians who enact them in order to curry favor with the union's political operatives. The existence of public sector collective bargaining makes public employees 'super citizens' and relegates the rest of the public to second class status. Rising public discontent has focused on the public employee, while public employees increasingly take a hostile attitude toward the public. Why is no one pointing out that unions are supposed to be for the people against the corporation, not for the people against the people? - Beyond Public Sector Unionism: A Better Way, Public Service Research Foundation

Related: 

Collective Bargaining Gives Enormous Political Power to Public Sector Unions

Voting Fraud Uncovered in Frederick County Maryland Plus Undercover Video Shows How Easy It Is to Commit Voting Fraud in North Carolina

The crucial swing states for deciding the US presidential elections through voting system fraud were Ohio and Florida. Whether by machine software with rigged software programming or by bussing in Somalians or by altering the vote count upon final submission or basic bully tactics to prevent entrance into the voting centers, the US national elections were truly tainted. The commonly followed Exit Polls are proof of vote fraud. The Paradigm Shift was to the fascist state in full blossom. A law was even passed to prevent challenges of the voting machines and software, a certain brand always in the spotlight. Recall that voter system fraud is a key trait of a Third World nation, along with bank fraud, absent rule of law, economic decay, and devotion to war. On the global stage, the swing states are of a different more macro meaning in the shaping of the Paradigm Shift. The shift is toward the East as financial center of gravity, altered by the extraordinary movement of Gold bullion from London and Swiss banking centers. [Source]

Massive Non-Citizen Voting Uncovered in Maryland

October 29, 2014

PJ Media - An election integrity watchdog group is suing the state of Maryland, alleging that it has discovered massive and ongoing fraudulent voting by non-U.S. citizens in one county. But because of the way that the non-citizens are able to cast votes in elections, the fraud is likely happening in every single county and subdivision across the state. The group believes that the illegal voting has been happening for years.

The group, Virginia Voters Alliance, says that it compared how voters in Frederick County filled out jury duty statements compared with their voting records. The group’s investigation found that thousands of people in Frederick County who stated that they are not U.S. citizens on jury duty forms went on to cast votes in elections. Either they failed to tell the truth when they were summoned for jury duty, or they cast illegal votes. Both are crimes.  

The same group previously found that about 40,000 people are registered to vote in both Virginia and Maryland.

It is a federal crime to cast votes if you are not legally eligible to vote. Non-citizens, whether in the country legally or not, are prohibited from voting in most local and all state and federal elections. Yet the VVA investigation found that hundreds of non-citizens have been voting in Frederick County, Maryland. One in seven Maryland residents are non-U.S. citizens.

“The lawsuit is the equivalent of the lookout spotting the iceberg ahead of the Titanic,” state Del. Pat McDonough told the Tatler. He added that the group’s investigation found a voter fraud “smoking gun.”

Maryland state law makes it easier for non-citizens, both those present legally and those in the country against the law, to vote. Maryland issues drivers licenses to legal and illegal aliens. Driver’s licenses in turn make it easier under the Motor Voter law to register to vote. Maryland also offers copious taxpayer-funded social programs to non-citizens in the state.

The group filed suit in Baltimore’s U.S. District Court on Friday. They are suing the Frederick County Board of Elections and the Maryland State Board of Elections.

Del. Pat McDonough (R-Baltimore and Harford Counties) detailed the alleged fraud in a Maryland press conference today. He is calling for a special state prosecutor because the fraud may be taking place statewide, with significant impact on Maryland elections. Maryland currently holds 10 electoral votes in presidential elections. McDonough is also proposing legislation including voter ID to close the loopholes that he says non-citizens are using to cast votes.

In a statement, Del. McDonough says:

There are frequent allegations in America and Maryland about the existence of voter fraud. In the case I am presenting today, there is documentation and a track record. The numbers and facts from the records in Frederick County are the tip of the iceberg. When these numbers are multiplied by including the other subdivisions in Maryland, the potential number is alarming and could change the outcome of a close statewide election.

Even more dangerous is the probability of many local elections that are decided by a few votes could be affected. All 188 members of the Maryland General Assembly are standing for re-election as well as many local office holders.

The important election that we have coming up demands that citizens’ votes are not diluted or cancelled by non-citizens who are not legally permitted to vote. The sanctity of the ballot box, because of the flawed system we are pointing out, has already been violated in previous elections.

The purpose of the lawsuit is to mandate those responsible for the administration of the election process will remove the non-citizens from the final voting count.

The purpose of the investigation by the special prosecutor is to penetrate more deeply statewide and determine why this fraud or any other related violation was allowed to occur.

The purpose of the legislation is to plug the massive loophole in current law which permitted these fraudulent practices to take place.

Maryland is a Democratic stronghold especially around its larger cities, but the governor’s race there is tightening as Republican Larry Hogan gains ground. Illegal votes could tip the balance if the legal vote is close enough on election day. 

“What if Hogan loses by 500 votes or 1000 votes?” McDonough asked.

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley is expected to run for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016. Del. McDonough noted that the fraud uncovered by VVA occurred on O’Malley’s watch.

2014 Election Results: Democrat Voter Fraud Caught in Arizona, Maryland, And Illinois?

October 30, 2014

Inquisitr - Early voting has begun for midterm 2014 elections, and reports of Democrat voter fraud have come in from Arizona, Maryland and Illinois. The Arizona incident featured a liberal activist caught on video stuffing hundreds of ballots into a ballot box. In Maryland and Illinois, voting machines were switching votes from Republican to Democrat, raising suspicions of fraud being the root of the so-called malfunction.

In a related report by The Inquisitr, Greenpeace terminated the contract of a Colorado-based worker who was caught on video seemingly condoning fraud in the state’s new vote-by-mail process. The undercover video was taken by James O’Keefe of Project Veritas. O’Keefe also recorded a worker for another liberal group on the video seems to encourage O’Keefe to commit fraud with unused ballots (using words like “cool” and “awesome”), while an operative from a different group apparently suggests that voting in two states might be worth a try.

The November 4 election day is quickly rounding the corner, and there has already been a number of reports of voter fraud taking place that may affect the 2014 election results. In Arizona, a liberal activist was caught on video stuffing hundreds of ballots into the ballot and was then seen hiding an unsealed ballot in his shorts before he left the building, according to Maricopa County Republican Party Chairman A.J. LaFaro.



The video shows an unidentified man wearing a “Citizens for a Better Arizona” t-shirt, a left-wing activist group, entering the building while voting attendants were at lunch and begins stuffing the ballot box. The video only surfaced because A.J. LaFaro happened to be sitting in a cubicle across from the ballot box. When the man spotted LaFaro watching, he became hostile, reported the Arizona Daily Independent.

When A.J. LaFaro pointed out there was unsealed ballot, the man responded, “It’s none of your business. What’s your name?” LaFaro said that after he explained who he was, the man vulgarly replied, “Go f**k yourself!”

LaFaro recounts the man then slipped behind the table to move out of view of the camera to hide the unsealed ballot in his shorts. Then, as seen on the video, the man exited the building to only return a short time later to enter another ballot. LaFaro believes that last ballot was the same one he snuck out of the building with.

A.J. LaFaro supported a voting law regarding activists groups within the last year. The law was passed then turned over by opposing Democrats. LaFaro thinks it should be illegal for groups to collect ballots.

“I believe it’s inconceivable, unacceptable and should be illegal for groups to collect hundreds, if not thousands of voter’s ballots and return them to the elections offices or polling locations. And let’s not forget the ‘ballot parties’ that occur where people gather en masse and give their unvoted ballots to operatives of organizations like Citizens for a Better Arizona so they can not only collect them but vote them illegally. America used to be a nation of laws where one person had one vote. I’m sad to say not anymore.”

In Maryland and Illinois, voting machines have been the culprits of switching the 2014 election results. A number of voting machines were dubiously switching votes cast for Republican candidates to the Democratic opponents, reported Newsmax.

Both Maryland and Illinois election officials claimed it as a “calibration error”, but technology experts are leery of their response.

Early Maryland voters in multiple locations were casting their votes for the midterm 2014 election, but when they pressed the touch screen in favor of Republican candidates, the vote appeared in the Democratic candidates box. A voter from Frederick explained his experience.

“When I first selected my candidate on the electronic machine, it would not put the ‘x’ on the candidate I chose — a Republican — but it would put the ‘x’ on the Democrat candidate above it. This happened multiple times with multiple selections. Every time my choice flipped from Republican to Democrat.”

Last week, reports Newsmax, this was also happening in Illinois when early voting began.

GOP state House candidate Jim Moynihan experience the problem first hand.

“I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast a vote for my opponent. You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.”

In both states, election officials described the problem as “calibration error.” But a software developer and expert on touch screens used by U.S. intelligence agencies told Newsmax that the explanation was bogus.

“It’s a software issue, and it’s incredibly suspicious that a bug like that could slip through accidentally. It defies belief,” said Tony Heller, an expert on this type of technology. 

Heller said any expert in the technology could figure out within minutes whether the problem whether accidental or deliberate.

The topic of voter fraud has become a hot topic, each party taking opposing sides. And another report by The Inquisitr finds that illegal voting could make the difference in the 2014 election results, determining whether a candidate wins or loses. Shouldn’t more voters be concerned?

China to Use Lasers to Combat Terrorist Drone Attacks During "Major Events in Urban Areas"

Why China is using lasers to take down drones

November 4, 2014

CS Monitor - China has developed and successfully tested technology to shoot down drones with lasers, according to state media.

The "homemade laser defense system" specifically targets small-scale drones flying at a low altitude – the likely choice of terrorists, the official Xinhua news agency reported.

The mechanism can also take down various other small aircraft within a two-kilometer radius within five seconds of locating its target, the China Academy of Engineering Physics, one of the system's co-developers, claimed in a statement Sunday.

"Characterized by its speed, precision and low noise, the system is designed to destroy unmanned, small-scale drones flying within an altitude of 500 m and at a speed below 50 m/s," Xinhua said, citing the statement.

"Intercepting such drones is usually the work of snipers and helicopters, but their success rate is not as high and mistakes with accuracy can result in unwanted damage," said Yi Jinsong, a manager with China Jiuyuan Hi-Tech Equipment Corp., a group under the academy spearheading the project, according to the report.

Yi said these cheap and easy-to-use drones are feasible weapons for terrorists.

Further, drones engaged in unlicensed mapping activities have officials worrying about the effect on military and civil aerial activities.

The new laser system will be installed or transported in vehicles, and "is expected to play a key role in ensuring security during major events in urban areas," the CAEP statement said. It reported the machine had a 100 percent success rate, shooting down more than 30 drones in a recent test.

Xinhua said the academy revealed that it was working on similar laser security systems with greater power and range.

"China typically deploys tight security for domestic political meetings, international conferences and sports events, looking to prevent public protests over issues such as illegal land seizures and corruption as well as any threats to the participants," the Guardian noted.

The US military successfully tracked and brought down a surveillance drone using a similar device in 2012, and laser-based weapons have become a standard line of defense against drones since, the Verge pointed out.

"By training a high-energy beam on the craft for long enough, the weapons are able to burn through the crafts in mid-air, and they are small enough to mount on a truck. The attack requires sustained contact with the target, making it ideal for less maneuverable aircraft like the predator drone, although similar attacks have also been proposed for destroying missiles before they reach their intended target."

Last year, the US Army successfully tested a truck-mounted laser to stop mortars and drones, destroying targets in low-level midair explosions, preventing them from exploding on the ground.

After the weapon stopped a barrage of 90 incoming mortars and several drones in mid-flight, defense officials at the Army Space and Missile Defense Command hailed it as a “big step in the development of targeted, high-energy laser beams that might also one day be used to defend US airspace against, for example, fighter-jet or cruise-missile attacks," the Monitor reported.

Russia's Putin Says the U.S. is to Blame for Constantly Erupting Chaos Around the World, Which Will Lead to World War 3

World War Three has been predicted to happen for over a century. Conspiracy theorists have predicted a surprisingly detailed and shockingly accurate timeline of events. Are we finally entering the Third World War?

on.aol.com

World War 3? Nuclear Russia on inevitable war, Putin calls US late on terrorism

November 3, 2014

Examiner - Vladimir Putin, the leader of Russia, has been vocal this week in a new speech stating that the US is to blame for the chaos currently erupting across the world, and that global war is “inevitable” as a result. The Inquisitr also reports this Sunday, November 2, 2014, that Putin is saying it is not a nuclear Russia that Americans should be fearing, but Islamic radicals — and that the US is late on waking up to international terrorism.

 In a proclamation that some are calling a precursor to World War 3 and Vladimir Putin’s most direct statement ever toward the West, Russia is clearly ready to stop the alleged “games” with the US nation. While speaking publicly at the Valdai Conference earlier this week in Sochi, Putin touched upon a variety of matters, most of which argue that American imperialism is to blame for current strife.

“Russia will no longer play games with the United States and engage in back-room negotiations. Russia is prepared for serious agreements, but only if these agreements are conducive to collective security … Russia has no intention of building an empire of their own, but will not go fishing in the murky waters created by America’s ever-expanding “empire of chaos," said Putin.

Putin went on to say that although a nuclear Russia has no personal aims to establish a powerful empire, they will not allow themselves to be dominated by the US, either. Perhaps one of the harshest claims Putin makes is that he believes another global war — World War 3 — will be nearly “inevitable” in the future. The leader asserts that Russia will be ready if and when that momentous time comes.

“Russia does not wish for the chaos to spread, does not want war, and has no intention of starting one. However, today Russia sees the outbreak of global war as almost inevitable, is prepared for it, and is continuing to prepare for it. Russia does not war, nor does she fear it… But those who manage to drag Russia into this process, through disregard for her interests, will be taught the true meaning of pain."

As posted by Common Sense News this week, Vladimir Putin is beginning to lose some support in Russia, as some view the political figure as prompting a “war party” leading to a possible World War 3 among the people. Yet while some activists see Putin and the nuclear powers of Russia as a greater threat than the extremists within the Islamic state, the foreign leader obviously thinks otherwise. He states that the true threats are these radicals, and that the US is heavily at fault for taking steps following the Cold War that “threw the system into sharp and deep imbalance.”

“A unilateral diktat and imposing one’s own models produces the opposite result. Instead of settling conflicts it leads to their escalation, instead of sovereign and stable states we see the growing spread of chaos, and instead of democracy there is support for a very dubious public ranging from open neo-fascists to Islamic radicals.”

The Russian leader also called the US nation and its government out for not waking up to the issues of terrorism, particularly that of the Taliban and al Qaeda, until the day 9/11 devastated America. Vladimir Putin noted that it wasn’t until America was hit home did it finally take a stance against this looming threat. He finally alleged that these terrorist organizations have been indirectly “sponsored” by America, encouraging these radical movements to turn their weapons toward the Soviet Union instead.

“Only after horrific terrorist attacks were committed on US soil itself did the United States wake up to the common threat of terrorism. Let me remind you that we were the first country to support the American people back then, the first to react as friends and partners to the terrible tragedy of September 11. During my conversations with American and European leaders, I always spoke of the need to fight terrorism together, as a challenge on a global scale. We cannot resign ourselves to and accept this threat, cannot cut it into separate pieces using double standards.”

A final fear surrounding World War 3 and its prospect this week was Vladimir Putin nearly launching a “secret” attack against Denmark this summer 2014. The Epoch Times shares this week that a “nuclear” prepared Russia invaded Bornholm, a Danish island, several months ago while it was hosting an annual conference with numerous political officials and reporters.

According to the Danish Defense Intelligence Service, military jets from Russia were flying low and heading toward the Bornholm gathering when they suddenly turned around and presumably returned. The press release affirmed that few details about the near-attack were released, but nonetheless called the incident the biggest military exercise that Russia has conducted over Baltic territory in over 20 years. A risk assessment analysis has also determined that tensions between the US and Russia will continue to escalate in the coming years, bringing conflict — and a potential World War 3 — to a head.

“Over the next few years, the situation in eastern Ukraine will highly likely turn into a new frozen European conflict, and the Ukraine crisis will continue to strain relations between Russia and the West … Russia has demonstrated willingness to use military force to prevent non-NATO states in the post-Soviet space from forming close ties with the West ... Russia will not risk an open military confrontation with NATO, but there is a risk that the Soviet nation might initiate intimidating military pressure on especially the Baltic countries, for instance in connection with a major international crisis with the West.”

Do you believe World War 3 may be on the horizon, or are Vladimir Putin’s speeches and statements merely empty words? The Russian leader also sparked significant debate back in October after subtly threatening both Europe and the US with its military might, remarking that the country has nuclear powers — over 5,000 weapons — and the capabilities to use them effectually.

“We hope that our partners will realize the recklessness of attempts to blackmail Russia, and will remember the risks that a spat between major nuclear powers means for strategic stability,” concluded Putin in a statement to a Serbian media outlet.

Nearly 60,000 Veterans Were Triple Dippers in 2013, Drawing a Total of $3.5 Billion in Military Retirement Pay Plus Veterans and Social Security Disability Benefits

Report says 60,000 veterans get triple benefits

November 1, 2014

AP - Nearly 60,000 veterans were triple dippers last year, drawing a total of $3.5 billion in military retirement pay plus veterans and Social Security disability benefits at the same time, congressional auditors report.

The average payment was about $59,000, but about 2,300 veterans, or 4 percent of the total, received concurrent payments of $100,000 or more, the Government Accountability Office said. The highest payment was to a veteran who received $208,757 in combined payments in 2013.

Some lawmakers say the report shows the need for better coordination among government programs that are facing severe financial constraints. The Social Security Disability Insurance trust fund could run out of money in as soon as two years, government officials say.

"We should fulfill our promises to the men and women who serve, but we need to streamline these duplicative programs," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who requested the study.

Veterans groups disagree. They say the retirement money was earned for years of service in the military, while disability payments are compensation for service-related injuries and wounds.

In most cases, veterans who receive a combination of benefits are severely disabled. About 4 in 5 veterans who got triple payments had a disability rating of at least 50 percent, the GAO said. Nearly half of those receiving triple payments were at least 60 years old.

Louis Celli Jr., a Washington representative for the American Legion, said critics of the multiple benefits are "misguided and uninformed." He said the report "should simply be filed in the category of one of Sen. Coburn's parting shots to loyal upstanding American patriots who have sacrificed so much for this country."

Coburn, a longtime critic of government spending, is retiring at the end of the year. He said in an interview that the report raises legitimate questions about whether disability benefits are getting to those who truly need them.

"This is billions of dollars a year in duplicative payments," Coburn said. "We ought to reassess and say, 'Are we doing more than take care of people in need?' I'm not against the military. I don't think they should be triple dipping."

Most Americans would find it hard to understand how someone making $86,000 a year in tax-exempt VA income qualifies for Social Security Disability Insurance, when civilian workers are disqualified from the program if they make as little as $13,000 a year, Coburn said.

Only 17 percent of those who received multiple forms of compensation had suffered a combat-related disability, according to the GAO.

Veterans have long been exempted from rules that deny Social Security benefits to anyone with other income exceeding $13,000 a year.

But until the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, veterans were barred from receiving both military retirement pay and Department of Veterans Affairs' disability benefits. Under a Civil War-era statute, the Pentagon docked retirement pay dollar-for-dollar up to the amount of disability benefits from the VA.

With bipartisan support, Congress changed that law in 2002, gradually restoring military retirement pay to veterans also drawing disability benefits from the VA.

"Our nation's status as the world's only superpower is largely due to the sacrifices our veterans made in the last century," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in March 2002 when the bill was being debated.

"Rather than honoring their commitment and bravery by fulfilling our obligations, the federal government has chosen to perpetuate this longstanding injustice," Reid said. "Quite simply, this is disgraceful and we must correct it."

At the time, then-Sen. John Warner, R-Va., a former Navy secretary, posed a question to fellow senators:

"How can we ask the men and women who have so faithfully served to sacrifice a portion of their retirement because they are also receiving compensation for an injury suffered while serving their country?"

Warner acknowledged that the change would have "significant cost," but added;

"Is the cost too high? I think not."

About 3 percent of the nation's 1.9 million military retirees collect all three benefits, the GAO said.

The report did not recommend changes to the program. The VA said in a response that it "generally agrees" with the report's conclusions. Social Security officials did not comment.