Stanley Meyer and many others. Always the same story. The Pentagon wants to see your idea and tell you how they would like to use your invention. You demonstrate your device
proving to them that it works, then they block all of your efforts and end up killing you. The only way to get a free energy device out to the public is to foget about patents,
distribute underground, sell it to EV enthusiests with the plans and encourage them to travel around and do as you are, you then have created a non interlinked underground
distribution system that will spread to the general populous and it will spread like wild fire, it will be un-stoppable.
This information comes from a reader of thetruthnew.info Writings and Rants, thetruthnews is in no way affiliated or profiting from Magniwork I just find this very interesting
and would like to share it with you. I have no idea if this system works and have not completely checked it out yet, use your own discretion.
Magniwork A Long Kept Secret For Generating Free Electricity is Finally On The Open, And You'll Never Have To Pay A Single Dime to the Power Company
"Building 7 Reporter Byron Pitts "Number of things don't add up."
Not Your Father's Army By Chuck Baldwin
February 5, 2010
Most of us Americans have a deep and abiding respect and admiration for our
country's fighting men who have served--and are serving--within the US Armed
Forces. We appreciate their willingness to put themselves in harm's way for
the preservation of our nation's liberty and independence. We honor their
sacrifice. Indeed, many of us share that sacrifice with the deaths,
dismemberments, and paralysis of our most cherished loved ones who were
killed or injured in the line of duty.
It is time, however, that we awaken to the reality of what our military is
becoming and where it is heading. Suffice it to say, this is not your
On December 8, 1941, my father, Ed Baldwin--along with his two brothers, Bud
and Gene--marched down to a recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas, to
enlist. The Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor the day before, and no branch
of service had to beg people to enlist that day. Bud joined the Navy. Gene
joined the Marines. When government officials saw Dad's resumé, they
selected him to help construct the atomic bomb. All three brothers served
their country with distinction throughout the war.
But what all of us need to realize is, World War II was the last
constitutionally fought war in which America has been engaged. The United
Nations was created at the end of WWII, and ever since then, our military
forces have increasingly become the "peacekeeping" arm of that evil
Since WWII, American forces have fought major wars in South Korea, South
Vietnam (including Laos and Cambodia), Kosovo, the Persian Gulf (Kuwait),
Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan--all for the benefit of the United
Nations. Add to these major wars lesser conflicts (except to those Americans
killed or wounded in them) such as Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Congo
(Zaire), Iran, El Salvador, Libya, Grenada, Honduras, Chad, Panama,
Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Macedonia, Bosnia, Sierra Leone,
Kenya, Tanzania, and Somalia. And this does not take into account the
countless CIA-sponsored Black Ops missions that have taken place all over
Yes, American forces have been used to both put people in power and take
people out of power all over the world. And as often as not, the people we
put in power were counted among the "bad guys," while the people we removed
from power were "good guys." Remember, our own CIA was the organization most
responsible for the rise to power of Osama Bin Laden. And it was the US
government that surreptitiously set up the murder of Dr. Jonas Savimbi, who
was one of the best friends the United States had overseas. Plus, does
anyone remember how the US treated our friend, the Shah of Iran? Yes, some
of us are old enough to remember when Iran was one of the best friends we
had in that region of the world.
But mind you, not one single war in which American forces have been engaged
since WWII has been constitutionally fought. Not one!
Ever since the United Nations was created, its interests have dominated the
usage of US forces. In fact, our military today is quickly morphing into the
tip of the spear for a burgeoning, global New World Order. To those with
eyes to see, the evidence is everywhere. It's not even being hidden anymore.
Have you seen that new US Navy television commercial? It boldly proclaims,
"The US Navy: A GLOBAL FORCE For Good." (Emphasis added.)
This politically correct, UN-dominated New World Order has changed (and is
changing) our US military right before our eyes. It has taken the greatest
and proudest independent fighting force in the world--one created to defend
the people and property of the United States--and turned it into a global
military policeman for the evil Machiavellians at the UN.
In order to convert the US military into a true "Global Force," several
changes are being forced upon our fighting men.
First, more and more women are entering the US military.
Currently, women comprise about 20% of military personnel. And for the first
time in US history, women are actively engaged in combat units in the
current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The massive integration of women in
combat may serve the interests of political correctness, but it does not
serve the interests of combat effectiveness. Neither does it serve the
interests of family and child rearing. And I don't care how old fashioned
Wives and mothers are the backbone of family nurturing. To willingly take
mothers away from their children--and subject both mother and child to the
separation and suffering that military life demands--is both unnatural and
And there is another stark reality that few people want to discuss: the fact
that 30% of all women in the US military are raped. Yes, you read it right:
According to NPR, "In 2003, a survey of female veterans found that 30
percent said they were raped in the military. A 2004 study of veterans who
were seeking help for post-traumatic stress disorder found that 71 percent
of the women said they were sexually assaulted or raped while serving. And a
1995 study of female veterans of the Gulf and earlier wars, found that 90
percent had been sexually harassed."
Government and military brass know that the introduction of women into the
military environment (especially the combat environment) is reaping problems
of epidemic proportions, but they are deliberately ignoring and even
covering them up.
For example, does anyone recall the name Jamie Leigh Jones? According to ABC
News, "A Houston, Texas woman says she was gang-raped by Halliburton/KBR
coworkers in Baghdad, and the company and the U.S. government are covering
up the incident.
"Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at
a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping
container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical
treatment, she'd be out of a job."
And this story leads into another phenomenon being created within this New
World Order army: the way our government and military are increasing their
use of "private" or "independent" contractors. In the past, these
were always known simply as mercenaries. Call them what you will,
mercenaries are now a major component of the way our government wages war.
According to Global Research, "The growing use of private armies not only
subjects target populations to savage warfare but makes it easier for the
White House to subvert domestic public opinion and wage wars.
"Americans are less inclined to oppose a war that is being fought by hired
foreign mercenaries, even when their own tax dollars are being squandered to
"'The increasing use of contractors, private forces, or, as some would say,
"mercenaries," makes wars easier to begin and to fight--it just takes money
and not the citizenry,' said Michael Ratner, of New York's Center for
Constitutional Rights. 'To the extent a population is called upon to go to
war, there is resistance, a necessary resistance to prevent wars of
self-aggrandizement, foolish wars, and, in the case of the United States,
hegemonic imperialist wars.'"
Remember, at any given moment, there might be as many--if not
more--mercenaries fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan as there are US military
forces. For example, according to the Christian Science Monitor, in early
2008, the number of mercenaries fighting in Iraq numbered more than 190,000.
Remember, in addition to the benefit of not drafting US citizens to fight
these perpetual wars (and thus avoid incurring the wrath and resistance of
the American public), mercenaries enjoy the luxury of not having to comply
with the military rules of engagement. And the stories of atrocities
committed by US-employed mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan are too
numerous to list.
In addition to the Jamie Jones case mentioned above, consider the case where
Blackwater (now called Xe) mercenaries mowed down 17 Iraqi citizens in an
unprovoked attack. And, of course, no one at Blackwater was held accountable
for these murders. Reports of abuse, cruelty, and savagery by mercenaries in
Iraq are commonplace. According to the Global Research report, "Many
soldiers of fortune on private payrolls previously served dictators in South
Africa, Chile, and elsewhere."
The Washington Post quotes Brigadier General Karl Horst, an advisor to the
U.S. Joint Force Command as saying, "These guys [mercenaries] run loose in
this country [Iraq] and do stupid stuff. There's no authority over them, so
you can't come down on them hard when they escalate force . . . They shoot
people, and someone else has to deal with the aftermath. It happens all over
And you wonder why the United States is viewed so negatively around the
Granted, there is a place and proper use for mercenaries. Fred E. Foldvary,
Senior Editor of The Progress Report, rightly observes, "One alternative to
U.S. military action against terrorists who have attacked the U.S. and other
countries, and are threatening further attacks, is to enact Letters of
Marque and Reprisal. Article I, Section 8, paragraph 11 of the U.S.
Constitution authorizes Congress to 'grant letters of Marque and Reprisal
and make rules concerning captures on land and water.' A 'reprisal' means an
action taken in return for some injury. A reprisal could be a seizing of
property or guilty persons in retaliation for an attack and injury. It could
include forces used against the perpetrators for the redress of grievances.
A reprisal could even involve killing a terrorist who is threatening further
harm and cannot be captured.
"'Marque' is related to 'marching' and means crossing or marching across a
border in order to do a reprisal. So a letter of Marque and Reprisal would
authorize a private person, not in the U.S. armed forces, to conduct
reprisal operations outside the borders of the U.S.A.
"Such Letters are grantable not just by the U.S. Constitution, but also by
international law, which is why it was able to be included in the
Constitution. The Letters are grantable whenever the citizens or subjects of
one country are injured by those in another country and justice is denied by
the government of that country, as happened with the attack by persons who
were in Afghanistan."
And that is exactly what Congressman Ron Paul attempted to do. He proposed
H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001, to authorize
the U.S. State Department to issue such Letters. See Dr. Paul's Press
However, neither the Congress nor the White House--Democrat or
Republican--has any intention of following the Constitution; therefore,
Letters of Marque and Reprisal were never authorized. As a result, no
authority has been granted to these mercenaries to wage war on behalf of
anyone, especially not the people of the United States.
But what unauthorized mercenaries do accomplish is to fulfill the demands of
internationalists and globalists to use unaccountable and uncontrolled (at
least by normal military protocols) private armies for their own personal
and nefarious purposes.
The next step for our politically correct "Global Force" is the
authorization for homosexuals to serve openly in the US military. This has
long been the goal of globalists, and it is now about to happen.
It was globalist President Bill Clinton who introduced the current "Don't
Ask, Don't Tell" policy that allows homosexuals to serve in the US armed
forces--but not openly. Of course, this was a major departure from US
military history. From George Washington's Continental army until the
Clinton administration, homosexuality was deemed "incompatible" with
military service. And now globalist Barack Obama is leading Congress to
change the policy even further by allowing homosexuals to serve openly in
the US military.
However, please consider this: if our governmental and military leaders
would cover up the raping of American servicewomen by servicemen, don't you
know that they will cover up the raping of American servicemen by homosexual
servicemen? Mark this down: mixing sex (heterosexual or homosexual) and
military service is a recipe for disaster. And the potential damage
inflicted upon military units (especially combat units) is exacerbated
exponentially by the introduction of large numbers of homosexuals and women
into those units. (This is the universal sentiment of virtually every active
duty or retired serviceman I have ever spoken with.) But it does fit
perfectly into the plans of the New World Order architects, who want to use
the US military as much for the advancement of their politically correct
agenda as they do for any actual military purpose.
Plus, dare I mention how that many violent gangs in North America are
encouraging their members to join the US military in order to learn tactics
and skills, which enable them to more effectively inflict their criminality
upon the American people? Well, it's true. And our military brass knows it's
true, and yet they still allow these thugs to enter our military. Hispanic
gang members, especially, are entering the US military in droves.
According to a report in The American Conservative magazine, "[R]ecent
figures indicate that gang membership in the Armed Forces significantly
surpasses civilian levels. Stars and Stripes reported that 1 to 2 percent of
the military are gang members, compared to 0.02 percent of the general
No, ladies and gentlemen, it is not your father's army. And, sadly, while
many of our fine military leaders (not to mention many of our active duty
soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines) see all of this taking place, they
are practically powerless to stop it, because political correctness and
globalism run rampant in Washington, D.C., including at the Pentagon.
This is the movie that Pepsi and Coca Cola don't want you to see.
Seed shortages could imperil home gardens Gardeners may have hard time finding seeds for cucumbers, carrots, onions
DES MOINES, Iowa - Dreaming of biting into a garden-fresh cucumber sandwich this summer? Better order your seeds now.
A poor growing season last year and increased orders from Europe could make it difficult for home gardeners to get seeds for the most popular cucumber variety and some
vegetables this spring. Farmers, who usually grow different varieties than home gardeners, aren't likely to be affected.
Seeds for what's known as open-pollinated cucumbers seem to be most scarce, but carrots, snap peas and onions also could be in short supply.
Read more here
Last year, Judicial Watch made big news by exposing Nancy Pelosi’s boorish demands for military travel. According to the internal DOD correspondence we
uncovered the Speaker has been treating the U.S. Air Force as her own personal airline. And not only was her staff demanding, arrogant and rude, but the Speaker cost taxpayers a
lot of money by making last minute cancellations and changes to the itinerary.
This week, Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Air Force that shed a bit more light on this ugly story.
According to the documents, which we obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Speaker’s military travel cost the Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a
two-year period — $101,429.14 for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol. (Lots and lots of alcohol.) The following are highlights from the recent release of about
2,000 documents, which you can read here:
Speaker Pelosi used Air Force aircraft to travel back to her district at an average cost of $28,210.51 per flight. The average cost of an international congressional
delegation (CODEL) is $228,563.33. Of the 103 Pelosi-led CODELs, 31 trips included members of the House Speaker’s family.
One CODEL traveling from Washington, D.C. through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq from May 15-20, 2008, “to discuss matters of mutual concern with government
leaders” included members of Congress and their spouses and cost $17,931 per hour in aircraft alone. Purchases for the CODEL included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose
vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch,
Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine.
According to a “Memo for Record” from a CODEL March 29 – April 7, 2007, that involved a stop in Israel, “CODEL could only bring Kosher items into the
Hotel. Kosher alcohol for mixing beverages in the Delegation room was purchased on the local economy i.e. Bourbon, Whiskey, Scotch, Vodka, Gin, Triple Sec, Tequila,
The Department of Defense advanced a CODEL of 56 members of Congress and staff $60,000 to travel to Louisiana and Mississippi July 19-22, 2008, to “view flood relief
advances from Hurricane Katrina.” The three-day trip cost the U.S. Air Force $65,505.46, exceeding authorized funding by $5,505.46.
If you have a moment, take a look at the documents for yourself. And pay special attention to the receipts, noting the large quantities of food and alcohol purchased at
taxpayer expense. Doesn’t it seem as if the Speaker’s congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else? It certainly seems that way to me.
At the heart of the issue of corruption, is a sense of entitlement on the part of our elected officials. Nancy Pelosi clearly believes she deserves special treatment at
taxpayer expense. This message comes across loud and clear in the disrespect she has demonstrated towards the U.S. Air Force and the American taxpayer.
Carbon Currency: A New Beginning for Technocracy? Link
By Patrick Wood
January 26, 2010
Critics who think that the U.S. dollar will be replaced by some new global currency are
perhaps thinking too small.
On the world horizon looms a new global currency that could replace all paper currencies and the economic system upon which they
The new currency, simply called Carbon Currency, is designed to support a revolutionary
new economic system based on energy (production, and consumption), instead of
price. Our current price-based economic system and its related currencies that
have supported capitalism, socialism, fascism and communism, is being herded to
the slaughterhouse in order to make way for a new carbon-based world.
It is plainly evident that the world is laboring under a dying system of price-based
economics as evidenced by the rapid decline of paper currencies. The era of
fiat (irredeemable paper currency) was introduced in 1971 when President Richard
Nixon decoupled the U.S. dollar from gold. Because the dollar-turned-fiat was
the world’s primary reserve asset, all other currencies eventually followed
suit, leaving us today with a global sea of paper that is increasingly
undesired, unstable, unusable.
The deathly economic state of today’s world is a direct reflection of the sum of
its sick and dying currencies, but this could soon change.
Forces are already at work to position a new Carbon
Currency as the ultimate solution to global calls for poverty reduction,
population control, environmental control, global warming, energy allocation
and blanket distribution of economic wealth.
Unfortunately for individual people living in this new system, it will also require
authoritarian and centralized control over all aspects of life, from cradle to
What is Carbon Currency and how does it work? In a nutshell, Carbon Currency will be
based on the regular allocation of available energy to the people of the world.
If not used within a period of time, the Currency will expire (like monthly
minutes on your cell phone plan) so that the same people can receive a new
allocation based on new energy production quotas for the next period.
Because the energy supply chain is already dominated by the global elite, setting
energy production quotas will limit the amount of Carbon Currency in
circulation at any one time. It will also naturally limit manufacturing, food
production and people movement.
Local currencies could remain in play for a time, but they would eventually wither
and be fully replaced by the Carbon Currency, much the same way that the Euro
displaced individual European currencies over a period of time.
Sounds very modern in concept, doesn’t it? In fact, these ideas date back to the
1930’s when hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens were embracing a new
political ideology called Technocracy and the promise it held for a better
life. Even now-classic literature was heavily influenced by Technocracy: George
Orwell’s 1984, H.G. Well’s The Shape of Things to Come and Huxley’s
“scientific dictatorship” in Brave New
This paper investigates the rebirth of Technocracy and its potential to recast the New
World Order into something truly “new” and also totally unexpected by the vast
majority of modern critics.
Philosophically, Technocracy found it roots in the scientific autocracy of Henri de Saint-Simon
(1760-1825) and in the positivism of Auguste Comte (1798- 1857), the father of
the social sciences. Positivism elevated science and the scientific method
above metaphysical revelation. Technocrats embraced positivism because they
believed that social progress was possible only through science and technology.
[Schunk, Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective, 5th, 315]
The social movement of Technocracy, with its energy-based accounting system, can be traced
back to the 1930’s when an obscure group of engineers and scientists offered it
as a solution to the Great Depression.
The principal scientist behind Technocracy
was M. King Hubbert, a young
geoscientist who would later (in 1948-1956) invent the now-famous Peak Oil Theory, also known as the
Hubbert Peak Theory. Hubbert stated that the discovery of new energy reserves
and their production would be outstripped by usage, thereby eventually causing
economic and social havoc. Many modern followers of Peak Oil Theory believe
that the 2007-2009 global recession was exacerbated in part by record oil
prices that reflected validity of the theory.
Hubbert received all of his higher education at the University of Chicago, graduating
with a PhD in 1937, and later taught geophysics at Columbia University. He was
highly acclaimed throughout his career, receiving many honors such as the
Rockefeller Public Service Award in 1977.
In 1933, Hubbert and Howard Scott formed an organization called Technocracy, Inc.
Technocracy is derived from the Greek words “techne” meaning skill and
“kratos”, meaning rule. Thus, it is government by skilled engineers, scientists
and technicians as opposed to elected officials. It was opposed to all other
forms of government, including communism, socialism and fascism, all of which
function with a price-based economy.
As founders of the organization and political movement called Technocracy, Inc.,
Hubbert and Scott also co-authored Technocracy
Study Course in 1934. This book serves as the “bible” of Technocracy and is
the root document to which most all modern technocratic thinking can be traced.
Technocracy postulated that only scientists and engineers were capable of running a
complex, technology-based society. Because technology, they reasoned, changed
the social nature of societies, previous methods of government and economy were
made obsolete. They disdained politicians and bureaucrats, who they viewed as
incompetent. By utilizing the scientific method and scientific management
techniques, Technocrats hoped to squeeze the massive inefficiencies out of
running a society, thereby providing more benefits for all members of society
while consuming less resources.
The other integral part of Technocracy was to implement an economic system based on
energy allocation rather than price. They proposed to replace traditional money
with Energy Credits.
Their keen focus on the efficient use of energy is likely the first hint of a sustained
ecological/environmental movement in the United States. Technocracy Study Course stated, for instance,
Although it (the earth) is not an isolated
system the changes in the configuration of matter on the earth, such as the
erosion of soil, the making of mountains, the burning of coal and oil, and the
mining of metals are all typical and characteristic examples of irreversible
processes, involving in each case an increase of entropy. (Technocracy
Study Course, Hubbert & Scott, p. 49)
Modern emphasis on curtailing carbon fuel consumption that causes global warming and
CO2 emissions is essentially a product of early Technocratic thinking.
As scientists, Hubbert and Scott tried to explain (or justify) their arguments in
terms of physics and the law of thermodynamics, which is the study of energy
conversion between heat and mechanical work.
Entropy is a
concept within thermodynamics that represents the amount of energy in a system
that is no longer available for doing mechanical work. Entropy thus increases
as matter and energy in the system degrade toward the ultimate state of inert
In layman’s terms, entropy means once you use it, you lose it for good.
Furthermore, the end state of entropy is “inert uniformity” where nothing takes
place. Thus, if man uses up all the available energy and/or destroys the
ecology, it cannot be repeated or restored ever again.
The Technocrat’s avoidance of social entropy is to increase the efficiency of
society by the careful allocation of available energy and measuring subsequent
output in order to find a state of “equilibrium,” or balance. Hubbert’s focus
on entropy is evidenced by Technocracy,
Inc.’s logo, the well-known Yin Yang symbol that depicts balance.
To facilitate this equilibrium between man and nature, Technocracy proposed that
citizens would receive Energy Certificates in order to operate the economy:
“Energy Certificates are issued individually to
every adult of the entire population… The record of one’s income and its rate
of expenditure is kept by the Distribution Sequence, so that it is a simple
matter at any time for the Distribution Sequence to ascertain the state of a
given customer’s balance... When making purchases of either goods or services
an individual surrenders the Energy Certificates properly identified and
“The significance of this, from the point of view of knowledge of what is going on in the social system, and of social
control, can best be appreciated when one surveys the whole system in
perspective. First, one single organization is manning and operating the whole
social mechanism. The same organization not only produces but also distributes
all goods and services.
“With this information clearing continuously to a central headquarters we have a case exactly analogous to the control panel of
a power plant, or the bridge of an ocean liner…” [Technocracy
Study Course, Hubbert & Scott,p. 238-239]
Two key differences between price-based money and Energy Certificates are that a) money
is generic to the holder while Certificates are individually registered to each
citizen and b) money persists while Certificates expire. The latter facet would
greatly hinder, if not altogether prevent, the accumulation of wealth and
At the start of WWII, Technocracy’s popularity dwindled as economic prosperity
returned, however both the organization and its philosophy survived.
Today, there are two principal websites representing Technocracy in North America: Technocracy, Inc., located in Ferndale,
Washington, is represented at www.technocracy.org. A sister organization in
Vancouver, British Columbia is Technocracy
Vancouver, can be found at www.technocracyvan.ca.
While Technocracy’s original focus was exclusively on the North American continent, it is now growing
rapidly in Europe and other industrialized nations.
For instance, the Network
of European Technocrats was formed in 2005 as “an autonomous research and social
movement that aims to explore and develop both the theory and design of
technocracy.” The NET website claims to have members around
Of course, a few minor league organizations and their websites cannot hope to create or
implement a global energy policy, but it’s not because the ideas aren’t still alive
A more likely influence on modern thinking is due to Hubbert’s Peak Oil Theory
introduced in 1954. It has figured prominently in the ecological/environmental
movement. In fact, the entire global warming movement indirectly sits on top of
the Hubbert Peak Theory.
Because of the connection between the environmental movement, global warming and the
Technocratic concept of Energy Certificates, one would expect that a Carbon
Currency would be suggested from that particular community, and in fact, this
is the case.
In 1995, Judith Hanna wrote in New Scientist, “Toward
a single carbon currency”, “My
proposal is to set a global quota for fossil fuel combustion every year, and to
share it equally between all the adults in the world.”
In 2004, the prestigious Harvard International Review published “A
New Currency” and stated,
“For those keen to slow global warming, the most effective
actions are in the creation of strong national carbon currencies…For scholars and policymakers, the key task is to mine history for
guides that are more useful. Global warming is considered an environmental
issue, but its best solutions are not to be found in the canon of environmental
law. Carbon’s ubiquity in the world economy demands that cost be a
consideration in any regime to limit emissions. Indeed, emissions trading has
been anointed king because it is the most responsive to cost. And since trading emissions for carbon is more akin
to trading currency than eliminating a pollutant, policymakers should be
looking at trade and finance with an eye to how carbon markets should be
governed. We must anticipate the policy challenges that will arise as this bottom-up system emerges,
including the governance of seams between each of the nascent trading systems,
liability rules for bogus permits, and judicial cooperation. [Emphasis
HIR concludes that “after seven years of spinning wheels and
wrong analogies, the international regime to control carbon is headed, albeit tentatively, down a productive
"Imagine a country where
carbon becomes a new currency. We carry bankcards that store both pounds
and carbon points. When we buy electricity, gas and fuel, we use our carbon
points, as well as pounds. To help reduce carbon emissions, the Government
would set limits on the amount of carbon that could be used." [Emphasis
In 2007, New York Times published “When
Carbon Is Currency” by Hannah Fairfield. She pointedly stated “To build a carbon market, its originators
must create a currency of carbon credits
that participants can trade.”
“… implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will be the most effective way
of meeting the targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. It would involve
people being issued with a unique number
which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their
carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity. Like with a bank account, a statement
would be sent out each month to help people keep track of what they are
using. If their "carbon account" hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits”. [Emphasis
As you can see, these references are hardly minor league in terms of either authorship or content.
The undercurrent of early Technocratic thought has finally reached the shore
where the waves are lapping at the beach.
Technocracy’s Energy Card Prototype
In July 1937 an article
by Howard Scott in Technocracy Magazine described an Energy Distribution
Card in great detail. It declared that using such an instrument as a “means of accounting is a part of Technocracy’s proposed
change in the course of how our socioeconomic system can be organized.”
Scott further wrote,
“The certificate will be issued directly to the individual.
It is nontransferable and nonnegotiable; therefore, it cannot be stolen, lost,
loaned, borrowed, or given away. It is noncumulative; therefore, it cannot be
saved, and it does not accrue or bear interest. It need not be spent but loses
its validity after a designated time period.”
This may have seemed like science fiction in 1937, but today it is wholly achievable. In 2010 Technocracy, Inc. offers an updated idea
of what such an Energy
Distribution Card might look like. Their website states,
“It is now possible to use a plastic card similar to today’s credit card embedded with a
microchip. This chip could contain all the information needed to create an
energy distribution card as described in this booklet. Since the same
information would be provided in whatever forms best suits the latest
technology, however, the concept of an ‘Energy Distribution Card’ is what is
If you study the card above, you will also note that is serves as a universal identity card and contains a
microchip. This reflects Technocracy’s philosophy that each person in society
must be meticulously monitored and accounted for in order to track what they
consume in terms of energy, and also what they contribute to the manufacturing
Carbon Market Players
The modern system of carbon credits was an invention of the Kyoto Protocol and started to
gain momentum in 2002 with the establishment of the first domestic economy-wide
trading scheme in the U.K. After becoming international law in 2005, the
trading market is now predicted to reach $3 trillion by 2020 or earlier.
Graciela Chichilnisky, director of the Columbia Consortium for Risk Management and a
designer of the carbon credit text of the Kyoto Protocol, states that the
carbon market “is therefore all about cash and trading – but
it is also a way to a profitable and greener future.” (See Who
Needs a Carbon Market?)
Who are the “traders” that provide the open door to all this profit? Currently leading
the pack are JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
“The banks are preparing to do with carbon what they’ve done
before: design and market derivatives contracts that will help client companies
hedge their price risk over the long term. They’re also ready to sell
carbon-related financial products to outside investors.”
At JP Morgan, the woman who originally invented Credit Default Swaps, Blythe Masters,
is now head of the department that will trade carbon credits for the bank.
Considering the sheer force of global banking giants behind carbon trading, it’s no wonder
analysts are already predicting that the carbon market will soon dwarf all
other commodities trading.
Where there is smoke, there is fire. Where there is talk, there is action.
If M. King Hubbert and other early architects of Technocracy were alive today, they would
be very pleased to see the seeds of their ideas on energy allocation grow to
bear fruit on such a large scale. In 1933, the technology didn’t exist to
implement a system of Energy Certificates. However, with today’s ever-advancing
computer technology, the entire world could easily be managed on a single
This article intended to show that
Carbon Currency is not a new idea, but has deep roots in Technocracy
Carbon Currency has grown from a continental proposal to a global proposal
It has been consistently discussed over a long period of time
The participants include many prominent global leaders, banks and think-tanks
The context of these discussions have been very consistent
Today’s goals for implementing Carbon Currency are virtually identical to Technocracy’s original
Energy Certificates goals.
Of course, a currency is merely a means to an end. Whoever controls the currency also
controls the economy and the political structure that goes with it. Inquiry
into what such a system might look like will be a future topic.
Technocracy and energy-based accounting are not idle or theoretical issues. If the global
elite intends for Carbon Currency to supplant national currencies, then the
world economic and political systems will also be fundamentally changed forever.
What Technocracy could not achieve during the Great Depression appears to have
finally found traction in the Great Recession.
[Editor's note: Read an international review of this article on The Daily Bell of Appenzell, Switzerland.]
The US government plans to expropriate and demolish the homes of hundreds of Haitians in the shantytown of Cit¨¦ Soleil to expand the occupying UN force¡¯s military base. The US government contractor DynCorp, a quasi-official arm of the Pentagon and the CIA, is responsible for the base expansion. The base will house the soldiers of the UN Mission to Stabilize Haiti (MINUSTAH). Cit¨¦ Soleil is the most bullet-ridden battleground of the foreign military occupation, which began after US Special Forces kidnapped and exiled President Jean-Bertrand Aristide on February 29, 2004. Citizens have since been victimized by recurring massacres at the hands of MINUSTAH.
DynCorp¡¯s $5 million contracts include expansion of the principal base, the rebuilding of the Cit¨¦ Soleil police station and two other militarized outposts, as well as training support and procurement of equipment.
According to Cit¨¦ Soleil mayor Charles Joseph and a DynCorp foreman at the site, the State Department¡¯s US Agency for International Development (USAID) provides funding for the base expansion¡ªa very unorthodox use of development aid.
Lawyer Evel Fanfan, the president of the Association of University Graduates Motivatd For A Haiti With Rights (AUMOHD), says that about 155 buildings would be razed as the base expansion moves forward. As of March 2009, eighty homes have been demolished. Most of the buildings targeted are homes, but one is a church.
¡°They started working without saying a word to the people living there,¡± Fanfan said. ¡°The authorities have not told them what is being done, if they will be relocated, how much they will be compensated or even if they will be compensated.¡±
Alarmed residents of the area formed the Committee for Houses Being Demolished (KODEL), which contacted AUMOHD. Fanfan put out a press release and KODEL held a press conference.
¡°MINUSTAH soldiers came to our press conference and told us to get a lawyer to talk to the American Embassy because the American Embassy is responsible for the work,¡± said Pastor assistant, Eddy Michel.
¡°Legally, the Haitian government has not authorized anybody to do anything,¡± said Fanfan. ¡°The Cit¨¦ Soleil mayor, Charles Joseph, supposedly authorized the construction, but there is no paper, no decree, no order which authorizes it.¡±
On March 25, 2009 US Ambassador to Haiti, Janet Sanderson, was joined by the head of MINUSTAH, Hedi Annabi, in a ceremony to inaugurate the newly overhauled base, which will house thirty-two Haitian policemen, including a specialized anti-riot counter-insurgency unit, as well as a larger number of UN troops.
A March 31, 2008 a DynCorp press release explained. ¡°Under the Haiti Stabilization Initiative task order, DynCorp International will provide training support for up to 444 Haitian National Police. The task order includes DynCorp International procurement of the Haitian police force¡¯s basic and specialized non-lethal equipment, vehicles and communications equipment. The value of this work is $3 million. DynCorp International has also been tasked to refurbish the main police station in Cit¨¦ Soleil. This station will function as the primary location for this new specialized unit. The refurbishment work will be more than $600,000.¡±
Related evidence of US tampering with Haiti¡¯s sovereignty and democratic processes surfaced on June 23, 2008, when human rights groups, Zamni Lasante (Partners in Health¡¯s flagship program in Haiti), the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, and The Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights (RFK Center) released a report revealing the Bush administration¡¯s blocking of ¡°potentially lifesaving¡± aid to Haiti in order to meddle in the impoverished nation¡¯s political affairs.
In addition to being the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere, Haiti also has some of the worst water in the world, ranking last in the Water Poverty Index.
The RFK Center released internal US Treasury Department documents on August 4, 2008, exposing politically motivated actions by the US government to stop the dispersal of $146 million in loans that the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) approved for Haiti. The IDB originally approved the loans in July 1998, including $54 million for urgently needed water and sanitation projects.
However, documents show that IDB and US Department of Treasury staff sought ways to tie the loans¡¯ release to unrelated political conditions that US leaders wanted the Haitian government to comply with. This intervention was in direct violation of the IDB¡¯s charter, which bars the Bank from basing decisions upon the political affairs of member states.
¡°After several years of investigating the withholding of these loans, we now have clear and detailed evidence of egregious intervention by the US government and the IDB to stop life-saving funds to Haiti,¡± said Monika Kalra Varma, Director of the RFK Center. ¡°With their transgressions now public, they must heed the call for monitoring and transparency. We urge them to implement the necessary oversight mechanisms to prevent a reoccurrence of behind-the-scenes malfeasance, and above all, to fulfill their obligations to the Haitian people.¡±
Update by Cyril Mychalejkou
When the Bush administration withheld aid to Haiti intended to fund water and sanitation projects designed to improve ¡°the quality of life¡ªparticularly for women and children¡ªand to reduc[e] incidence of disease and child mortality,¡± it did so in a country that according to Washington DC-based International Action, is where ¡°water is the leading cause of infant mortality and illness in children . . . Haiti now has the highest infant mortality rate in the western hemisphere . . . [and] more than half of all deaths in Haiti were due to water-borne gastro-intestinal diseases.¡±
Despite the report released in June by the RFK Center which labeled the action as ¡°one of the most egregious examples of malfeasance by the United States in recent years,¡± and the internal US Treasury Department documents released in August that prove the blocking of the loan was politically motivated, there was a virtual media blackout of the findings. The New York Times published a 487-word article (¡°Rights Groups Assail US for Withholding Aid to Haiti, Citing Political Motives,¡± June 24, 2008) covering the release of the report, but it never followed up. And despite admitting that the Bush administration was displeased with former Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, and that President Bush encouraged the coup that removed Aristide from office in 2004, the Times was either unable to, or refused to, recognize that the blocking of aid may have been a deliberate action to create a climate that would cause political and social unrest¡ªconditions that could encourage parts of the Haitian population to acquiesce to an overthrow of their democratically-elected government. But this was something Jeffrey Sachs, former advisor to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, recognized. In an article in the Los Angeles Times (¡°From His First Day in Office, Bush Was Ousting Aristide,¡± March 4, 2004) Sachs wrote, ¡°US officials surely knew that the aid embargo would mean a balance-of-payments crisis, a rise in inflation and a collapse of living standards, all of which fed the rebellion.¡±1
The fact that the Bush administration may have caused the deaths of thousands of Haitians by blocking aid for cynical and self-interested political purposes was not a story worthy of coverage by the US mainstream media. Neither was the Bush administration¡¯s role in the violent coup that removed President Aristide, or the fact that selectively rewarding or withholding aid is used as a foreign policy tool in order to influence, destabilize and overthrow governments. But there are media outlets and organizations readers can turn to in order to follow developments like these as they happen.
Comments on US Repression of Haiti Continues
Thanks for this info, I don't even know my own country anymore.
The U.S. is not the U.S. it is some kind of United Nations puppet monstrosity
wreaking havoc on everything in it's path.
The U.S.government and our clueless people back the slavery of people all over the world,
take the Chinese for another example we demonize their ways but buy their cheap
products and take their loans to pay our debt with no intention of ever paying
it back. Dorothea, I don't know if you believe in carma. I have seen enough of
it to know it's real and I know it comes back in full circle and I fear the days
of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness are nearing an end if we don't stop
what we are doing all over the world.