The Liar, the Which, and the War-drobe

We all like to think that we are really bright individuals; we go to school, we pay "taxes", we show up to work on time, and most of us have never been arrested. Why then, we should ask ourselves, do we have the situation that have? Maybe we aren't too bright after all? When we (the patriot movement) wrote to you the public months ago (last year), that the logical and punctual choice for President of the United States (hereinafter "president") was either Ron Paul or a third party candidate, you snubbed your noses at us and said that we were crazy, and we wouldn't get support. Well a) we proved the latter incorrect via outstanding support for third party candidates and Dr. Paul and b) how crazy do we look now? The economy is worse than it was last year, we are still in Iraq and Afghanistan, and now we are looking martial law smack dab in the face with this "swine flu." So really how crazy are we?

Barack Obama promised us (the USA public) that should we elect him as our Commander-in-Chief, then he will bring the troops home. Now do I need to back that up with an article (because I can) or can we all agree that that is what was said? The more we leave the troops (most of whom are Guard or Reserve) the higher likelihood that suicide amongst said troops will rise. Just go to your neighborhood Google and type in soldier commits suicide and see what you get. I have, personally, had numerous dealings with such incidents and it is sad and demoralizing. You really want to support our troops? Bring them home, where they belong.

Barack Obama promised that he would fix the economy when he became President. How's that working for him. Even the much maligned Eliot Spitzer has come out of his bunker to comment about the banks to which he served once upon a time. And despite these so-called "stimulus funds" more states are cutting (not adding) jobs. We were more worried about what dog they were going to choose that we lost sight of our own affairs.

This blog is predicting that Barack Obama will save the legacy of George W. Bush by being the worst President in history (he has 3. something years to prove us wrong), and he will be a one term President. So the new question will be who will be the next prez?

Ron Paul (if he runs again)?
Lou Dobbs (if he decides he's had enough)?
Someone in the third parties?
Evan Bayh?
Hillary R. Clinton (please Jesus no!)?
Joe Biden?
Sarah Palin?

Which ever Presidential candidate it maybe that wins, they will have a handful to deal with.

This blog, mainly this writer, believes that this swine flu is the production of this administration to further it's goal of martial law and distract you from the economy and wars. This "flu"-ke (fluke for those at home), will die out like the bird flu-ke before. Myself and others were talking about how weird this is; how every time they do these epidemics, there is always something going on (bird flu=1 war and a bad economy...swine flu=2 wars, a bad economy, and disgruntled citizens...what next? Elephant flu?).

Some things to think about: where your money is going...where your sons and daughters are going...and where you'll be going to work after you get laid off (which we pray doesn't happen)...

Please visit www.infowars.com and this blog (among other independent websites) for your news that you will not find anywhere else. Support us and we will reciprocate.

Dollar Devaluation Doom

Recently we have been finding that bees are dying, the US is fighting an illegal war in Iraq (and spending trillions in the process), illegal immigrants are taking jobs (because businesses don't have to pay a living wage to these workers), and the US government wants to devalue the Dollar (continuously). All the while we the people are spending more for products that in 1913 would be much less. How much? Well imagine, you go to a store in 1913, and spend $5.00 for a suit. That same suit would be over $200.00 today. The American Dollar has been devalued so much that $1.00 is actually only worth $0.04 .

How does this affect me? As the scenario above shows, you are paying more today than what you paid, or rather what you would have paid earlier in the last century. Our current devaluation (about 50%) of the Dollar is in accordance with our conflicts (whether real or imagined) abroad. Take China for example, the US government continues to ask for a floated currency, just like ours. China will not bit on this proposal, because they know that if they did such a thing, their currency would be too inflated (just like ours). Our borrowing is outrageous, we borrow over $85 million from our sons, daughters, and grandchildren. This kind of borrowing, whether you are a democrat or a republican, is going to damage their futures for many years after they are born. The current generation is feeling the pinch, and even though they don't recognize it now, ten years down the road when they want to go to college, they won't be able. They will have to borrow against their grandchildren, and the cycle will continue.

A floated currency means that the proposed currency is 'floated' against the stock exchange (Dow Jones Industrial Average, NYSE, et cetera). When the commodities go up we devalue the Dollar, or "adjust" by raising interest rates, which effects everything from bread to gas (petrol for my UK readers). This fluctuation can work both ways, where commodities can go up as the Dollar is devalued. A Dollar's devaluation can have effects on our natural resources, by raising the price of drills, rigs, and mining equipment. When this price goes up, then so too does the price of such materials. China doesn't want to 'float' their currency for several obvious reasons, and because they are a nation that has a continuously effective industrialization. When the US gives reasons for a floating currency to the Chinese, it is a worthless explanation at best. They want the Chinese to do this because it creates a trade gap and covers their butts when it comes time to pay their trade debts.

Some articles like the New York Times article about the devaluation of the Dollar, says that people are too anxious and need to calm down. Well NYT writers, do you want to make less? Do you want to have your pensions? Do you want to have outrageous heath costs? Then keep writing the same filth that you continuously write. Just like "global warming" (myth), and everything else, they don't ask questions, do research, or interview people (besides government subsidised scientists). The US News and World Report wrote an article about this topic and stated that this policy of adjustment will backfire and cause even more economic hardships in the years to come. Hardships will come in the form of, more manufacturing jobs being shipped overseas, crop shortages due to farmers losing their land and in the end everyone will be paying $8.00 a gallon for gas (petrol). Housing prices will inevitably go up as well, this is due to greed however. Back in the 1940's and 50's a family paid roughly $5,000 to $10,000 for a good house, in 2006, you would be lucky to get a house under $140,000. This is because as we adjust for inflation (devalue the dollar/ raise interest rates) we are causing the "cost of living" to rise as well. Then the property taxes rise, then the cost of commodities rise and this becomes a viscous circle that will continue as long as we have the Central Bank, I mean, the "Federal" Reserve in power.

If the Chinese stopped buying our Dollars, and yes they do buy our Dollars, and start selling them back, our economy would collapse. The Chinese are the only thing keeping the US from becoming a second world country. That is why the only thing that will help the US has a President like Dr. Ron Paul (Rep. TX). He will bring back a stable form of economy and we will again become the richest country in the world. He will slowly begin to incorporate gold as a currency backer and this will stabilize the economy. Anyone who is interested in learning about economics and how this works click here.

Yes I understand that many of you think that the Dollar is still backed by gold, unfortunately that too is incorrect. The Federal Reserve has complete control of all gold reserves in the US and can not be audited, therefore the people no longer own the gold and the Dollar is a fiat currency. The same goes for the Canadian, Australian and the Euro. Any one whom doesn't believe this look it up on Google. Laws may say one thing but the economy and the World Bank says another. Ask yourself, why or how can these people manufacture money out of thin air, any time they want? How can they adjust interest rates when they do not correspond to the rates of gold that is on the market? When I say the 'Dollar', for clarification, this is talking about the US Dollar, and since the Dollar is controlled by the Fed. and the Fed. is controlled by the global elite, then you'll see that devaluation of the Dollar is a good thing. In other words if the Dollar becomes so devalued then they can buy up the US lock, stock and barrel. That is a bad thing for the people of the US and their sovereignty.

Richard Nixon eliminated the gold standard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As many of my "loyal readers" may or may not know I posted this article on the seventh of May, last year (2007). However I am choosing to augment this post with the addition of an article that was sent via Mises.org. The post reads:

"Economic Outlook 2008: Darkening Clouds"
By Dominick Armentano
Posted on 1/2/2008

Presidential election years usually are not recessionary but next year will be an exception. Several economic factors are colliding in an almost perfect storm to markedly slow the general economy and the stock market.

The most important signal flashing recession is, of course, the subprime mortgage fiasco. After years of monetary inflation on the part of the Federal Reserve, individuals and families with poor credit were suckered into low-down-payment/low-interest adjustable mortgages that simply cannot be maintained or repaid under current conditions. Their incentive is to sell the property quickly before their equity evaporates or the financial institution repossesses it. Yet the massive oversupply of homes and condos for sale has pushed prices down at a record clip and made additional foreclosures even more likely. Next year, unfortunately, will be the Year of the Auction.

The financial institutions have also been punished … well sort of. Various institutions including hedge funds that hold these poorly performing debt obligations have been forced (by accounting rules) to "write down" the value of these assets, take huge paper losses in the bargain, and pull in their financial horns. Thus, any near-term recovery in housing must now fight a record supply availability, falling prices, higher insurance costs and restricted credit … a near-term impossibility in my view.

Moreover, the slowdown in residential and commercial construction will send secondary ripple effects throughout the economy. Laid-off construction workers don't spend money. Construction and home furnishing suppliers sell less output and make fewer investments. Even local governments will be pinched by declining property-tax assessments and fewer developer fees. Things are likely to get worse before they get any better.

The second major factor indicating a near-term recession is the sky-high price of crude oil and refined product. Pushed upward by world-wide speculative Middle East war fears and increases in demand (especially from China), increasing energy prices act as an inflationary "tax" on domestic production and consumption throughout the market economy. Higher costs of production will lower profits; higher prices will reduce some consumption. The only good news here is that any substantial economic slowdown in 2008 will eventually moderate the price of oil and other commodity prices as well.

The third factor in the current recession scenario — and the real wild card — is the continuing decline in the value of the dollar in international money markets caused by our Iraq blunder and the Federal Reserve–generated oversupply of dollars. Some economists would argue that a devalued dollar is good for US exports, and thus positive for the economy as a whole. I disagree for three reasons.

First, the bulk of crude oil purchases takes place in dollars; a falling dollar translates into still higher crude oil prices. Second, the US dollar is the major reserve currency of the international monetary system and dollar-paying investments (such as US Treasury bills and bonds) are held in massive amounts by foreign banks and governments. Dollar devaluation makes these investments less attractive and any disinvestment in these areas would sharply drive bond prices down and increase interest rates.

The third reason why dollar devaluation makes recession more likely is that it effectively prevents the Federal Reserve from pushing US interest rates much lower. Any additional Fed easing (inflation) would be seen as a signal of even further future dollar devaluation and even higher dollar prices for oil. Unfortunately, we will not be able to "inflate" our way out of this recession this time. We will simply have to take our lumps and let market forces liquidate the bulk of the malinvestments caused by the unprecedented Greenspan money bubble. This liquidation process will not be pretty but it is necessary to restore a sustainable economic recovery in the years ahead.

A note on Dr. Dominick T. Armentano:

is professor emeritus in economics at the University of Hartford (Connecticut). He is the author of numerous reviews, articles and op-eds on regulatory policy, some of which have appeared in "National Review", the "Cato Journal", "The Antitrust Bulletin", "The New York Times", the "London Financial Times" and "The Wall Street Journal". He has presented talks to academic and business audiences in the United States and abroad. Between 1978 and 1985 he was a regular commentator on BYLINE, a nationally syndicated public affairs radio program. His books include The Myths of Antitrust: Economic Theory and Legal Cases (Arlington House, 1972), Antitrust & Monopoly: Anatomy of a Policy Failure (John Wiley, 1982 and Independent Institute, 1990) and Antitrust: The Case for Repeal (Mises Institute, 1999). Send him mail.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Rogers: Dollar To Lose World Reserve Status "

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, September 15, 2008

With the greenback plummeting after the news of Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy, top investor Jim Rogers predicts that the dollar will lose its status as the world reserve currency status and has resolved to buy more gold despite a recent fall in the price of the commodity.

Rogers, who correctly predicted China’s resurgence as an economic superpower back in the 80’s as well as crude oil surpassing $100, says the global economy is in a recession that is going to get much worse while inflation will continue to skyrocket.

“Some countries lie about it. But, inflation in all countries is going to get worse. The next decade is going to see lot more inflation, which is not good,” Rogers told the India Business Standard.

“Frequently, since the prices of the commodities go up before the inflation numbers, one can stay ahead of inflation. But, if you get it wrong you might do worse. So, investing in those commodities, which are going to go up first or selecting the right commodities, is the key to stay ahead of the inflation and make a lot of money.”

Turning to the dollar, Rogers dismissed the greenback as a “flawed currency” that would continue to deteriorate for two to three decades, adding that he would seek to use the dollar’s recent rally as an opportunity to get out of the currency completely.

“I do not want to own any US dollars. Also, I would not urge you to buy US dollars. (The) dollar is going to loose its status as world reserve currency,” said Rogers.

“Some of the OPEC countries have already started and no longer take dollar, like Venezuela no longer accepts the dollar. Other countries are already looking and may be taking a package of basket of currencies instead of the dollar. I am not the only one who knows the dollar is in trouble. Anybody who watches the TV knows that the dollar is in trouble,” he added.

Rogers also said that the bull market in oil has at least another ten years to run and that oil prices will only go higher.

Speaking on the subject of commodities, Rogers recommended sugar, coffee and cotton and also said that he would be buying more precious metals.

“I am trying and want to buy some gold. However, whether this is the low in the gold, I have no idea, but if gold goes lower, I will add some more. Gold is something I do not plan to sell. Gold is something I will gift to my children,” concluded Rogers.

Effete Plastics

Trying to figure out why more and more men are getting testosterone shots and patches, I came across several articles (medical and otherwise) showing that plastics and the chemicals in plastics are leaking into our foods and our environment. These chemicals would include BPA, PFOA, PBDEs, PET, PVC, but the one that we will be concentrating on for now is BPA, or bisphenol-A.

When this chemical, and the other chemicals listed above, leak into your foods they cause changes in your body and these are usually, breast cancer, prostate cancer, diabetes, and so on and so forth. When we think about plastics, we usually think about how the invention of such has influenced many of our lives and made our lives much easier to live. What we don't think about is how much this invention might cause many of our ailments. Plastics, functionally, are very important, and I'm not telling you that we should totally eliminate them, what I'm saying is that we should be cognizant of how we use them and for what actions we use them for.

Many of the articles, like this one, say that the chemical that breaks down in the body (bisphenol-A) causes breast cancer, prostate cancer, and in a recent study it showed that plastics can cause diabetes. In this study, they injected mice with pure corn oil, and oil containing either bisphenol-A or an equal amount of female sex hormone, estrodiol. They gave the mice a maximum of 8 shots per day of one of the two substances (two levels/ two groups) over a four day span. They state that within 30 minutes of an injection of either the estrodiol or the bisphenol-A, had an abnormal low concentration of glucose in their blood. When you have this you are heading toward diabetes. Dr. Belcher's rats were "at a period in their development equivalent to the third trimester of human fetal development through to the first few years of childhood." In the study, there was insulin resistance, but that is very close to diabetes. The earlier "test-tube studies" it was shown that "bisphenol-A makes pancreatic cells [that] secrete the glucose-regulating hormone [called] insulin." It was also shown, in the studies, to cause obesity when exposed early in life. [Science News Online]

According to an article from NewsTarget.com the chemical BPA (bisphenol-A) disrupts brain development and acts as an artificial estrogen. Let me clarify, what the article said is that BPA was "[..]found to disrupt important effects of estrogen in the developing brain." This can cause breast cancer and increase the growth of prostate cancer cell growth. This, BPA, is the same thing that the doctor gives you if he deems you to be menopausal, meaning an artificial estrogen or if you are a man, this is the opposite. The estrogen that the doctor gives you for menopause, is also linked to ovarian cancer, and breast cancer. This study was done by Dr. Scott Belcher from the University of Cincinnati. Dr. Belcher also said that plastics that have no BPA (bisphenol-A), other toxins are present such as the long list of chemicals that I listed above. Mr. Belcher also reported that to cause harm in you or me, the chemical causes more harm "at surprisingly low doses." It is even in your water supply.

A Missouri University study conducted by Kembra Howdeshell and Frederick vom Saal, stated that plastics are linked to reproductive and reproductive weight. This story was released back in 1999 and yet you hear nothing about this, do you? This was all linked to the same chemical in plastics, BPA . They also said that these plastics have the highest levels of natural estrogen. In addition they state that plastics, repeatedly used were being leaked into the environment. In this study they found that there was an "earlier onset of puberty and an increase of body weight after birth." When mice were exposed to the chemical BPA it was found that the mice weighed 20% more than when examined at puberty. This could be why you see a large amount of kids (mainly girls) that are 11 but they look like they are 16 or 17 and overweight children. They also found that "mice with more natural estrogen in them were much more sensitive to the chemical [BPA] than those with low levels of natural estrogen." The chemical that was injected did not effect any of the functions of the mother, but instead, only effected the child within.

Causes environmental problems, and is switching the sexes of sea life. Found about 800 miles north of Hawaii in the Pacific ocean is a cesspool of garbage and waste plastics that is causing damaging effects on our environment. This can be shown by the scene described in the article as; "[..]a slow, deep, clockwise-swirling vortex of air and water caused by a mountain of high-pressure air that lingered above it." I can not even understand why anyone would dump their garbage into the sea. This is a treasure not of the United States, and not of any other country, instead it is a treasure of a universal scale. The seas are the greatest natural wonder that should be cherished for millennium. I feel that this problem is a collaborative effort that we need to confront and it will not go away until we do. The sea is NOT a garbage can, nor should it be treated as one. Okay, enough with the rant, back to the message. The amount of plastic resin that is produced in the USA (The USA is largest producer of plastic resin in the world) is astronomical. In 2005 the USA produced about 120 billion pounds of resin. It is projected that in 2010 there will be about 130 billion pounds and growing.

Plastic is an interesting compound, and how it is produced is also interesting. Plastic is petroleum mix, where then can be mixed with other chemicals to provide hardness, suppleness, to make it inflammable, et cetera. Some of the chemicals that I listed above such as PFOA (perfluorooctanic acid) and PBDEs (poly-brominated diphyl ethers) are most likely a carcinogen. These chemicals, which are added in with BPA, are used to treat the popcorn bag that you get at the movies and buy for your home. They are also used for floor coverings, cosmetics, carpeting, paint, baby bottles, baby food packaging, seat coverings in your new car ("new car smell"), varnishes, time released pharmaceuticals, epoxy resins, dental sealants and so on and so forth. These chemicals have been shown, through a number of testing, to cause thyroid and liver toxicity, reproductive problems, and memory loss (alzheimer's). Other compounds that I have forgotten to mention (probably because I use plastics), such as PET and HDPE are used in soda bottles and milk jugs. The above article mentions that "there is no legal way to recycle a milk container into another milk container without adding a new virgin layer of plastic." It also retains the toxins that were in the plastics in the first place. So you (meaning they) are just adding more and more toxins into your products and you are just taking in more and more toxins in response. The linked article is very interesting and I encourage you to read the entire thing.

Causes birth defects, and may cause interaction with the HOXA(10) gene, involved with uterine development. Also causes infertility according to an article produced by Yale University. When the uterine development is disrupted, it then in turn disrupts the general architecture of the child's reproductive apparatus and the organs.

The studies that I have spoke of show the intricate and fragility of our reproductivity and our organs. Estrogen is shown to be a rapid responder that is involved with our sexual differences and functions, Belcher states. BPA was shown to be an oestrogenic to breast cancer cells in 1938 and has been linked to the cause of brain defects. BPA was shown to have a high concentration in cans of peas, beans artichokes corn and mushrooms. You may ask yourself; if BPA is in plastics, then how is it in the highest levels in canned goods? It's (BPA) in the liquid, and it enters your food.

Many people, like Lorenz Rhomberg and James Lamb, say that the evidence is very weak on this subject. When people like this say silly things, I look at who they work for and who pays them to do the research, in this case Lorenz is paid by the America Plastics Council. There have been thousands of studies that were done and they all show that testostitrone is kept from being made and that these chemicals are causing harsh effects to our children and ourselves. In Mr. Vom Saal's case he has done 140 plus animal studies.

The government and regulators of such, have resisted banning these chemicals, even though these chemicals have been shown to cause tremendous harm. There is no such thing as 'more harm than good', especially in this day and age where government starts at one level such as the 'more harm than good' level then keeps moving forward on a deadly train that will hurt you permanently. It is apparent that the Plastics Council has as much clout as the Council on Foreign Relations.

These articles have scared me to glass and paper, because at least these can be recycled and they are easier on our environment than the plastics. When you go to the grocery store think about this article and tell them that you want paper bags and try not to by any plastics (or anything contained in plastics). I am not an environmentalist, I am a person that is concerned for my own well being and I have pride in my surroundings. I don't trash my planet. I take a common sense approach to this matter of our environment, rather than the 'Gorian' approach (TAX).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Common plastics chemical linked to human diseases"
By Michael Kahn

LONDON (Reuters) - A study has for the first time linked a common chemical used in everyday products such as plastic drink containers and baby bottles to health problems, specifically heart disease and diabetes.

Until now, environmental and consumer activists who have questioned the safety of bisphenol A, or BPA, have relied on studies showing harm from exposure in laboratory animals.

But British researchers, who published their findings on Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, analyzed urine and blood samples from 1,455 U.S. adults aged 18 to 74 who were representative of the general population.

Using government health data, they found that the 25 percent of people with the highest levels of bisphenol A in their bodies were more than twice as likely to have heart disease and, or diabetes compared to the 25 percent of with the lowest levels.

"Most of these findings are in keeping with what has been found in animal models," Iain Lang, a researcher at the University of Exeter in Britain who worked on the study, told a news conference.

"This is the first ever study (of this kind) that has been in the general population," Lang said.

Steven Hentges of the American Chemistry Council, a chemical industry group, said the design of the study did not allow for anyone to conclude BPA causes heart disease and diabetes.

"At least from this study, we cannot draw any conclusion that bisphenol A causes any health effect. As noted by the authors, further research will be needed to understand whether these statistical associations have any relevance at all for human health," Hentges said in a telephone interview.

A U.S. Food and Drug Administration panel of outside experts on Tuesday will hear testimony on health effects from BPA as it reviews a draft report it issued last month calling BPA safe.

"The study, while preliminary with regard to these diseases in humans, should spur U.S. regulatory agencies to follow recent action taken by Canadian regulatory agencies, which have declared BPA a 'toxic chemical' requiring aggressive action to limit human and environmental exposures," Frederick vom Saal of the University of Missouri and John Peterson Myers of the nonprofit U.S.-based Environmental Health Sciences, wrote in a commentary accompanying the study.

BOTTLES TO UTENSILS
BPA is used to make polycarbonate plastic, a clear shatter-resistant material in products ranging from baby and water bottles to plastic eating utensils to sports safety equipment and medical devices.

It also is used to make durable epoxy resins used as the coating in most food and beverage cans and in dental fillings.

People can consume BPA when it leaches out of plastic into liquid such as baby formula, water or food inside a container.

In the study, the team said the chemical is present in more than 90 percent of people, suggesting there is not much that can be done to avoid the chemical of which over 2.2 million tons is produced each year.

The researchers, who will also present their findings at the U.S. FDA session on Tuesday, added it was too early to identify a mechanism through which the chemical may be doing harm.

Animal studies have suggested the chemical may disrupt hormones, especially estrogen.

The researchers also cautioned that these findings are just the first step and more work is needed to determine if the chemical actually is a direct cause of disease.

"Bisphenol A is one of the world's most widely produced and used chemicals, and one of the problems until now is we don't know what has been happening in the general population," said Tamara Galloway, a University of Exeter researcher who worked on the study.

Canada's government in April decided BPA was harmful to infants and toddlers and announced plans to ban some products.

The European Union's top food safety body said in July the amount of BPA found in baby bottles cannot harm human health.

(Reporting by Michael Kahn, Editing by Will Dunham)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Willie Nelson: Impeach Bush, “Throw The Bastards Out”

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
February 18th, 2008

American icon Willie Nelson says he supports efforts to impeach President Bush and "throw the bastards out," adding that the administration will do anything to stay in power, including staging an event to cancel the election.

In his second appearance this month, Nelson told The Alex Jones Show today that he supported Dennis Kucinich’s attempt to impeach Bush, adding, "If you break the law you have to pay for it one way or another and if these guys haven’t broke the law nobody has."

"The deck’s been stacked and we need to figure out a way to get a new fresh deck in there in the deal and I don’t know how else to do it except throw the bastards out," said Nelson.

But the award winning star of stage and screen was quick to clarify that he didn’t see the Democrats as any kind of viable alternative.

"We went through a couple of elections now and we didn’t do anything, we thought we did but come to find out that the voting machines are crooked, everything’s stacked against us, the politicians that we vote for won’t stay and fight and they won’t count the votes."

Nelson agreed that an elite cherry picked presidents and leaders to do their bidding against the interests of the people.

"They find them and they groom them and they put them in office and tell them exactly what to do and you give the speeches will small words and big letters and let them go," said Nelson.

"I really believe that George Bush believes he’s right, he believes what he’s saying and that makes it even more pathetic because to have someone that wrong think they’re right and have him be the leader of our country - that’s a scary thought," he added.

The star also re-iterated a warning made during his last appearance on the show, that the Bush administration could potentially stage an event to postpone or cancel the presidential election.

"It could be anything and anything will work because they have everyone scared to death, I just think there are people out there who will do anything to stay in power, anything to keep what they have, they’ve already proven they’ll do anything to keep it," he said.

Reacting to the big response his last appearance on The Alex Jones Show generated, Nelson said "I think it would take courage not to say something, I usually say what I think and it’s harder for me to shut up."

"I don’t have the ability to remain quiet when all this stuff is going on all around us," he added.

Nelson clarified his previous comments about Building 7 after the news media attempted to skew his words and claim he said that no planes hit the WTC on 9/11. Nelson made it clear he was talking about WTC 7, which imploded symmetrically within seven seconds on the late afternoon of 9/11 despite the fact that it was only hit by minimal debris from the falling towers and not a commercial airliner.

"I was talking about the third building that nothing hit and yet it fell as if it was hit the same way, all three buildings fell the same way, but the third building wasn’t hit by anything," said the country music star.

Nelson’s contention that the twin towers were deliberately imploded received media attention after his first appearance on the radio show two weeks ago.

"'Jane Roe' (Roe v. Wade)"

1-25-08
Rense.com

About an hour ago Norma McCorvey, a.k.a "Jane Roe" from the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, formally endorsed Ron Paul at the Phoenix Park hotel in Washington. Why didn't she endorse a frontrunner like Mike Huckabee? Thank the grassroots: She saw a newspaper ad in Nevada, bought by Paul supporters, using the analogy of the frog and the pot of boiling water to demonstrate what was happening to America. "It touched my heart." That was three weeks ago, and McCorvey keynoted a pro-life Paul rally in Nevada on January 12th, but the campaign made the official announcement today before Paul spoke at the March for Life. McCorvey:

I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v Wade. Ron Paul doesn't just talk about being pro-life, he acts on it. His voting record truly is impeccable and he undoubtedly understands our constitutional republic and the inalienable right to life for all. Ron Paul is the prime author of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v. Wade. As the signor of the affidavit that legalized abortion 35 years ago I appreciate Ron Paul's action to restore protection for the unborn. Ron Paul has also authored H.R. 1094 in Congress, which seeks to define life as beginning at conception. He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn.

Article by: Rense.com
Links provided by: interpreter (the interindependent crew)