It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The real problems are not political...

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 05:59 AM
I posted these thoughts in another thread, but I would like to post them here as well in a separate thread. I fully expect it to be missed, but perhaps a few more will see it here.

It is not POLITICAL!

You can segregate the topics here, provide greater staff scrutiny, regulate and rule the flow of discussion, punish, ban, and explore but it will not change the reality, nor will it stop it. You will not find any real answers, nor solutions.

While many of you believe that it is all "politics" it is in reality a symptom of a greater global cause, and ultimately the breakdown of order over chaos in ALL "civilized" nations.

The ability of governments and economies to sustain acceptable levels of prosperity, opportunity and ultimately to provide the most basic essentials is failing.

So many seem to believe that through political agendas everything can be fixed... But failure is certain, no matter which political party is in charge, so there is the rub, someone will be blamed, and arguments will erupt.

The very fabric that had held humanity together for centuries is unraveling, global populations have already grown beyond self sustaining abilities and it has finally reached into the US economy and government which had thought itself immune to this kind of failure.

Nothing you will find in this new forum will change what is happening, nor will it slow the progression of the problems, because none of the answers are political. It can and will only get worse.

Either nature will find a way to reduce global human populations, or man will eventually. Between now and then you can expect to see further breakdown of civility, not just on ATS, but everywhere. Your rules will not stop this, nor change it.

Descent into chaos will include ATS, while you all are looking for political solutions or for someone or party to blame, bickering, playing the dirty political games, the core problems will only continue to worsen.

Enjoy your oblivion while it lasts.

[edit on 15-10-2009 by Walkswithfish]

posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 08:46 PM
No one wants to discuss this eh?

Too busy with partisan talking points, baiting and playing politics as usual?

It's okay, because the truth is sometimes to hard to accept.

It is all too easy to blame "them" or "him" or "her"

Growth is good to a point, do you have any idea how far growth can go before it becomes bad?

Shrinking government revenues while increasing government spending, but still massive job losses while the markets are artificially inflated should be a powerful warning.

It will all come crashing down soon enough...

Maybe we should just wait until then to discuss which party is at fault, which president is to blame etc?

Yep, that sounds like a plan.


posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 09:44 PM
reply to post by Walkswithfish

I wil agree it is not political. It is not the "population" either. The US, EU and China have populations that are SHRINKING. Africa has the high birth rate but they also have a high death rate and were the subject of UN sterilization plans. And said plan seemes to be working.

Barney Cohen reviews levels, differentials, and trends in fertility for more than 30 countries from 1960 to 1992. He finds evidence of fertility decline in Botswana, Kenya, and Zimbabwe, confirming the basic results of the DHS. What is new here though is his finding that the fertility decline appears to have occurred across cohorts of women at all parities, rather than just among women at middle and higher parities, as might have been expected on the basis of experience in other parts of the world. He also presents evidence that fertility may have begun to fall in parts of Nigeria and possibly in Senegal

The collapse of the world economy was planned.

Since the 1970's we have had increasing regulations that make it more and more difficult for a small business to even get off the ground. OSHA, EPA, Equal Rights, complex tax laws, while small and medium businesses flounder under the red tape, Mega corporations pull up stakes and move to countries with a green light to pollute and exploit workers at slave wages. Unfortunately the Mega Corporations had a problem called National Borders, with pesky problems like tariffs and quarantine. To get around these problems they come up with “Free Trade” NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) in 1994 and WTO (World Trade Organization) in 1995. Included for the first time was Agriculture in the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA), written by Dan Amstutz former VP of Cargill. Why Agriculture? Because the IMF and World Bank SAP programs had successfully helped the Mega Corporations to set up large plantations in third world countries. Now with the help of a democratic Congress they plan to do the same in the USA but first they had to crash the real estate market and pass laws regulating independent farmers out of business.

In Sept. 14, 1994 David Rockefeller, speaking at the UN Business Council,.
"This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."

Thats the Rockefeller of International banking, and Standard Oil fame who has controlling interest in not one but four international Oil Companies. Rockefeller who has hosted luncheons at the family's Westchester estate for the world's finance ministers and central bank governors, following the annual Washington meetings of the World Bank and IMF. Rockefeller whose Chase Bank served as training grounds for three World Bank presidents, John J. McCloy, Eugene Black and George Woods.

What “ major crisis could he be talking about? Skipping ahead to the present we find stories of “JP Morgan Chase to become Megabank” and “Analysts say JP Morgan Chase (the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds) will emerge from the bank collapse as the big winner” We also find Monsanto reported record earnings in 2008. The rest of the Ag Corporations are privately owned so no reports are available. Gee what a coincidence! The oil companies, the Ag companies and JP Morgan Chase all come up winners while the peons in the USA lose there jobs, their homes and now food costs and taxes are poised to soar thanks to the new laws.

What new laws you ask? Well in 2008 US Ag exports alone were a record $114 billion and the Mega- corporations do not want independents here or abroad any slice of that. The red tape legislated in the last century that got rid of competition worked so well it is now being used here and abroad on farmers. In the EU it has successfully rid the Mega-corporations of millions of farmers. In India it is reported a farmer is committing suicide every 32 minutes. Now Congress is rushing through several bills to bring the same horror to the USA. They are called Food Safety Bills but actually are sponsored by the likes of Monsanto. Look behind one of the sponsors, Congresswoman DeLauro and what do you find? Her husband, Stanley Greenberg pollster, strategist and master manipulator of the public. Greenberg of Greenberg Carville Shrum who directed Campaigns in 60 countries (including Tony Blair's in the UK) and was responsible for the Bolivia fiasco. Stan Greenberg “...specializes in research on globalization, international trade...Another coincidence perhaps?

And Last we have the 2002 Rockefeller autobiography “Memoirs” where on page 405," Mr. Rockefeller writes: “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents... to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists and of conspiring with others around the world ... If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

David Rockefeller praised the major media for their complicity in helping to facilitate the globalist agenda by saying, "We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. . . . It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

I suggest you read History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job It explains how the bankers transformed the US from an independent debt free people to debt ridden wage slaves.

...This transformation was the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful – though unelected – financial and industrial executives who wanted to drastically change agricultural practices in the US to better serve their collective corporate financial agenda. This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations. CED has influenced US domestic policies in much the same way that the CFR has influenced the nation's foreign policies.[1]
Composed of chief executive officers and chairmen from the federal reserve, the banking industry, private equity firms, insurance companies, railroads, information technology firms, publishing companies, pharmaceutical companies, the oil and automotive industries, meat packing companies, retailers and assisted by university economists – representatives from every sector of the economy with the key exception of farmers themselves – CED determined that the problem with American agriculture was that there were too many farmers. But the CED had a “solution”: millions of farmers would just have to be eliminated.....

...Their plan was so effective and so faithfully executed by its operatives in the US government that by 1974 the CED couldn't help but congratulate itself in another agricultural report called “A New US Farm Policy for Changing World Food Needs” for the efficiency of the tactics they employed to drive farmers from their land.
The human cost of CED's plans were exacting and enormous.

CED's plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities. The loss of a farm also means the loss of identity, and many farmers' lives ended in suicide [6], not unlike farmers in India today who have been tricked into debt and desperation and can see no other way out

posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 09:57 PM
reply to post by crimvelvet

O snap

To OP:
I am curious as to what you think the root problem is then?
Personally I am leaning more towards my buddy Crim

[edit on 15-10-2009 by RjKon]

posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 10:12 PM
reply to post by RjKon

Sure its your buddy Crim. and all a grand globalist conspiracy to bring down the US economy.

Believe what you wish, ultimately you will see for yourselves exactly what is at fault here.

The world can only provide so much energy, resources are stretched thin, the environmental limits on food production and raw energy are factors.

Without stable economic growth and job growth in the USA alone, we can expect to see further decline.... It will crash eventually despite all efforts to stop it.

The government is dependent on the revenues from businesses and taxpayers, with more and more people dependent on the government and fewer and fewer jobs... well do the math, it is rather simple.

There isn't a political agenda or fix for this, only patches and bandages.

With new restrictions and more taxes, what potential for growth do we have?

There are new generations who will be faced with this, and what will their answers be?

Chaos will come soon enough, enjoy your time now, in the future you'll want to remember when we had it this good.

Send my regards to Crim, will ya?

posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 07:08 PM
reply to post by Walkswithfish

No one wants to discuss this eh?

Too busy with partisan talking points, baiting and playing politics as usual?

It's okay, because the truth is sometimes to hard to accept.

Sure its your buddy Crim. and all a grand globalist conspiracy to bring down the US economy.

Actually it is research not a conspiracy theory. You call me a conspiracy theorist and say you want “ to discuss this” So lets discuss this. You seem to think “over population” is the reason for third world starvation. So we will start with food since that is where I started getting concerned about World Politics:

Three or four years ago I heard the USDA was going to require all farms to get a “premise ID number” or PIN and all livestock (29 species) including bunnies, birds and horses was to have RFID tags. Any movement on or off the farm or sale had to be reported within 24 hours. The FDA plans similar measures with plants but the USDA plans were further along.

Investigation showed: The USDA uses certain terms in their NAIS User Guide and other comunications.. They are stakeholder, instead of farmer, Premises instead of property and they refer to a National Herd tagged with an international number code.

The USDA also claims to “own” the PIN (page6 A User Guide) and even though the program is ‘voluntary at the Federal level”, the PIN stays permanently with the property, according to USDA documents.
For the livestock tag, the country code for the United States is 840. The 840 code covers all financial instruments, like stocks, checks, and bearable securities otherwise known as dollar bills. 9Search for ISO-4217.0 This International Organization of Standards code covers only financial instruments.
note the wording used in the NAIS document about registering your premises which puts many of us on guard against any tenet of NAIS.  Words have meaning and contracts use certain words to avoid confusion.  Those words are premises and stakeholder
Many have been signed up without their knowledge or permission.
Zanoni sought a restraining order and alleged that not only has the USDA collected premises information from landowners who did not voluntarily submit that information, but it has failed to remove that information from the list when requested to do so by the landowners.
Len Brown, of the law firm Clymer & Musser of Lancaster, Pa., represented Zanoni in the case. He commented, “It boils down to a database created by the U.S. government in an inappropriate way. This created huge hurdles for journalists trying to write about NAIS.
“The rules say people being placed in a database such as this need to be notified, but the USDA has admitted to data mining from sources like state veterinarians and avian flu records, even entry lists from county fairs,” Brown stated.
You register your premises because you have livestock (even one) and  effectively become a sharecropper, clouding title to property.  By calling the owner a stakeholder and the property a premises, this is where the gray area of property rights happens.
 Stakeholder.....Stakeholders are NOT the owners of the property, they are those who hold the property until the owner is determined.

A stakeholder is a person who holds money or other property while its owner is being determined. A stakeholder is typically involved when two persons bet on the outcome of a future event and have a third person act as the stakeholder, holding the money (or "stake[s]") they have both wagered (or "staked") until the event occurs. Courts may act as stakeholders, holding property while litigation between the possible owners resolves the issue of which one is entitled to the property. Other examples of  stakeholders include trustees who hold property until beneficiaries come of age, or an escrow agent who holds part of the purchase price of property is being held until some condition is satisfied.
A stakeholder in the context of business refers to everyone with an interest (or "stake") in what the entity does. That includes a business' vendors, employees, and customers, as well as members of a community where its offices or factory may affect the local economy or environment.

 The effects of a permanently assigned federal number to your land and the usage of the
word 'premise' instead of property is cause for serious alarm. 
word premises signifies a formal part of a deed,and is made to designate an estate; to designate is to name or entitle.  Therefore a premises has no protection under the constitution and has no exclusive rights of the owner tied to it. 
Would this property once it has a premise number, even be legal to sell?  According to the NAIS document, the premises number stays with the land forever even if there are no animals on it.  
The inference does not matter if it is land with or without buildings.
The term premises as defined by Webster states: the preliminary and explanatory part of a deed or of a bill of equity [its being identified in the premises of a deed]  a. a tract of land with the buildings thereon, a building or part of a building with its appurtenances.
Appurtenances - an incidental right (as in a right of way) attached to a principle property right and passing in possession with it. A subordinate part or adjunct. Accessory objects.
Now on the other hand:
Property is something owned or possessed; a piece of real estate. b. the exclusive right to possess, enjoy, and dispose of a thing: ownership c. something to which a person has legal title
With all the above defined, you can see why premises is the legal word of choice for the USDA. Premises in the legal sense defines a deed or bill of equity where there is more then one person that has legal access over the items. In this case real estate and a "deed" is given to the USDA. On the other hand, if property is used, it is defined as a sole ownership, no one else has legal claim, it but the person that owns it. Another key word in the definition of premises is appurtenances. As you can see it allows a legal right of way onto land by the parties entering into the contract.
The 4th and 14th amendment protect our property rights under the constitution. Premises is a term used in a legal contract you enter into to allow others ownership, much like a lease to an apartment or other real estate you may rent or occupy. Premises are NOT protected. The USDA knew exactly what they where doing. This is why Greg Newindorf in Michigan stood his ground, but had no say over what the USDA did in coming on his property/premises (ownership lost) or what they did in tagging and testing the cows (national herd) for TB. good points from Susan Barackman
The USDA's NAIS Timeline: which as you can see by the dates have not come to pass due to those who oppose NAIS...not that the USDA is changing any part of NAIS, they are just backing off and regrouping and finding other ways to implement it. 
• July, 2005: All States capable of premises registration.
• July, 2005: Animal Identification Number system operational.
• April, 2007: Premises registration and animal identification “alerts”.
• January, 2008: Premises registration and animal identification required.
• January, 2009: Reporting of defined animal movements required; entire program becomes mandatory.


posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 07:10 PM
So that is the problem that got my attention. Lets back track it to see where it came from.

The NGO responsible for NAIS and Premises- ID is the NIAA or National Institute for Animal Agriculture. The membership is large producers, veterinarians, scientists, government representatives and allied industries. In 2002, the National Institute of Animal Agriculture (NIAA) began a major push for NAIS. [This was BEFORE the Canadian BSE cow]
Notice that the majority of the members are the very ones who stand to profit. Tag makers, and large producers who do not have to tag animals, they can use one number per herd. Small Farmers must tag every animal. What does this mean in terms of animals actually tagged vs the whole population?
The following chart was presented at the 2008 NIAA Annual Meeting

In the U.S .Today… Chart of top producers
– The top ten food retailers sell more than 75% of food.
– The top ten chicken companies produce 79% of chicken.
– The top 50 dairy cooperatives produce 79% of the milk. [9.1 million milk cows]
– The top 60 egg companies produce 85% of eggs.
– The top 20 pork producers produce more than 50% of pork. [63 million hogs]
Two percent of pork producers produce 80% [57,000 producers 2% is 1140 producers]
– The top 10 pork packers process 87% of pork.
The top four beef packers process more than 80% of beef [97 million beef cattle]

You will notice around 80% of the animals are owned by less than 100 producers in each category except pork where it is 1000 producers yet there are over 2 million farms (US Ag. Census 2005).
This means over 80% of the animals in the USA do not have to be tagged. The only animals that require tagging are those of the small producer..Yet millions of dollars of tax payer money are being spent by the USDA to implement the ideas of those few producers not effected law.

Lets track back a step further

According to the World Trade Organization: "Measures to trace provide assurances ..have been incorporated into international standards... The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures...Aims to ensure that governments DO NOT USE QUARANTINE AND FOOD SAFETY REQUIREMENTS as Unjustified trade barriers... It provides Member countries with a right to implement traceability [NAIS] as an SPS measure."

Although the SPS measures were recognized as having the potential to impede trade and were considered important under previous GATT rounds, they were relegated to being included as parts of other agreements and as exceptions to the main provisions fostering increased trade. [SPS measures were found in the original GATT Articles, mainly Article XX "General Exceptions," and later in the 1979 Tokyo Round Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, a plurilateral agreement known as the Standards Code ( ).] The impetus for negotiating a separate Agreement for SPS measures and for bringing quarantine issues to the forefront can be attributed to the deeper integration of agriculture into the international trading system (open markets and free trade) in general and to the decision to discipline the use of quantifiable nontrade barriers (quotas, subsidies, and licenses) in particular. Many countries, including the United States, feared that, with a reduction in the use and levels of these support measures, some importing countries might turn to technical trade barriers (notably SPS measures) as a means of allowing them to continue providing support to their farming community. Consequently, the intent of the Agreement was to ensure that when SPS measures were applied, they were used only to the extent necessary to ensure food safety and animal and plant health, and not to unduly restrict market access for other countries (James and Anderson, 1998; Roberts, 1998).

Translated this means NAIS traceability will TAKE THE PLACE OF TESTING and border crossing QUARANTINE.


posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 07:13 PM
Now take a step further back, who wrote the WTO AoA and who pushed for it.

Who wanted the World Trade Organization Agreement on Agriculture (WTO-AoA)?

The AoA, which was written by the US-dominated giant grain trading interests and the agribusiness allies such as Cargill, ADM, Monsanto and DuPont, serves only the agenda of these global supranational private companies, whose sole aim is to maximize stock gains and profits, regardless of human consequences. Their focus is the domination of the $1 trillion global agriculture trade. Notably, the actual author of the AoA of WTO was Daniel Amstutz, a former Vice President of Cargill Grain, who was at the time in the Washington US Trade Representative’s Office, before going back to the grain trade.(3).

The TRIPS agreement of WTO is at the heart of the GMO takeover of world food production. Under TRIPS the WTO demands that all member countries give ‘intellectual property protection’ via patent rights to plant varieties, something entirely outside the domain of normal patent rights. Even though the Indian government refused to ratify the GATT TRIPS clause at Uruguay, a US challenge in the WTO later forced India to pass TRIPS legislation that gives patent protection to firms like Monsanto and Syngenta....

Who controls WTO?

Almost never does someone ask ‘who really controls the WTO?’ The question is of utmost importance for the future of global food security.

The essential control of WTO decisions, decisions which have the full power of international law and can force governments to repeal local laws for health, safety and such if WTO claims it prevents the free trade of GMO products, that power is held by private interests, by a global US-centered agribusiness cartel...

Under the secretive WTO rules, countries can challenge another’s laws for restricting their trade. The case is then heard by a tribunal or court of three trade bureaucrats. They are usually influential corporate lawyers.

The lawyers have no conflict of interest rules binding them, such that a Monsanto lawyer can rule on a case of material interest to Monsanto. Incredibly, the names of the judges are kept secret! Further, there is no rule that the judges of WTO respect any national laws of any country. The three judges meet in secret without revealing the time or location. All court documents are confidential and cannot be published. It is a modern version of the Spanish Inquisition with far more power.
The powerful private interests who control WTO agriculture policy prefer to remain in the background as little-publicized NGO’s. One of the most influential in creating the WTO in the first place was an organization called the IPC or the International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy Council or International Policy Council, for short.

The IPC was created in 1987 explicitly to drive home the GATT agriculture rules of WTO at Uruguay talks. The IPC demands removal of ‘high tariff’ barriers in developing countries, remaining silent on the massive government subsidy to agribusiness in the USA.

IPC: International Policy Council on Agriculture, Food and Trade.
A look at the IPC membership will explain what interests it represents.
The Chairman is Robert Thompson, former Assistant Secretary US Department of Agriculture and former Presidential economic adviser.
Also included in the IPC are Bernard Auxenfans, former chairman Monsanto France; Allen Andreas of ADM/Toepfer;
Andrew Burke, Bunge (US);
Dale Hathaway former USDA official and head IFPRI (US).
Other IPC members include Heinz Imhof, chairman of Syngenta (CH)
Rob Johnson of Cargill (US) and USDA Agriculture Policy Advisory Council;
Guy Legras (France) former EU Director General Agriculture,
Rolf Moehler (Germany) former EU Director General Agriculture
. Donald Nelson of Kraft Foods (US);
Joe O’Mara of USDA,
Hiroshi Shiraiwa of Mitsui & Co Japan;
Jim Starkey former US Trade Representative Assistant;
Hans Joehr, Nestle head of agriculture;
Jerry Steiner, Monsanto (US).
And Members Emeritus include Ann Veneman, herself a board member of a Monsanto subsidiary company before she became US Secretary of Agriculture for George W. Bush in 2001.

In effect the IPC is run by US-based agribusiness giants including Cargill, Monsanto, Bunge, ADM, the very interests which benefit from the rules they drafted for WTO trade.

In Washington itself, the USDA no longer represents interests of small family farmers. It is the lobby of giant global agribusiness....

At this point the research starts having more legs than a full crab trap so I will save it for tomorrow.


posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 09:38 PM

Somewhere in those posts my mind blew out and I was left dumbfounded. I can't believe any one person has retained that much knowledge on a subject like this and can explain it so well. I will be re-reading it tomorrow because I already am a little confused. I did bring up the RFID chip in another thread as it relates to humans.


I agree that making things them vs us only distracts the weak minded and is similar to giving a toy to a child while you change their diaper, give them a shot, etc.... Just something to keep them busy while you do X. It seems that for those of us who have figured out this is happening, others (like crim and walk) are ahead of the next curve.
Nice work and thanks for offering that info to those of us looking to learn what is going on behind the curtain.

Here is my confusion and I hope that one of your educated fellows will offer up an explanation I can understand. From what I understand, the farmers don't own their farms because of a policy they unwittingly signed. This policy will allow the gov to take their farm or make it beyond cost effective to grow anything besides what the gov wants them to. This will essentially control our population because hunger will follow. Am I getting this so far?

Thanks for the help and keep up the great work please!

posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 10:45 PM
I can tell you there are parallels with 2012. Myan Calender. 100 yrs of Federal Reserve Bank.... *its not Federal, * It has no Reserve.. Is it really a Bank....? Plan 2000. Codex Alamentarus. WWIII.

I agree its not Political, its an Global Agenda. a Political Agenda would be easy to solve.. the problem is huge and billions of lives hang in the balance. what would you say if I told you. They are Trying to Kill You!.... they basically, broke up the family - no one sits down and eats anymore - so Mickey Dee's and other FrankenFood vendors have taken the place of good wholesome food, with heart clogging, blood pressure rising .... your probably right, I'm looking too close at the information...

Autism exploded when vaccines to attend school became manditory --- is there connection... looking at the date one would conclude there must be.... I dont see them stopping these school required vaccines... just the opposite... I can go on and on - on this subject - my files have thousands of such interesting decisions made by our leaders... kind of makes you wonder who they work for....

[edit on 9-11-2009 by Anti-Evil]

[edit on 9-11-2009 by Anti-Evil]

new topics

top topics


log in