Georgia Guidestones blown up.

Join the revolution against big tech censorship the answer to 1984 is http://Social1776.com

State and local officials are investigating a bombing at a rural Georgia monument that some conservative Christians have dubbed satanic and previously called for its demolition.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation reported that just before dawn Wednesday, someone detonated an explosive device and damaged the Georgia Guidestones, dubbed by some as “America’s Stonehenge.”

Erected in 1980, the massive granite monument is 7 miles north of Elberton, Georgia, near the South Carolina state line.

According to the GBI, preliminary information indicates unknown suspects set off the bomb at 4 a.m.

Law enforcement officials walk around the damaged Georgia Guidestones monument near Elberton, Ga., on Wednesday, July 6, 2022. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation said the monument, which some Christians regard as satanic, was damaged by an explosion before dawn.

To read original article https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2022/07/06/georgia-guidestones-explosion-police-say-monument-damaged-bombing/7823958001/

Activist Anna Taylor is facing Medical kidnapping once again!

🙏Prayer request: Anna Taylor has court Tuesday. Please pray she gets her case sorted out without getting locked up, without false conviction of burglary (or breaking & entering) over an illegal lockout & domestic dispute. We need a serious turnaround of the case.

📞🚨 Emergency Phone Blitz for Anna Taylor! Numbers below. Please spread this far & wide as fast as possible. We need as many people to call as possible because Anna has court again – today 10/19/21 10AM. GA10 district, New London, Connecticut. 112 Broad Street. Ask to drop the charges! Meanwhile she needs time to establish her case (present witnesses, submit evidence). It was an illegal lockout during a civil dispute. They are calling it felony burglary when there was no intent to commit any crime. Breaking & entering is an incorrect charge too – Anna was living there for months.There is also an element of grave slander in this case to try to make her look mentally ill (& open the door to probate, asset theft, forced vaccination, forced drugging potentially causing brain damage etc.), & it looks like a setup. She is being railroaded into felony charges from a civil dispute w/her boyfriend with whom she had a child. The building owner is the one pressing charges. Anna is of sound mind, not a danger to herself or others.
=>Prosecutor Sarah Steere 860.443.8444 sarah.steere@ct.gov
=>Judge Edward V. O’Hanlan, Superior Court Judge. 860.443.8343
=>Archbishop His Excellency Leonard Paul Blair. 860.541.6491
=>Vicar General Steven Boguslawski 860.249.8431
History of advocacy for Anna from Courtroom Watch: https://courtroomwatch.org/?s=Anna+taylor+
Thank you for your help!

please call Sean Tiernan the public defender at Office 860.443.5356 and Mobile 860.501.9691 X4032 (voicemail says full for Office & Mobile picks up) & tell him you’ve known her X number of years & that she’s of sound mind & not a danger to herself or others. Docket no. K10K-CR21-0372339-S

KNL-CV21-5022764-S
TAYLOR, ANNA v. DODANI, MANJOLA Et Al

Filed 10/14/21

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100054117357223

The man who planned 9/11, his name is Mike Harari (now 82 or 83 years old) who is a retired counterintelligence specialist and former Deputy Chief of the Mossad But I can assure you that this was done by the Freemasons.”


by TBFWS

(The Battle For World Supremacy)
April 4, 2010

Updated May 9, 2010

from BattleForWorld Website


Dimitri Khalezov, a former officer of the Soviet nuclear intelligence, expressed his knowledge about the September 11, 2001 so-called terrorist attack on the United States.

In what appears to have been a ‘revenge attack’, which was organized by an elite man with grievances against some of the things the United States has done. What Americans saw on their televisions as the 911 reporting unfolds were attacks contrived by U.S. officials in high places when the plan became known to them so that the ‘revenge attack’ that the elite man had organized could to be masked and explained away by a scripted televised show.

The footage that everyone saw showing the plane crashing into the World Trade Center (WTC) was digitally put together by the team working for the elite man and fed to the U.S. television stations on September 11.

No planes crashed into the WTC; the terrorist attack was all make-believe. And that the U.S. officials were the ones who used the situation to begin launching fake wars in the Middle-East.

Read transcription excerpts below for more information regarding Dimitri’s revelation interviews.


The Third Truth, by Dimitri Khalezov

“I seem to be the only person on this Planet who was able to provide satisfactorily explanation in regard to the WTC-1, 2 and 7 pulverizations, plus satisfactorily explanations regarding the Pentagon attack, anthrax letters, doomsday plane, the true nature of the 9/11 cover-up, and the rest of strange things that happened on that day.

My explanations have no flaws and I can answer any and every question about 9/11 that no other ‘conspiracy theorist’ could ever answer. I know the entire truth about 9/11 whether you like it or not.

To answer the second part of your questions:

Yes, I know the Chief Organizer (of 9/11) personally. Also before the 9/11. Moreover, I was so close to him that he did not invite anyone else but me alone to his early breakfast on the 12thof September 2001 (in Bangkok, while in the United States it was still the 11th of September) and there he shared a bottle from his collection of wines with me to celebrate the 9/11 event.

The chief organizer of 911 invites YOU and YOU only to a breakfast to celebrate the 911 attacks?

To continue answering your questions. Yes, it was only me alone who was invited and no one else, but it is not the main point of my story at all. The main point is that I know why the WTC was pulverized during its collapse and I can explain the process in precise detail, as well as explain in exact details any other parts of the 9/11 attack, including all seeming ‘inconsistencies’ which no one else could satisfactorily explain so far.

To be honest, I could tell you that a larger half of the Arab and Pakistani communities in Bangkok, not to mention Russian, Serbian, Iranian and others were openly celebrating the 9/11 event because it was love from first sight. The 9/11 attack was ugly judging from the point of view of the American people and from their obedient allies, but when it comes to the rest of the bipeds the 9/11 attack seems a bit beautiful in performance.

The US officials knew perfectly well who did the 9/11 and they even know WHY they were punished in such a manner. But they can not do anything against the real culprits, because it was them – the US officials, who did the most of the actual crimes related to the 9/11 event.

So, there is nothing to complain about.

What the chief organizer (Mike Harari) thinks about you now? I think he does not give a ####, neither do I. As I have told you the Americans can not even bring him (Mike Harari) to the court, because he did not do much in reality.

All he did was this: He rented offices on the necessary floors of the WTC twin towers and had explosives installed to imitate plane impacts and holes, plus he arranged for cameramen to film the ‘planes’ (he means the scenes with stand-in actors where the planes would then be digitally inserted into the video later, TBFWS Editor), plus he arranged for a missile with broken detonators to be fired into the Pentagon. Nothing more than that.

The US officials did the rest.

  • they shoot down two planes (with people onboard to publicly account for the WTC two explosions)

  • they brought remains of one plane to the Pentagon site

  • they demolished the twin towers (with human beings still inside and around)

  • moreover, they demolished the WTC-7 building

  • they sent unprotected workers to clean up ‘ground zero’

  • they sent anthrax letters implying that they were sent by Saddam Hussein emissaries, etc, etc, etc…

Just compare the amount of guilt of the real 9/11 organizers and that of the US officials.

So, the real 9/11 organizer does not give a #### really. Because all the high-ranking US officials know who did it anyway and my book would not add to their knowledge. It would only add to the knowledge of the general public.

If you think I know the entire 9/11 story, of course I do not know the entire chain of events in precise details (such as, for example, the exact details of the plane ‘hijackings’ or the names of the low-ranking Freemasons involved in the setup, or the exact details of how exactly they pressed the red buttons and who exactly convinced them to do so and on which minute and second of the day).”

(TBFWS Editor: The ‘red button’ is a reference to the trigger device built into the World Trade Center foundation just incase the building had to be demolished at a future date. After the chief planner of 911 gave the orders to set off the explosives in both of the WTC top floors, orders were later given by U.S. officials to press the red button to bring down the buildings.)


Who Did 911?

“I also would like to remind you that I am a specialist in nuclear weapons, unlike many of you. It was my profession for several years. (Who did 911?) It is not so simple as you might think.

Because the Mossad did it firstly, but not alone, and secondly not in its entirety. It was only certain individuals from the Mossad, not the entire Mossad. And it is quite complicated, indeed, so it is not so easy to explain it in a few lines.

Besides, the Mossad did only the minor part of the job. French secret service, for example, did much more than the Mossad.

Besides, all those ‘cameramen’ and ‘witnesses’ who ‘saw’ planes were not Mossad operatives, they were members of the Freemasonic sect. As well as ‘passengers’, pilots, stewardesses and many other actors involved. (TBFWS Editor: He is referring to people who were part of the script during the 9/11 operation.)

It is really a very complicated operation and I don’t know even 5% of its details.

Though I know some people from the Mossad and from the French secret services who were involved. I don’t know for sure who exactly fired the missile and from what kind of ship it was fired from.

But I can assure you that this was done by the Freemasons.”

The man who planned 9/11, his name is Mike Harari (now 82 or 83 years old) who is a retired counterintelligence specialist and former Deputy Chief of the Mossad; a former friend of the U.S. PresidentBush Senior and the former Deputy General Manuel Noriega – the Dictator of Panama.

A rare photo is posted below.



Nuclear Device For Building Demolition

Many years ago Rayelan Allen of RumorMillNews was told by her former husband Gunther Russbacher a CIA agent that a nuclear device was built into the United Nations foundation for its eventual demolition.

(And here we have Dimitri Khalezov of Russia revealing that it is standard policy in the United States to use such a device when constructing very large buildings.)

Dimitri replied:

“About the nuclear device under the U.N. building, I did not know that before, but it sounds reasonable to me. Because since the Controlled Demolition Inc. has patented nuclear technique for demolition, it would be reasonable to expect that they would promote it to get more contracts to secure more work for the future. This is capitalism, after all and everyone is after profits…

It should be noted that the nuclear weapons manufacturers are not ‘commercialized’ and to use nuclear devices on some commercial projects is a rare opportunity for them to get into some commerce too. So, why not use such an opportunity? So, I would not be surprised at all if this is true as reported by Russbacher.

Moreover, since the publication of my 9/11 movie, I’ve read even stranger news on the Internet regarding a Japanese architect who claimed that at least two skyscrapers in Japan also have nuclear devices installed under them by the Controlled Demolition Inc. (not surprising, considering that the initial architect of the WTC was a Japanese guy and he understandably brought this kind of idea back to Japan).

It looks awful, to be honest… I do remember that the U.N. building was promptly evacuated on 9/11 and it was also reported on television as a piece of important news.”

An alternative for the ‘Dimitri Khalezov Telephone Interview’ in below video:

911 Nuclear Demolition

Telephone interview to Dimitri Khalezov

http://blip.tv/play/AYHhlyUC


NOTE

Something mysterious has happened to Dimitri’s original Youtube channel.

Video links disabled by Israeli agent Owen Mark Le Winton:

All his videos were flagged to the ‘private’ setting and are no longer available to the public.

 

An imposter and obstructionist by the name of ‘Owen Mark Le Winton’ is claiming copyright on behalf of the Israeli government and Youtube believes him. Dimitri said that ‘Big Brother’ is extremely unhappy with his movie, and that hopefully the problem with the Israeli agent imposter Owen will be settled soon.

 

(Anyone can declare another person’s work as their own on Youtube. And in this case they are helping an imposter to suppress and steal another person’s original work).


“The Third Truth” by Dimitri Khalezov, Publisher: Lulu.com, ISBN: 1409288536; Edition: Paperback; 2009-11-25. (His book is not yet published. If you’re interested in a copy, email us and your contact information will be sent to an agent of the publisher.)


News

Note: Is there a connection between the Somali pirates hijacking the Russian oil tanker, the Israeli Mossad and the Russian government? Rumor has it that the Israelis are involved in the Somali pirate setup. Are members of the Mossad sending a warning to the Russian government regarding the Dimitri Khalezov revelation videos? 

Manuel Noriega Extradited To France

May 10, 2010
HUFFINGTONPOST.COM

The U.S. extradited former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega to France on Monday, clearing the way for him to stand trial there on money laundering charges.

The former strongman, who had been held in a federal prison just outside Miami, was placed on an overnight Air France flight to Paris, according to a Justice Department official who spoke anonymously because he was not authorized to comment on the case.

Noriega was ousted as Panama’s leader and put on trial following a 1989 U.S. military invasion ordered by President George H.W. Bush Sr. Noriega was brought to Miami and was convicted of drug racketeering and related charges in 1992.


Videos

from DiscloseTV Website

911 Nuclear Demolition

Dimitri Khalezov’s Nuclear Demolition Videos Being Scrubbed Off Web!

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Part 9

Part 10

Part 11

Part 12

Part 13

Part 14

Part 15

Part 16

Part 17

Part 18

Part 19

Part 20

Part 21

Part 22

Part 23

Part 24

Part 25

Part 26

 

Additional Information

Nuclear demolition of skyscrapers.

Nuclear demolition of skyscrapers.

Please, note: even though this web site deals with purely technical matters and it has absolutely nothing to do with any politics, it might still be considered being “politically incorrect”. So, a possibility exists that this site could be removed one day by authorities and such a prospect can not be ignored. If so happens, you would be able to find a reference to a new source here: www.911thology.cn (note, it is a *.cn domain, not *.com ), or you could search the Internet by ‘9/11thology’ keyword and you would always find some related info. 


This article describes a general concept of nuclear demolition of skyscrapers – particularly in connection with known thermo-nuclear demolition schemes of the World Trade Center in New York and that of the Sears Tower in Chicago. Though, the current article does not deal with any exact details of implementation of this concept in regard to these particular structures, but provides rather general knowledge on this subject. Besides, this article does not consider any conspiracy behind nuclear demolition of the WTC on 9/11, neither does it consider any moral aspect of this issue – such as ground zero clean-up works and so on – it aims to explain its purely technical aspect. However, there are other articles available in the Internet that describe the WTC nuclear demolition scheme in more or less exact detail, as well as articles that describe particular conspiracy in regard to the actual WTC demolition – links to these articles are available at the end of the current description.Nuclear demolition of skyscrapers was patented by “ Controlled Demolition Inc.” – the most renowned demolition company that deals with controlled demolition of buildings, and especially with controlled demolition of skyscrapers. The same company was a primary designer of nuclear demolition projects of the World Trade Center in New York and of the Sears Tower in Chicago.
Photo: South Tower begins to collapse.
The author of this article – Dimitri A. Khalezov, a former officer the Soviet nuclear intelligence, officially known as the Special Control Service of the 12th Chief Directorate of the Defense Ministry.

Part 1. Brief history. Atomic demolition.

Initial idea to use nuclear devices in demolishing various constructions was born almost simultaneously with an appearance of actual nuclear weapons in the beginning of 50s. At first nuclear munitions were not called “nuclear”, but “atomic”, so a concept of demolition using these munitions was called accordingly – “atomic demolition”. These words managed to survive and despite renaming former atomic weapons into “nuclear weapons”, words “atomic demolition” could still be encountered today in names of special engineering devices – SADM and MADM. The first one stands for “Special Atomic Demolition Munitions”, the second – for “Medium Atomic Demolition Munitions”, while many people mistakenly believe that SADM means “Small Atomic Demolition Munitions”, rather than “Special”.In fact, there would not be a big mistake to call them “small” instead of “special”, because SADM are indeed “small” – their nuclear explosive yields usually does not exceed 1 kiloton in TNT equivalent. Considering that all modern SADM have variable yields that could be set at as low as 0.1 kiloton, and sometimes even at 0.01 kiloton (equivalents to 100 and 10 metric tons of TNT respectively), they deserve to be called “small” munitions. Other popular names for these Small Atomic Demolition Munitions are “mini-nuke” and “suite-case nuke”, though the second one is probably not logically correct. In reality most of SADM resemble big pots weighing between 50 to 70 kilograms that could be carried as back-packs – so it is very unlikely that they could fit into any suite-case. However, there are also modern “mini-nukes” made of Plutonium-239, rather than of Uranium-235, and due to a much lower critical mass of Plutonium, their size could be significantly decreased – some latest Plutonium-based “mini-nukes” could indeed fit into an attache-case. Medium Atomic Demolition Munitions (MADM) are bigger in both – their size and their TNT yield. They could be up to 15 kiloton in TNT yield, weigh up to 200 kg and be as big as a typical large gas-cylinder for home use.Either of abovementioned atomic demolition munitions could be successfully used in demolishing large objects that could not be demolished by any reasonable amount of conventional explosives – especially in times of emergency, when there is neither time, nor a possibility to prepare their “normal” demolition by conventional means. For example, it could be bridges, dams, tunnels, some reinforced underground structures, large reinforced buildings, etc. However, an efficiency factor for such nuclear demolitions using SADM or MADM is not too high. As it is probably known, the main aim of controlled demolition of buildings by implosion method is not to actually eliminate these buildings by blowing them up and sending their parts flying around, but to bring them down neatly with the least possible damage to surroundings. For this reason engineers who prepare controlled demolitions have to first figure out exact points on buildings bearing structures and attach charges of conventional explosives to the right spots – in order to break these bearing structures. In almost all cases there would be more than one spot to attach explosives, since it is unlikely that any of such structures would have only a single supporting girder or a single supporting column that it is to be broken; at best case there would be a few of them, if not many. In case with nuclear demolition using abovementioned atomic demolition munitions it is not the case. People who suppose to use atomic munitions in case of emergency would have neither time, nor enough education to make such precise calculations as in case of a conventional controlled demolition. Maximum of what these people could have – is some basic field-engineering knowledge and some basic knowledge in regard to nuclear weapons usage. Thus, usage of atomic demolition munitions in such case is to bring down a targeted structure not “neatly”, but just anyhow and at any cost. That is why an explosive yield of atomic munitions used to demolish such structure in case of emergency in any case would be excessive, with major part of their entire explosive energy spent in vain – as in case with any other nuclear explosion. So, the major part of energy, released by a nuclear explosion of such an atomic demolition device would be spent on creating well-known factors of atomic blast: thermal radiation, air-blast wave, ionizing radiation, electro-magnetic pulse – that have nothing to do with the actual demolition task and could unlikely contribute to it. However, all these destructive factors of an atomic explosion would greatly contribute to damaging of the surroundings – and this damage could be rather extreme, definitely exceeding in its cost a cost of the actual demolition. It could be said that a nuclear demolition in the abovementioned sense would have much lower performance index compare to a precisely calculated conventional controlled demolition, since the latter one directs almost entire energy of explosives used on breaking bearing structures, rather than on creating an air-blast wave or a thermal radiation. Besides of this, an atomic demolition device itself is quite a costly thing too. At minimum, a Uranium-based “mini-nuke” costs a couple of million US dollars, if not more (a Plutonium-based one costs much more than that). Apparently, a thousand tons of TNT would cost cheaper than a 1 kiloton atomic munitions. However, it is possible to demolish quite a few buildings using 1000 tons of TNT, while it is possible to demolish only one single building (but to damage many other buildings around) using a “mini-nuke”. Considering all of this, it could be concluded that it is not an option – to use any atomic demolition munitions, either small, or medium, for demolishing any civil infrastructure in times of peace when there is enough time to prepare demolishing any of such objects nicely by conventional means. And in any case a conventional controlled demolition would be cheaper than a nuclear demolition. Mini-nukes could only be used for demolition job in case of real emergency.

Part 2. Modern history. Nuclear demolition of skyscrapers.

So, how come that this old atomic demolition concept, despite of being known to be too costly and despite of having a too low performance index compare to a conventional controlled demolition by implosion was eventually revived and even implemented in the World Trade Center nuclear demolition scheme? It happens because of a new generation of buildings has come into existence at the end of 60s – namely steel-framed buildings.Despite common misconception, there were no steel-framed skyscrapers ever been demolished by an implosion anywhere in the world. Primarily, because the most of skyscrapers are new buildings and their time to be demolished has not come yet. The tallest building ever demolished by an implosion was only 47-strories high – it was the Singer Building in New York City that was built in 1908 and demolished in 1968 due to its being obsolete. This building was a much weaker structure compare to incredibly strong hollow-tube type steel-frame skyscrapers being built today. So, despite common misconception, it is not possible to demolish a steel-frame building by a commonly known controlled demolition (implosion) scheme. In bygone days when buildings were brick-walled and concrete-panelled, their bearing structures used to be concrete supporting columns and concrete supporting girders. Sometimes these concrete bearing structures were reinforced by insertions of metal bars, but sometimes they were plain concrete. In either case it was possible to calculate right amount of conventional explosives to be attached to these bearing structures at right spots (or to be placed into holes drilled in bearing structures) in order to break them all at once and to cause the building to collapse into its footprint. However, it is no longer possible with modern steel-framed buildings – such as, for example former Twin Towers of the New Your World Trade Center, World Trade Center building # 7, or the Sears Tower in Chicago.Here is an example of steel structure of the WTC Twin Tower:
Photo: WTC Twin Tower under construction.
There was no any “bearing structure” in its former sense – the entire Tower was essentially a “bearing structure”. The WTC steel-frame consisted of exceptionally thick double-walled steel perimeter and core columns. This co-called “tube-frame design” was a totally new approach which allowed open floor plans rather than columns distributed throughout the interior to support building loads as it was traditionally implemented in previous structures. The Twin Towers featured load-bearing perimeter steel columns (square in cross-section) positioned one meter from each other on the Towers’ facades to form an exceptionally rigid structure, supporting virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and sharing the gravity load with the core columns. The perimeter structure contained 59 such columns per side. The core structure of the Tower consisted of 47 rectangular steel columns that run from the bedrock to the Towers’ tops. How such steel perimeter and core columns looked like could be seen from this picture showing some remnants of these columns as found on the ground zero after the WTC demolition following the September 11 attacks:
Photo: WTC core and perimeter columns.
Note that these core (rectangular) and perimeter (square) columns did not belong to lower parts of the Twin Towers, but to their upper parts. That is why they were spared by general pulverization the Towers were subjected to during their demolitions, while virtually nothing, except microscopic dust remained of similar columns belonging to the lower parts of the Twin Tower structure.Here is one more picture (from NIST report) showing the Twin Towers perimeter columns during their construction:
Photo: Twin Towers perimeter structures.

These steel columns were incredibly thick – each wall measuring 2.5 inch (6.35 cm), so the entire thickness of either of the columns was 5 inch (12.7 cm). To imagine how thick this is, here is a good example to compare with: front armour of the best tank of the WWII period – T-34 – was only 1.8 inch (4.5 cm) and it was single-walled. Yet there were practically no armour-piercing artillery shell available that time that would be capable of penetrating such front armour. Of course, no explosives whatsoever would ever be able to tear throw such front armour of a tank either (except only a hollow-charge shell which would still not be able to tear a complete piece of such armour, but only to burn some narrow hole through an armour plate). Considering that the Twin Towers’ steel frames consisted of double-walled steel columns that were almost trice as thick compare to the T-34 tanks’ front amour, it would not be possible to find any solution to break such columns simultaneously in many spots in order to achieve an “implosion” effect – the basic goal of any controlled demolition. It was, of course, technically possible to break some of these columns in certain spots, using exceptionally huge amounts of hollow-charges attached to each individual column, but even such an incredible solution would not help to achieve the desired “implosion effect”. The Towers were simply too high and too rigid – their steel cores would have been simultaneously broken in too many spots on every floor, which no one could afford. And even if they could, still, such a solution would not lead to the desired effect – there would not be any guarantee that such a high-raised structure would fall strictly down to its foot print – it might as well scatter its debris as far as a quarter of a mile, considering its mere height. So, it was impossible to bring the WTC Towers down by any kind of traditional controlled demolition.The same thing could be said about the WTC building # 7 and of the Sears Tower in Chicago. Either of them was constructed using similar thick double-walled steel frame that was impossible to break at once due to reasons described above. However, in accordance with the US laws governing construction of skyscrapers buildings designers had to submit some satisfactorily demolition project before their construction project could be approved by the Department of Buildings. No one could be allowed to build a skyscraper that can’t be demolished in the future. This is the main point of the skyscrapers’ in-built nuclear demolition features. Ironically, such a nuclear demolition scheme of a skyscraper is not meant to actually demolish the respective skyscraper, especially considering that no one has any practical experience in demolishing skyscrapers by such means – it is only intended to convince the Department of Buildings to permit the skyscraper’s construction whatsoever. It appears that all designers and proponents of such nuclear demolition schemes sincerely hope that their ideas would not be put to use during their life-time.Anyhow, “Controlled Demolition Inc.” began to study possibilities of demolishing modern skyscrapers by underground nuclear explosions at the end of 60s, at request of the then New York Sate Governor Nelson Rockefeller – when it became necessary to get a legal approval from the New York Department of Buildings for the WTC Twin Towers construction. After some research, a final solution was found and approved by the Department of Buildings and “Controlled Demolition Inc.” got its nuclear demolition know-how patented.

Part 3. How does a modern nuclear demolition work?

.
.
.
.
.

First of all, such a modern nuclear demolition has nothing to do with the former atomic demolition using SADM or MADM as described above. It is an entirely new concept. During modern nuclear demolition process, a demolition charge does not produce any atmospheric nuclear explosion – with its trade-mark atomic mushroom cloud, a thermal radiation and an air-blast wave. It explodes quite deep underground – much in the same sense as any nuclear charge explodes during a typical nuclear test. So, it does produce neither any air-blast wave, nor any thermal radiation, nor any penetrating radiation, nor any electro-magnetic pulse. It could cause only relatively minor harm to surroundings by an ensuing radioactive contamination, which, nonetheless, considered being a negligible factor by designers of such demolition schemes.

What is a basic difference between an atmospheric and an underground nuclear explosion? The basic difference is this. During an initial stage of a nuclear (as well as a thermo-nuclear) explosion, its entire explosive energy is being released in a form of a so-called “primary radiation” that in its main part (almost 99%) falls within X-rays spectrum (and remaining part is represented by gamma-rays spectrum that causes radiation injuries and visible spectrum that produces visible flash). So, this almost entire explosive energy represented by X-rays would be spent on heating of surrounding air at tens of meters around a hypocenter of such an explosion. It happens because X-rays can not travel too far, being consumed by surrounding air. Heating of this relatively small area around the nuclear explosion hypocenter would result in appearance of so-called “nuclear fireballs” that physically is nothing else than an extremely overheated air. These nuclear fireballs are responsible for the two main destructive factors of an atmospheric nuclear explosion – its thermal radiation and its air-blast wave, since both factors result exclusively from high temperatures of the air around a nuclear explosion. When it comes to an underground nuclear explosion, the picture is entirely different. There is no air around a small “zero-box” a nuclear charge is placed into, so an entire amount of energy instantly released by a nuclear explosion in a form of X-rays would be spent on heating of surrounding rock, instead. It would result in overheating, melting and evaporating of this rock. Disappearance of the evaporated rock would result in creation of an underground cavity, size of which directly depends on explosive yield of nuclear munitions used. You can have an idea on how much rock could disappear during an underground nuclear explosion from the below table – where quantities of evaporated and melted materials of various kinds (in metric tons) are shown on “per kiloton of yield” basis:

Rock type Specific mass of vaporized material
(in tons per kiloton yield)
Specific mass of the melted
material (in tons per kiloton yield)
Dry granite 69 300 (±100)
Moist tuff (18-20% of water) 72 500 (± 150)
Dry tuff 73 200 – 300
Alluvium 107 650 (±50)
Rock salt 150 800
Just as an example: detonation of a 150 kiloton thermo-nuclear charge buried sufficiently deep in granite rock would result in creation of a cavity measuring roughly 100 meters in diameter – such as the one shown in this picture:
Photo: WTC nuclear demolition idea.
Picture: underground cavity after nuclear blast.
All skyscrapers have their lowest foundations lying 20-30 meters beneath the Earth surface. So, it is possible to calculate a position of a “zero-box” under such a skyscraper in such a way that a nuclear explosion would produce a cavity upper end of which would not reach the Earth surface, but would reach only the lowest underground foundation of a skyscraper it intends to demolish.For example, in particular cases of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York, their lowest underground foundations were 27 meters beneath the surface. While the 150 kiloton thermo-nuclear demolition charges were positioned as depths of 77 meters (measuring from the surface), or 50 meters below their underground foundations. Such a thermo-nuclear explosion at a depth of 77 m would create an extremely overheated cavity with its upper sphere touching the lowest underground foundations of the Twin Tower it intends to demolish. But it would still be short of reaching the Earth surface by 27 meters – so surrounding structures would not to be affected by any destructive factors of this underground nuclear explosion (except by, possibly, only its radioactive contamination). The Tower that is to be demolished supposes to lose its foundations completely, and to be sucked-in into this overheated cavity, temperatures inside of which are deemed enough to melt the entire Tower. Nuclear demolition schemes of the WTC building # 7 and that of the Sears Tower in Chicago were calculated in the same way.

However, there is one more factor that is to be taken into consideration during calculation of nuclear demolition projects of skyscrapers. This is about the actual evaporated granite rock inside the cavity. Where all that former granite rock now in gaseous state supposes to go from the cavity? In fact, a picture of the physical events after an underground nuclear explosion is quite interesting. Let’s consider it.

Photo: physical process during underground nuclear blast.
This pictorial rendition schematically represents all important physical processes during an ideally deep (means occurred sufficiently far from the Earth surface) underground nuclear explosion. So, now it should become clear that an extreme pressure of the evaporated rock inside the cavity makes at least two important jobs: 1) it expands the actual cavity from its “primary” size to its “secondary” size; and 2) because it does this expansion at the expense of the neighboring areas of the rock, it produces two damaged zones around itself, each representing a different degree of damage. A zone immediately adjacent to the cavity in nuclear jargon is called a “crushed zone”. This zone could be as thick as a diameter of the cavity itself and it is filled with a very strange matter. Its filling is rock that is completely pulverized. It is reduced into a fine microscopic dust, an approximate particle of which is about 100 micron in size. Moreover, this particular state of material within this “crushed zone” is a very strange state – except after an underground nuclear tests it does not occurs anywhere else in nature. If you pick up a stone from this zone, but do so very gently, it might still stick together and still resemble a stone by its form and its color. However, it you only slightly press this “stone” with your fingers it will immediately crush into that complete microscopic dust it actually consists of. A second zone – next to the “crushed zone” is called a “damaged zone” in professional nuclear jargon. This “damaged zone” is filled with rock crushed to various pieces – from very small (millimeters in size), to some relatively big fragments. As closer to a border of the “crushed zone”, as smaller will be such debris, and as farther from hypocenter – as larger will be such debris. Finally, outside of the “damaged zone” border, there would be virtually no damage inflicted to surrounding rock.However, we have considered above the physical processes which are true to an “ideally deep” underground nuclear blast. When a nuclear charge is buried not sufficiently deep, a picture will be slightly different. “Damaged” and “crushed” zones will not be exactly round in the latter case. They would be rather elliptic – with their longer ends directed upwards – comparable with an egg facing upwards with its sharper end, or possibly even more ellipsoidal and sharper upwards than a typical egg. It happens because the pressure of the evaporated gases would encounter the least resistance towards the Earth surface (since it is too near), so either “crushed zone” or “damaged zone” would extend upwards farther than to any other direction. But when propagating upwards upper boundaries of the “damaged zone” and “crushed zone” encounter underground foundations of the Tower which is to be demolished, the picture would be even more different. It is because materials the Tower is built of differ from surrounding granite rock in a sense of resistance of materials. Besides, there is a lot of empty space inside the Tower, while the remaining granite rock towards the rest of directions (to either sides and downwards) is solid. So, expansion of the upper boundaries of “damaged” and “crushed” zones by the Tower’s structure will be the farthest. In case of the WTC Twin Towers or the Sears Tower the “damaged zone” could likely reach up to 350-370 meters, while “crushed zone” that follows immediately, would likely reach up to 290-310 meters. But in case of the much shorter WTC-7 its entire length will be within the “crushed zone” – so it would be pulverized completely. This ability of nuclear demolition to pulverize steel and concrete alike is one of its unique features.The picture below shows an example of that fine microscopic dust that covered all over Manhattan after the WTC demolition. Many people mistakenly believed that it was allegedly “concrete dust”. No, it was not. It was “complete” dust – mainly pulverized steel. Despite common misconception, the WTC structures did not contain much concrete. Concrete was used only in some limited quantities to make very thin floors slabs in the Twin Towers construction. It was not used anywhere else. The major part of the WTC Twin Towers was steel, not concrete. So this finest dust was in its major part represented by steel dust accordingly. Though, it was not only “steel dust” alone – it was also a “furniture dust”, “wood dust”, “paper dust”, “carpet dust”, “computer parts dust” and even “human dust”, since remaining in the Towers human beings were pulverized in the same manner as steel, concrete and furniture.
Photo: dust from the WTC pulverization.

Some people might wonder – why the WTC-7 collapsed to its footprint very neatly, in its entirety, while either of the Twin Towers crushed down scattering not only dust, but even some debris to quite large distances. This question is very easy to answer – you have to look at the distribution of “crushed” and “damaged” zones along the Twin Towers structures and the answer will become obvious.

The picture below represents an approximate distribution of damages in case of a nuclear demolition of a skyscraper using a 150 kiloton thermo-nuclear charge positioned 50 meters deeper than the lowest underground foundations of a skyscraper. Don’t forget, that demolition charges in this particular case were buried not “ideally deep”, that is why forms of the “crushed” and “damaged” zones were not “ideally round” either – they were elliptic, with their sharper ends facing upwards – towards areas of the least resistance.

Photo: nuclear demolition scheme.

This particular distribution of damages along the skyscrapers structures inflicted by such a process could be better understood when you watch videos showing details of collapses of the WTC Twin Towers and the WTC-7. You can click the “Videos” button at the top panel of this page to watch these videos.It should be added also that despite an apparent insufficiency of 150 kiloton thermo-nuclear charges to pulverize the tallest skyscrapers in their entirety, charges of higher yields could not be used in nuclear demolition industry due to merely legal reasons. The problem is that in accordance with the USA – Soviet so-called “ Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976” yield of nuclear munitions used for non-military purposes was limited to 150 kiloton /per individual nuclear explosion and to maximum of 1.5 megaton aggregate yield for group explosions. So, the nuclear demolition industry has to fit into these legal frames: in case of the WTC demolition it was possible to use as many charges as necessary, but not in excess of 150 kiloton per charge. That is why the WTC nuclear demolition scheme consisted of three of such charges – with aggregate yield of 450 kiloton. For those people who have difficulty to imagine how powerful 150 kiloton is, it could be reminded that an atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 was less than 20 kiloton.As it was mentioned in the beginning, this article does not describe any nuclear demolition scheme of a particular building in any exact detail, but does it rather on a conceptual level. But there is another article that describes a nuclear demolition scheme of the World Trade Center in New York in particular. It is available here: http://www.wtcnucleardemolition.comThe author of this article – Mr. Dimitri A. Khalezov, a former officer the Soviet nuclear intelligence, officially known as the Special Control Service of the 12th Chief Directorate of the Defense Ministry.

Any comments and suggestions are welcome.

GOOD NEWS: an interview with Dimitri Khalezov regarding the WTC nuclear demolition and 9/11 in general is now available. It contains detailed technical explanations supported by animated graphics and various contemporary 9/11 video clips.   You can find download links for this presentation on the Internet by searching for Dimitri Khalezov video in Google.

                                                                           

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.

                   Funds are badly needed to keep things  

               moving and the truth spreading.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.

.
.
..

Please, consider donating.

.
.
.
.
.


Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976 WTC demolition scheme, which was required to obtain the original building permit in New York

http://www.911thology.com
http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com
http://www.nuclear-demolition.com

September Clues
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWl8mUSDIwU

Amazing interview with Dimitri Khalezov, former Nuclear Intelligence officer of the Soviet Union. Because of the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976 between the USA and the former USSR and Dimitri’s military role in the USSR’s Nuclear Intelligence division, Dimitri had certain knowledge of the WTC demolition scheme, which was required to obtain the original WTC building permit in New York (i.e. NY did not issue a building permit without submitting a demolition scheme). Dimitri uses his insider information combined with his military background to explain the events of 911 in depth. He leaves no 911 question unanswered.

In Part 1, Dimitri explains:
– Dimitri Khalezov background
– Planes and explosions
– Pentagon mentioned (explained fully in Part 2)
– Nuclear detonations explained
– WTC1 & WTC2 nuclear demolition

Truth about Austerity Measures and Bailouts It’s Just Money for The Illuminati Family’s!

AntiNewWorldOrderParty.com
AntiNewWorldOrderParty.com

Austerity Measures and Bailouts are just payments to the Illuminati Family’s by way or proxy!  First the Banksters get Nations in dept by loans and bailouts that can not be paid back, like what is happening in America.  Second The Nation makes governmental cuts like what is happening in EUROPE  aka stealing pensions , cutting services like Parks, Police Teachers Firemen ect ect! Then the Government sells off Parks Government owned property, Roads Water ways Parks ect ect to the Illuminati Bankster Familys AKA the MOBSTERS!

This is all part of the (The Hegelian Dialectic) aka The Problem Reaction Solution method!  .. the Illuminati family’s or the ruling elite create a problem, anticipating in advance the reaction that the population will have to the problem and then have the prepared Solution!  Example an Global Economic Melt down.  The after the people react and demand a solution to the created problems that was the  desired agenda of the ruling elite.  Then and only then the Pre prepared agenda of the Global Elite Banksters  presented as the solution such as a one world Governmental Monetary system or Global Governmental system to fix the problem. 

The bad part about this conspiracy is that along with the reaction to the problem the population becomes violent, in protesting the Austerity Measures implemented by the Governments!  And once again (The Hegelian Dialectic) comes into place with  FEMA Camps AKA Concentration Camps for the protesters dissidents and homeless people effected by the Illuminati s Global Agenda 

In economicsausterity is a policy of deficit-cutting, lower spending, and a reduction in the amount of benefits and public servicesprovided.[1] Austerity policies are often used by governments to reduce their deficit spending[2] while sometimes coupled with increases in taxes to pay back creditors to reduce debt.[3] “Austerity” was named the word of the year by Merriam-Webster in 2010.[4]

The Expansionary fiscal contraction hypothesis is the economic theory that explores whether government austerity can result in economic expansion. This hypothesis indicates that expansion from austerity is very limited and occurs only during periods when consumption is not constrained.

Contents

[hide]

[edit]Reasons for undertaking austerity measures

Austerity measures are typically taken if there is a threat that a government cannot honor its debt liabilities. Such a situation may arise if a government has borrowed in foreign currencies that they have no right to issue or they have been legally forbidden from issuing their own currency. In such a situation, banks may lose trust in a government’s ability and/or willingness to pay and either refuse to roll over existing debts or demand extremely high interest rates. In such situations, inter-governmental institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) may demand austerity measures in exchange for functioning as a lender of last resort. When the IMF requires such a policy, the terms are known as ‘IMF conditionalities‘.

[edit]Typical effects

Development projects, welfare, and other social spending are common programs that are targeted for cuts: Taxes, port and airport fees, train and bus fares are common sources of increased user fees.

In many cases, austerity measures have been associated with protest movements claiming significant decline in standard of living. A case in point is the nation of Greece. The financial crisis—particularly the austerity package put forth by the EU and the IMF— was met with great anger by the Greek public, leading to riots and social unrest. On 27 June 2011, trade union organizations commenced a forty-eight hour labor strike in advance of a parliamentary vote on the austerity package, the first such strike since 1974. Massive demonstrations were organized throughout Greece, intended to pressure parliament members into voting against the package. The second set of austerity measures was approved on 29 June 2011, with 155 out of 300 members of parliament voting in favor. However, one United Nations official warned that the second package of austerity measures in Greece could pose a violation of human rights.[5]

[edit]Controversy

Austerity programs can be controversial. In the Overseas Development Institute briefing paper “The IMF and the Third World” the ODI addresses five major complaints against the IMF’s austerity ‘conditionalities’. These complaints include these measures being “anti-developmental”, “self-defeating”, and “they tend to have an adverse impact on the poorest segments of the population”. In many situations, austerity programs are implemented by countries that were previously under dictatorial regimes, leading to criticism that the citizens are forced to repay the debts of their oppressors.[6][7][8]

Economist Richard D. Wolff has stated that instead of cutting government programs and raising taxes, austerity should be attained by collecting (taxes) from non-profit multinational corporations, churches, and private tax-exempt institutions such as universities, which currently pay no taxes at all.[9]

In 2009, 2010, and 2011, workers and students in Greece and other European countries demonstrated against cuts to pensions, public services and education spending as a result of government austerity measures.[10][11] Following the announcement of plans to introduce austerity measures in Greece, massive demonstrations were witnessed throughout the country, aimed at pressing parliamentarians to vote against the austerity package. In Athens alone 19 arrests were made while 46 civilians and 38 policemen had been injured by June 29, 2011. The third round austerity has been approved by the Greece parliament on February 12, 2012 and has met strong opposition especially in the cities of Athens and Thessaloniki where the police have clashed with demonstrators.

Opponents argue that austerity measures tend to depress economic growth, which ultimately causes governments to lose more money in tax revenues. In countries with already anemic economic growth, austerity can engender deflation which inflates existing debt. This can also cause the country to fall into a liquidity trap, causing credit markets to freeze up and unemployment to increase. Opponents point to cases in Ireland and Spain in which austerity measures instituted in response to financial crises in 2009 proved ineffective in combating public debt, and placing those countries at risk of defaulting in late 2010.[12]

[edit]The “Age of Austerity”

The term “Age of austerity” was popularized by British Conservative leader David Cameron in his keynote speech to the Conservative party forum in Cheltenham on April 26, 2009, when he committed to put an end to what he called years of excessive government spending.[13] [14]

[edit]Word of the year

Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary named the word “austerity” as its “Word of the Year” for 2010 because of the number of web searches this word generated that year. According to the president and publisher of the dictionary, “austerity had more than 250,000 searches on the dictionary’s free online [website] tool” and the spike in searches “came with more coverage of the debt crisis”.[15]

[edit]Examples of austerity

This section is in a list format that may be better presented using prose. You can help by converting this section to prose, if appropriateEditing help is available. (June 2011)

Anti-austerity protests, chiefly taking the form of massive street protests by those affected by them and some of them also involving a greater or lesser degree of militancy, have happened regularly across various countries, especially on the European continent, since the onset of the present-day worldwide financial crisis. The phenomena are, collectively, decidedly separate, conceptually, from the austerity measures themselves, even though the enactment of the latter is a prerequisite for the former. This is because they are of the sizes they are; that they cut across age groups (e.g., both students and older workers) and other demographics; that they can incorporate many different types of actions in many different segments of a given country’s economy including education funding, infrastructure funding, manufacturing, aviation, social welfare, and many many others; and that the phenomenon of austerity, when explained by itself, is inadequate to properly encompass the phenomenon of widespread opposition to it, and that opposition’s nuances and fluctuations.

Anti-austerity actions are varied, ongoing, and can be either sporadic and loosely-organised or longer-term and tightly-organised. Theycontinue as of the present day. Recent upheavals in Tunisia and in Egypt in 2011 were originally largely anti-austerity and anti-unemployment before turning into wider social revolutions.

Most recently, the global and still-spreading Occupy movement has arguably been the most noticeable physical enactment of anti-austerity and populist sentiment.

Contents

[hide]

[edit]Background

Austerity is mainly noticed by a country when its aspects (usually known as ‘cuts’) are implemented unilaterally and forcibly (a “hatchet job“) rather than through a more careful strategy of creeping normalcy wherein such cuts are made to seem reasonable, or at least tolerable. Austerity is usually only referred to by that name when it is part of a sweeping package or packages of reforms that have the openly-admitted effect of great or even complete overhaul of major aspects of a society’s socioeconomic core facilities, programs and/or services. Because of this nature, austerity programs in general often are virulently opposed by the populations experiencing them, as they tend to have an impact on the poorest segments of the population. Those who are pro-austerity (who usually refer to the process as “deficit reduction”) usually counter that these poorest segments of the population would also suffer the most should a debt crisisoccur[citation needed], an argument rejected by most anti-austerity individuals.

Prior to the 2010 European sovereign debt crisis, in many situations, austerity programs were implemented by countries that were previously under dictatorial regimes (e.g., Portugal, Greece, Spain), leading to criticism that the citizens are forced to repay the debts of their oppressors.[1][2][3] In Greece, for example, the current austerity measures are popularly viewed as a combination of leftover policies of the 1967-1974 military dictatorship in that country on the one hand, and the “betrayal” of socialist principles by the current parliamentary-majority Panhellenic Socialist Movement on the other hand, due to that party’s wholesale enactment of extremely severe austerity measures in the country, which most everyday Greeks conceive of as intensely right-wing in nature, at least when compared to the party’s officially-stated core beliefs.[citation needed]

In the present-day enactments of various “austerity budgets”, however, a prior history of dictatorship is not necessarily a precondition for the implementation of such a budget by a given government. Examples of countries implementing severe austerity measures without a history of what the world’s mainstream media would typically consider a ‘dictatorship’, include the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, the latter of which witnessed its housing market completely (rather than partially as elsewhere) collapse, and the Republic eventually appealing for a massive bailout from the International Monetary Fund, “in exchange for” implementation of a very severe austerity programme. The austerity measures and the terms of the IMF bailout became major aspects of the 2008–2011 Irish financial crisis, and popular anger over these issues played a very major role in the loss of governmental power of Fianna Fáil to opposition parties in the 2011 Irish general election. The loss was so complete and so total for Fianna Fáil that many commentators remarked that the results were “historic”. Fine Gael and the Labour Party entered in to a coalition government with one another, and Fine Gael’s leaders have vowed to re-negotiate the terms of the IMF bailout so that austerity can be slowed or stopped and the Irish economy can be given a chance to grow again.[4] Sinn Féin, which for the first time also won a notable percentage in the election, has called for a nationwide referendum over whether the bailout agreement should be scrapped altogether, but this suggestion has been met with dismissal by officials.[5]

Austerity in most European countries, including Spain and Italy — where there have been massive anti-austerity protests, wildcat strikes, and union-organized industrial actions of various types at semi-regular intervals since late 2008, earning for the most part massive worldwide media attention — is by no means limited to what could be the ‘expected’ areas of the economy that might in theory experience direct penalties as a result of gross mismanagement, such as financial institutions. In fact, financial institutions rarely, if ever, truly receive such ‘punishment’ by a country’s government; austerity-like levies could perfectly well be imposed on them for causing, or helping to cause, the crisis that leads to the austerity measures in the first place, but typically are not. Instead, it is argued (chiefly by people engaging in anti-austerity protests, but also some economists as well) that rather than ‘punish’ the banks and others truly responsible for the crisis, the government is instead ‘punishing’ regular people for the ‘crimes’ of others, namely the ‘elite’ and/or greedy professional money-handlers engaging in market manipulation.

[edit]Examples

100,000 peaceful anti-austerity protesters in front of the parliament of Greece on 29 June 2011.

  • The May–July 2011 Greek protests, also known as the “Indignant Citizens Movement” or the “Greek indignados”, started demonstrating throughout Greece on 25 May 2011;[6] the movement’s largest demonstration was on 5 June, with 300,000 people gathering in front of the Greek Parliament,[7] while the organizers put the number to 500,000.[8] The protests lasted for over a month without any violent incidents, while on 29 June 2011, amid a violent police crackdown and accusations of police brutality by international media and Amnesty International,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15] the square was evacuated but demonstrations continued the next day despite the crackdown;[16][17] they officially ended on 7 August 2011,[18] but resumed in October.
  • The 2011 Spanish protests, whose participants are sometimes referred to as the “indignados“, are a series of ongoing anti-austerity demonstrations in Spain that rose to prominence beginning on 15 May 2011; thus, the movement is also sometimes referred to as the May 15 or M-15 movement as well. It is a collection of several different instances of continuous demonstrations countrywide, with a common origin in internet social networks and the Democracia Real Ya web presence, along with 200 other small associations.[19]
  • In late March 2011 the Portuguese Prime Minister resigned a few hours after the latest austerity bill he backed was rejected by the rest of government. The government called that particular austerity round unacceptable.[20] In his resignation speech, Jose Socrates expressed concern that an IMF bailout akin to Greece and Ireland would now be unavoidable.
  • In mid-March 2011 the British Medical Association held an emergency meeting at which it broadly decided to emphatically oppose pending legislation in the British Parliament, the Health and Social Care Bill, that would overhaul the functioning of the National Health Service. Dr Layla Jader, a public health physician, said: “The NHS needs evolution not revolution – these reforms are very threatening to the future of the NHS. If they go through, our children will look back and say how could you allow this to happen?” And Dr Barry Miller, an anaethetist from Bolton, added: “The potential to do phenomenal damage is profound. I haven’t seen any evidence these proposals will improve healthcare in the long-term.”[21] There have also been various grassroots groups of UK citizenry virulently opposing the pending new bill, including NHS Direct Action,[22] 38 Degrees,[23] and the trade union Unite.[24]
  • One of the United Kingdom‘s most severe austerity measures came into the force of law on 9 December 2010: spending for higher education and tuition subsidies and assistance in English universities — historically rather substantial in scale — was cut by an astounding total of 80%.[25] That announcement and its implications, which included a near-tripling of student tuition fees from their previous levels[26] up to a new ceiling of £9000/year, led to a huge backlash amongst students who almost immediately took to the streets over various non-sequential days against this announcement, squaring off with police on several occasions including an instance where some students angrily entered the Conservative headquarters and smashed windows and destroyed its interior.[27]On the day of the passage of the measure itself, there was an explosion of street violence by enraged students and their allies, especially in London. There is an ongoing law enforcement investigation into, and even active pursuing of,[28] the participants of the violence over the various protest days, with particular attention focusing on the moments when a number of protesters successfully attacked a royal car driving on its way to a London event,[29] although they did not injure its occupants. Shouts of “off with their heads” were reportedly heard.[30] On 25 March 2011, Charlie Gilmour, son of Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour, became one of the more high-profile individuals to be officially charged in relation to those events.[31] As a result of these protests, a number of groups formed to combat the austerity measures that began with the cuts to higher education. One such example is Bloomsbury Fightback!, which is a group of radical students and workers in Bloomsbury, London, centred around the Bloomsbury Colleges in theUniversity of London and focusing on organising around education and employment issues, of which many are the result of the austerity measures, .
  • The group UK Uncut is one outgrowth of the anger felt by average citizens at austerity, albeit the group focuses not so much on combating the cuts themselves as on demanding that the rich, rather than the poor, pay the shortfalls causing the austerity in the first place — a sort of “tax the rich” movement. UK Uncut attempts to organise flash mob protests inside the highest-profile buildings of the businesses of the rich people avoiding tax or paying less than they should.
  • Around the same time as the heating-up of the England protests (but before the passing of the bill), students in Italy occupied theleaning tower of Pisa in a similar protest regarding its own educational system.[32]
  • On 27 November 2010, a massive protest against pending austerity took place in Dublin;[33] The Irish Examiner news service also reports on a 7 December 2010 clash around the Dáil where protesters threw smoke bombs and flares at police.[34] Additionally, La Scala in Italy experienced a clash on 8 December 2010 including scuffles with police.[35]
  • More generally, throughout 2009 and 2010, workers and students in Greece and other European countries demonstrated against cuts to pensions, public services and education spending as a result of government austerity measures.[36] There was a brief airport strike in Spain in December 2010, and assorted brief “general strike”-like actions in France have taken place, particularly around the very controversial plan of the French government to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62, a proposal which eventually successfully passed.
  • Further protests have since taken place in Greece and elsewhere, have continued throughout 2011 and 2012,[37] including in Nigeriawith major large street clashes against the withdrawal of fuel subsidies. There was also a major protest in London by UK groups from across that country on 26 March 2011,[38] centred around a protest call initially made by the Trades Union Congress but subsequently involving many other groups. In general, the UK’s round of austerity measures, or “cuts”, from April 2011 onward are understood by most of the population to be, as an aggregated phenomenon, the worst withdrawal of public services since those services’ foundings, in the early 20th century and the post-World War II era. The coalition government currently in power in Britain repeatedly reassures the public that these public sector cuts will be replaced by a “Big Society” underpinned by charitiesstart-up businesses and private enterprise. Critics counter on the one hand that such a model is effective back-door privatisation, and on the other hand that even assuming the “Big Society” is a genuine populist initiative, it still fails conceptually, since the very charities and start-up businesses touted in this model are also the ones being severely slashed or eliminated by the new austerity-fuelled economics of the government.
  • Participants in more militant forms of protest engaged in during the 26th March demonstration, who in total only comprised 1,500 people out of the estimated 250,000-500,000 total participants, have been relentlessly attacked by the government as “mindless thugs”[39] with the UK’s mainstream media including the BBC generally supporting this perception. This remains the case even though the fundamental seriousness of damage thus far remains debatable; much reporting seems to have focused on the smashing of a Santander bank branch’s glass entranceway doors by largely anarchist activists, who would have also been behind the simultaneous destruction of several automated teller machines and the scrawling of “class war” in graffiti on neighbouring walls — rather than destruction of infrastructure such as roads, bridges, schools or homes that would have indisputably comprised terrorismby any objective measure. There are those who would therefore argue that the activists, even if misguided in their actions, still technically only targeted the institutions (i.e., banks) perceived responsible for the cuts, and did not cross the line into more general mayhem. Nevertheless, the Home Secretary Theresa May vociferously advocates the review by authorities of UK terrorism law to determine whether the Metropolitan Police can legally extend their own powers of arrest and detention using those provisions. Talk of the approximately 1,500 people involved in the militant aspects of the anti-cuts march almost totally eclipsed the more general event of up to half a million peaceable, albeit still angry, protesters who say they have very real, very personal grievances against the government’s cuts plans.

[edit]Perspectives

Economist Richard D. Wolff has stated that instead of cutting government programs and raising taxes, austerity should be attained by collecting from non-profit multinational corporations, churches, and private tax-exempt institutions such as universities, which currently pay no taxes at all.[40] Groups like UK Uncut and the campaigners for a Robin Hood tax argue for a “tax the banks” strategy that is similar, as well as to argue that the banks and corporations severely underpay the taxes they already owe, and need to stop tax-dodging.

There are also those like Nobel Prize laureate Paul Krugman, who argue that austerity measures tend to be counterproductive when applied to the populations and programs they are usually applied to.[41] This argument holds that austerity measures tend not to revitalize economies by ‘getting people off of benefits and back to work,’ and similar, but rather that austerity simply depresses economic growth wholesale, which ultimately causes governments to lose more money in tax revenues than they would have if they had not enacted the austerity and instead created jobs and new infrastructure and industries. In countries with already anemic economic growth, austerity can engender deflation which inflates existing debt. This can also cause the country to fall into a liquidity trap, causing credit markets to freeze up and unemployment to increase. Advocates of these positions point to cases in Ireland and Spain in which austerity measures instituted in response to financial crises in 2009 proved ineffective in combating public debt and the countries got in ever more dire financial straits as 2010 and 2011 progressed.[42]

[edit]References

  1. ^ Harvey, D (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism
  2. ^ Klein, N. (2007) The Shock Doctrine
  3. ^ Chomsky, N (2004) Hegemony or Survival
  4. ^ http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Enda-Kenny-and-Eamon-Gilmore-will-renegotiate-EU-bailout-117573543.html
  5. ^ http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/bacik-dismisses-sinn-fein-calls-for-bailout-referendum-497233.html
  6. ^ “Στα χνάρια των Ισπανών αγανακτισμένων (On the footsteps of the Spanish ‘indignados’)” (in Greek). http://www.skai.gr. 26 May 2011. Retrieved 26 May 2011.
  7. ^ “300.000 πολίτες στο κέντρο της Αθήνας!” (in Greek). http://www.skai.gr. 5 June 2011. Retrieved 5 June 2011.
  8. ^ “”Αγανακτισμένοι”: Πρωτοφανής συμμετοχή σε Αθήνα και άλλες πόλεις” (in Greek). http://www.skai.gr. 5 June 2011. Retrieved 5 June 2011.
  9. ^ “Greece passes key austerity vote”. http://www.bbc.co.uk. 29 June 2011. Retrieved 29 June 2011.
  10. ^ Siddique, Haroon; Batty, David (29 June 2011). “Greece austerity vote and demonstrations – Wednesday 29 June 2011”. London: http://www.guardian.co.uk. Retrieved 1 July 2011.
  11. ^ Smith, Helena (1 July 2011). “Greek police face investigation after protest violence”. London: http://www.guardian.co.uk. Retrieved 3 July 2011.
  12. ^ “TEAR GAS FIRED AS GREEK POLICE CLASH WITH ATHENS PROTESTERS”. http://www.amnesty.org. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
  13. ^ “GREECE URGED NOT TO USE EXCESSIVE FORCE DURING PROTESTS”. http://www.amnesty.org. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
  14. ^ “Back when peaceful demonstrations in Greece were massive and meaningful…”. http://www.ireport.cnn.com. Retrieved 3 July 2011.
  15. ^ Donadio, Rachel; Sayare, Scott (29 June 2011). “Violent Clashes in the Streets of Athens”. http://www.nytimes.com. Retrieved 3 July 2011.
  16. ^ “Επιστρέφουν στην Πλατεία Συντάγματος οι Αγανακτισμένοι για να εμποδίσουν την ψήφιση του βασικού εφαρμοστικού νόμου” (in Greek). Retrieved 30 June 2011.
  17. ^ “Πλήγμα για την Ελλάδα το βομβαρδισμένο κέντρο” (in Greek). Retrieved 30 June 2011.
  18. ^ “Απομακρύνθηκαν οι “Αγανακτισμένοι” από τον Λευκό Πύργο”. http://www.protothema.gr. Retrieved 9 August 2011.
  19. ^ “Movimiento 15-M: los ciudadanos exigen reconstruir la política (15-M Movement: citizens demand political reconstruction)”. Politica.elpais.com. 2011-05-17. Retrieved 2011-05-22.
  20. ^ “Portugal PM Jose Socrates resigns after budget rejected”BBC News. 23 March 2011.
  21. ^ “Doctors want halt to NHS plans but reject opposition”BBC. 15 March 2011.
  22. ^ http://www.nhsdirectaction.co.uk/
  23. ^ http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/Protect_our_NHS_Petition#petition
  24. ^ http://www.unitetheunion.org/sectors/health_sector/unite_4_our_nhs.aspx
  25. ^ Mulholland, Hélène (2010-12-09). “Lib Dem parliamentary aide quits over tuition fees as MPs prepare to vote”guardian.co.uk(London: Guardian News and Media). Retrieved 2011-01-04.
  26. ^ http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/Lib-Dems-join-key-vote-tuition-fees-rise/article-2974808-detail/article.html
  27. ^ “California university students protest tuition hikes”CNN. 18 November 2009.
  28. ^ “Latest Suspects Wanted For Violent Disorder And Affray”Daily Mail (London). 20 March 2011.
  29. ^ “Student protests: Radio failure claims rejected”BBC News. 11 December 2010.
  30. ^ http://abcnews.go.com/International/british-prince-charles-royal-car-attacked-luck-photographer/story?id=12363034
  31. ^ Davies, Caroline (25 March 2011). “Charlie Gilmour to stand trial over attack on royal convoy”The Guardian (London).
  32. ^ “Italian student protesters occupy Leaning Tower of Pisa”BBC News. 25 November 2010.
  33. ^ http://www.thirdage.com/news/dublin-unions-protest-harsh-austerity-plan_11-27-2010
  34. ^ http://budget.breakingnews.ie/news/protesters-target-dail-over-cuts-484837.html
  35. ^ “Italian cuts spark fight at the opera for La Scala”BBC News. 8 December 2010.
  36. ^ Kyriakidou, Dina (4 August 2010). “In Greece you get a bonus for showing up for work – Arcane benefits add billions to Greece’s bloated budget”. Toronto: thestar.com. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  37. ^ “Riots in Greece as austerity measures start to bite”Austerity Bill. 23 February 2011.
  38. ^ Taylor, Matthew (14 March 2011). “Anti-cuts campaigners plan ‘carnival of civil disobedience'”The Guardian (London).
  39. ^ “Home Secretary Theresa May condemns protest ‘thugs'”BBC News. 28 March 2011.
  40. ^ Wolff, Richard (4 July 2010). “Austerity: Why and for Whom?”. RDWolff.com. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  41. ^ Krugman, Paul (1 July 2010). “Myths of Austerity”The New York Times.
  42. ^ Leung, Sophie; Salamat, Rishaad (11 November 2010). “Stiglitz Says Ireland Has Bleak Prospect of Cutting Deficit, Saving Banks”.Bloomberg.
  1. ^ Elmhirst, Sophie (24 September 2010). “Word Games: Austerity”. New Statesman. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  2. ^ Traynor, Ian; Katie Allen (11 June 2010). “Austerity Europe: who faces the cuts”. London: Guardian News. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  3. ^ Wesbury, Brian S.; Robert Stein (26 July 2010). “Government Austerity: The Good, Bad And Ugly”. Forbes.com. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  4. ^ “Word of the Year 2010”. Merriam-Webster.
  5. ^ “Greek austerity measures could violate human rights, UN expert says”. http://www.un.org. 30 June 2011. Retrieved 3 July 2011.
  6. ^ Harvey, D (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism
  7. ^ Klein, N. (2007) The Shock Doctrine
  8. ^ Chomsky, N (2004) Hegemony or Survival
  9. ^ Wolff, Richard (4 July 2010). “Austerity: Why and for Whom?”. RDWolff.com. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  10. ^ Kyriakidou, Dina (4 August 2010). “In Greece you get a bonus for showing up for work – Arcane benefits add billions to Greece’s bloated budget”. Toronto: thestar.com. Retrieved 29 September 2010.
  11. ^ Costas Kantouris and Nicholas Paphitis (10 September 10 2011). “Greek police, firefighters protest”The Boston Globe.Associated Press Sm,meme,emme,e,e,e. Retrieved 29 September 2011.
  12. ^ Leung, Sophie (2010-11-11). “Stiglitz Says Ireland Has Bleak Prospect of Cutting Deficit, Saving Banks”. Bloomberg. Retrieved 2011-07-01.
  13. ^ Deborah Summers (26 April 2009). “David Cameron warns of ‘new age of austerity'”The Guardian (.). Retrieved April 26, 2009.
  14. ^ M. Nicolas Firzli & Vincent Bazi (Q4 2011). “Infrastructure Investments in an Age of Austerity : The Pension and Sovereign Funds Perspective”Revue Analyse Financière, volume 41. Retrieved 30 July 2011.
  15. ^ Contreras, Russell (December 20, 2010). “Audacity of ‘austerity,’ 2010 Word of the Year”. Associated Press. Retrieved December 20, 2010.[dead link]
  16. ^ Time Magazine (1952), “ARGENTINA: Inflexible Austerity”
  17. ^ Sonja Pace (2010-06-16). “Germany Approves Biggest Austerity Plan Since World War II | News | English”. .voanews.com. Retrieved 2011-07-01.
  18. ^ “WRAPUP 4-Greek debt costs spike on budget jitters”.Reuters. 21 January 2010.
  19. ^ “UPDATE 2-Italy joins Europe’s austerity club with deep cuts”Reuters. 25 May 2010.
  20. ^ (AFP) – Jul 27, 2010 (2010-07-27). “AFP: Japan unveils budget austerity guidelines”. Google.com. Retrieved 2011-07-01.
  21. ^ “Soros says EU “wrong” to push austerity on Latvia”.Reuters. 10 October 2009.
  22. ^ “Mexico’s Austerity Plans”The New York Times. 8 February 1985.
  23. ^ “Revista Envío – President Arnoldo Alemán Between the Fund and the Front”. Envio.org.ni. Retrieved 2011-07-01.
  24. ^ “Bankrupt Hamas government unveils austerity package”. Americanintifada.com. Retrieved 2011-07-01.
  25. ^ Leigh Phillips (2010-05-20). “EUobserver / Romania sees biggest protest since 1989 over austerity measures”. Euobserver.com. Retrieved 2011-07-01.
  26. ^ Salvadó, Francisco J. Romero (1999) Twentieth-century Spain: politics and society in Spain, 1898–1998
  27. ^ Coates, Sam; Evans, Judith (7 June 2010). “Cameron fingers culprits for Britains 770bn debt pile”The Times (London).

With Glen Beck You actually do get some truth from him albeit a watered down version with his truth comes the treachery like a dirty referee in a football game. He makes good calls all game until the score is tied and it’s 4th down and you have the ball on the goal line ready to score and he calls an offside penalty and moves you back or gives the other team the ball.

  • why when I get an email from Freedomworks entitled “Patriot, get your free gift from Glenn Beck” do I start searching for land in Chile
    7 people like this.

Upstate NY Public School Bans Use Of The Word FREEDOM

Upstate NY Public School Bans Use Of The Word FREEDOM

by  on March 24, 2012

Students of the 8th grade at Spry Middle School  in Webster NY were banned from using the word freedom and from wearing shirts bearing the word freedom at a school rally on march 4th , 2011 . Several weeks earlier students began organizing a protest campaign planning to shout the word ” freedom ” and wear shirts with the word freedom written across the front  at the upcoming rally. The protest was in support of a classmate who was suspended , arrested , and put on trial in town cout for having a small amount of marijuana . Just minutes before the rally , principal Dave Swinson took the entire 8th grade class aside and threatened them by saying anyone who says ” free , freedom , free Paul , or rasta ” or wears the t-shirts with freedom written across the front , will be removed from the rally , suspended , and face ” further consequences “. Not to be defeated , the students wore the shirts anyway . They also planned a suprise for the rally . As each class was introduced , there was yelling and screaming , each class trying to out-shout the other . When it came time for the 8th grade the principal made the introduction , everyone awaited the loudest screams of all and ……TOTAL SILENCE ! With a ” silent freedom scream ” these adult-minded children showed child-like adults the failure of prohibition , the power of protest and the meaning of freedom . A week and a half later on March 15 units of the Webster police and the Monroe County sheriffs office entered Spry middle school , a “gun free zone ” , heavily armed with batons , tasers , and loaded  handguns . There was no 911 call . There was no complaint . Students were held hostage , forced to remain in one place for almost an hour . Three german shepard police dogs were circulated throughout the hallways , barking aggressively and scaring the children in the classrooms , according to eyewitnesses . Several students were taken away for interrogation and physically searched by adults not related to them . No arrests were made . In a follow-up email principal Swinson  told parents of the traumatized children : ” the drill went very well , as we expected . “

 

 

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑