World Debt Clocks ???

Link:

WW3 Starts !!! Israeli & Palestinian Maps 1946 – 2000

(Now that Obama wants pre-1967 Israel border, will he now want pre-1845 Texas border?)

Newsmax
Allen West: Obama’s Recognition of Pre-1967 Borders ‘Beginning of the End’ for Jewish State
Thursday, May 19, 2011 03:19 PM
By: Newsmax Wires

Conservatives led by Florida Republican Allen West Thursday were quick to blast President Barack Obama’s game-changing recognition of a Palestinian state existing along Israel’s pre-1967 borders — a decision that many described as an existential threat for the Jewish state.

“Today’s endorsement by President Barack Obama of the creation of a Hamas-led Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, signals the most egregious foreign policy decision his administration has made to date, and could be the beginning of the end as we know it for the Jewish state,” said West, R-Fla., one of the leading Tea Party thinkers in the House Republican freshman class,” West said in a prepared statement.

“From the moment the modern day state of Israel declared statehood in 1948, to the end of the 1967 Six Day War, Jews were forbidden access to their holiest site, the Western Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City, controlled by Jordan’s Arab army.

“The pre-1967 borders endorsed by President Obama would deny millions of the world’s Jews access to their holiest site and force Israel to return the strategically important Golan Heights to Syria, a known state-sponsor of terrorism,” said West, a career military veteran of the war in Iraq.

“Resorting to the pre-1967 borders would mean a full withdrawal by the Israelis from the West Bank and the Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem. Make no mistake, there has always been a Nation of Israel and Jerusalem has been and must always be recognized as its rightful capital.

“In short, the Hamas-run Palestinian state envisioned by President Obama would be devastating to Israel and the world’s 13.3 million Jews. It would be a Pavlovian style reward to a declared Islamic terrorist organization, and an unacceptable policy initiative.

Glenn Beck’s comments Video Link:

Engineers & 9/11 ….

Engineers Request Permission to Speak Freely Regarding World Trade Building 7

Washington’s Blog
May 21, 2011

Preface: This essay does not question whether Bin Laden and Al Qaeda attacked us on September 11, 2001, or whether Iran, Saudi Arabia or another nation-state had a hand in the attacks. It focuses solely on a peripheral issue regarding the third building which fell on that terrible day.

Former commander-in-chief President Bush said:

Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories.

Indeed, the 9/11 Commission was warned not to probe too deeply. For example, ACLU, FireDogLake’s Marcy Wheeler and RawStory reported (quoting RawStory):

Senior Bush administration officials sternly cautioned the 9/11 Commission against probing too deeply into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, according to a document recently obtained by the ACLU.

The current commander-in-chief, Barack Obama, has also warned against questioning 9/11:

As anyone in the military knows, you can’t give your opinion unless you get first “permission to speak freely”.
We’re not in the military. However, I am not entirely sure that matters, given that speaking out against government policies may be considered a type of terrorism in America today.

Many hundreds of high-level military officers, intelligence officers, congressmen, legal scholars and experts have broken the commander-in-chief’s orders not to question the government’s official narrative regarding 9/11. And see this and this.

But neither Bush nor Obama has instructed us not to discuss World Trade Center Building 7. Indeed, they have never once mentioned the fact that a third building collapsed on 9/11 (and the 9/11 Commission never mentioned it either), even though that building was not hit by a plane.
And no one was killed when Building 7 collapsed. As such, discussions of why Building 7 fell does not question Al Qaeda’s responsibility for the 3,000 deaths of innocent Americans which occurred on 9/11. It doesn’t even touch on U.S. military affairs since 9/11, since no wars or anti-terror campaigns were launched to avenge anything which happened in connection with Building 7.

For these reasons, I will take the commander-in-chiefs’ silence on this subject as permission to speak freely. And the family members who lost loved ones on 9/11 want this topic discussed.

Moreover, if Building 7 collapsed for reasons other than the official explanation, that does not necessarily show nefarious intent. For example, Paul K.

Trousdale – a structural engineer with decades of experience – says:

I had always thought the 3rd building was destroyed to prevent unpredictable collapse.

Here It Is

Have you ever seen Building 7 collapse? Here’s footage from several different angles:

Top Experts Say Official Explanation Makes No Sense

Numerous structural engineers – the people who know the most about office building vulnerabilities and accidents – say that the official explanation of why building 7 at the World Trade Center collapsed on 9/11 is “impossible”, “defies common logic” and “violates the law of physics”:
Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)

Alfred Lee Lopez, with 48 years of experience in all types of buildings:

I agree the fire did not cause the collapse of the three buildings. The most realistic cause of the collapse is that the buildings were imploded

John D. Pryor, with more than 30 years experience:

The collapse of WTC7 looks like it may have been the result of a controlled demolition. This should have been looked into as part of the original investigation

Robert F. Marceau, with over 30 years of structural engineering experience:

From videos of the collapse of building 7, the penthouse drops first prior to the collapse, and it can be noted that windows, in a vertical line, near the location of first interior column line are blown out, and reveal smoke from those explosions. This occurs in a vertical line in symmetrical fashion an equal distance in toward the center of the building from each end. When compared to controlled demolitions, one can see the similarities

Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley and 30 years of engineering experience, says:

Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition

Steven L. Faseler, structural engineer with over 20 years of experience in the design and construction industry:

World Trade Center 7 appears to be a controlled demolition. Buildings do not suddenly fall straight down by accident

Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, writes:

Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash – twice. Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust

Graham John Inman points out:

WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?

Paul W. Mason notes:

In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation

David Scott says:

Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode . . . .

Nathan Lomba states:

I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures.
Neither of the official precipitating sources for the collapses, namely the burning aircraft, were centered within the floor plan of either tower; both aircraft were off-center when they finally came to rest within the respective buildings. This means that, given the foregoing assumptions, heating and weakening of the structural framing would have been constrained to the immediate vicinity of the burning aircraft. Heat transmission (diffusion) through the steel members would have been irregular owing to differing sizes of the individual members; and, the temperature in the members would have dropped off precipitously the further away the steel was from the flames–just as the handle on a frying pan doesn’t get hot at the same rate as the pan on the burner of the stove. These factors would have resulted in the structural framing furthest from the flames remaining intact and possessing its full structural integrity, i.e., strength and stiffness.
Structural steel is highly ductile, when subjected to compression and bending it buckles and bends long before reaching its tensile or shear capacity. Under the given assumptions, “if” the structure in the vicinity of either burning aircraft started to weaken, the superstructure above would begin to lean in the direction of the burning side. The opposite, intact, side of the building would resist toppling until the ultimate capacity of the structure was reached, at which point, a weak-link failure would undoubtedly occur. Nevertheless, the ultimate failure mode would have been a toppling of the upper floors to one side–much like the topping of a tall redwood tree–not a concentric, vertical collapse.

For this reason alone, I rejected the official explanation for the collapse of the WTC towers out of hand. Subsequent evidence supporting controlled, explosive demolition of the two buildings are more in keeping with the observed collapse modalities and only serve to validate my initial misgivings as to the causes for the structural failures

Edward E. Knesl writes:

We design and analyze buildings for the overturning stability to resist the lateral loads with the combination of the gravity loads. Any tall structure failure mode would be a fall over to its side. It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below.

We do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the top.
The engineering science and the law of physics simply doesn’t know such possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled demolition can achieve such result, eliminating the natural dampening effect of the structural framing huge mass that should normally stop the partial collapse. The pancake theory is a fallacy, telling us that more and more energy would be generated to accelerate the collapse. Where would such energy would be coming from?

Michael T. Donly, P.E.:

Antonio Artha,with 15+ years of experience in building design
Fire and impact were insignificant in all three buildings. Impossible for the three to collapse at free-fall speed. Laws of physics were not suspended on 9/11, unless proven otherwise

Steven Francis Dusterwald:

The symmetrical “collapse” due to asymmetrical damage is at odds with the principles of structural mechanics

John S. Lovrovich:

It is virtually impossible for WTC building 7 to collapse as it did with the influence of sporadic fires. This collapse HAD to be planned

Travis McCoy, M.S. in structural engineering

James Milton Bruner, Major, U.S. Air Force, instructor and assistant professor in the Deptartment of Engineering Mechanics & Materials, USAF Academy, and a technical writer and editor, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Christopher Michael Bradbury:

It is very suspicious that fire brought down Building 7 yet the Madrid hotel fire was still standing after 24 hours of fire. This is very suspicious to me because I design buildings for a living

David Anthony Dorau, practicing structural engineer with 18 years’ experience in the inspection and design of buildings under 5 stories tall, who worked as a policy analyst for the Office of Technology Assessment, an arm of the U.S. Congress providing independent research and reports on technological matters

Russell T. Connors, designed many buildings and other types of structures

Lester Jay Germanio, 20+ years experience

Daniel Metz, 26+ years experience

Jonathan Smolens, 11 years experience, with a specialty in forensic engineering

William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont Technical College

Marshall Casey Pfeiffer

Paul A. Thomas

Steven Merritt

Kers Clausen

Dennis Kollar, American structural engineer

Doyle Winterton, American structural engineer (retired)

The above is just a sample. Many other structural engineers have questioned the collapse of Building 7, as have numerous experts in other disciplines, including:

The former head of the Fire Science Division of the government agency which claims that the World Trade Centers collapsed due to fire (the National Institute of Standards and Technology), who is one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering (Dr. James Quintiere), called for an independent review of the World Trade Center collapse investigation. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. … I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.
A Dutch demolition expert (Danny Jowenko) stated that WTC 7 was imploded

Harry G. Robinson, III – Professor and Dean Emeritus, School of Architecture and Design, Howard University. Past President of two major national architectural organizations – National Architectural Accrediting Board, 1996, and National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, 1992. In 2003 he was awarded the highest honor bestowed by the Washington Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, the Centennial Medal. In 2004 he was awarded the District of Columbia Council of Engineering and Architecture Societies Architect of the Year award. Principal, TRG Consulting Global / Architecture, Urban Design, Planning, Project Strategies. Veteran U.S. Army, awarded the Bronze Star for bravery and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam – says:
The collapse was too symmetrical to have been eccentrically generated. The destruction was symmetrically initiated to cause the buildings to implode as they did

A prominent physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC (Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the official theory for why Building 7 collapsed “does not match the available facts” and supports the theory that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition
Again, this essay is not questioning whether or not Al Qaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks, or even the collapse of the Twin Towers.

It is simply questioning why a third building which was never hit by a plane collapsed on 9/11. (Not that planes caused WTC to collapse free fall speed )

For-Profit US Corporation Tax Exempt ??? Only 1 in USA !!!

The FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM is the only for-profit corporation in America that is exempt from both federal and state taxes. The FED takes in about one trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking families listed below get all that money. Forty cents in every dollar of US taxes.

Who really owns the FED? The Rothschilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New York.

There have been three central banks in the nation’s history. The first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by the current FED. What they all have in common is an insidious practice known as “fractional banking.”

Although the Federal Reserve Bank claims not to be private as their website claims, the clearly operate under terms that no other “government institution” operates by. For example, they are not required to submit financial information and are not subject to IRS audits, nor do they even publish the amount of money they print to the American public. So given these terms it’s hard to believe the Federal Reserve’s claims that they are a government institution providing a genuine service to the American people. A commonly held position not mentioned on their website is that The FED is a privately owned central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a country’s fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it wasn’t for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, including the United States FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but for profit.

“It is well the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” — Henry Ford

Actual 1976 List link:
http://www.lust-for-life.org/Lust-For-Life/HowRothschildFamilyControlsFED/ImageFiles/chart1.png/a>

http://www.apfn.net/doc-100_bankruptcy27.htm/a>

The Solution: Guns Gold Silver Food Storage & Ammo…….

US – Fiat – Fed – IMF – Central Banks – World Banks – Private Banks – Rothschilds – 13 families – money – currency – JP Morgan – Jekyll Island – gold – silver – congress – coinage act – Who owns the Federal Reserve System –
Federal Reserve System – End the FED – Monopoly Money –

What Tax Free For Profit US Corporation has Profits of 9940 % ++ ????

The FED is the only for-profit corporation in America that is exempt from both federal and state taxes? The FED takes in about one trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking families listed below get all that money. Forty cents in every dollar of US taxes.

During Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing delivered approximately 6.4 billion notes at an average cost of 9.6 cents per note. Production Facts: (Per the Federal Reserve)

http://www.bep.treas.gov/uscurrency/annualproductionfigures.html/a>

Who really owns the FED? The Rothschilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New York.

There have been three central banks in the nation’s history. The first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by the current FED. What they all have in common is an insidious practice known as “fractional banking.”

Although the Federal Reserve Bank claims not to be private as their website claims, the clearly operate under terms that no other “government institution” operates by. For example, they are not required to submit financial information and are not subject to IRS audits, nor do they even publish the amount of money they print to the American public. So given these terms it’s hard to believe the Federal Reserve’s claims that they are a government institution providing a genuine service to the American people. A commonly held position not mentioned on their website is that The FED is a privately owned central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a country’s fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it wasn’t for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, including the United States FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but for profit.

PS: THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM PROFITS ARE EVEN HIGHER SINCE DIGITAL OR ELECTRONIC CREATION OF CURRENCY, WHICH IS SIMPLY A WIRE TRANSFER OF CREDIT, COSTS ARE LESS THRU FRACTIONAL BANKING , ARBITRAGE, DERIVATIVES, TAARP BAIL OUTS, QE1 QE 2 QE3 , IMF, FORECLOSURES, REPOSSESSIONS, AND THE RTC FROM THE S&L DAYS = RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION FROM THE 1990’S SAVINGS AND LOANS DAYS…….

“It is well the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” — Henry Ford

Actual 1976 List link:
http://www.lust-for-life.org/Lust-For-Life/HowRothschildFamilyControlsFED/ImageFiles/chart1.png/a>

http://www.apfn.net/doc-100_bankruptcy27.htm/a>

The Solution: Guns Gold Silver Food Storage & Ammo…….

US – Fiat – Fed – IMF – Central Banks – World Banks – Private Banks – Rothschilds – 13 families – money – currency – JP Morgan – Jekyll Island – gold – silver – congress – coinage act – Who owns the Federal Reserve System –
Federal Reserve System – End the FED – Monopoly Money –

Cost to Print US $100, $50, $20, $10, $5 & $1 Bills ?

The answer is 9.6 (nine point six) cents each bill……..so that is a 9040% – 90.4% PROFIT MARGIN !!!!!……so what is this Fiat Monopoly REALLY WORTH ????? It is like “currency artwork” …….the value is in the eyes of the beholders…….like China and Bill Gross who was America’s largest TBill or USA’s IOUs = Dollar Backed Debt holder until he just sold out 100% of all of his USA IOU’s !!!!

Production Facts: (Per the Federal Reserve)

During Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing delivered approximately 6.4 billion notes at an average cost of 9.6 cents per note.

http://www.bep.treas.gov/uscurrency/annualproductionfigures.html/a>

The Solution: Guns Gold Silver Food Storage & Ammo…….

Monopoly Fiat Money ?

Answer: Yes……All of the above worthless paper …..Federal Reserve NOTES = IOUs OR WE OWE WE’s OR WE OWE THE WORLD = Banksters = Global Central Banks = The Houses of Rothschild Rockefeller Morgan Warburg Lehman Lazard Seif Goldman Sachs Kuhn Loeb Windsor and Monopoly Money are of the same Fiat Value…….however, this is what the Constitution says the Congress shall coin: Silver & Gold Coins

“It is well the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” — Henry Ford

Actual 1976 List link:
http://www.lust-for-life.org/Lust-For-Life/HowRothschildFamilyControlsFED/ImageFiles/chart1.png/a>

Survivalist Guns Gold Get Away Plan link:

Imperialist America ???

Who Should USA Attack Next ???

The Treasury is Coming !!!

The Treasury is Coming! The Treasury is Coming!
Wednesday, May 18th, 2011
By Silver Shield
GCN Live.com

It did not take long, but the Treasury has started the thieving. Since we have not raised the debt ceiling yet, the Treasury has started to dip into pensions. They will buy a couple of days by not meeting its investment into government retirement funds. This is just tipping the toe in the water of the trillions that we will see before this is all over. The debt ceiling will be raised, some BS spending cuts will be announced, and the Fed will continue to print more money/debt. There will be no grand reform and everything is going to plan as the world gets ready for the largest wealth transfer in human history.

To the millions of government employees that have been riding the gravy train are going to meet a very rude awakening when the dollar collapses. This group of citizens will have their paradigm shattered when the wealth that they thought they had is wiped away. They will also be out of a job, and realize that they are ill prepared to join the real economy. During the collapse of the Soviet Union those that worked in the system were the last to adapt to the new paradigm, often failing to adapt at all. Those that see this mathematically inevitable collapse coming and actually do something about it, will have a huge head start as the rest of the world tries to figure out what the hell happened.

I wrote “Got a 401k or an IRA?” about what happens when governments get desperate. Unlike us when we reach the end of our credit line, the government will not stop its profligate ways. It will simply blow through every dollar it can get its hand on trying to put off the day of reckoning. I believe that before all of this is over and the dollar dies, your retirement funds will be wiped clean. If you have a 401k, IRA, Roth IRA, Social Security, annuity or any long term savings plan or pension, be prepared to have it destroyed.

My question to you is: what are you going to do about it? The alarm has been sounded. The Treasury is Coming! The Treasury is Coming! Are you going to risk your life’s savings on the hope that this ponzi scheme will pay out before the collapse? Will you wait until the REAL purchasing power of those dollars are worth nothing? Or will you get out while the music is still playing?

I remember Alan Greenspan was once questioned before Congress about if the US could pay on its $140 trillion dollar unfunded liabilities. Bernanke said that we could absolutely pay that, but he had an important caveat to that that should have gotten much more attention. He went on to clarify that he could not guarantee the purchasing power of those dollars. You are faced with a default of the currency, a government raid of your savings, a forced redistribution into “safe” government bonds, or a hyperinflation of the purchasing power of you savings. There is NO WAY OUT if you stay in any paper assets. Read the Silver Bullet and the Silver Shield to give you a head start on this paradigm shift. If you want a more complete picture join the free Sons of Liberty Academy.
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.” – Charles Darwin
Wake Some People Up!

Chris Duane writes under the pen name of Silver Shield. He spent six years researching and creating the Sons Of Liberty Academy. The academy’s sole purpose is to help people become aware and prepared for the mathematically inevitable world-wide fiat currency collapse. He is currently writing publicly at Don’t Tread On Me, one of the fastest-growing blogs on the internet.