"Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame."

Troy, N.Y. – Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society. The scientists, who are members of the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) at Rensselaer, used computational and analytical methods to discover the tipping point where a minority belief becomes the majority opinion. The finding has implications for the study and influence of societal interactions ranging from the spread of innovations to the movement of political ideals. "When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority," said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski, the Claire and Roland Schmitt Distinguished Professor at Rensselaer. "Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame." As an example, the ongoing events in Tunisia and Egypt appear to exhibit a similar process, according to Szymanski. "In those countries, dictators who were in power for decades were suddenly overthrown in just a few weeks." The findings were published in the July 22, 2011, early online edition of the journal Physical Review E in an article titled "Social consensus through the influence of committed minorities." An important aspect of the finding is that the percent of committed opinion holders required to shift majority opinion does not change significantly regardless of the type of network in which the opinion holders are working. In other words, the percentage of committed opinion holders required to influence a society remains at approximately 10 percent, regardless of how or where that opinion starts and spreads in the society. To reach their conclusion, the scientists developed computer models of various types of social networks. One of the networks had each person connect to every other person in the network. The second model included certain individuals who were connected to a large number of people, making them opinion hubs or leaders. The final model gave every person in the model roughly the same number of connections. The initial state of each of the models was a sea of traditional-view holders. Each of these individuals held a view, but were also, importantly, open minded to other views. Once the networks were built, the scientists then "sprinkled" in some true believers throughout each of the networks. These people were completely set in their views and unflappable in modifying those beliefs. As those true believers began to converse with those who held the traditional belief system, the tides gradually and then very abruptly began to shift. Advertisement "In general, people do not like to have an unpopular opinion and are always seeking to try locally to come to consensus. We set up this dynamic in each of our models," said SCNARC Research Associate and corresponding paper author Sameet Sreenivasan. To accomplish this, each of the individuals in the models "talked" to each other about their opinion. If the listener held the same opinions as the speaker, it reinforced the listener's belief. If the opinion was different, the listener considered it and moved on to talk to another person. If that person also held this new belief, the listener then adopted that belief. "As agents of change start to convince more and more people, the situation begins to change," Sreenivasan said. "People begin to question their own views at first and then completely adopt the new view to spread it even further. If the true believers just influenced their neighbors, that wouldn't change anything within the larger system, as we saw with percentages less than 10." The research has broad implications for understanding how opinion spreads. "There are clearly situations in which it helps to know how to efficiently spread some opinion or how to suppress a developing opinion," said Associate Professor of Physics and co-author of the paper Gyorgy Korniss. "Some examples might be the need to quickly convince a town to move before a hurricane or spread new information on the prevention of disease in a rural village." The researchers are now looking for partners within the social sciences and other fields to compare their computational models to historical examples. They are also looking to study how the percentage might change when input into a model where the society is polarized. Instead of simply holding one traditional view, the society would instead hold two opposing viewpoints. An example of this polarization would be Democrat versus Republican. The research was funded by the Army Research Laboratory (ARL) through SCNARC, part of the Network Science Collaborative Technology Alliance (NS-CTA), the Army Research Office (ARO), and the Office of Naval Research (ONR).

Take Eritrea. Long an isolationist nation determined to be self-reliant, the country's GDP and income both rose nearly 9 percent in the last ten years, with adult illiteracy dropping by 8.4 percent. Life expectancy, school enrollment and primary school completion rate all increased, while mortality rate dropped substantially. During the same period, Eritrea's ratings on the UN Human Development Index which measures achievement in three dimensions (long healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living) rose 9.3 percent. That a lot of achievement in ten years especially the rise in human development index.

Banco del Sur An alternative to the World Bank and IMF MICHAEL SHANK and AMI CARPENT The World Bank's launch in late November of a five-year action plan for fighting the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa is emblematic of the Bank's new direction. The structural adjustment programs are of yesteryear. Less controversial campaigns are becoming more common and economic strong-arming less frequent. Why the shift? The economies of some former Bank recipient countries have improved, loans repaid, and Bank presence ushered out. Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador have done as much, even creating a Bank of the South, launched in early December with four other South American countries. The split from foreign aid is a significant one, even though western economists doubt that the southern three will survive on their own. Yet, the numbers already look promising and there is precedence for economic stability in foreign aid-free, developing countries. Take Eritrea. Long an isolationist nation determined to be self-reliant, the country's GDP and income both rose nearly 9 percent in the last ten years, with adult illiteracy dropping by 8.4 percent. Life expectancy, school enrollment and primary school completion rate all increased, while mortality rate dropped substantially. During the same period, Eritrea's ratings on the UN Human Development Index which measures achievement in three dimensions (long healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living) rose 9.3 percent. While Eritrea is no shining star ranking at an unenviable 130th in the HDI, it does challenge the paradigm of dependency, faced by many developing countries, on foreign aid. Its social indicators are improving, slowly but surely, and without the backing of the banks in the west. Mimicking Eritrea's headstart on self-reliance, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and most likely others are eager to shrug off what they perceive as the political yoke of foreign aid. They think western aid is frequently aligned with the geopolitical priorities and interests of developed nations. Not long after the Bank appointed Robert Zoellick and the IMF appointed France's Dominique Strauss-Kahn, South American nations announced their intentions to form the Bank of the South. Now, with December's launch, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Uruguay, Paraguay and Venezuela have staked their self-reliant claim to be free of foreign philanthropy. How the south will fare is yet to be seen. Venezuela's 2008 budget allocates 46 percent to the social sector with special attention to health, education, food aid, land reform, affordable housing, micro credit and job training. These are sectors in which the Bank and the IMF traditionally focused on. Some economists see this as serious socialism. How dare Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez funnel oil and natural gas revenues into the social sector and rebuild the deteriorating infrastructure? How dare Bolivia's President Evo Morales consider an equitable nation-wide distribution of revenues stemming from natural resources? How dare Ecuador's President Rafael Correa decree that 99 percent of extra oil income will be distributed among the people, leaving only one percent for foreign firms? They dare because they can. With fuel prices crossing $100 a barrel, oil-rich and gas-rich nations are exerting the same power on developed nations that they once did so determinedly on developing nations. The tables have turned and the formerly dependent are less so. And who's to blame them? HIV/AIDS programs in Africa then for the Bank? With the pandemic on the rise throughout the continent, countries are in weak position to refuse assistance. Self-reliance in Sub-Saharan Africa may be slower to pick up steam than in South America. But don't be surprised if the African continent creates a Bank of its own sometime soon. The Eritrean model may well be worth mimicking.

The guy is very prejudiced but he has got a point. Somalia should not be looking to others to solve it problems. the drought is affecting us badly because we haven't made the necessary investment in water wells, agriculture, infrastructure and grain reserves. Somalis in general aren't willing to sacrifice for the common good and therefore you reap what you sow. therefore if the consequence of our collective action is mass starvation so be it. why must broke westerners pay to keep Somalis alive. drought is a regular occurrence in Somalia and so there should be a comprehensive plan to deal with it even in the good times. there is no point in disaster relief if no concrete action is not being taken on the issue. if broke westerners want to help good on them but it shouldn't be a surprise that some of them want all their wealth to stay in their country in this challenging times. And also respect this man freedom of speech.

Malika and Serenity what you don't want to acknowledge is that Somalis are only reaping what they have sown. those who bought down the barre government did not consider what would happen if they succeeded. the starving masses are part of the problem and the public in Somalia are as guilty as the warlords. you say first put out the fire then all long term issues will be dealt with. if somebody was playing with matches and not thinking about the consequences of his action, then the house catches fire and he asks people for help, will you help him? when a million Somalis starve then they will take food security seriously and stop believing that a savior will save regardless of what happens. the reason Chimera ideas are not realized is that when there is no crisis all the public think about is politics and clan. there is no morality, work ethic and law and order in Somalis in Somalia. if people can't cooperate on a daily basis why cooperate when the chicken came home to roast. the obligation in Islam don't start and finish in a crisis. the bottom line is that Somali public have forgotten God. they will suffer the consequences and don't think the diaspora is lucky. their suffering will came soon enough as the world will go from one crises to another in the next decade. so everyone will suffer eventually so people better adept and survive. the root problem is the Somalia culture which in due time will be completely replace by the true Islamic culture if Somalia is not to be a hell hole.

Chimera is right. the problem is that Somalis in Somalia are useless people. apart from the livestock in the north and farming in the south the country doesn't do much real production. all the nice businesses in Bosasso and elsewhere in Somalia is built on the remittance and investment of the diaspora. the diaspora is too generous to begin with because imagine that all that remittance stops because food and energy inflation worldwide causes the diaspora to have no extra income to send home, then what. There is no point in giving a man a fish without teaching him to fish because are you always going to give him fish. Somalis where every they are like to get something for nothing such as those Somalis on welfare and remittance. i have no interest in helping starving Somalis because there is no point in helping somebody who is not willing to help themselves because they just want to get past this hard moment without anything changing. that is what is wrong with aid to Africa. people became dependent on the aid. i was willing to send aid to the people of Pakistan because their problems were from God and they are my Muslim brothers. all these Somalis who are starving let them pray to the clan because in reality a lot of the starving people have more observed faith in the clan than Allah. let us imagine that Allah removes this problem then will they remember and change out of gratitude. if Somalis don't start the path of change then maybe Allah will forget them all together.

You don't seem to see the problem with the federal model. Most Somalis are not waiting for a panacea only the diaspora are. the unmanaged process of devolution is ongoing because Somalis hate central authority and this hatred is deep rooted, even ibn battuta noticed when he visited Mogadishu 800 years ago. Even puntland and somaliland may fragment in the future if sections of the population no longer feel their interests are looked after. Same issue in Sudan with south sudanese, darfur and others feeling their interests are not looked after. Federal Somalia Republic cannot look after the opposing interests of all Somalis. Somalis say they want justice done to them and then they discriminate against small tribes and Bantus. The only central authority that can exist is one that is very just or one that hurts all sections of Somalia equally. the bottom line is that Somalis have contradictory interests and the panacea is Somalis learning the golden rule of do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

I wholeheartedly support Puntland break from TFG who are a pointless outfit. the reality is that the South is a mess and puntland should give up on dreams of Somalia republic because i believe that the genie is out of the bottle and the unmanaged process of devolution will continue until a balance of power is achieved between all the fiefdoms that are created including somaliland, puntland and many others yet to come. The dream of 1960 is dead and most somalis is Somalia have accepted that except for the Diaspora.

With all the problems coming down the pipe in the 5 years i hope Somalis stop their self made problems or else a lot of them will perish. That may not be such a bad thought. Would love to get yours views on what high food prices will do to Somalia and what Somalis will do if the World enters a Great Depression or Economic Collapse as some economist are predicting. No hating.

Get ready for a rocky year. From now on, rising prices, powerful storms, severe droughts and floods, and other unexpected events are likely to play havoc with the fabric of global society, producing chaos and political unrest. Start with a simple fact: the prices of basic food staples are already approaching or exceeding their 2008 peaks, that year when deadly riots erupted in dozens of countries around the world. It's not surprising then that food and energy experts are beginning to warn that 2011 could be the year of living dangerously - and so could 2012, 2013, and on into the future. Add to the soaring cost of the grains that keep so many impoverished people alive a comparable rise in oil prices - again nearing levels not seen since the peak months of 2008 - and you can already hear the first rumblings about the tenuous economic recovery being in danger of imminent collapse. Think of those rising energy prices as adding further fuel to global discontent. Already, combined with staggering levels of youth unemployment and a deep mistrust of autocratic, repressive governments, food prices have sparked riots in Algeria and mass protests in Tunisia that, to the surprise of the world, ousted long-time dictator president Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali and his corrupt extended family. Many of the social stresses evident in those two countries are present across the Middle East and elsewhere. No one can predict where the next explosion will occur, but with food prices still climbing and other economic pressures mounting, more upheavals appear inevitable. These may be the first resource revolts to catch our attention, but they won't be the last. Put simply, global consumption patterns are now beginning to challenge the planet's natural resource limits. Populations are still on the rise, and from Brazil to India, Turkey to China, new powers are rising as well. With them goes an urge for a more American-style life. Not surprisingly, the demand for basic commodities is significantly on the rise, even as supplies in many instances are shrinking. At the same time, climate change, itself a product of unbridled energy use, is adding to the pressure on supplies, and speculators are betting on a situation trending progressively worse. Add these together and the road ahead appears increasingly rocky. Breadbaskets without bread Let's begin with food, the most important and volatile of these commodities. Food prices declined in October 2008 after the onset of the global financial crisis, but that seems to have been an anomaly. The December 2010 index of global food prices compiled by the United Nations' Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) hit a record 215, one point higher than in the spring of 2008. (In that index, based on a "bundle" of food staples, a baseline of 100 represents average prices in 2002-2004.) Some food products, including sugar, cooking oils, and fats, are now trading substantially above their 2008 levels; others, including dairy products, grains, and meat, are inching perilously close to record levels. As 2011 begins, food experts fear that, within months, prices for key staples will climb above the 2008 threshold and stay there, causing extreme hardship for poor people around the world. "We are at a very high level," said a worried Abdolreza Abbassian, an economist at the FAO. "These levels in the previous episode led to problems and riots across the world." Of particular concern to Abbassian and his colleagues is the rising cost of corn, rice, and wheat, the staple crops of billions in many of the poorest countries. According to the FAO, by the end of 2010 international corn and wheat prices were already approaching their 2008 peak levels (about US$260 and $340 per metric ton, respectively). Analysts attribute the rise in grain prices to growing demand in both developed and developing nations, along with a number of cataclysmic weather-related events and speculation by investors. An extreme drought and fierce fires last summer destroyed a large percentage of the wheat crop in Russia and Ukraine, while heavy flooding in India and the inundation of 20% of Pakistan damaged significant parts of the grain output of those countries. At the same time, unusually hot and dry weather suppressed production in a number of other key farming areas. What makes the picture look so worrisome today are indications that the severity and frequency of extreme weather events appear to be on the rise. In the past few weeks alone, several such events point the way to serious supply problems ahead. Most significant has been the unprecedented rainfall and flooding in Australia that put an area more than twice the size of California largely underwater, significantly disrupting wheat cultivation there. Australia is one of the world's leading wheat producers. Unusually dry conditions in the American Midwest and Argentina have also hinted at future problems in grain and corn output. It's still too early to predict the size of this year's grain and corn harvests, but many analysts are warning of a shortfall in supplies, along with sky-high prices. The energy crisis returns Soaring food prices are being driven as well by speculative investments and the rising price of oil. Partly in response to the diminishing value of the dollar, some investors are sinking their money into food futures (along with gold and silver) as a speculative hedge. At the same time, the price of oil is edging toward the $100 mark, making it increasingly profitable for farmers to switch from growing corn for human consumption to growing it for the manufacture of ethanol, which in turn reduces the amount of farm acreage devoted to staples. Oil would have to fall below $50 per barrel to make the cultivation of corn as a food product competitive with ethanol production - and that's not likely to happen. So even if more corn is produced this year, less will be available for food purposes and the price of what remains is bound to rise. The precipitous rise in oil prices has startled the experts. Not so long ago, the US Department of Energy was projecting a price range of $70-$80 per barrel in 2011, but as the year began oil was already trading above $90 a barrel and some analysts predict that it will reach $100 before the year is out. A few are even talking about the $150 barrel and gas prices at the pump of $4 or more. If prices climb above $100, global consumer spending could take another nosedive. "Oil prices are entering a dangerous zone for the global economy," says Fatih Birol, the chief economist for the International Energy Agency (IEA). "The oil import bills are becoming a threat to the economic recovery." As with food, the rising cost of oil is a product of growing demand, insufficient supplies, and speculative investments. According to the most recent projections from the IEA, daily global oil consumption in 2011 will average 87.4 million barrels, an increase of about two million barrels from the first quarter of 2010. Much of the extra demand is coming from China, where a newly minted middle class is buying automobiles at a record clip, as well as from the United States, where previously cautious consumers are slowly returning to pre-2008 driving habits. At a time when the oil industry is experiencing declining rates of output at many existing oil fields and finding it ever more difficult to add production, even two million extra barrels per day can be a daunting challenge (and greater demand is expected in the coming years). In the United States, for example, much hope was placed in oil exploration in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Alaska, but in the wake of the BP disaster, this seems like a forlorn prospect. Production in Mexico and the North Sea, two bright spots of recent years, is facing a sharp decline, while other key producers, including those in the Middle East, are struggling to maintain current output levels at existing fields. Many energy analysts believe that the world is at (or will soon reach) peak oil - the moment when global petroleum output achieves a maximum sustainable daily rate and begins a long-term, irreversible decline. Others contend that higher levels of output are still possible. Whatever the truth of the matter, at this moment the oil industry is finding it increasingly difficult, and ever more costly, to boost output above current levels. This, combined with insatiable demand, is driving prices skyward. Under these circumstances, speculators are again being drawn into the oil market as a rare sure bet. Such speculators helped push oil prices to a record $147 per barrel back in 2008, but fled the market when prices crashed as the American economy headed to a meltdown. Now, they're coming back. "Hedge funds and private investors are buying up financial instruments tied to the price of crude, and thereby helping push up oil prices," the Wall Street Journal reported in late December. The rising price of gas will, in turn, hurt consumers just as they show signs of opening their wallets again. No less worrisome, oil-importing countries like the United States, Japan, and many in Europe will face soaring bills for fuel imports, further enfeebling economies already suffering from profound weakness. Rising food prices leading to riots, protests, and revolts, mounting oil prices, mammoth worldwide unemployment, and a collapsed recovery - it looks like the perfect set of preconditions for a global tsunami of instability and turmoil. Events in Algeria and Tunisia give us just an inkling of what this maelstrom might look like, but where and how it will next erupt, and in what form, is anyone's guess. A single guarantee: we haven't seen the last of resource revolts which, in the coming years, could reach an intensity we scarcely imagine today.

I recently heard 2 good TED talks. Naomi Klein: Addicted to risk Van Jones: The economic injustice of plastic

All you Somalia Republic believers are disproving yourselves. You are right that modern day states are a recent development but you see there is nothing sacred about the Republic. It was desired by the Somali people and it came to be and the Somali people turned against it and it fell within 30 years and for the last 20 years there has been no serious attempt at getting it back and Somalis are attempting other arrangements which may work in the long-term. modern borders can change and there is no attempt to get Bangladesh back to Pakistan or bring back the Soviet Union for example. Modern States are essentially political arrangements and once that arrangements is no longer favored by a majority and not a minority sooner or later it will collapse. Lets be real the majority of Somalis in Somalia have no allegiance or desire to see the Republic back except if it only serves their tribal interests and in the current scenario there is no hope for a tribal dictatorship like there was in 1969-1991.

I have seen that there are former IRS agents and Ron Paul that are claiming that the income tax is unconstititional and that you don't have to pay it. watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZl6202HJGQ i live in the UK so i don't really know all the details on income tax rules and regulations.

in that funny or what. what next force every to buy a condom or a house for their own good ofcourse. this nanny state approach whithout the benefits of a public system is truly where the Hypocricy lies.

Rep. Burgess: Government Can Force Us to Buy General Motors Products If Obamacare Mandate Upheld in Court Monday, March 29, 2010 By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter (CNSNews.com) – Representative Michael Burgess (R-Texas) told CNSNews.com that if the mandate in the health care law requiring individuals to purchase health insurance or be penalized is upheld by the courts, the federal government could mandate anything, such as requiring all Americans to purchase a General Motors car. On Capitol Hill, CNSNews.com asked Representative Burgess, “The Congressional Budget Office has said that never before in the history of the United States has the federal government mandated that any one buy a specific good or service and, of course, the bill includes the individual mandate. Is there a part of the Constitution that you think gives Congress the authority to mandate individuals to purchase health insurance?” Representative Burgess, himself a doctor, said, “No, I personally do not, and I think that is exactly right. Never before in the history of this country have we had the ability to coerce American citizens to purchase something and then invoke the Commerce clause after we coerce that purchase.” “It just flies in the face of what a free society should be, so I’m perfectly comfortable with the attorneys general bringing suit against this bill,” said Burgess. “I think it’s the appropriate thing to do. Plus, you also have the equal-protection business of some states being more equal than others and, really, it should be equals among equals, not some states getting special deals to buy off a vote to get the bill passed.” CNSNews.com also asked Burgess, “If the federal government mandates that you have to purchase health insurance, is there any legal commodity that the federal government cannot require individuals to purchase?” “That’s the next step and what else?” said Burgess. “Could the federal government require all of us to purchase a General Motors product? And the answer is yes.” “If this mandate is ruled, upheld by the courts, it opens the door for all kinds of mischief by the federal government,” he said. “We’ll be better off not opening this door or closing it very, very quickly.” Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) told CNSNews.com that he “applauds” the states that are stepping up and taking legal action against the federal government. So far, 13 attorneys general have sued the federal government over the individual mandate in the health care law. “I think the mandate is unconstitutional so I applaud the states [that] are going to step up and spend some resources and take this to the courts because I believe it’s unconstitutional,” said Chaffetz. “You have something like 37 states that are filing some sort of lawsuit or another, so, including Utah, and I applaud that.” Chaffetz was also asked if he thinks there is a limit to what Congress can mandate individuals to do. “Yeah, I think never before have we seen the federal government mandate that you have to actually purchase,” he said. “You know, I understand they need to tax, but to actually purchase something? I think that steps over the line and I hope the states are victorious in their suits.” Chaffetz continued: “That’s the worry, that if they can get away with this, the federal government can get away with who knows what? And that’s where there’s got to be limits and balance on this, and clearly the Constitution, I don’t think, you know, allows this to happen. So I hope this country makes the right decision. I really do.” On the other hand, Democratic Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) said it is “not likely” the individual mandate will be overturned. “I’m not a lawyer,” he told CNSNews.com. “I’m told by some pretty smart lawyers that the chances of states overturning this are not likely. The federal law will be pre-eminent but that’s why they make courts. We’ll have an opportunity to find out.” According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the federal government has never before mandated that Americans buy any good or service. In 1994, when Congress was considering a universal health care plan formulated by then-First Lady Hillary Clinton, the CBO studied the plan’s provision that would have forced individuals to buy health insurance and determined it was an unprecedented act. The CBO stated: “A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”

no you have got it wrong. i support a public system. this reform isn't a public system. it just forces everybody to buy something. it lead to this.

this anti-islam propoganda may have a serious purpose. maybe they are just preparing the world for world war three perhaps me thinks. it was predicted by Albert Pike in a letter to his friend. here it is. To date, no conclusive proof exists to show that this letter was ever written. Nevertheless, the letter is widely quoted and the topic of much discussion. Following are apparently extracts of the letter, showing how Three World Wars have been planned for many generations. "The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the "agentur" (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions." 2 Students of history will recognize that the political alliances of England on one side and Germany on the other, forged between 1871 and 1898 by Otto von Bismarck, co-conspirator of Albert Pike, were instrumental in bringing about the First World War. "The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm." 3 After this Second World War, Communism was made strong enough to begin taking over weaker governments. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin, a large portion of Europe was simply handed over to Russia, and on the other side of the world, the aftermath of the war with Japan helped to sweep the tide of Communism into China. (Readers who argue that the terms Nazism and Zionism were not known in 1871 should remember that the Illuminati invented both these movements. In addition, Communism as an ideology, and as a coined phrase, originates in France during the Revolution. In 1785, Restif coined the phrase four years before revolution broke out. Restif and Babeuf, in turn, were influenced by Rousseau - as was the most famous conspirator of them all, Adam Weishaupt.) "The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." 4 Since the terrorist attacks of Sept 11, 2001, world events, and in particular in the Middle East, show a growing unrest and instability between Modern Zionism and the Arabic World. This is completely in line with the call for a Third World War to be fought between the two, and their allies on both sides. This Third World War is still to come, and recent events show us that it is not far off. this is just a prediction. no need to go to potty. may be true. will shall just have to wait and see.

so all those who are celebrating heathcare reform tell me why?

What's Really in Obama's Health Care Reform Bill - A Plain English Translation Thursday, July 30, 2009 by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...) (NaturalNews) Mrs. Bouchard seemed upset. "I can't afford health care as yet." The new health reform bill Made her sickly and ill "But I'd rather have cancer than debt!" What's really in Obama's health care reform bill? Almost no one knows, and here's why: It's 1,017 pages long and written in an alien form of bureaucratic English that can barely be decoded by earthlings. And yet, astonishingly, a U.S. Army translator has been found who speaks "Washington Doublespeak" and he was kind enough to decode the bill and post his plain-language findings over at FreeRepublic.com (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f...). Below, we reprint what he found in the health care reform bill. As you read this, keep in mind that some of these translations are a bit loose with the interpretations, but I've personally spot-checked these points, and they are indeed all contained in the bill in one form or another (shrouded in Doublespeak language, of course). Editor's note: I don't personally agree with every interpretation listed here, and some of the bill's provisions are actually good ideas (like banning doctors from owning stock in health care companies). But overall, this interpretation points out many alarming provisions in the proposed health care reform bill... From CMS at FreeRepublic.com: • Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the government option! • Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure! • Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! • Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process) • Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None. • Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services. • Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard. • Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. • Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) • Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange. • Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans) • Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens • Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan. • Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter. • Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed. • Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages. • Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.

The K Street Hustlin’ of Obamacare By Keith Johnson Oooh snap! Looks like we’ve been right all along. All the big K Street money pumped into the House and Senate has been overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of Obama’s horrendous new healthcare legislation. Go figure. According to a study released over the weekend by “The Center for Public Integrity”, a non-partisan public interest think tank in Washington D.C., it is estimated that a record $120 million was spent lobbying for health reform. In addition to direct lobbying, some of the top firms also rewarded members of Congress with campaign contributions through political action committees and individual lobbyist donations. The largest of these firms, Patton Boggs LLP, contributed more than $55,000 almost exclusively to Democrats. Patton Boggs represents Bristol-Myers Squibb, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the nation and the eighth largest corporation in the United States. On January 21, 2010, Patton Boggs was one of several big name health insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital lobbying organizations whose top executives got together to throw a fundraiser for Massachusetts Senatorial candidate Martha Coakley in hopes of landing her the Democratic seat and the crucial 60th vote needed to pass the healthcare takeover bill. The other top firms that participated (along with a list of the companies they represent) are as follows: Capitol Hill Strategies: Amgen—the nation’s largest biotechnology firm BIO—a muli million dollar biotechnology firm Merck—the largest pharmaceutical company in the world Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America– a trade group representing pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies Grover Park Group: Blue Cross—a federation of 39 health insurance organizations Pfizer—a pharmaceutical company, ranking number one in sales in the world Duberstein Group: Novartis—a pharmaceutical company ranking number one in revenues and three in sales Sanofi-Aventis—a pharmaceutical company that ranks number four in sales worldwide Mehlman, Vogel, Castagnetti: Humana—the fourth largest health insurance company in the United States Abbott Laboratories—a multi billion dollar pharmaceuticals healthcare company General Electric—multi billion dollar corporation dealing in many health related sectors Elmendorf strategies: UnitedHealth Group—the nations largest health insurance company Heather Podesta & Partners: Cigna—the nation’s fifth largest health insurance company Eli Lilly—a multi billion dollar pharmaceutical company that ranks tenth in sales Of the over 17,000 lobbyists in Washington D.C., The Center for Public Integrity ranks Patton Boggs as numero uno. In terms of healthcare reform, they are followed by Alston and Bird, who represent Aetna, the nation’s third largest health insurer. Coming in at number three is Foley Hoag, who also represent Pfizer as well as Eli Lilly, Amgen and Merck. Tied for fourth place are Podesta Group and Capitol partners. Dutko Worldwide rounds out the top five and they also lobbied for UnitedHealth, PhRMA, and medical device firm Medtronic Inc. Of those lobbying firms’ big name clients, Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America alone spent $26.1 million lobbying for Obamacare in 2009, making it the single most expensive lobbying effort in history. During the week leading up to the vote on the legislation, PhRMA launched a multi million dollar ad blitz in 43 districts of potential swing Democrats to help secure passage. And in this election cycle, PhRMA has contributed $30,300 to Dem’s compared to $13,000 to Repub’s. Overall, PhRMA has spent well over $100 million on ad campaigns promoting health care reform legistlation. According to his wikipedia bio, PhRMA’s outgoing CEO Billy Tauzin ”was a key player in 2009 healthcare reform negotiations that produced pharmaceutical industry support for White House and Senate efforts. Reportedly, proposals for Medicare Part D cost reductions and permitting drug importation from Canada were dropped in favor of $80 billion in other savings.” That’s right, he helped write the stinking bill. The largest health insurance providers in the nation are UnitedHealth Group, WellPoint, Aetna, Humana and Cigna. Ever since the healthcare debate began over a year ago, shares of Cigna, UnitedHealth Group and WellPoint have been up an average of 120%. Upon passage of the bill, health insurer’s stocks soared with Aetna hitting a 52 week high. The share price of Cigna surged 375% compared to 46% for the stock market overall (as measured by the S&P 500) since November 2008. It should be noted that Aetna has been a major supporter and campaign contributor to the campaigns of Max Baucus (D-MT) of the Senate Finance Committee who received $56,250 in donations and Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) who received $110,000. Todd M. Schoenberger, Managing Editor of “Taipan’s Tipping Point Alert” wrote recently that “One day following a vote in favor of healthcare reform legislation, stocks turned higher led by the healthcare sector. Despite the concern of many Wall Street analysts, any negative sentiment surrounding the healthcare sector about higher taxes and pressure on bottom lines quickly subsided as everything from managed care to medical device stocks traded higher with heavy volume.” Hospital shares also surged. The day after the House passed the bill, shares of Health Management Associates, Tenet Healthcare and Community Health Systems all jumped 11%, 9%, and 6% respectively. It should be clear by now that the major players in the healthcare industry overwhelmingly lobbied in support of Obamacare and have and will continue to reap vast rewards. So then you may ask who exactly is this great villain the Democrats have dubbed as the evil “health insurance industry”? The name that consistently comes up is America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP). According to wikipedia, “America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) is a national political advocacy and trade association with about 1,300 member companies that sell health insurance coverage to more than 200 million Americans and is thereby funded by the premiums they pay.” But AHIP not only represents the top health insurance companies in the nation, it also represents the smaller companies that will no doubt be thrown under the bus or absorbed by larger concerns. So it makes sense why they were chosen to act as the controlled opposition. They were the ones often cited as the big bad insurance industry that Nancy Pelosi referred to in response to a heckler at a Democratic rally who yelled “You’ll burn in Hell for this!” AHIP President Karen M. Ignagni often plays the villain as she did on the Oprah Winfrey show opposite Sicko Director Michael Moore. But this two-faced organization showed their true colors a long time ago. Miami Herald journalist John Dorschner reminds us in a March 23rd article that “In November 2008, just days after Obama’s landslide victory, America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group, made a stunning announcement, saying it favored universal coverage and supported a law that would stop insurers from rejecting applicants because of preexisting conditions. “Universal coverage is within reach,” the group said in a historic press release. After being adamantly opposed to reform during the Clinton years, AHIP said it had changed its mind — based on one condition: Any reform plan had to require that all individuals have insurance or pay stiff penalties.” And just recently, AHIP has come out in full support of Obamacare. According to a TIME Magazine article: America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the industry trade group, has agreed to sign on to a new, 50-state health care reform implementation effort, provisionally called Enroll America, which is being organized by Ron Pollack of the pro-reform group Families USA. “We are participating in it,” says AHIP spokesman Robert Zirkelbach. “The goal is to get everyone covered.” On the night the House passed the dreaded Obamacare legislation, Obama stated, “Tonight, we pushed back on the undue influence of special interests. … We proved that this government — a government of the people and by the people — still works for the people.” Sure—Here’s a guy who received more then three times the campaign contributions from the pharmaceutical industry than John McCain or $3.58 for every$1 received by his Republican competitor. And those stats come straight out of the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group. Yeah, Obama can come up with some eloquent words, but as we’ve pointed out, this is nothing but a windfall for the big insurance companies, the pharmaceutical industry and device manufacturers. It’s an outright raping of the American people by a government of the special interests and by the special interests.

OUTRAGE! – Healthcare Bill Exempts Congress And Staff March 24th, 2010 Michael Suede This is so outrageous I’m fairly speechless. Politico reports: The Congressional Research Service believes a court could rule that the legislation “would exclude professional committee staff, joint committee staff, some shared staff, as well as potentially those staff employed by leadership offices.” However, when the combined Senate bill came to the floor, the definition of staff had been narrowed. Both senators filed a second amendment in December restating their original intent, but they say Democrats blocked it. “The American people will be appalled to learn the health care bill exempts leadership and committee staff. This special deal for unelected staff underscores everything the public detests about the arrogance of power in Washington,” Coburn said. “I tried to fix this inequity along with senators Grassley, Burr and Vitter, but Majority Leader [Harry] Reid obstructed our effort.” The fascist democrats obstructed an amendment that forced themselves and their crony staff from being put into the same lot with the rest of us. Of course, why wouldn’t they? They are a bunch of fascist looting criminal thieves intent on destroying this country at all costs. They have no morals. They have no respect for freedom or liberty. They have no respect for the constitution. As with all tyrannical governments – laws are for the little people. Of course, this is just one outrage among thousands. The history of government giving itself more rights than its citizens is nearly endless, even in our supposedly “free” country.

americans can celebrate a stimulus package for the healthcare industry all they like but the fact of the matter is is that their country and empire are dying. in 3-5 max the US will either be a dictatorship or in a civil war, instead of the oligarchy or corporate state that it is now. the next economic bomb is going to be a climate change bill based on Bad science. all i will say let the show continue.

Economic Black Hole: 20 Reasons Why The U.S. Economy Is Dying And Is Simply Not Going To Recover Even though the U.S. financial system nearly experienced a total meltdown in late 2008, the truth is that most Americans simply have no idea what is happening to the U.S. economy. Most people seem to think that the nasty little recession that we have just been through is almost over and that we will be experiencing another time of economic growth and prosperity very shortly. But this time around that is not the case. The reality is that we are being sucked into an economic black hole from which the U.S. economy will never fully recover. The problem is debt. Collectively, the U.S. government, the state governments, corporate America and American consumers have accumulated the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world. Our massive debt binge has financed our tremendous growth and prosperity over the last couple of decades, but now the day of reckoning is here. And it is going to be painful. The following are 20 reasons why the U.S. economy is dying and is simply not going to recover.... 1) Do you remember that massive wave of subprime mortgages that defaulted in 2007 and 2008 and caused the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression? Well, the "second wave" of mortgage defaults in on the way and there is simply no way that we are going to be able to avoid it. A huge mountain of mortgages is going to reset starting in 2010, and once those mortgage payments go up there are once again going to be millons of people who simply cannot pay their mortgages. The chart below reveals just how bad the second wave of adjustable rate mortgages is likely to be over the next several years.... 2) The Federal Housing Administration has announced plans to increase the amount of up-front cash paid by new borrowers and to require higher down payments from those with the poorest credit. The Federal Housing Administration currently backs about 30 percent of all new home loans and about 20 percent of all new home refinancing loans. Tighter standards are going to mean that less people will qualify for loans. Less qualifiers means that there will be less buyers for homes. Less buyers means that home prices are going to drop even more. 3) It is getting really hard to find a job in the United States. A total of 6,130,000 U.S. workers had been unemployed for 27 weeks or more in December 2009. That was the most ever since the U.S. government started keeping track of this statistic in 1948. In fact, it is more than double the 2,612,000 U.S. workers who were unemployed for a similar length of time in December 2008. The reality is that once Americans lose their jobs they are increasingly finding it difficult to find new ones. Just check out the chart below.... 4) In December, there were also 929,000 "discouraged" workers who are not counted as part of the labor force because they have "given up" looking for work. That is the most since the U.S. government first started keeping track of discouraged workers in 1949. Many Americans have simply given up and are now chronically unemployed. 5) Some areas of the U.S. are already virtually in a state of depression. The mayor of Detroit estimates that the real unemployment rate in his city is now somewhere around 50 percent. 6) For decades, our leaders in Washington pushed us towards "a global economy" and told us it would be so good for us. But there is a flip side. Now workers in the U.S. must compete with workers all over the world, and our greedy corporations are free to pursue the cheapest labor available anywhere on the globe. Millions of jobs have already been shipped out of the United States, and Princeton University economist Alan S. Blinder estimates that 22% to 29% of all current U.S. jobs will be offshorable within two decades. The days when blue collar workers could live the American Dream are gone and they are not going to come back. 7) During the 2001 recession, the U.S. economy lost 2% of its jobs and it took four years to get them back. This time around the U.S. economy has lost more than 5% of its jobs and there is no sign that the bleeding of jobs is going to stop any time soon. 8) All of this unemployment is putting severe stress on state unemployment funds. At this point, 25 state unemployment insurance funds have gone broke and the Department of Labor estimates that 15 more state unemployment funds will likely go broke within two years and will need massive loans from the federal government just to keep going. 9) 37 million Americans now receive food stamps, and the program is expanding at a pace of about 20,000 people a day. The United States of America is very quickly becoming a socialist welfare state. 10) The number of Americans who are going broke is staggering. 1.41 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009 - a 32 percent increase over 2008. 11) For decades, the fact that the U.S. dollar was the reserve currency of the world gave the U.S. financial system an unusual degree of stability. But all of that is changing. Foreign countries are increasingly turning away from the dollar to other currencies. For example, Russia’s central bank announced on Wednesday that it had started buying Canadian dollars in a bid to diversify its foreign exchange reserves. 12) The recent economic downturn has left some localities totally bankrupt. For instance, Jefferson County, Alabama is on the brink of what would be the largest government bankruptcy in the history of the United States - surpassing the 1994 filing by Southern California's Orange County. 13) The U.S. is facing a pension crisis of unprecedented magnitude. Virtually all pension funds in the United States, both private and public, are massively underfunded. With millions of Baby Boomers getting ready to retire, there is simply no way on earth that all of these obligations can be met. Robert Novy-Marx of the University of Chicago and Joshua D. Rauh of Northwestern's Kellogg School of Management recently calculated the collective unfunded pension liability for all 50 U.S. states for Forbes magazine. So what was the total? 3.2 trillion dollars. 14) Social Security and Medicare expenses are wildly out of control. Once again, with millions of Baby Boomers now at retirement age there is simply going to be no way to pay all of these retirees what they are owed. 15) So will the U.S. government come to the rescue? The U.S. has allowed the total federal debt to balloon by 50% since 2006 to $12.3 trillion. The chart below is a bit outdated, but it does show the reckless expansion of U.S. government debt over the past several decades. To get an idea of where we are now, just add at least 3 trillion dollars on to the top of the chart.... 16) So has the U.S. government learned anything from these mistakes? No. In fact, Senate Democrats on Wednesday proposed allowing the federal government to borrow an additional $2 trillion to pay its bills, a record increase that would allow the U.S. national debt to reach approximately $14.3 trillion. 17) It is going to become even harder for the U.S. government to pay the bills now that tax receipts are falling through the floor. U.S. corporate income tax receipts were down 55% in the year that ended on September 30th, 2009. 18) So where will the U.S. government get the money? From the Federal Reserve of course. The Federal Reserve bought approximately 80 percent of all U.S. Treasury securities issued in 2009. In other words, the U.S. government is now being financed by a massive Ponzi scheme. 19) The reckless expansion of the money supply by the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve is going to end up destroying the U.S. dollar and the value of the remaining collective net worth of all Americans. The more dollars there are, the less each individual dollar is worth. In essence, inflation is like a hidden tax on each dollar that you own. When they flood the economy with money, the value of the money you have in your bank accounts goes down. The chart below shows the growth of the U.S. money supply. Pay particular attention to the very end of the chart which shows what has been happening lately. What do you think this is going to do to the value of the U.S. dollar?.... 20) When a nation practices evil, there is no way that it is going to be blessed in the long run. The truth is that we have become a nation that is dripping with corruption and wickedness from the top to the bottom. Unless this fundamentally changes, not even the most perfect economic policies in the world are going to do us any good. In the end, you always reap what you sow. The day of reckoning for the U.S. economy is here and it is not going to be pleasant.

Insurance Industry “suddenly” excited about health care law; launches program to “Enroll America” March 25, 2010 America 20xy 3/25/10 By Andrew Steele After supposedly opposing the president’s health care bill, which would force Americans to buy private insurance, and giving Americans over the past year the impression that the battle was that of a populist president vs. big business, the insurance industry is suddenly embracing the new law and wants to get as many Americans enrolled as possible! According to a TIME Magazine article: America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the industry trade group, has agreed to sign on to a new, 50-state health care reform implementation effort, provisionally called Enroll America, which is being organized by Ron Pollack of the pro-reform group Families USA. “We are participating in it,” says AHIP spokesman Robert Zirkelbach. “The goal is to get everyone covered.”" The myth that insurance companies oppose legislation that would lay heavy fines on any citizen who doesn’t purchase their product was used by the mainstream media and the White House to make Americans believe that the victory of a few corporations somehow equated to victory for the people. While doing nothing to address the creation of new jobs so that the uninsured can sustainably afford the insurance they’re being forced to buy, the new law has assured the insurance industry an endless well of customers, backed by the US taxpayer if those customers are unable to pay. Enroll America will focus on enticing the final 5% of Americans who will be eligible for health insurance under the new law but whom congressional budget scorers do not expect to enroll. On a state-by-state basis, the group will work to create an easy application process for benefits, including access to enrollment at doctors’ offices, pharmacies and government agencies that provide other benefits like food stamps. Though the people behind Enroll America say they’re concerned that a small percentage of the population will defy the law, the IRS has been enlisted to help the government enforce the insurance mandate. The Congressional Budget office estimates that 95% of Americans will get health insurance by 2016. That will add nearly 32 million previously uninsured people to the health-coverage rolls. No doubt, for the insurance industry, the presidency of Barack Obama will be very good for business.