REPORT REVEALING OBAMAS ELIGIBILITY

HOLIDAY OF 2ND CHANCES
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Radio/News.aspx/2153
PROPHECIES FOR THE ERA OF MUSLIM TERROR-ISRAELI PERSPECTIVE
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Radio/News.aspx/2152
HISTORIC LIKUD VOTE APPROACHES
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/137270
ARAB LEADER FORCIBLY OUTSTED
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/137268
EFFORTS TO SAVE JEWISH LANDS
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/137269

MAN OF THE CLOTH 2nd face on Shroud points to supernatural origin-Another image of crucified man revealed during restoration April 27, 2010 8:45 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi 2010 WorldNetDaily

Second face on backside of Shroud of Turin.Scientists examining the Shroud of Turin since the restoration that began in 2000 have found a second face on its reverse hidden side,a discovery they believe adds evidence to the argument it is not a medieval painting or photographic rendering. As part of the restoration undertaken in the summer of 2002, the Holland cloth – the backing cloth placed on the shroud by the Poor Clare Nuns to preserve it after the 1532 fire – was removed, permitting for the first time in centuries an examination of the back side. In 2004, Professors Giulio Fanti and Roberto Maggiolo of the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Padua in Italy published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Optics their study, The Double Superficiality of the Frontal Image of the Turin Shroud.They concluded there exists a second, even fainter face image on the backside of the Shroud of Turin, corresponding but not identical to the face image of the crucified man seen in head-to-head dorsal and ventral views on the front side. The second face image on the back of the shroud was hidden for centuries, until the 2002 restoration when the Holland cloth was removed.

Get Jerome Corsi's mystery-and-faith thriller The Shroud Codex,autographed! Fanti and Maggiolo used image-processing techniques, including Gaussian filters and Fourier transformations to highlight the extremely faint second face on the backside of the shroud, including details of a nose, eyes, hair, beard and mustache. To the naked eye, the backside of the shroud appears to show no image whatsoever. Like the face image on the front side of the shroud, the previously hidden image on the backside is a superficial image that exists only on the topmost linen fibers, created by the same dehydration process characteristic of the face and body image on the front.

Negative of image on front of Shroud of Turin

The backside of the shroud contains only a limited ventral image of the crucified man in which a stain appears to correspond to the crossed hands seen on the front.
Fanti and Maggiolo found no dorsal image of the crucified man on the shroud's back side. The researchers concluded the image of the face on the backside of the shroud was not created by a process of painting in which the facial image on the front bled through to create an image on the reverse side. Similarly, if a photographic process created the image of the face, the photographic emulsion on the shroud must have been applied separately on the front and reverse surfaces, without any photographic emulsion soaking through the linen fibers at the center. The two scientists demonstrated this by noting the image of the face impressed on the backside has some slight differences from the front image. For instance, the nose on the back presents the same extension of both nostrils, unlike the front side, in which the right nostril is less evident.Moreover, Fanti and Maggiolo concluded the central part of the fabric was clearly not involved in the creation of the image [on the backside] – i.e., the internal part of the linen fabric does not have an image.The researchers, other words, found a doubly superficial face image on both the front and back sides such that if a cross-section of the fabric is made, one extremely superficial image appears above and one below, but there is nothing in the middle.The shroud, therefore, they concluded, was not created by paint soaking through the linen or by a photographic image printing through to the reverse side, because the front and back facial images are not identical and the center fibers show no image creation whatsoever.

Fanti and Maggiolo concluded the shroud image was created by a corona discharge, understood as a radiant burst of light and energy that scorched the body image of the crucified man on the topmost fibers of the shroud's front and back sides, without producing any image on the centermost of its linen fibers. Imagine slicing a human hair lengthwise, from end to end, into 100 long thin slices; each slice one-tenth the width of a single red blood cell,writes Daniel Porter, editor of ShroudStory.com.The images on the Shroud of Turin, at their thickest, are this thin.
Fanti and Maggiolo found the faint image of the face on the reverse side of the shroud contained the same 3D information contained in the face and body image of the crucified man seen on the shroud's front side. The current Exposition of the Shroud in Turin, underway until May 23, is the first time the Shroud of Turin has been displayed since the 2002 restoration. The back side of the shroud is not being shown for public observation; a new backing cloth has been sewn on to replace the Holland cloth, hiding the reverse side once again.

DOCTOR DOCTORIAN FROM ANGEL OF GOD
then the angel said, Financial crisis will come to Asia. I will shake the world.

JAMES 5:1-3
1 Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
2 Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten.
3 Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.

REVELATION 18:10,17,19
10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.
17 For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off,
19 And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.

EZEKIEL 7:19
19 They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the LORD: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumblingblock of their iniquity.

REVELATION 13:16-18
16 And he(FALSE POPE) causeth all,(WORLD SOCIALISM) both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:(CHIP IMPLANT)
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.(6-6-6) A NUMBER SYSTEM

WORLD MARKET RESULTS
http://money.cnn.com/data/world_markets/
CNBC VIDEOS
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15839263/site/14081545/?tabid=15839796&tabheader=false

HALF HOUR DOW RESULTS WED APR 28,2010

09:30 AM +2.48
10:00 AM +19.95
10:30 AM +22.90
11:00 AM +39.82
11:30 AM +15.94
12:00 PM +17.83
12:30 PM +41.71
01:00 PM +45.72
01:30 PM +40.21
02:00 PM +48.06
02:30 PM +63.40
03:00 PM +75.19
03:30 PM +68.16
04:00 PM +53.28 11,045.27

S&P 500 1191.36 +7.65

NASDAQ 2471.73 +0.26

GOLD 1,169.90 +7.70

OIL 83.22 +7.70

TSE 300 12,076.90 -69.80

CDNX 1660.44 +1.95

S&P/TSX/60 707.94 -4.23

MORNING,NEWS,STATS

YEAR TO DATE PERFORMANCE
Dow +42 points at 4 minutes of trading today.
Dow +1 points at low today.
Dow +42 points at high today so far.
GOLD opens at $1,164.70.OIL opens at $82.81 today.

AFTERNOON,NEWS,STATS
Dow -23 points at low today so far.
Dow +77 points at high today so far.

WRAPUP,NEWS,STATS
Dow -23 points at low today.
Dow +77 points at high today.

CRUDE OIL +1.9 MILLION BARRELS
GASOLINE -1.2 MILLION BARRELS
DISTILLATE INVENTORIES +2.9 MILLION BARRELS

Greece downgraded amid rumours of special May summit-Greece is the first euro area member to have its credit rating downgraded to junk status (Photo: John D. Carnessiotis, Athens, Greece)ANDREW WILLIS Today APR 28,10 @ 09:28 CET

The eurozone was plunged into further difficulty on Tuesday (27 April) as credit rating downgrades for both Greece and Portugal provided further evidence the economic contagion was rapidly spreading beyond the Hellenic Republic. European share prices tumbled after rating agency Standard and Poor's cut Greece's credit rating to junk status, a first for a euro area country, with Reuters reporting that euro area leaders were preparing to hold a special summit on 10 May to activate an aid package for the embattled debt-ridden country. There are talks at the highest level, and 10 May is the first available date after the vote for activation in the Greek parliament on May 6 or 7,said a Spanish EU presidency spokesperson, reported the newswire. The euro currency fell to its lowest level against the dollar for almost a year, as investors continued to worry over German intransigence in providing aid to Greece, and the possibility of a restructuring of Greek debt.

Speaking from Tokyo where he was participating in an EU-Japan summit, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy said negotiations between EU, IMF and Greek officials were progressing well.The negotiations are going on. They are well on track and there is no question about restructuring of the debt,he said, a view backed up by statements made by European Central Bank president Jean-Claude Trichet.

Bail-out size?

Despite the attempts to calm financial markets, concerns continued to grow that the money currently offered to Greece may not be enough. During a teleconference meeting earlier this month, euro area finance ministers promised to provide up to €30 billion in bilateral loans this year, with a further €10-15 expected to come from the IMF. Officials in Athens and Washington indicated on Tuesday that the IMF was now in talks to increase its aid contribution by €10 billion, reports the Financial Times, amid fears the original figure would not meet Greek needs. Athens is currently struggling under a €300 billion debt pile, with 19 May seen as a crucial date in the government's debt refinancing calendar. On Tuesday Goldman Sachs said that rescuing the Greek economy could require a bail-out closer to €150 billion over the next three years, and warned this would be politically impossible for European leaders.On my numbers, a one-year fully funded programme needs to provide a minimum €50-55 billion; an 18-month programme will require some €75 billion, and a three-year programme a minimum €150 billion,wrote the bank's chief European economist, Erik Nielsen, in a note to investors. I think the latter number is out of reach even for the present political environment of generosity, so the debate is between €55 billion and €75 billion,he added.

Germany

Much of the debate continues to centre on Germany, where crucial regional elections in the North Rhine-Westphalia state on 9 May have been blamed for the mixed messages emanating out of Berlin. Socialists in the European Parliament attacked what they perceive as Chancellor Angela Merkel's go-slow policy on Tuesday.The downgrading of Greece's sovereign credit rating to junk status is an indictment of Angela Merkel's policy of prevarication,said the president of the Party of European Socialists, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen.Analysts have also been critical of the apparent foot-dragging, despite assurances from Ms Merkel and her finance minister earlier this week that they are committed to preserving eurozone stability. Polls suggest the transfer of bilateral aid to Greece is hugely unpopular with German citizens, with the tabloid Bild newspaper on Wednesday running headlines saying: Fear for our money, Greeks don't want to save and Bild gives Greeks their drachma back.However, analysts following the regional campaign inside North Rhine-Westphalia (NWR) say the Greek aid issue is less of a concern to the region's voters than questions of employment and the economy in general. The populous NWR state with 18 million inhabitants is seen as a crucial region for the country's political parties, with victory for Ms Merkel's Christian Democrats essential if she is to hold on to her majority in the Bundesrat, the country's upper parliamentary chamber.

EU risks losing Ukraine, minister warns
ANDREW RETTMAN Today APR 28,10 @ 11:11 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Ukraine's economy will in the coming years integrate more closely with Russia than with the EU unless the union becomes more open, Ukraine's EU affairs minister has said. People in my leadership are extremely pragmatic. If we don't have real deliverables from contacts with the EU and we just see more and more pre-conditions, of course we will have closer business relations with countries such as Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus. In practical terms, our markets will become closer to Russia,Ukraine's EU affairs minister Konstantin Yeliseyev told EUobserver in a phone interview on Wednesday (28 April).The minister noted that the EU did not give Ukraine a roadmap for future visa-free travel as a reward for holding democratic elections in March.He said the EU blueprint for a new Association Agreement, to be concluded by the end of the year, is designed to open Ukraine's market to EU companies while keeping the single market fenced off from competition in a selfish and asymmetric plan.Mr Yeliseyev added that at a human level it is easier for President Viktor Yanukovych to more frequently visit Moscow than Brussels because his EU trips see him coming home empty-handed.In the first 50 days of the Yanukovych presidency, Russia has given Ukraine a $40 billion (€31 billion) discount on gas prices in return for keeping its Black Sea fleet in Crimea until 2042. It has secured Gazprom's involvement in a scheme to modernise Ukraine's gas industry and it is set to unveil on Friday a new set of joint ventures in the nuclear, oil, water, electricity, aviation and ports sectors.

Mr Yeliseyev downplayed the ideological significance of the Crimea deal, which has been depicted by Ukrainian opposition politicians and Western commentators as a sell-out to the Kremlin.He said the $40 billion discount will help crisis-hit Kiev to put in place domestic reforms and to normalise relations with Russia - two key EU demands in recent years. He added that the Russian naval presence does not rule out Ukraine's EU membership, even though it scuppers any chances of joining Nato. The minister also said it is out of the question that Ukraine might join a customs union with Russia and Belarus or recognise two Russian-backed rebel regions in Georgia, both of which are red lines in terms of its EU relations.But he attacked the EU for lacking a coherent strategy for his country.The EU does not know what to do with Ukraine. It has no vision for where it sees us in the next 10 years, or 20 years. It cannot clearly decide that, together with Ukraine, the EU would be more stable and more prosperous. When it finally decides this, it may be too late,he said. This Eastern Partnership - it's nothing, it's nothing. What can you do with €50 million a year for such a country as Ukraine? he added, on the EU's flagship policy for relations with post-Soviet states, which includes modest financial aid.EU officials are monitoring developments in Kiev with some concern after a vote on the Crimea deal saw fist-fights in the Ukrainian parliament on Tuesday and prompted fresh talk that the Russia-wary Western half of the country may one day split off on its own.

An EU source said the Yanukovych government gave assurances to EU commissioner Stefan Fuele that it will press ahead with pro-EU integration policies during his visit to Kiev earlier this month, however.In practical terms, it would not cost the EU anything to have a visa roadmap and an EU membership perspective in the Association Agreement. But it would seem paradoxical to reward Yanukovych for his pro-Russian policies,the contact added.Yanukovych's tactics resemble those of Lukashenka. He plays on both sides and he is trying to raise the stakes,the EU official said, referring to Belarus leader Alexander Lukashenka, who has in the past year secured concessions from both the EU and Russia by threatening the Kremlin that he will shift toward the West.

EU tables bigger budget for 2011 despite financial crisis
VALENTINA POP Today APR 28,10 @ 09:27 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – The EU commission on Tuesday (27 April) proposed a 2011 budget of €130 billion, an increase of almost six percent compared to the current year, with funds for poor regions, research and economic recovery getting the biggest boost.The draft budget adopted today gives Europe and its citizens incentives to develop an economy for the future: research and innovation, sustainability and inclusion are its cornerstones,EU budget commissioner Janusz Lewandowski said.The commission proposes €130.1 billion in real payments to be made next year, an increase of 5.9 percent. On top of that, as much as €142.6 billion could be committed in 2011 and cashed in during the following years.Farm subsidies remain stable at €58.1 billion, representing the budget's biggest slice, while most other spending areas are on the rise, notably regional policy which is set to increase by 14.7 percent to €54.6 billion.Members of the European Parliament, who have the power to reject the draft budget, raised concern about where the extra spending will come from, with member states slashing their domestic budgets in response to the financial crisis.I must admit, I am also not too happy. First of all, I do wonder about the general increase of the budget in times like this,said German liberal MEP Alexander Alvaro.He urged the EU institutions to make more savings and suggested moving unused funds from agriculture to other parts of the budget.Mr Lewandowski said he was neutral about moving funds and defended the extra expenditure as a positive message from Europe, arguing that EU funds will stimulate the real economy.The biggest winners of the EU budget are the new member states from central and eastern Europe, while Germany will remain the biggest contributor to the pot.

Cash-strapped Greece is also set to receive some €2.5 billion in regional aid and €700 million in farm subsidies. This money will come on top of the aid package aimed to prevent Greece from defaulting, now being negotiated between Athens, member states and the International Monetary Fund.EU foreign aid is to fall by 2.4 percent to €7.6 billion, but spending on administration will increase by 4.5 percent to €8.3 billion.The draft does not yet include the costs for the new diplomatic service to be run by foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton because she has not submitted the figures yet, Mr Lewandowski said. Those amendments could be carried out at a later stage, he added.A cut in aid for the Palestinian Authority to €200 million was criticised by Socialist Swedish MEP Goran Farm, who noted that the drop was more than total reserve in the commission's foreign-affairs budget. But Mr Lewandowski said that the sum could be increased over the course of the year. Meanwhile, the Turkish Cypriot community is set to get almost double the aid it received in 2010, despite their newly elected leader's populist stance which could derail reconciliation talks with the Greek Cypriot part.The draft budget still has to be agreed by EU governments and approved by the European Parliament.

Russia-Norway pact defuses Arctic tension
LEIGH PHILLIPS Today APR 28,10 @ 09:26 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - After some 40 years of negotiations, Norway and Russia have reached agreement over their undersea borders in the high north.The two sides announced they had reached an accord late on Tuesday (27 April) as the leaders of Norway and the Russian Federation signed a joint declaration bringing an end to the struggle over the extent of their Arctic territory.This is an historic day. We have reached a breakthrough in the most important outstanding issue between Norway and the Russian Federation,said Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg.The frontiers at the bottom of the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean have long been a source of contention between Moscow and Oslo. In 2007, a Russian submarine famously planted a flag on the Arctic sea floor underneath the North Pole, while the Norwegian coast guard has regularly detained Russian fishing boats.The flag stunt, mounted by State Duma deputy and polar explorer Artur Chilingarov, at the time seemed to herald a race for the Arctic.The EU for its part in 2008 published a security analysis highlighting the boundary disputes at the pole, arguing that the bloc should boost its civil and military capacities to respond to serious security risks resulting from catastrophic climate change.I believe this will open the way for many joint projects, especially in the area of energy,Russian President Dmitri Medvedev told reporters.The agreement will see a maritime delimitation line that divides a disputed area of some 175,000 square kilometres of the Arctic shelf in two parts of roughly the same size. The document also provides for fisheries and oil and gas co-operation, with language on work together to manage marine life.

Crucially, there are a series of detailed rules and procedures governing how oil and gas deposits that cross the border should be apportioned.Negotiations have completed, but some further technical work must still be done before a final treaty is signed, at which point, this will have to be approved by the two nations' parliaments.Agreement on the maritime delimitation line opens up new prospects for cooperation in the north on resources, trade and industry, employment opportunities and people-to-people co-operation across our common border,said Mr Stoltenberg.

EUROPEAN UNION ARMY

DANIEL 7:23-25
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast (EU,REVIVED ROME) shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth,(7TH WORLD EMPIRE) which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.(TRADING BLOCKS)
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings(10 NATIONS) that shall arise: and another shall rise after them;(#11 SPAIN) and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.( BE HEAD OF 3 NATIONS)
25 And he (EU PRESIDENT) shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.(3 1/2 YRS)

DANIEL 8:23-25
23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king (EU DICTATOR) of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences,(FROM THE OCCULT) shall stand up.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power:(SATANS POWER) and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes;(JESUS) but he shall be broken without hand.

DANIEL 11:36-39
36 And the king (EU DICTATOR) shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers,(THIS EU DICTATOR IS JEWISH) nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.(CLAIM TO BE GOD)
38 But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces:(WAR) and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.
39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god,(DESTROY TERROR GROUPS) whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many,(HIS ARMY LEADERS) and shall divide the land for gain.

REVELATION 19:19
19 And I saw the beast,(EU LEADER) and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse,(JESUS) and against his army.(THE RAPTURED CHRISTIANS)

Development NGOs issue legal warning over new EU foreign service
LEIGH PHILLIPS 27.04.2010 @ 17:34 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The European development NGO community has attacked the EU's already quite well advanced plans to subsume aid policy under the rubric of its new diplomatic corps, arguing that the new set-up will make development a mere pawn of foreign and security policy and that this is illegal under the Lisbon Treaty.A coalition of almost the entire community of development organisations have warned that legal action could be taken against foreign affairs chief Catherine Asthon's proposal for the External Action Service to prevent the EAS from taking over development policy.Concord, the umbrella group of all European development groups together with CIDSE, the alliance of European Catholic development charities, Aprodev, its Protestant counterpart, and Eurostep, the secular aid coalition, together sought legal advice from White & Case, a UK law firm, whose analysis came back saying: The EAS may be in breach of objectives and competencies laid down in the Lisbon Treaty.The role of the EAS under the EU treaties is restricted to the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), which represents only part of the EU's external action. Development co-operation is outside the scope of the CFSP and therefore the EAS has no capacity in respect of it,the legal analysis reads. The CFSP is the agreed foreign policy of the EU for mainly security and defence diplomacy and actions.The Ashton proposal, which is intended as an instrument setting out the organisation and functioning of the EAS, cannot alter areas of competence as defined under the treaties, such as the exclusive competence of the commission in development co-operation activities. Detracting from the exclusive competence of the commission would require a formal treaty amendment.Stripping away the jargon, essentially the development groups believe that the European Commission is less political than the member states.

It has been the sole agent responsible for development policy and implementation until now, and they fear that the commission is having its powers in this area diluted or even stripped away.They view the EU executive as an organisation that in principle is supposed to stand above national interests and represent the interest of Europe as a whole and so is a better manager of development policy.They worry in particular that with the development area being placed in the hands of the EAS, the member states will now have their fingers in the pie and will subordinate poverty reduction in the third world to less altruistic foreign policy imperatives.Simon Stocker, the director of Eurostep, warned in particular against a politicisation of EU aid.According to Roeland Scholtalbers, of CIDSE, they do not view the commission as an angel in the development realm. But this is a matter of principle, serving the common EU interest. Not everything the commission does is positive when it comes to development, particularly when it comes to trade policy, but this is absolutely a regression.Member states do not make each other accountable, but the commission does, as they are doing in the example of calling on them to live up to aid promises.
The organisations admit that it is rather late in the game to be raising the issue now - on Monday, foreign ministers signed off on the high representative's proposals - but they nevertheless intend to mobilise all their national organisations to put pressure at the member-state level.

Meanwhile, in Brussels, the groups are going to take the issue to the European Parliament - one of the European institutions that could launch a legal case to the European Court of Justice, and is still very much a key player in the EAS debate, according to Elise Ford, head of Oxfam's EU office. The European Parliament has sent cases to ECJ in the past to challenge the legality of EU decisions and the misspending of the EU development money. It has the power to force member states to reverse their decision,Ms Ford continued.Mr Scholtalbers told EUobserver that if MEPs do not take legal action, the groups themselves may do so.If the parliament doesn't act, although we are getting a very good response from MEPs so far, then legal action on our own part becomes quite a serious possibility.The parliament is already not particularly happy with what it sees as an intergovernmental approach to the EAS rather than EU community approach.

Political context

An EU official close to the high representative on Tuesday said that he had read the document but was convinced that the proposals are compliant with the Lisbon Treaty.

The [NGOs'] legal advice overlooks one basic fact: development policy yesterday, today and tomorrow will be based on the [main] instrument adopted on development policy, the European Development Fund [EDF], which is based on rules that very much puts poverty reduction at the forefront of what we want to obtain.He said that the rules governing the use of EDF funds will not change with the establishment of the foreign service: When managing these monies, we do it according to EDF rules.The official however defended the need to place development within the framework of foreign policy: We are unfortunately living in a world where development depends on political factors. You do not make development in the Sudan or Somalia and forget that there is a political context.That is what the EAS is about. It is not a way of trying to divert development money to so-called political purposes. It's about how you best promote the interests of that particular country.

Member states agree diplomatic service outline
HONOR MAHONY 27.04.2010 @ 09:08 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Member states on Monday (26 April) reached political agreement on the future shape of the EU's new diplomatic service, with the parliament seen as the biggest remaining obstacle to a formal go-ahead.Announcing the breakthrough after lengthy negotiations, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said Europe needs an External Action Service because it will help us to build a distinct 21st century European response.[The service] will bring together in a joined-up way our response to the issues that we face in the world and promote comprehensive policies,she added.Most of the negotiations on Monday focussed on how to ensure that member state diplomats are fairly represented in the EAS. The rules say that the service should be made up of an equal number of officials from the commission, the Council secretariat and member states, but governments are worried that it will take a long time before their quota is filled.It was also agreed that the EAS will only offer limited consular services - an earlier more extensive role was reduced due to British misgivings - while the commission will have a say over candidates shortlisted to head the EU's 136 delegations around the world.Formal agreement on the blueprint can only be given by member states once the European Commission gives its consent - seen as likely - and MEPs give their opinion on it.

Ordinarily member states would be more cavalier about the prospect of a non-binding opinion from MEPs on the diplomatic service's structure. But parliament's co-decision powers on issues further down the line, such as on changing staffing and financial rules, crucial to getting the service up and running, have given deputies a de facto veto.Ms Ashton said Monday's agreement would allow her to kick-start negotiations with MEPs. She appealed to the EU assembly to play a constructive role noting that parliament's powers and prerogatives are fully respected within the decision.While the parliament will have budgetary oversight over the service and the power of the secretary general of the service has been watered down - both major points for MEPs - it will be a stand-alone body rather than an integral part of the commission, as deputies had called for.Member states, some of whom are exasperated by MEPs playing hardball, believed putting the service under the commission's roof would give the parliament powers it does not have in the treaty, such as a say on defence and foreign affairs.A meeting of the parliament's budgetary control committee on Monday illustrated the likely difficulty of the negotiations still to come.German conservative MEP Ingeborg Graessle said the diplomatic service's independent status raises a whole series of legal questions that would not be raised if it is part of the commission.She pointed to the lack of clarity on who is responsible if EU money is misspent. It is very important that only EU officials spend EU money,she noted, referring to fact that heads of delegation, who may be national diplomats, can sign off budgets for their delegations.

We only have clear supervisory powers if the commission is responsible.Bulgarian Socialist MEP Ivailo Kalfin noted that the decision to put the EAS in charge of strategic planning on development issues - with its billions-strong yearly budget - and the commission in charge of its implementation will blur the lines of responsibility.I am afraid that when we try and find the chain of responsibility, we shall face great difficulties,he said.MEPs have an equal say with member states on changing the staff and financial rules in order to accommodate the service and on establishing a budget for it.

King accepts Belgian PM's resignation
ANDREW WILLIS 27.04.2010 @ 09:29 CET

Belgium's King Albert II has accepted the resignation of Prime Minister Yves Leterme, raising the spectre of national elections just weeks before the country is scheduled to take over the EU's rotating presidency on 1 July. Mr Leterme tendered his resignation on Thursday after the Flemish Liberal (Open VLD) party pulled out of his ruling coalition government, the long-running squabble revolving round the linguistic status of suburbs surrounding Brussels.The king subsequently asked deputy prime minister Didier Reynders, a French-speaker, to find a compromise solution, but on Monday (26 April) Mr Reynders asked to be relieved of the task, prompting the king to accept Mr Leterme's resignation.I regret that the necessary dialogue to achieve a negotiated settlement did not produce the result we hoped for, Mr Leterme, a Flemish Christian Democrat, said in a statement.Options now include the possibility of a new coalition, with talks taking place this week, or fresh elections, with June the earliest possible date under Belgian constitutional rules.

Mr Leterme will stay on in a caretaker capacity until a solution is found, but analysts say the current impasse is particularly acute, going beyond Belgium's storied history of linguistic disputes between the nation's French and Dutch speaking politicians. For a period of nine months in 2007, the country was left effectively without a government after politicians were unable to form a coalition following elections.Open VLD's exit from the coalition last week was prompted by frustration over the government's failure to solve the dispute between the French-speaking and Dutch-speaking communities in the Brussels-Halle-Vilvoord electoral district. A proposed controversial new law would remove the special voting rights of minority French-speakers in the area, with a vote on the matter set to take place this Thursday in parliament.

EU presidency, debt pile

As well as the perceived gravity, the timing of the latest imbroglio is far from ideal, with Belgium scheduled to take over reins of the EU's rotating six-month presidency in little over two months' time. Holders of the presidency are charged with organising and chairing the majority of the EU's many meetings between member state officials, essential to the smooth operation of the European Union. Privately, EU officials concede they do not relish the prospect of more uncertainty, with the collapse of the Czech government during the country's presidency in the first half of 2009 resulting in considerable confusion. The country's growing debt pile, roughly equal to the country's annual GDP, has also been singled out as another clear reason why a stable government is essential at the current juncture.Unforeseen economic developments could place considerable strain on the country's bond market if no finance minister were in place, Carsten Brzeski, senior economist with Dutch bank ING told EUobserver last week. Former Belgian Prime Minister Mark Eyskens told the national media:If we have a deep political crisis, we could find ourselves in a similar position to Greece. We have a debt of over 100 percent [of GDP] that we must finance.

Barroso to discuss five-year plan during China visit
ANDREW WILLIS 26.04.2010 @ 17:21 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso will travel to China this week (29 April - 1 May) for talks with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao as the two sides look to map out a five-year co-operation plan. We will seize this opportunity to generate positive momentum in our 35-year relationship and develop a far-reaching agenda for the next five years,Mr Barroso said in a statement on Monday. The EU and China are important global players and it is essential that we work together in addressing common challenges,the Portuguese politician added ahead of his visit to Beijing and Shanghai, his first since the new commission was formed in February and since the EU's new rulebook, the Lisbon Treaty, finally came into force. A number of other EU commissioners are scheduled to make the journey: EU high representative Catherine Ashton, digital agenda commissioner Neelie Kroes, culture commissioner Androulla Vassiliou, trade commissioner Karel De Gucht, energy commissioner Gunther Oettinger and climate action commissioner Connie Hedegaard.

The EU is China's largest trading partner, with the growing number of trade disputes set to feature prominently in talks between Mr De Gucht and his Chinese counterpart, as will questions of market access. Earlier this month, Joerg Wuttke, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, said lobbying from local Chinese firms was leading Beijing to slow down market-opening reforms.The pie is getting bigger and the door is getting narrower,Mr Wuttke told reporters. Currency issues will also be on the agenda, with Europe once again joining the US in calling for an appreciation of the Chinese currency, the renminbi. However, while he EU will discuss the revaluation of yuan with China,Our idea is not to put pressure because we think it doesn't work, EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht said in a recent interview with Chinese state news agency Xinhua. Connie Hedegaard will meet a number of Chinese officials involved in international climate negotiations ahead of the upcoming UN talks scheduled for the beginning of June. On Friday, Mr Barroso will participate in the opening ceremony of the Shanghai World Expo 2010 and the inauguration of the EU Pavilion the following day.

Blacks, Hispanics and women must vote for Obama again…..NOT! By Laurie Roth

Obama is on the Rules for radicals warpath. He is identifying the contrived enemies and pretend friends while feeding his attack and seduction plans to the largely, deaf and dumb, worshipping media. It is boringly familiar. As usual, Obama is dramatically reaching out to the young voters but not just any young voter. He wants Blacks, Hispanics and female voters. He is calling on the first time voters who voted for him in 2008 to do it again and beat the Republicans. The case and plans against Republicans and conservatives are growing. The latest race war move by Obama is the vivid attack of Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona by Obama and liberals. Nepalitono calls the new immigration law in Arizona misguided, while Obama threatens all kinds of Federal, legal review. Obama and his minions are crying, civil rights violations, racism and police state.He could not be more thrilled that this law was signed into existence. It is the perfect tool to manipulate a race war against the Republicans.Obama sees the poll numbers going down. He notices the massive growth of the Tea Parties, many of which are Independents and Democrats. The old tactic of the Saul Alinsky play book, that Obama taught ACORN workers from, is to invent crisis, blame your enemy, then rush in to solve the problem. Hitler had this strategy memorized also. We conservatives, that includes Republicans, obviously hate Hispanics, poor people, civil rights, black people and women’s rights! We are evil, nasty and the party of NO.

We see drama queen central unfolding.San Francisco City attorney Dennis Herrera has called for a boycott of all Arizona-based businesses and the state in general.
Nepalotino and Obama call this outstanding law misguided and offensive to civil rights LaRaza and other far leftist, groups say this will create a police state…..bla bla bla.The bottom line is that many states, Arizona being just one of them are in an emergency situation because our clueless and irresponsible federal Government hasn’t led and done their job for years, no decades, in stopping the flood of illegal aliens over our borders. Though laws have been on the books for ages outlawing businesses in the U.S. from hiring illegal aliens, the apparent law behind the law is to virtually ignore this law. Hire all you want. Use that cheap, slave labor. Make sure you the business owner get all the benefits of the cheapest labor possible, violating and insulting the illegal aliens, while you violate and deny jobs to American workers, who would work those jobs if they could get them! The same time you do all this, preach to the American people lies about the illegal aliens only doing the jobs U.S. citizens won’t, while supporting the goal of family values.

The flow of illegal aliens has grown to the terminal cancer stage in our country. Amnesty, co-dependency and looking the other way is not the answer. The great Ronald Reagan offered amnesty and that only acted as a lightening rod, attracting millions more over our borders. Obama is also pushing for amnesty and pushing a worker ID for all workers in America. This proposed strategy would address the immigration issue somehow. I find that stream of logic ‘dummer than a post’ because we already have an out of control crime wave with illegals stealing Ids and Social Security numbers. If everyone is forced to have a worker ID with biometrics and all, this will only create an even larger Identity theft industry, now with fake and stolen worker Ids.Keeping illegal aliens from crossing our borders is just one of the many ways we must intervene to stop this flow. We must get serious with the Government of Mexico, workers and employers here and there. We must offer laid out and clear incentives to work along the border and in Mexico, while offering total protection. The Mexican Government must declare internal war on their own fraud, payola and compromise with Drug Cartels. Once they have confronted, with their military, the many drug and crime cartels, then they must explore some economic benefits for building business and employment opportunities along the US and Mexican border. We need voices and leaders who will get creative and visionary to really solve this problem for all. That means including workers, both Governments, the poor illegals who want jobs, our national security issues and crime prevention.The Obama administration is pursuing young, black, Hispanic and female voters. Obama thinks he owns them and that he can seduce them into believing that he actually cares about race and women’s issues. Wake up call to all minorities and women! OBAMA DOES NOT CARE ABOUT YOU AT ALL! He only cares about the votes he can manipulate out of you and the tax money he can take from your wallet. He wants and demands a nation of worshipping, tax surfs, preferably, African-American and Hispanic. You are not supposed to have your own mind. Do you get it yet?

The Arizona immigration law is new and will be monitored and watched to make sure it doesn’t go over the line. However, isn’t it high time that the concept of sanctuary cities and the neutering of Cops stop!!!? Now, in Arizona, they actually have the right to ask a few questions and pick up and illegal alien. As if that is over the top! I’m sorry, if illegals might feel violated or like their privacy rights are being trampled, but, IT WAS ILLEGAL IN THE FIRST PLACE FOR THEM TO COME HERE WITH OUT GOING THROUGH A LEGAL PROCESS.Try cutting across the border of Mexico to a resort, just because you couldn’t be bothered with proper paper work and see what happens. It won’t be pretty.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW HERE INFOWARS.COM
http://www.infowars.com/
OBAMA DECEPTION
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
FALL OF THE REPUBLIC MOVIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8LPNRI_6T8&feature=player_embedded
ENDGAME GLOBAL ENSLAVEMENT
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261
POLICE SATE 4-THE RISE OF FEMA MOVIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klqv9t1zVww&feature=player_embedded
INVISIBLE EMPIRE MOVIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO24XmP1c5E&feature=player_embedded
BOHEMIAN GROVE NWO OCCULTISTS
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-82095917705734983
WITCHCRAFT IN THE WHITE HOUSE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmaiX86sUoc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF2eILED00s&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZARWvlz_yKI&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sbh7KrUwawI&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IG0tmvCozU&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgP-SyrooKI&feature=channel
OBAMA SCAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V1nmn2zRMc&feature=player_embedded
PHIL BERG - OBAMA CRIMES
http://obamacrimes.com/
LAURIE ROTH SHOW
http://therothshow.com/
DOUG HAGMANN
http://homelandsecurityus.com/
CANADA FREE PRESS-JUDI MCLEOD
http://www.canadafreepress.com/

JUNE 29TH ELLIGABILITY CASE
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=137773

AND THE OTHER ISSUE WE MUST KEEP ON THE TABLE AND IN PEOPLES MEMORY IS THAT BARRY SOETORO IS REALLY BARACK OBAMAS REAL NAME AND HE WAS BORN IN KENYA NOT AMERICA.BARRY SOETORO AKA BARACK OBAMA IS NOT ELLIGABLE TO BE THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA GOVERNMENT.EVERYTHING HE SIGNS IN BARACK OBAMA IS ILLEGEL,BECAUCE HIS REAL NAME IS BARRY SOETORO.AMERICAS CONSTITUTION WILL BE IN SHAMBLES ONCE THIS SCAM IS FINALLY REVEALED TO THE WORLD.

BY THE TIMELINE IN OBAMAS OWN BOOKS-OBAMA WENT TO PAKISTAN ON HIS INDONESIAN PASSPORT.ANOTHER ISSUE OUT OF 400 PEOPLE AT COLUMBIA THAT GRADUATED THE YEAR OBAMA OR BARRY SOETORO DID,NO ONE COMES FORWARD TO SAY THEY KNEW HIM.HOW COME AT HAWAII HOSPITAL WERE OBAMA CLAIMS HE WAS BORN,NO NURSES OR ANYBODY CAME FORWARD TO SAY THEY WITNESSED OR TOOK PART IN THE BIRTH.THIS BARRY SOETORO OR AKA BARACK OBAMAS LIFE IS A COMPLETE FRAUD.AND AMERICA IS CONNED TO BELIEVE THE LIE.WHY WOULD SOETORO AKA OBAMA SPEND 2 MILLION DOLLARS TO STOP ALL THESE LAWSUITS IF THERES NO COVERUP.HE WOULD JUST SHOW THE PROOF OF EACH EVENT-PLACE OF BIRTH,CERTIFICATE AND REAL NAME BARRY SOETORO INDONESIAN PASSPORT.

The proof is everywhere from statements and affidavits from Government parliament sources and Obama’s own Grandmother who says she saw him born in a hospital in Mombassa Kenya. The former ambassador to Kenya says Obama was born in Mombassa Kenya, so do others. Check out the affidavits at www.obamacrimes.com and join Phil Berg and other concerned citizens for a huge eligibility protest march May 29th 12-4pm.

An investigative report detailing the Obama eligibility controversy
By Douglas J. Hagmann, Director
http://homelandsecurityus.com/archives/3735
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=136589

27 April 2010: I cannot think of any other subject in recent American history that has been so mired in controversy, so factually misrepresented, mischaracterized and so misunderstood than the matter of the eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA II to hold the office of President of the United States. Despite its importance, the topic has been summarily dismissed as fodder for conspiracy theorists by many, while others insist that the question of OBAMA’s citizenship has been asked and answered. But has it really been answered, and if not, why not? In consideration of the controversy that continues to plague Barack Hussein OBAMA over his citizenship status and his well documented sustained pattern of refusal to provide authenticated documentation of his birth records and numerous other pertinent records, I’ve conducted an in-depth investigation into the matter in an effort to separate fact from fiction, myth from reality. My approach was the same I’ve used as an investigator over the last 25 years on behalf of Fortune 100 companies in their selection of corporate executives, conducting due diligence background investigations. In this case, however, I was not afforded direct and unfettered access to the applicant’s, or in this case, OBAMA’s original records. Nonetheless, I conducted inquiries and a lengthy investigation researching the information directly or indirectly disclosed by OBAMA, as well as collections of documents, court records, official federal and state documents, verbal statements, utterances and other documents determined to be of authentic provenance.

At issue is whether Barack Hussein OBAMA or any of his representatives have furnished sufficient documentation to prove his eligibility for the office of President of the United States under Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution that states:No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.Presently, OBAMA occupies the White House as the Chief Executive Officer of the United States of America. As president, he is the commander-in-chief of our armed forces and ultimately responsible for the security of the United States. Any person of reasonable sensibilities would logically believe that his eligibility status has long been established by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) or those in positions of oversight for such matters. But has it?

In order to be as comprehensive as possible, my investigative findings include important background information into the legal definition of a natural born citizen” as applicable to Article II of the U.S. Constitution. This background information is provided to clear up many common misconceptions about the eligibility controversy, and to explain why so many people are confused and easily mislead over this issue. After thoroughly investigating this matter, I have found demonstrable evidence that this confusion is a deliberate and highly effective tactic used to divert attention from a constitutional issue and thus, the rule of law, to the detriment of American citizens.This report will also provide insight into the reasons for the largely ignored yet unprecedented legal fight by Barack Hussein OBAMA II, his representatives and assigns, against any release of the authenticated copy of his long form birth certificate and a multitude of other relevant historical documents.

Natural Born Citizen Qualification: The Facts

Based on extensive research, there are two separate but equally relevant legal issues that involve the specific eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA II to legally serve as President of the United States. First is the U.S. Constitution which was adopted into law on 17 September 1787. As noted by Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution, an individual born after 1787 cannot legally or legitimately serve as U.S. President unless that person is a natural born citizen of the United States.The second issue is the precise definition of a natural born citizen.The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, adopted on 9 July 1868, furnishes a rather broad definition of who qualifies as a natural born citizen.Specifically, who qualifies as a natural born citizen legally qualified to hold the office of President of the United States under Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution lies at the core of the eligibility argument. For the sake of clarity in advance of potential ancillary arguments, it is noted here that the Twelfth-Amendment to the U.S. Constitution mandates that Vice-Presidents possess the same qualifications as Presidents.Obviously, there is no legitimate controversy over the eligibility status of Barack Hussein OBAMA in terms of his age and length of residency within the U.S. Despite popular belief by many to the contrary, there is, however, an unresolved issue over his status as a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States.

While many constitutional scholars hold different beliefs over the intent of the natural born citizen qualifier, I submit that an extraordinarily prescient illustration of logic behind this qualification can be found in a brief letter from John JAY, a founding father of the United States and the first chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court to George WASHINGTON dated 25 July 1787:

——————————————————

Dear Sir,

Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.

I remain, dear sir,

Your faithful friend and servant,

John Jay.

——————————————————

A study of the Federalist Papers and the writings of our founding fathers clearly indicate a concern for the security of the United States stemming from threats from within,or to prevent foreign enemies from becoming commander-in-chief. Given the nature and various enemies we currently face, the brief but ominous note to George WASHINGTON would certainly appear as relevant today, if not more so, as it was over 200 years ago.Three years after that note was written, Congress affirmed in 1790 that a person born abroad whose parents are both citizens of the U.S. is, in fact, a U.S. citizen. In the years that followed, there have been many legal arguments to further define a natural born citizen. Based on extensive research, it would appear that the next best definition originates from an 1874 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162 (1874). The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that if an individual is born in the United States and both parents are U.S. citizens at the time of birth, that individual is, in fact, a natural born citizen. That same Supreme Court decision also addressed the issue of a person born in the United States where one of the parents is not a U.S. citizen at the time of the birth of the child. The ruling noted that in such a case, the child’s natural born citizenship status is in doubt.In any event, subsequent rulings by Congress and enacted by federal statute affirm that children born abroad by parents who are both U.S. citizens are not only U.S. citizens themselves, but are recognized as natural born citizens.On the other hand, individuals born in the United States or elsewhere by one or more parents who are not U.S. citizens are not likely to be eligible to hold the office of President of the United States absent of federal statute affirming their eligibility. Therein lays the current situation of Barack Hussein OBAMA II and the need to establish his citizenship status through authenticated documents.

Presidential eligibility; historical & current oddities

Since the U.S. Constitution was adopted into law, every elected U.S. president who was born after 1787 was born in the United States of parents who were both U.S. citizens except two: Chester Alan ARTHUR and Barack Hussein OBAMA II. It is interesting to note that when Chester Alan ARTHUR was born, his father, William ARTHUR was a British subject and not a U.S. citizen. There is ample authenticated historical evidence to substantiate that ARTHUR deliberately and publicly misrepresented his family lineage during his campaign and following his election in 1880 as the 21st President, took steps to destroy evidence, including family and birth records.Barack Hussein OBAMA II has publicly admitted that his father was a Kenyan native and a British citizen who never became a U.S. citizen. Based on that admission and further verification of his father’s nationality, OBAMA’s status as a natural born citizen and thus, his eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States is questionable at best, at least according to the aforementioned Supreme Court ruling of Minor v. Happersett. This issue becomes more prescient and ominously nefarious when one investigates the overt and covert behavior of OBAMA as a candidate, his actions following his election, the duplicity of the media, members of the U.S. Congress, the Federal Elections Commission and other factors by those who appear to be working individually or in concert to purposely misdirect the core Constitutional argument.It is obvious that not all presidential candidates are treated equally in terms of their eligibility, as illustrated during the 2008 election. During the 2008 campaign, a lawsuit was filed petitioning the removal of Presidential candidate John McCAIN from the ballot. Ironically, the suit stemmed from the questions over McCAIN’s constitutional eligibility as his natural-born status was in doubt. To put to rest any doubt, McCAIN responded by providing an authenticated copy of his long form birth certificate to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) and Congress. Despite the early rumblings of controversy over OBAMA’s origins, OBAMA did not.

Although McCain provided his long form birth certificate and took proactive measures to ensure his eligibility to hold office, many political and media pundits remained unsatisfied. Before the term birther became synonymous with racist conspiracy theorist, an article published on 28 February, 2008 in The New York Times titled McCain’s Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out questioned McCAIN’s eligibility.On that same day, Senator Claire McCASKILL, a Missouri democrat introduced a bill titled Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. Oddly, the bill was co-sponsored by both Senators Barack Hussein OBAMA II and Hillary Rodham CLINTON, both who were running against McCAIN at the time the bill was introduced. Despite the specificity of its title, the bill (SB 2678) was an attempt to change the legal definition of a natural born citizen as referenced by Article II, Section I, clause V of the U.S. Constitution, a move that by default, would arguably and preemptively take away any constitutional challenges against the eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA II.Although the bill failed to progress in the Senate, the same lawmakers introduced a non-binding resolution (Senate Resolution 511) on 10 April 2008 to again ostensibly recognize McCAIN as a natural born citizen,the resolution contained broad language that could be applied to OBAMA.The controversy surrounding the eligibility of John McCAIN to hold office continued, at least in the media. On 11 July 2008, an article was published in The New York Times under the title A Hint of New Life to a McCain Birth Issue. The article cited a law professor from the University of Arizona who concluded, in a detailed analysis that neither Mr. McCain’s birth in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone nor the fact that his parents were American citizens is enough to satisfy the constitutional requirement that the president must be a natural-born citizen.The law professor cited in that article, Gabriel J. Chin, published a sixty-two page discussion paper in August 2008 titled Why Senator John McCain Cannot be President: Eleven Months and a Hundred Yards Short of Citizenship (Arizona Legal Studies, Discussion Paper 08-14).The status of Barack Hussein OBAMA, however, remained unquestioned by the majority of academia.

Arguments over importance & relevance: Birthers are born

Like the layers of an onion, one must peel back the layers of hyperbole, political agendas, accusations of racism, and other types of detractions and distractions to arrive at the very core of the argument, which is simply this: Is Barack Hussein OBAMA in fact legally eligible, under the United States Constitution, to serve as President of the United States? There are many who claim that the issue of Obama’s eligibility is unimportant and irrelevant, or an unnecessary distraction to the real crises facing America, including but not limited to OBAMA’s policies and actions as President. It is an interesting dichotomy that some of the most vocal proponents of the first amendment are the same who appear to disregard the fourteenth amendment, a practice especially virulent among those in the media. There are also those self-proclaimed conservative media pundits who have the collective audience of millions of Americans who flatly refuse to discuss, let alone demand answers to a legitimate legal question as defined by the U.S. Constitution.Others claim the argument is moot, as the President was duly elected by the will of the people. Those people are in need of a history lesson as that argument is technically flawed at the most fundamental level. Others assert that questioning the eligibility issue is rooted in racism and bigotry, at which point the rule of law is ultimately lost in a flurry of deliberate distractions presented in the form of incendiary accusations.Perhaps the most calculated and methodical approach in use today to dissuade people from addressing this issue is the labeling of anyone who believes that American citizens deserve to know whether Barack Hussein OBAMA meets the eligibility requirements as a birther.The negative connotations of this label are vast and incisive, and the evolution of this term has grown to include ancillary questions of OBAMA’s past.The popular but erroneous perception is that birthers,often lumped together with 9/11 truthers and others who have legitimate questions and concerns about important issues either live in a world where conspiracies dominate their thoughts, or are simply branded as kooks seeking answers to non-existent questions. The fact is that there are indeed legitimate unanswered questions about the events of 9/11 as there are legitimate unanswered questions about the background and overall eligibility of OBAMA. Individuals asking rational, fact based questions about either subject are intentionally combined with others whose questions are obviously well beyond the realm of reason.

In particular, it is not only the absence of authenticated evidence regarding OBAMA’s citizenship status at birth that cause rational people to question his eligibility status under Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution, but the manner in which OBAMA and those in positions of government oversight have responded to legitimate inquiries. It is also how some members of the media have chosen to report on this issue, misreport or otherwise distort the issue, or not report on it at all.Whatever arguments are used to understate or even mock the importance of this matter, it cannot be denied that the rule of law is being ignored and as a result, the Constitution of the United States is being trampled. If the fourteenth amendment is permitted to be exploited, ignored or violated, it might not be long before other amendments, along with the entire Constitution, become nothing more than a footnote in American history. As such, questions surrounding this matter must be taken seriously.

The Obama eligibility issue: has it already been answered? No. It has been a common tactic to refute questions about OBAMA’s eligibility by citing the Internet publication of a Certification of Live Birth (COLB), also known as a short form birth certificate purportedly issued by the state of Hawaii. The controversial document was originally posted on the Internet at http://www.dailykos.com, a political website on or about 12 June 2008 as questions about OBAMA’s place of birth and eligibility status began to become a popular Internet topic. As there was no certification of authenticity that accompanied the alleged document, its provenance could not be established.Subsequent to the document being posted on the aforementioned website, the Fight the Smears website reproduced the document here. While many believe Fight the Smears website is an independent organization dedicated to separating fact from fiction, it is actually owned and operated by Organizing for America,the successor organization to Obama for America.Clearly, it is far from independent.Yet another website purported to be an independent arbiter of truth is FactCheck.org, which claims that the eligibility status of OBAMA has long been satisfied. Like the previous site, it is important to understand who owns or operates the site in order to assess the reliability of the site. The Fact Check website is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. It receives its primary funding from the Annenberg Foundation. It is relevant to note that Barack Hussein OBAMA II was a founding member, chairman, and past president of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was also funded by the Annenberg Foundation. Accordingly, it is reasonable to challenge the neutrality of the information provided by that site.

Since then, the image, including variations of the image, have appeared on the Internet to prove that Barack Hussein OBAMA meets the eligibility requirements under Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution.Since its original posting, numerous individuals and websites have sought to disprove the authenticity of the document, which was posted as an image in JPEG format, through analysis of the image or by other means (e.g. sequencing of certificate numbers, absence of state seal, etc.). Although there appears to be sufficient evidence suggesting the document is not a valid certificate and has been falsely created or the image has been deliberately altered, limiting discussion at this time to the merits of the COLB detracts from a much larger issue: OBAMA’s massive and unprecedented campaign to keep sealed his actual birth certificate (and other relevant records) from public view.This is not to say that the publication of the COLB document is unimportant. In fact, quite the opposite is true if the matter of legal eligibility is ever properly and thoroughly investigated by a legitimate court of inquiry within the United States. As agents, representatives or the assigns of Barack Hussein OBAMA have publicly asserted that the question of eligibility has been officially answered by the publication of the COLB as listed on officially sanctioned web sites, and it is ultimately proven that the document is deliberately deceptive by any means, an inquiry into violations of the United States Crimes Code, 18 USC Section 1028 encompassing fraud and other related activity involving identification documents might apply.Since the initial COLB was first published in June 2008, there have been at least two additional incarnations of the document, each containing revisions that bear additional information allegedly supporting its authenticity. Accordingly, the Certification of Live Birth is consistently cited by individuals, the media and others to prove the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA. Nonetheless, even an authenticated and genuine Certification of Live Birth is legally insufficient for the purpose of proving eligibility, as it merely represents that OBAMA’s birth record is on file in the state of Hawaii. It falls short of providing the information necessary to determine constitutional eligibility in at least two areas: it does not offer any information regarding who supplied the information, nor does it confirm the authenticity of the information provided. Again, it merely indicates that the information is on file.

Hawaii officials declare Obama eligible

Yet another deception levied against the American people is the assertion that the Hawaiian officials have confirmed Barack Hussein OBAMA’s eligibility through a statement issued on 27 July 2009 by Dr. Chiyome FUKINO, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, which declared Obama Hawaiian-born and a natural-born American citizen.Those who claim that the 2009 press release by Dr. FUKINO must understand that FUKINO has absolutely no statutory authority to make such a statement. Accordingly and based on the rule of law, that statement cannot be considered as evidence or legal documentation either to support or deny OBAMA’s eligibility status.

Hawaii birth announcements: anecdotal evidence of eligibility

Many who argue that Barack Hussein OBAMA II was born in Hawaii not only point to the COLB as direct evidence of eligibility, but they also point to two separate birth announcements that appear in the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin in 1961. Those doing so either fail to understand the legal definition of a natural born citizen as it applies to the eligibility factor, or are guilty of intentionally misdirecting the core issue. A birth announcement is simply that – a public announcement that a baby was born. The birth announcements do not provide any information about the child’s citizenship, cannot be authenticated, and hold no weight of evidence to support either side of the eligibility argument.Coming next: Legal Stonewalls & identifying the money & people behind the fight.This report is available for downloading in PDF format: Click here.

No Proof By Douglas J. Hagmann APR 30,10
Part II of an investigative series
http://homelandsecurityus.com/archives/3742

In the first part of this investigative report, background was provided to identify the core legal and constitutional arguments in the matter of Barack Hussein OBAMA II’s eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States. Using my investigative experience, I performed this investigation in compliance with the same industry standards that apply to performing background investigations of individuals selected for corporate positions by Fortune 100 companies.As noted in my initial report, the primary intent of this investigation has been to establish whether Barack Hussein OBAMA has indeed furnished the necessary proof to confirm his eligibility to assume the position of the President of the United States, and whether that proof has been properly authenticated. In other words, this investigation sought to determine whether there are any legitimate questions or concerns over the eligibility issue, or whether the matter has been sufficiently resolved. Or to put it yet another way, is there a legitimate reason to mock, belittle, marginalize, or otherwise consider the so-called Birthers as kooks living on the fringe of conspiracy?

Despite assertions by politicians, media pundits and others, this issue is far from having been resolved. Investigation found that those who will not discuss this issue or mock the questions and those asking the questions either do not fully understand the issue, or have agendas that conflict with the truth being disclosed. This part of the investigation will provide detailed information outlining how that conclusion has been reached, and will offer additional information of relevance pertaining to the narrow scope of the issue of eligibility itself. Additional investigative results in the form of supplemental reports will address the methods being presently employed – and identify those who are employing them – to keep the truth from being made known to the American people.It is the conclusion of this investigator that Barack Hussein OBAMA II has not only failed to provide proof of eligibility, but has and continues to fight efforts to release the proof necessary to confirm that he is legally eligible to occupy his current position as the president of the United States. To be clear, it is important to understand that there is a vast and significant difference between the meaning of the words evidence and proof, although most people use the terms synonymously. While Black’s Law Dictionary offers the legal definition of both terms, they can be easily summarized for the purpose of this investigation as follows: Evidence is something that offers the basis for belief or disbelief, or knowledge on which to base belief, while proof is the establishment of facts by evidence.Clearly, the United States Constitution requires the higher standard of proof and not merely evidence of eligibility to hold the office of President. Contrary to the assertions of representatives speaking on behalf of OBAMA, media accounts and numerous reports on various Internet sites, OBAMA has provided absolutely no proof that he meets the eligibility requirements as of the date of this investigation.Before proceeding, it’s important to understand that the distinction between evidence of proof is neither petty nor is it mere semantics,as the legal definitions between evidence and proof are exceptionally clear, especially in a court of law and especially when considering someone to assume the highest position in U.S. government. In fact, it is this distinction that is being methodically exploited to misrepresent the facts of this case, and to pejoratively label anyone who continues to demand proof as a birther.

Certification of Live Birth as proof

Clearly, the image of the Certification of Live Birth is a large part of the eligibility question. Much debate and discussion has taken place over the image’s authenticity and provenance. As noted, that document first appeared in JPEG image format on or about 12 July 2008 on the political website DailyKos, and was subsequently published on the OBAMA-backed website Fight the Smears and also on www.FactCheck.org.Controversy became rampant as numerous analyses of the image at each site suggested that in certain cases, alterations to the image were made. The controversy became exacerbated by the obvious revisions made to that image that appeared on various web sites to such an extent that the accusations distracted from the most basic of issues: The Certification of Live Birth, even if authenticated, is not legally sufficient to be considered proof of citizenship and therefore, is legally insufficient to be prove the eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA II. Accordingly, the long form,or vault copy of the actual birth certificate needs to be released for the legal burden of proof to be satisfied.The release of the authenticated long form of OBAMA’s birth certificate will identify the parents, the exact location of birth, as well as the source of the information provided on that form. By virtue of the legal definition and standards of proof, it is the only document suitable to meet the legal definition of proof, and the only document that will contain all of the necessary information to prove or disprove his eligibility to hold office.While investigation of possible alterations of the JPEG of the COLB posted and presented as genuine on a site sanctioned by OBAMA or those representing him could become relevant in a separate criminal investigation, the topic is subordinate to and detracts from the primary issue of OBAMA’s eligibility. Analysis of the JPEG image purported to be that of OBAMA’s Certification of Live Birth is beyond the scope of this investigation, especially since the document itself (and not a JPEG image of the document) has not been made accessible for review. Nonetheless, allegations of alteration must be properly investigated as any evidence of alterations with the intent to deceive, done by an individual or group acting in an official capacity, can be used to illustrate a course of conduct that might later prove useful in the venue of a criminal investigation.

The authenticity of the Certification of Live Birth notwithstanding, it is the conclusion of this investigator that OBAMA has not only failed to produce the appropriate form necessary to prove eligibility (the vault copy or long form birth certificate), but has gone to significant lengths to keep that form from being released.Investigation into this area has produced sufficient evidence to indicate that representatives of Barack Hussein OBAMA II, either at his direction or with his knowledge and consent, posted or caused to be posted the Certification of Live Birth at the Fight the Smears website, claiming the document is incontrovertible proof of his citizenship status and thus, his eligibility to hold the office of President. At that site, the Certification of Live Birth is improperly labeled and presented to the visitors as Barack Obama’s Official Birth Certificate.It is, in fact and reality, no such document.When one considers the text above the image as shown above, it is reasonable to question the intent of the site operators with regard to improperly representing that the document is something it is not, and to allege that those claiming Barack Obama doesn’t have a birth certificate aren’t actually about that piece of paper — they’re about manipulating people into thinking Barack is not an American citizen.It would appear that the actual manipulation is not originating from anyone asking reasonable, fact-based questions, but by those who deceitfully represent that the image of the COLB is an actual birth certificate.

Arguments used to deflect the truth

To be sure, there are numerous individuals and groups who claim that the presentation of the Certification of Live Birth is sufficient to prove Obama’s Constitutional eligibility. In January 2009, Janice OKUBO, director of communications for the Hawaii Department of Health, stated that the COLB provides sufficient information to answer all of the questions surrounding OBAMA’s eligibility. To illustrate her assertion, she noted that the COLB lists OBAMA’s location of birth as Honolulu, Hawaii:If you were born in Bali, for example, you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate.As noted in the previous section of this report, it is important to understand that the COLB does not provide the critical information pertaining to OBAMA’s parents, the exact location of birth, or the source of information provided. Only one document (of current relevance) will provide that information: an authenticated copy of the long form or vault copy of the birth certificate of Barack Hussein OBAMA II. In an article titled Born in the U.S.A originally published on 21 August 2008 and updated on 1 November 2008, FactCheck.org also attempted to quell further questions of OBAMA’s eligibility by commenting on the Certification of Live Birth:FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as supporting documents to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.This assertion is a bit more misleading, as the author refers to the Certification of Live Birth as a birth certificate.In other words, the staffers examined the COLB, not the long form or vault copy of the birth certificate of Barack Hussein OBAMA II. The affirmation that the COLB is genuine notwithstanding, only one document (of current relevance) will provide that information: an authenticated copy of the long form or vault copy of the birth certificate of Barack Hussein OBAMA II.

In summary, arguments over the authenticity of the COLB are nothing more than a distraction from the primary issue: the Certification of Live Birth, even if authenticated, is not legally sufficient to be considered proof of citizenship and therefore, is legally insufficient to be prove the eligibility of Barack Hussein OBAMA II. Accordingly, the long form,or vault copy of the actual birth certificate needs to be released for the legal burden of proof to be satisfied. And THAT is the document that Barack Hussein OBAMA II continues to fight against being released.

Nomination without proof

It is reasonable to ask how any individual could successfully secure the nomination of their respective party if they did not furnish the necessary proof of eligibility as required by the U.S. Constitution. This question is especially relevant considering the intense examination of Senator John McCAIN as candidate for the Republican Party. A follow-up and equally reasonable question is who would allow such an event to occur absent of such proof, and who would have had to known about the potential controversy in advance? A prevailing yet erroneous theory is that for one to believe that Barack Hussein OBAMA II is not constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States, there must be a massive conspiracy that involves numerous individuals and multiple levels of government.Although one would reasonably suspect that there had to have been a large number of co-conspirators involved in such an act, the opposite is actually true.An investigation into this issue found that only the chairperson of each party (the party’s national convention that nominates the candidate) has to sign an Official Certification of Nomination,which is the recognized legal instrument that affirms that the party’s candidate meets all of the eligibility requirements to hold the office of President. In the case of Barack Hussein OBAMA II, that responsibility fell with Ms. Nancy PELOSI. It is a surprisingly simple process that is completed following the official nomination of the candidate for office, and is usually filed immediately after the close of the party’s convention.In the case of Barack Hussein OBAMA, PELOSI signed the affirmation of eligibility in her capacity as Chair of the Democratic National Convention along with Alice GERMOND, the Secretary of the Democratic National Convention. Her signature, affixed and notarized to this legal instrument, was viewed as sufficient documentation by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) that both OBAMA and BIDEN were duly nominated and met the Constitutional eligibility requirements,according to an official interviewed by this investigator at the FEC in Washington, DC. According to this FEC official, no further verification was required or performed at any level [within the FEC].Unsurprisingly, repeated attempts by this investigator to secure information from Ms. PELOSI’s Washington, DC office for information about the eligibility and background verification process were not answered as of the date of this report. Meanwhile, one Washington insider with ties to the FEC told this investigator that the process of filing the Official Certification of Nomination is easier than getting a DC driver’s license. No one asks any questions and the process is nothing more than a mere formality,stated this source.

Oddities surrounding the Official Certification of Nomination affidavits

One very suspicious circumstance verified during the course of this investigation involves the production and filing of the Official Certification of Nomination forms. Numerous web sites and open sources have furnished two images of the same affidavit as best illustrated at the web site operated by Reverend James David MANNING (at this link). Under the heading of Exhibit 6 at this location are two nomination documents, each with different wording as to the certification of the candidates.This investigator took steps to verify the authenticity of the original documents and not the Internet copies. Using a federal index system of certified election documents, the authenticity of both documents was established and it was verified that both exist on file. Additionally, this investigator and Judi McLeod, founder and editor of Canada Free Press, interviewed Reverend MANNING in February 2010 about this and other matters, in a further attempt to secure bona fide documentation about OBAMA’s background and the authentication of documents. Reverend MANNING noted the discrepancies in the wording, and has since conducted his own inquiries of these documents.Interestingly, the wording within the certifications is significantly different; one contains the Constitutional certification clause within the body of the document, while the other does not. The different wording of these two separate documents is detailed as follows:

Document with Constitutional certification clause:THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 through 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.Document without Constitutional certification clause:THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively.During the course of this investigation, attempts were made by this investigator to have the differences between documents explained by various government officials within the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Despite numerous attempts, no explanations were obtained. The absence of the constitutionality clause remains of significant concern to this investigator and is an area that requires further exploration.This discrepancy was also addressed in an article written by Canada Free Press columnist JB Williams on 24 April 2010. In that article, Mr. Williams accurately described the difference in documents:Note that the language which certifies that Barack Hussein Obama meets all constitutional qualifications is missing in the DNC documents filed in 49 of the 50 states. The certification of constitutional qualification for the office of president was filed only in Hawaii. That text is missing in the DNC certification filings for all other states.Whereas the RNC filed the exact same certification document, including the constitutional text for John McCain in all 50 states, Obama was technically certified in only one state, Hawaii.

Prior knowledge of eligibility problems

That the process of filing the Official Certification of Nomination is indeed a simple one and rests on the sworn statements of two individuals, it is not intended to mean that others did not possess prior knowledge of OBAMA’s failure to provide sufficient proof of eligibility. In fact, as early as 2005, some individuals presently serving in his administration appear to have known that the eligibility issue relative to his citizenship might become a future problem.A twenty-six page article written by Sarah P. HERLIHY was published in the Chicago-Kent Law Review, Volume 81:275 titled Amending the Natural Born Citizen Requirement: Globalization as the Impetus and the Obstacle.The date of publication is 22 February 2006, although the article appears to have been written by HERLIHY in late 2005. As the title implies, the author argues that Article II of the U.S. Constitution inhibits globalization of the U.S. She further opines that the provision is discriminatory, outdated, and undemocratic. On page fifteen of her article, HERLIHY references several hypothetical arguments that bear an eerie likeness to the not-so hypothetical implementation of policies we are witnessing under the OBAMA administration.The HERLIHY BRIEF,as I have labeled it, is interesting on several levels, but relevant on one level in particular: HERLIHY was employed as an associate by Kirkland & Ellis, LLP, a Chicago, Illinois based law firm with offices worldwide. Further investigation found that a senior partner of that same firm, Bruce I. ETTELSON, was a former member on the finance committee of Barack Hussein OBAMA II when he was a Senator in Illinois. Could this be a mere coincidence, or perhaps an attempt to break psychological barriers while grooming a future President?

That, combined with legislative efforts during the 2008 campaign involving McCAIN’s eligibility (as documented in Part I of this report), appear to suggest a broader level of knowledge among individuals that the issue of eligibility as it relates to the U.S. Constitution, might present a future problem.

A mission gone wrong?

John O. BRENNAN is currently the assistant to President OBAMA and Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Until he began working for OBAMA, BRENNAN was the CEO of a firm called the Analysis Corporation, a government subcontractor whose work involved providing intelligence-related consulting services to federal agencies. In 2008, a contract employee of BRENNAN’s firm was caught inappropriately accessing certain passport files in the State Department’s passport office. BRENNAN’s firm was cited in March, 2008 for breaching sensitive files, including the passport files of Hillary Rodham CLINTON, John McCAIN and Barack Hussein OBAMA.On 21 March 2008, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack confirmed that the contractor from BRENNAN’s company had accessed the passport files of the presidential candidates that included OBAMA. It is significant to note that the passport files include a virtual treasure trove of personal information, including an applicant’s name, social security number, date and place of birth. The files would likely contain additional information including original or authenticated copies of birth certificates, naturalization certificates, or oaths of allegiance for U.S.-born persons who adopted the citizenship of a foreign country as minors.It should be noted that at the time of the incident, BRENNAN was working as an unpaid adviser to the Obama campaign and was said to have virtually unfettered access to the candidate. BRENNAN, of course, denounced the actions of the employee.

The nature of the breach,according to intelligence sources close to this investigator, confirmed that the target of the unlawful access was the file containing documents related to Barack Hussein OBAMA (a fact that was originally reported in an article written by Ken Timmerman for NewsMax.com). This is significant, of course, as OBAMA has not permitted the release of his passport records or the documentation contained in that file.It is important to note that this was not the first breach, nor the only one. At least two other incidents that resulted in the termination or other disciplinary action took place in the several months around this same time period. This breach, however, was different, and the difference between this incident and the others must not be dismissed as it is directly related to the potential disclosure of personal information of Barack Hussein OBAMA II, including his original, long form birth certificate. This incident involved more than a curious subcontractor worker; it involved other co-conspirators, including an unidentified contact within the U.S. State Department itself.Research into the three separate incidents was performed, noting that two of those incidents were somewhat limited in terms of what was accessed. The breach that involved HARRIS, however, as often happens with the use of unmanageable criminal assets,went dangerously awry.

Following this incident, federal investigators identified a cooperative witness with direct information about the breach of the passport records – allegedly by accident. That individual, identified as Leiutenant Harris Junior, 24, was stopped for a minor traffic infraction on 25 March 2008, and was found to be in possession of stolen credit cards and documents that were traced back to the breach of the passport records. (Copy of arrest record here in PDF format) HARRIS, known to DC police, began working with federal authorities to strike a deal as they expanded their investigation into the passport incident. According to a review of the arrest record, HARRIS admitted to investigating officers that he obtained the documents from (an unnamed) co-conspirator who works for the U.S. Department of State [emphasis added by this author].Less than a month later, HARRIS was found with a single bullet wound to his head on Thursday, 17 April 2008, inside of his car that was parked in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in Washington, DC. HARRIS was described as an important witness in the breach of the passport records. While his death was attributed to an increase in violence in the city, at least one detective interviewed by this investigator is not too sure.It’s an awfully big coincidence, and you know how I feel about coincidences,stated this homicide detective.I’ve considered that it was someone tying up loose ends,he added. The murder of HARRIS remains unsolved.

Legal stonewalls

From an investigative perspective, the reluctance of Barack Hussein OBAMA to release an authenticated copy of his actual long form birth certificate is as revealing as it is troubling. The exact number of lawsuits filed within the last two years to legally compel Barack Hussein OBAMA to release a copy of his authenticated, long form birth certificate is unknown. According to Canada Free Press columnist JB Williams in an article he wrote on 24 April 2010 discloses that OBAMA has spent in excess of $2 million in legal fees [to prevent the release of that document]. Mr. Williams stated nobody spends $2 million in legal fees to hide an authentic birth certificate. At least no one who is not hell bent on hiding information of significance.Mr. Williams also notes that [I]n every instance, the lawsuits were dismissed prior to discovery, or the legal process that in these cases, permit the petitioning party to review evidence relevant to the lawsuit.From an investigative perspective, the most obvious and nagging question is why Barack Hussein OBAMA II has refused and continues to refuse to authorize the release of that document for review. Consistent with the background investigations I have conducted on behalf of Fortune 500 and 100 companies, such a refusal would be sufficient cause to automatically dismiss the individual seeking the high-level executive position from such consideration. By comparison to the 150 or so investigations of this type I have performed over the last 25 years, I have yet to find anyone under consideration for such a position to refuse this most routine and basic request. Moreover, I have never experienced anyone who has not only refused to do so, but spent extraordinary sums of money in legal fees to fight against such disclosure.The authenticated long form birth certificate is not the only document of interest that OBAMA refused to provide, but it is the most salient and direct method of furnishing proof to answer the eligibility issue once and for all.Barack Hussein OBAMA II promised transparency to the American people during his campaign and if elected, during his time in office of President. Yet, that promise of transparency has been replaced with walls of lawyers and an administration of individuals who have mounted an unprecedented campaign of opacity. In addition to his actual birth certificate, OBAMA has refused to release the following records that would provide insight into the individual currently occupying the highest office in the United States:

•Official U.S. passport records
•Medical records
•Occidental College records & transcripts
•Columbia College records & transcripts
•Harvard College records
•State of Illinois Bar Records
•Private practice law client list
Each of the above records would be considered relevant to his position as President, and most previous presidents have themselves authorized the release of such information for public review. Requesting the release of the above records is certainly reasonable, and is consistent with the requests of previous administrations.Of course, cursory research of various web sites will provide lists of other documents undisclosed by OBAMA, including but not limited to his natural parent’s marriage license, records from overseas primary schools, and even his Baptismal certificate, if one even exists. Also included by some sites are his adoption records, various grade school and high school transcripts, and published articles that he would have authored while enrolled in college. While the release of such records would indeed prove enlightening, they are not necessarily intrinsic to the issue of his Constitutional eligibility.The production of a single document could put this entire controversy to rest: the long form birth certificate. As noted in this investigative segment, it is that single document that OBAMA has not only refused to release or authorize to be released, but has spent an estimated $2 million to keep under wraps.

Coming next: The money & people behind the fight.

Islamic Influence in U.S. Prisons
by Hillel Fendel APR 28,10

Douglas J.Hagmann, Director of the Northeast Intelligence Network, has written of extensive Islamic infiltration into American prison systems. Excerpts from his most recent article on the topic: Most recent statistics available show that one out of three African-American inmates in U.S. prisons convert to Islam while incarcerated. The type of Islam to which they convert teaches the same ideology as the 9/11 hijackers, which is the Wahhabi or Salafi form of Islam that originated in and is continually being exported from Saudi Arabia… [T]he ideology behind this fundamentalist form of Islam is completely incompatible with the culture, politics, and social fabric of the West. Nonetheless, it is being embraced by numerous groups, agencies and individuals inside the United States. The high rate of conversion of inmates to Islam, and specifically the Wahhabi brand of Islam is no accident. The lack of oversight of teaching materials brought in to prisons to facilitate their conversion is no accident. The influx of Wahhabi chaplains into our prison system and military is no accident. The entire process is by design, and consists of a sophisticated combination of personnel placement, funding, and an active support structure of numerous interrelated entities and individuals.

The indoctrination of American inmates is a well known strategy detailed in al Qaeda training manuals. The manuals state that non-Muslim prisoners should be eyed for conversion to religious jihad as they are likely to be disenchanted with their country’s policies and feel disenfranchised from society. They also can make perfect operational assets for Islamic terrorist groups because of their ability to more easily blend into American society.In 2003, when Muslims comprised well under 1% of the American population, it was estimated that 17-20% of the prison population was Muslim. An oft-quoted statistic states that 80% of the prisoners who find faith in prison convert to Islam. This month, this phenomenon led to violence. A man who converted to Islam in a U.S. prison before he was freed has confessed to killing his wife and three others in Chicago because she refused to wear Muslim garb and adopt his new-found faith. The confessed murderer is James A. Larry, 31, who confessed to the crime and expressed no remorse. During his most recent prison term, between 2002 and 2007, he began receiving visits by imams through the Islamic prison outreach program. He became increasingly radicalized with orthodox Islamic beliefs, a detective on the case said, ultimately demanding compliance to fundamentalist Islam by his wife and family. He [allegedly] killed his wife because she would not wear Muslim attire, and would not follow his beliefs. It was an honor killing, pure and simple…In addition to shooting his 19-year-old pregnant wife to death, Larry also stands accused of murdering three other relatives, all aged 16 and under, as well as injuring his mother and nephew and shooting at his niece.

Prisons are Recruiting Grounds for Islamic Fundamentalism
This didn’t have to happen,the detective said. But it did, and it will probably happen again in another community, to another family. The reason it happened here and the reason it will happen again is that we’ve allowed our prisons to become recruiting grounds for Islamic fundamentalism that teaches this twisted [expletive deleted]. And our system has become too lenient, too PC, and too afraid to confront this problem, so now we have nearly an entire family murdered by a guy quoting Allah and the Qur’an.In a 2004 report, the Justice Department faulted the prison system for failing to protect against infiltration by [Muslim] extremists.

Obama’s Blame Game By Alan Caruba Wednesday, April 28, 2010

It hasn’t taken long for most Americans to figure out Obama’s blame game in which each new crisis requires a straw man to discredit and knock down. Co-authors, Ken Blackwell, a senior fellow with the Family Research Council, and Ken klukowski, a widely published constitutional lawyer, have joined forces to write The Blueprint: Obama’s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency($22.95, Lyons Press).For Obama to remake our country into what he wants it to be, he must subvert the Supreme Law of the Land.Shortly after the passage of Obamacare close to twenty States’ attorney generals joined in a legal suit to challenge its unconstitutional demand that Americans buy government-issued health insurance. Who can forget the euphoria that led to Obama’s election? We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America,said Obama on October 30, 2008. He wasn’t just engaging in the usual overblown campaign rhetoric. He meant it!

Which raises the question, if it ain’t broke, why fix it? The United States of America has the oldest constitution in continual use. It has been amended only twenty-six times in 222 years since 1778. Ten of those amendments are embodied in the Bill of Rights.In the fifteen months since he was sworn into office we have been witness to the way Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their Democrat cohorts in Congress conduct the business of government. It isn’t pretty.To borrow from The Blueprint, here are the basic elements. We begin with the constant crisis factor. I grant that the financial crisis that occurred in 2008, conveniently just before the election, was real. Suspiciously, it was trigged by sudden massive withdrawals from U.S. banks. To date, no investigation has been pursued, nor have those making the withdrawals been identified. The Federal Reserve stepped in to blunt the attack.

I hasten to point out that the crisis was entirely a creation of the government and its social justice programs that distorted to mortgage market. What was not needed, however, was a bogus $787 billion stimulus bill that, thus far, has been a failure of stupendous proportions. Passed rapidly with the promise that it would keep the unemployment rate at eight percent, we are now beyond ten percent and rising.

Pathetically wedded to truly bad ideas, the president and the Democrats had waited nearly two decades to reform Medicare in America. They took a stab at it during the Clinton years and failed. The Republicans had long offered common sense solutions to some of the obvious problems such as the need for tort reform and expanding the right of insurance companies to sell across state lines, but these were repeatedly defeated. Instead, Obama insisted the problem was the nation’s physicians, people who devote years of their lives at considerable cost in order to heal the sick. As far as he was concerned they were in fact rapacious gangsters requiring children with a sore throat to get tonsillectomies. He told audiences that the reform was necessary to ensure that the poor were not turned away at the emergency room doors even though a federal law ensures that no one is ever turned away for lack of insurance.The blame game was expanded to include both the pharmaceutical and insurance industries and this is the same tactic used to advance the horrid Cap-and-Trade Act. The oil, gas and coal companies are identified as the bad guys. This hides the fact that the bill is based on the bogus global warming theory that greenhouse gases are warming an Earth that is demonstrably cooling.The latest straw man in the Obama crosshairs is Goldman Sachs, a respected bank that is being set up to advance legislation to further regulate the financial sector. An appearance before a congressional committee is the latest kabuki theatre. The government, however, has been running Ponzi schemes—-Social Security and Medicare—-for decades. Why would we take seriously the same people who are currently spending the nation into intolerable debt?

The final element of Obama’s chicanery is the identification of victims and this is always a ruse to infuse any argument with elements of class warfare. In his pitch to save Democrats from being turned out from office in November, Obama has identified with blacks, Hispanics, younger voters and women, presumably the party’s base these days, though one suspects even they are catching onto the game.What the Founders wanted above all was a limited central government with clearly delineated powers. What Americans have gotten, under the spell of various progressives since the days of Theodore Roosevelt, is a monstrous government that intervenes and interferes with fundamental capitalism, the free market, is in full attack on private property, and increasingly encroaches on the most elemental of our personal freedoms.Barack Obama is waging war against the U.S. Constitution as he pursues his bizarre agenda of redistributing the wealth.This is a fundamentally Marxist concept. It didn’t work for the former Soviet Union. Its economic elements have been abandoned by Red China. It is destroying oil-rich Venezuela. It has enslaved Cubans and North Koreans.
Obama’s blame game will not change. Americans must now unite to change our future by electing a Congress composed of men and women who value the Constitution more than the political power that has mistakenly been given to the Democrat Party and its socialist minions.Alan Caruba, 2010

Eco-Hypocrite Of The Day By Bob Parks Tuesday, April 27, 2010

If anything, liberals are consistent: do as we say, not as we do.What kind of U.N. environmental ambassador builds a 20,000 square-foot home with a six-car garage, an elevator and a lagoon? Why, that would be the Hub’s favorite Pats fan, Gisele Bundchen! A paparazzo’s sneak pics of Bundchen and hubby Tom Brady’s gargantuan new Brentwood, Calif., chateau has green activists seeing red.How big a space do two people need? asked Philip Dowds, a Massachusetts Sierra Club official and professional architect.A 20,000 square-foot house — the resources that it takes to put it together and the land that it needs, this just can’t happen anymore.LOL.

Goldman Sachs Fraud: Obama Is Partially to Blame!
By John Lillpop Tuesday, April 27, 2010 CFP

President Obama and Democrats in Congress are trying to use the Goldman Sachs fraud allegations as evidence of Wall Street greed in order to justify the president’s call for another layer of anti-business regulation, an effort that failed the first trial vote in the U.S. Senate on Monday night. Leftists are also counting on the Goldman Sachs fraud case as a wedge issue to distract attention from the ObamaCare fiasco, Obama’s failure to improve unemployment despite the trillion dollar stimulus bill, the out-of-control federal deficit, foreign policy failures, and the attempt to replace free-market capitalism with socialism.Desperate Democrats are scrambling like drowning rats to latch on to a populist theme that will spare their jobs when the tsunami of voter anger floods across our great nation on November 2. In their partisan scheming, Democrats are counting on anti-Wall Street anger to out poll anti-government rage. An outbreak of voter memory loss is also a critical part of the Obama campaign election strategy for this fall.However, observant voters will recall that President Obama was a key player in the bail out of financial institutions.

It was he who cried wolf and warned that there was no time to study and review before sending hundreds of billions to firms the president now refers to as greedy purveyors of fraud and corruption.It was President Obama who cautioned against too much caution, lest the American economy collapse like a flimsily-stacked deck of cards.It was President Obama who saw the bail out as the only way to avoid a devastating depression.And it is President Obama who has repeatedly taken credit for saving the economy with his economic policies, including the ill-advised bail outs.

Perhaps the fraud planned by Goldman Sachs could have been nipped in the bud if only Obama and his administration had refused to send out all of that taxpayer money without a comprehensive understanding of the facts?

After all, many did advise caution, Sir.

Come November 2, the American people will deliver the only verdict that really matters. In the war between the anti-Wall Street and anti-government crowds, who will prevail in November? Those who realize that the Goldman Sachs fraud scheme would not have worked if President Obama had not been complicit will vote from the anti-government perspective.If enough thinking voters show up on November 2, America may be saved from the irrational wave of Obamamania that was once so prominent.

IMF As Grim Reaper of Austerity? Washington’s Blog April 28, 2010
http://www.infowars.com/imf-as-grim-reaper-of-austerity/

As I wrote last June:When the International Monetary Fund or World Bank offer to lend money to a struggling third-world country (or emerging market), they demand austerity measures.

As Wikipedia describes it:In economics, austerity is when a national government reduces its spending in order to pay back creditors. Austerity is usually required when a government’s fiscal deficit spending is felt to be unsustainable.Development projects, welfare programs and other social spending are common areas of spending for cuts. In many countries, austerity measures have been associated with short-term standard of living declines until economic conditions improved once fiscal balance was achieved (such as in the United Kingdom under Margaret Thatcher, Canada under Jean Chrétien, and Spain under González).Private banks, or institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), may require that a country pursues an austerity policy if it wants to re-finance loans that are about to come due. The government may be asked to stop issuing subsidies or to otherwise reduce public spending. When the IMF requires such a policy, the terms are known as IMF conditionalities.

Wikipedia goes on to point out :Austerity programs are frequently controversial, as they impact the poorest segments of the population and often lead to a wider separation between the rich and poor. In many situations, austerity programs are imposed on countries that were previously under dictatorial regimes, leading to criticism that populations are forced to repay the debts of their oppressors.

What Does This Have to Do With the First World? Since the IMF and World Bank lend to third world countries, you may reasonably assume that this has nothing to do with first world countries like the US and UK.But England’s economy is in dire straight, and rumors have abounded that the UK might have to rely on a loan from the IMF.And as former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker said :People seem to think the [American] government has money. The government doesn’t have any money.Indeed, the IMF has already performed a complete audit of the whole US financial system, something which they have only previously done to broke third world nations.Al Martin – former contributor to the Presidential Council of Economic Advisors and retired naval intelligence officer – observed in an April 2005 newsletter that the ratio of total U.S. debt to gross domestic product (GDP) rose from 78 percent in 2000 to 308 percent in April 2005. The International Monetary Fund considers a nation-state with a total debt-to-GDP ratio of 200 percent or more to be a de-constructed Third World nation-state.

Martin explained:What de-constructed actually means is that a political regime in that country, or series of political regimes, have, through a long period of fraud, abuse, graft, corruption and mismanagement, effectively collapsed the economy of that country.The IMF is – in fact – now saying that the U.S. must live more austerely.As the Washington Post noted Saturday:In the lingo of the International Monetary Fund, the future of the world hinges on rebalancing and consolidation, antiseptic words that would not seem to raise a fuss.But the translation is a bit ruder, something on the order of: Suck it up. The party’s over.To keep the global economy on track, people in the United States and the rest of the developed world need to work longer before retiring, pay higher taxes and expect less from government. And the cheap imports lining the shelves of mega-chains such as Wal-Mart and Target? They need to be more expensive.That’s the practical meaning of a series of policy papers and statements issued in recent days by IMF officials, who have a long history of stabilizing economies and solving global financial problems, as they plot a course to keep the world economy growing and reduce the risk of another great recession.It means a pretty serious reworking of expectations in the developed world: changes in labor rules, product prices, currency values and even the social contract between governments and an aging citizenry.It is not that living standards will lower, but they will not increase as fast as they have been,said Domenico Lombardi, a former IMF executive director. The ideas being discussed by world leaders are coded words,he said.They don’t like words like imposing higher taxes and cutting spending.

The level of the correction needed is large, perhaps 10 percent of gross domestic product. In the United States, that would amount to roughly $1.4 trillion annually, to be cut from government programs or raised through new taxes.Dean Baker notes:Back in the 90s the IMF came to be known as the Typhoid Mary of emerging markets as its policy prescriptions led to sharp economic downturns in one country after another.The grim reaper might be a better analogy.IMF As World’s Central Bank? Not only is the IMF treating America like another failed state, but the IMF may – in some ways – replace the U.S.As I pointed out last May, the IMF may be taking over world’s financial regulator:AP writes:The Group of 20 countries have made the [IMF] the linchpin in their efforts to combat the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression

The Washington Post notes:Global financial chiefs agreed yesterday to reshape the International Monetary Fund, moving to broaden its mission …The IMF, which in recent years had become largely an advisory body to nations in crisis, will now be charged with aggressive monitoring of the global economy. Underscoring that role, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said yesterday that Washington had consented to a rigorous IMF review of the U.S. financial system for the first time since the fund was created at the end of World War II.And the IMF’s currency – Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) – may become the world’s reserve currency. See this and this.And some say that the IMF will become the world’s central bank.According to Jim Rickards – director of market intelligence for Omnis – the purpose of the G20 Summit in Pittsburgh on September 24 was as follows:The IMF is being sort of anointed as a global central bank.Rickards also said that the plan is for the IMF to issue SDRs as a global reserve currency to replace the dollar, and then America will gradually depreciate the dollar to reduce the size of its enormous debt:However, the Wall Street Journal argued in October that – while the IMF would like to be the world’s central bank – the G20 is relegating it to a lesser role:International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn is using the IMF’s annual meeting here to campaign for turning the fund into a kind of global central bank with at least $1 trillion for lending developing nations in a crisis.

But a very different reality is taking shape: The IMF is essentially being turned into the staff of the Group of 20, an organization of industrialized and developing nations that doesn’t have a headquarters, staff or rules for membership. With the leaders of the G-20 effectively functioning as the board of directors of the global economy, they need the IMF’s help to carry out their role.Ellen Brown argues that the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has been, and will continue to be, the real power behind the throne, even though the IMF seems to be gaining power.I don’t know who is right. But it does seem like America is losing its imperial status, and that global institutions such as the IMF, G20 and BIS are filling the void.

An illegal bank is the second-largest holder of U.S. treasury securities
April 27, 2010 by fauxcapitalist

From the U.S. Treasury Department’s latest numbers of major foreign holders of treasury securities, we see that China owned $877.5 billion and Japan owned $768.50 billion in February 2010.From their historical data, we see that China overtook Japan as the largest foreign holder of treasury securities as recently as September 2008, the month that the world’s economic system was thrown into turmoil by the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the stock and real estate market.However, Japan isn’t the second-largest holder of U.S. treasury securities — the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank of New York is. That is, one of the 12 member banks of the illegal privately owned Federal Reserve System of the United States.From their official numbers on April 21, 2010, they owned $771.57 billion in U.S. treasury securities — $3 billion more than Japan did in February.Their parent organization, the Federal Reserve, lies about interest-free United States Notes, the currency that Congress issued to fund the Civil War, when the bankers were demanding 20-30% interest.

While United States Notes didn’t benefit the bankers, they clearly benefitted the American people, by not having to pay any interest during their entire lifetime, including to this very day. On the other hand, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is receiving interest from their $771 billion in treasury securities, and as a member bank of the Federal Reserve, it receives a 6% annual dividend on its stock in the Federal Reserve System, with the proceeds going to private interests.Even calculating with the current all-time low Federal Funds Rate of 0.25% on all the bank’s $771 billion in treasury securities, that’s nearly $2 billion a year in interest that could be saved by this and future generations, which will be compounded every year, and will reach $15-50 billion when annual interest rates reach a more historically recent level of between 2-6%.

Goldman Sachs and Federal Fraud By Jacob Hornberger
View all 50 articles by Jacob Hornberger Published 04/28/10

Commentators are debating whether the Justice Department will be able to prove its civil fraud case against Goldman Sachs. Unfortunately, they're missing the point. The Justice Department didn't bring its suit with the aim of proving that the company committed fraud. It brought its suit to get a massive amount of money for the federal government in a pretrial settlement of the case. Here's how the racket works. The government knows that its litigation will cost Goldman Sachs millions of dollars in litigation costs, including attorney's fees, deposition expenses, bad public relations, and loss of revenues. So, the government calculates that the company will be willing to settle for a large amount of money to save itself from all that aggravation. The government accepts the settlement. The Justice Department lawyers celebrate that they've won the case. Federal officials, ever more desperate for more revenues to pay for their out-of-control spending, are exultant over the free monies that have been deposited into the government's coffers. Many years ago, I was a young lawyer practicing law in my hometown of Laredo, Texas. One of my clients was the owner of a local trucking company. One day, he got served with a notice from the State of Texas assessing him with an enormous fine. The fine, the notice stated, represented the amount of extra burden that my client's trucking business was placing on the roads and highways of the state. The state was claiming that because the trucking industry used the state's roads and highways more than other people, it was more responsible for their maintenance costs.

I told my client that the state's claim was ridiculous. The state collects gasoline taxes to cover such maintenance costs. When trucking companies purchase gasoline, they're paying what the legislative branch has determined to be an appropriate amount. I advised my client to fight the lawsuit in that it was nothing more than extortion. But there was one big problem with my advice. I don't recall the exact amount that the state was demanding, but let's say it was $200,000, which would have been an extremely large sum for my client, a small trucking company. The problem was that the state was offering to settle its proposed lawsuit for, say, $25,000. So, my client was in a quandary -- whether to pay the $25,000 and get rid of the suit or fight the state on principle and possibly end up losing $200,000. My client chose to settle the suit. The state received a "free" $25,000, plus all the other settlement money that was being paid by other trucking companies that had received the same notice. In the Goldman Sachs case, government regulations and regulators failed to prevent what they now claim is civil fraud. If economic regulations and government regulators can't prevent such things from happening, especially in one of the largest financial companies in the world, then what good are they? Isn't that the purported purpose of regulations and regulators? The feds aren't going after Goldman Sachs on criminal charges of fraud, which would fall within the ambit of proper governmental powers. Instead, they're only going after the company on civil charges of fraud. They're seeking money, not jail time. What's that all about? If investors have been defrauded, why can't they sue for their damages? Why shouldn't they, not the government, receive the money for damages they've allegedly suffered? What business does the government have suing for civil damages? It hasn't suffered any injury.

It's all about money. As the deficit becomes larger and larger, we can expect to see the federal government desperately looking for more ways to extract money from private businesses. Look at the record fine they just levied against Toyota -- $16.4 billion, an amount that Toyota has agreed to pay rather than incur expensive litigation. No doubt federal officials are celebrating this large amount of free money that will soon be deposited into their coffers. And don't forget: all those automobile regulations and regulators failed to prevent the Toyota accelerator problems from occurring. The real fraud is the whole idea of a regulated economy. When public officials assumed the power to regulate economic activity many decades ago, they expressly represented that it would protect people from bad things happening to them. That representation was false and fraudulent. Regulations and regulators don't protect people. They simply lull people into thinking that the government is taking care of them. The regulated economy simply provides the government with another means of legally stealing or extorting money from the private sector to satisfy the ever-voracious financial needs of a bankrupt government.Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him email.

OZONE DEPLETION JUDGEMENT ON THE EARTH DUE TO SIN

ISAIAH 30:26-27
26 Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in the day that the LORD bindeth up the breach of his people, and healeth the stroke of their wound.
27 Behold, the name of the LORD cometh from far, burning with his anger, and the burden thereof is heavy: his lips are full of indignation, and his tongue as a devouring fire:

MATTHEW 24:21-22,29
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake (ISRAELS SAKE) those days shall be shortened (Daylight hours shortened)
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

REVELATION 16:7-9
7 And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.
8 And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire.
9 And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.

04/26/2010 Copenhagen Fallout Merkel Abandons Aim of Binding Climate Agreement By Dirk Kurbjuweit, Christian Schwägerl and Gerald Traufetter DER SPIEGEL

Frustrated by the climate change conference in December, German Chancellor Angela Merkel is quietly moving away from her goal of a binding agreement on limiting climate change to 2 degrees Celsius. She has also sent out signals at the EU level that she no longer supports the idea of Europe going it alone.I have three children, German Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen said during a speech in Berlin last week, as he ventured to explain why climate policy still remains important after December's failed summit in Copenhagen. He said that a maximum rise in temperature of 2 degrees Celsius is the highest amount that we can still tolerate, because beyond that life will no longer be possible as we know it.Currently the prospects are not so good that his children will enjoy a life that remains unchanged. True, starting this weekend, the German government will attempt to rekindle international efforts to save the Earth's climate as it hosts a conference at the Petersberg Hotel near Bonn. But, at the same time, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has now decided to change the course of her climate policy.As recently as last December she said: If we don't succeed in limiting global warming to 2 degrees, then the costs of the resulting damages will be many times higher than what we now, with a change in our lifestyle, can achieve.Now it's a different story: Merkel will no longer endeavor to contractually implement the 2-degree target -- in other words, to reach a legally binding agreement with specific reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. She doesn't want to be snubbed again because she has realized that important countries won't lend their support the next time around either. This was confirmed two weeks ago at the nuclear summit in Washington by Chinese President Hu Jintao and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The Limits of Germany's Influence

Germany now has to acknowledge the limits of its influence. The country's climate policy was an attempt to play a leadership role on the grand stage. But the others didn't follow suit. On paper they praise the objective, but they are not prepared to do more than make vague promises. The only way forward, it seems, is by taking side roads. But even there the Chinese and the Indians won't simply trot along behind the Germans.On the domestic front, this threatens to bring down the great symbol of Germany's efforts to remodel society in line with a climate-friendly lifestyle and mode of production. If Merkel is no longer fighting on the international stage to achieve the 2-degree target, how does she intend to convince her fellow Germans that they have to change anything? A domestic temperature target would be absurd.Back in Copenhagen the chancellor was still defending global mandatory target values in the face of extreme resistance from China and India. At a meeting of the heads of state on the margins of the summit -- which was racing towards collapse with every passing minute -- Merkel even engaged in a showdown with the two new superpowers. The IPCC report comes to 2 degrees,said Merkel.And it also says that we have to reduce (carbon dioxide emissions) by 50 percent.She wanted to make it clear to Chinese delegation leader He Yafei and Indian Prime Minister Singh that they also had to do their part to achieve the 2-degree target. Let us suppose there is a 100 percent reduction -- (e.g.) no CO2 in the developed countries anymore,even then you would have to reduce carbon emissions in the developing countries in order to reach the 2-degree goal, the visibly irritated chancellor said. That is the truth.When the Indian leader absolutely refused to accept any concrete targets in the Copenhagen Protocol, Merkel dropped the diplomatic etiquette. But then you do not want legally binding! she yelled at the leader of a nation with over a billion people. Singh literally shouted back:That's not fair! His Chinese colleague, Deputy Foreign Minister He Yafei, added calmly and in polished English: The current formulation would not be agreed.

The Process Has Come to a Standstill

The collapse of the Copenhagen summit has permanently shaken up Merkel. She offered to organize the meeting in Bonn to avoid totally losing momentum in the talks. Then she left Denmark feeling frustrated. She had rarely experienced such a humiliation. She won't let that happen to her again, she has told herself ever since. Irregularities committed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also annoyed the chancellor. Although these errors have not altered the urgent and key messages, she has angrily said among her close advisers that the IPCC's poor communication has made it more difficult to promote climate protection.The general mood among climate protectors has soured even further in the months since Copenhagen.The process has come to a standstill, everything is very difficult,says Röttgen.This weekend in Bonn he wants to give global climate policies a new boost. Merkel is attending and Mexican President Felipe Caldéron will be on hand along with environment ministers and negotiators from nearly 50 countries. They intend to draw lessons from the debacle at Copenhagen and prepare the next big climate conference in Cancún at the end of the year. A binding agreement for the 2-degree target will not be achieved there, either.The environment minister remains valiant. He says that he and the chancellor are not looking to abandon the 2-degree target, but rather to find new ways to attain it,says Röttgen. But that could also take significantly longer. If the resolutions that countries laid down in the Copenhagen Accord are implemented, the average global temperature is expected to rise by over three degrees Celsius during this century. Climatologists warn that this could lead to a dangerous warm period.

A Time for Realpolitik

After having dreamt of achieving the great objective, now it's time for realpolitik. Merkel and Röttgen had to admit that countries like China and India will not submit to a mandatory target that others have contrived. They are continuing to pursue their climate policies, but are focusing strictly on domestic issues -- and neither is willing to relinquish any of their sovereignty. Germany is adapting to this and now plans to launch concrete climate protection projects with individual partner countries. Röttgen speaks of a new approach: In Bonn we want to create a new level that will allow us not only to point towards CO2 targets from above, but also to launch projects from below that produce measurable successes.This includes forest protection and more concrete cooperation in the transfer of environmentally friendly technologies. But it is precisely in the area of pledging funds for such projects that Merkel has failed to come through. After Copenhagen she distanced herself from the promise of Germany contributing an additional €1.3 billion ($1.75 billion) by the year 2012. According to current figures, only €210 million in extra cash will be injected into programs. When you see how many extra billions of euros are haphazardly pumped into the health care system, it's pretty disheartening,says a top-ranking official in Röttgen's ministry.There is a contradiction here: While Germany primarily intends to rely on practical projects to achieve the 2-degree target, the government is spending significantly less money on these projects than it has pledged. This could mean that Germany is also effectively distancing itself from the target.

An Uphill Battle

There are also differences of opinion within the European Union in Brussels. The environment minister is campaigning within his circle of colleagues for the EU to unilaterally increase its reductions of carbon dioxide emissions from 20 to 30 percent. Merkel has indicated within the circle of her high-ranking colleagues, however, that she no longer supports the idea of Europe going it alone.Röttgen is already trying to move forward by emphasizing additional arguments beyond the 2-degree target -- primarily based on economic reasoning. We can live well and cheaply now at our children's expense over the next 20 years or invest in long-term opportunities,he says. German environmental technologies are an export hit,one of the leading sources of prosperity that we have,and crude oil and other natural resources are becoming increasingly scarce, he adds. But he still hasn't made any significant headway in convincing the ministers in his coalition government -- which is comprised of Merkel's conservative Christian Democrats and the business-friendly Free Democratic Party -- that climate protection is not a hopeless issue plagued by sacrifice, but rather a win-win-win opportunity for industry, the environment and future generations. Here, too, he is fighting an uphill battle.

Stocks pull back after Spain's credit rating cut By STEPHEN BERNARD, AP Business Writer - APR 28,10

NEW YORK – Stocks retreated from their highs Wednesday afternoon after Spain became the latest European country to have its debt ratings cut by Standard & Poor's. Major indexes were narrowly mixed.Spain's downgrade comes a day after S&P cut its ratings on Greece and Portugal, which sent stocks plummeting. Greece's debt was slashed to junk status.Greece and Portugal will be Europe's subprime problem, said John Lekas, portfolio manager at Leader Capital in Portland, Ore.A drop in stocks from the latest downgrade was being tempered by another strong batch of earnings. Comcast, Northrop Grumman and Dow Chemical all posted better-than-expected results. Trading was muted ahead of an announcement from the Federal Reserve about interest rates.

Stocks had been higher earlier in the day after European leaders reassured investors that Greece would receive bailout money in time to cover $11.3 billion in debt payments coming due on May 19.German leaders said their country's portion of a nearly $60 billion bailout for Greece could be approved by the end of next week. Germany, the largest of the 16 countries that use the euro, has been demanding further spending cuts from Athens before it approves the bailout package.Debt concerns across Europe have sent the euro sharply lower in the last few months. The euro fell against the dollar again on Wednesday, touching its lowest level in a year.

In early afternoon trading, the Dow Jones industrial average rose 44.43, or 0.4 percent, to 11,036.42. The Standard & Poor's 500 index rose 6.41, or 0.5 percent, to 1,190.12, while the Nasdaq composite index fell 4.40, or 0.2 percent at 2,467.07.
Earnings provided a boost to stocks early in the day. Cable company Comcast Corp., Northrop Grumman Corp. and Dow Chemical Co. were the latest companies to top earnings expectations.Tim Courtney, chief investment officer at Burns Advisory Group in Oklahoma City, said that improving sales at companies like Dow Chemical prove the economy is on the mend.It indicates consumers may be getting back on their feet, Courtney said.Dow Chemical was the biggest winner, jumping $1.64, or 5.5 percent, to $31.71. Comcast rose 27 cents to $18.73, while Northrop Grumman rose 95 cents to $68.13.The Nasdaq was hurt by disappointing sales and outlooks from chain restaurants Buffalo Wild Wings Inc. and Panera Bread Co. Buffalo Wild Wings shares dropped $9.36, or 18.3 percent, to $41.65, while Panera Bread fell $5.37, or 6.2 percent, to $80.86.About four stocks rose for every three that fell on the New York Stock Exchange, where volume came to 682.4 million shares, compared with 763.6 million shares traded at the same time on Tuesday.Bond prices dipped after surging higher a day earlier. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note, which moves opposite its price, rose to 3.75 percent from 3.69 percent late Tuesday.

Gold and oil both rose.

The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies was flat at 721.27.Overseas, Britain's FTSE 100 fell 0.3 percent, Germany's DAX index dropped 1.2 percent, and France's CAC-40 fell 1.1 percent. Japan's Nikkei stock average tumbled 2.6 percent.

POISONED WATERS

REVELATION 8:8-11
8 And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;
9 And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed.
10 And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;
11 And the name of the star is called Wormwood:(bitter,Poisoned) and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.(poisoned)

REVELATION 16:3-7
3 And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea.(enviromentalists won't like this result)
4 And the third angel poured out his vial upon the rivers and fountains of waters; and they became blood.
5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.
6 For they(False World Church and Dictator) have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.

Crews to set fire to oil leaking in Gulf of Mexico By KEVIN McGILL and CAIN BURDEAU, Associated Press Writer - APR 28,10

NEW ORLEANS – Crews geared up to set fire to oil leaking from the site of an exploded drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico on Wednesday, a last-ditch effort to get rid of it before it reaches environmentally sensitive marshlands on the coast.A 500-foot boom will be used to corral several thousand gallons of the thickest oil on the surface, which will then be towed to a more remote area, set on fire, and allowed to burn for about an hour, the Coast Guard said. Such burns will continue throughout the day if they are working.It was unclear what would be used to set the oil on fire and how far from shore it would burn. The slick was about 20 miles east of the mouth of the Mississippi River.About 42,000 gallons of oil a day are leaking into the Gulf from the blown-out well where the Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank last week. Eleven workers are missing and presumed dead. The cause of the explosion has not been determined.Greg Pollock, head of the oil spill division of the Texas General Land Office, which is providing equipment for crews in the Gulf, said he is not aware of a similar burn ever being done off the U.S. coast. The last time crews with his agency used fire booms to burn oil was a 1995 spill on the San Jacinto River.

When you can get oil ignited, it is an absolutely effective way of getting rid of a huge percentage of the oil,he said.I can't overstate how important it is to get the oil off the surface of the water.He said the oil will likely be ignited using jelled gasoline and lit rags soaked in oil. What's left afterward is something he described as a kind of hardened tar ball that can be removed from the water with nets or skimmers. I would say there is little threat to the environment because it won't coat an animal, and because all the volatiles have been consumed if it gets on a shore it can be simply picked up,he said.Authorities also said they expect no impact on sea turtles and marine mammals in the burn area.A graphic posted by authorities fighting the slick shows it covering an area about 100 miles long and 45 miles across at its widest point.Louisiana State Wildlife and Fisheries Secretary Robert Barham told a legislative committee Wednesday morning that National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration projections show a high probability oil could reach the Pass a Loutre wildlife management area Friday night, Breton Sound on Saturday and the Chandeleur Islands on Sunday.The decision to burn some of the oil comes as the Coast Guard and industry cleanup crews run out of other options to get rid of it.

Crews operating submersible robots have been trying without success to activate a shut-off device that would halt the flow of oil on the sea bottom 5,000 feet below.
Rig operator BP Plc. says work will begin as early as Thursday to drill a relief well to relieve pressure at the blowout site, but that could take months.Another option is a dome-like device to cover oil rising to the surface and pump it to container vessels, but that will take two weeks to put in place, BP said.Winds and currents in the Gulf have helped crews in recent days as they try to contain the leak. The immediate threat to sandy beaches in coastal Alabama and Mississippi has lessened. But the spill has moved steadily toward the mouth of the Mississippi River, home to hundreds of species of wildlife and near some rich oyster grounds.

The cost of disaster continues to rise and could easily top $1 billion. Industry officials say replacing the Deepwater Horizon, owned by Transocean Ltd. and operated by BP, would cost up to $700 million. BP has said its costs for containing the spill are running at $6 million a day. The company said it will spend $100 million to drill the relief well. The Coast Guard has not yet reported its expenses. Associated Press Writer Melinda Deslatte in Baton Rouge contributed to this report.

Senate banking bill stalls again, GOP still united By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer - APR 28,10

WASHINGTON – A Senate bill to rein in financial institutions has stalled again as Republicans remain unified against the Democrats' proposed overhaul.The 56-42 vote failed to get the necessary 60 votes to move the legislation to the Senate floor for debate. Without that step, senators cannot offer amendments to the bill.It was the third such vote in three days, orchestrated by Democrats to maintain pressure on Republicans. GOP senators insist key provisions be changed before formal debate begins.Republican criticism has shifted to the bill's consumer protection provisions. For the most part, they have dropped arguments that the bill would perpetuate bailouts. That shift came after Republican Sen. Richard Shelby said he and Senate Banking committee Chairman Christopher Dodd had agreed to fix some aspects of the bill.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Fresh off a confrontation with Goldman Sachs executives, Democrats are mounting another effort to police the freewheeling Wall Street ways that they say helped bring on the worst recession since the Great Depression.Outnumbered Senate Republicans have held together for two days, twice blocking the start of debate on rewriting financial regulations, in hopes of negotiating changes in the bill. In the protracted fight, Republicans have cast the Democrats' proposal as a perpetuation of taxpayer bailouts — a hot-button issue — and accused Democrats of writing an overambitious bill that will hurt small businesses.Democrats are pressing ahead, hoping that Republican resistance is wearing thin and that the scrutiny of Goldman's actions in the market will stiffen public sentiment against the excesses of financial institutions. Democrats scheduled another vote for Wednesday to sustain pressure on the GOP in the expectation that some incremental changes to the bill ultimately would force several Republicans to relent and back the legislation.Few doubt that the Senate will pass an overhaul of financial regulations in an attempt to prevent a recurrence of the crisis that nearly caused a Wall Street collapse in 2008. But Republicans want their imprint on the bill. And bankers appear to want them to succeed as well.If campaign contributions are any barometer, large Wall Street institutions approve of what Senate Republicans have been doing to alter the regulatory regime envisioned by the Obama administration and its Democratic allies.

The political action committee of Bank of America, for instance, has contributed 57 percent of its $336,000 in 2009-10 donations to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In the 2007-08 cycle, 53 percent of the bank's PAC contributions went to Democrats.A spot check of contributions by The Associated Press showed that Goldman Sachs' PAC, which contributed predominantly to Democrats between 2007 and 2009, shifted to Republicans in March, contributing $167,500 to Republican members of Congress and their political committees and $117,000 to Democrats. Similar patterns emerged for JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley, whose PACs both shifted to Republicans last month.Testifying before a Senate investigative panel on Tuesday, Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein said he generally supported the pending Democratic bill but said there are details of it that I think I'm less sure of.Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and the committee's top Republican, Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, have been conducting on-and-off negotiations for months but have not arrived at a compromise. Dodd incorporated some Republican proposals into his bill and appeared ready to accept new alterations that addressed Republican claims that the bill could still result in government bailouts.

But Shelby also was seeking changes in the bill's consumer protection provisions — a key feature and a priority for President Barack Obama. Dodd on Tuesday said that if Republicans wanted to change his consumer measures, they should do so by amendment in the Senate.We're not going to write this whole bill between two senators, Dodd said.The Republican tactics in the Senate carry risks for the party. The public is angry at Wall Street, and Democrats have taken the opportunity to charge Republicans with doing Wall Street's bidding.On NBC's Today show Wednesday, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said, It is totally inconsistent to be arguing that there ought to be financial reform, and after all these months of reviews, studies, hearings, not allow a bill to come to the floor.Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, responded that Republicans are trying to strengthen the bill — for example, with better protections against taxpayer-funded bailouts.Republicans on Tuesday floated a 20-page summary of a GOP alternative to Dodd's measure. The Republican plan would prohibit the use of taxpayer money to bail out failing financial giants in the future and impose federal regulation on many but not all trades of complex investments known as derivatives. Unlike in the Democrats' bill, large banks would not have to help pay for the failure of their peers. It also calls for consumer protections that are narrower than what Democrats and the White House seek, and it would place restrictions of financial assistance to mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Republicans also were counting on the public to forget the Republican stalling tactics. You know, what happens on Monday or Tuesday versus what happens later is something largely lost on the general public,Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said. But there were signs that Republicans would only stick with the strategy for so long. Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, said he would vote to let the bill advance to the Senate floor if bipartisan talks were no longer progressing. I have an idea of how much time it takes to cut a deal,he said.If that's not possible, then we go on.

Pressure mounts on Germany to aid Greece by Simon Sturdee - APR 28,10

BERLIN (AFP) – Pressure piled on Germany to stop stalling a package to rescue Greece from crippling debts Wednesday as the International Monetary Fund warned confidence in the whole eurozone was on the line.The euro hit a one-year dollar low with a downgrade of Spain's credit rating accelerating its fall, escalating fears that the Greek debt crisis is spreading across Europe a day after Greek debt was slashed to junk status.Greece meanwhile acted to stop speculators operating on the Athens stock exchange as the interest rate it has to pay to borrow money hit 11.1 percent, only trailing Pakistan and Venezuela in the world's highest interest payers.And the Greek government faced growing domestic discontent with new strikes erupting.Herman Van Rompuy, the European Union's president, said the bloc's leaders would meet on May 10 and talks were advancing to enable Greece to tap up to 45 billion euros (60 million dollars) in loans from the EU and the IMF. But the Greek government said it was resisting calls in the negotiations for deeper cuts in salaries, dampening hopes of an imminent deal.It is perfectly clear that the negotiations with the Greek government, the European Commission and the IMF need to be accelerated,German Chancellor Angela Merkel said after senior international finance officials came to Berlin.We hope they can be wrapped up in the coming days and on the basis of this, Germany will make its decisions,she told reporters after talks with IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn.European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet warned time was fast running out and Germany must quickly decide whether to contribute its share.

There is an absolute necessity to decide very rapidly,he said after meeting German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble, Strauss-Kahn and top German lawmakers.Strauss-Kahn struck a similarly ominous note, saying: It is the confidence in the whole (euro)zone that is at stake.With opinion polls showing strong opposition within Germany to handing over cash to the Greeks, Merkel has said Berlin will only contribute when Greece comes up with a firm plan to bring its finances in order.
Merkel, who is being asked to come up with some 8.4 billion euros, faces a key regional election on May 9 and analysts say she is wary of having her hand forced ahead of the polls. In comments likely to fuel sentiment against a bailout, the head of one of Germany's top economic institutes warned Athens would not pay Berlin back.

And two lawmakers, who met with Strauss-Kahn and Trichet, said the size of the bailout package could be as high as 120 billion euros over three years.Asked on MDR radio if Germany would ever get its money back, Hans-Werner Sinn, head of the Ifo institute and one of the top advisors to the government, said: To tell you the truth, no.He also said that it would also be understandable if other countries such as Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy would see the bailout of Greece as a precedent and ask for money themselves.The German government did try to shield Spain and Portugal from comparisons with Greece after market analysts warned the crisis in Athens could spill over into heavily-indebted eurozone states. As regards whether there is a comparison of Spain and Portugal to Greece, we do not see one,finance ministry spokeswoman Jeanette Schwamberger said. However Spain's benchmark Ibex-35 share index closed down 2.99 percent after ratings agency Standard & Poor's cut the country's credit rating and warned it could face another downgrade. The stock market in Portugal, which also had its rating lowered on Tuesday, rebounded from heavy opening losses as the government and opposition vowed to work together to ensure economic stability. Greece has seen its cost of borrowing soar as investors, fearing a default, have demanded greater risk premiums for their loans, which in turn has pushed the country's debt even higher. The public deficit rose to 13.6 percent in 2009 and its debt reached 273.4 billion euros, or 115.1 percent of output, the EU data agency said last week.

The decision by S&P to slash Greece's credit status to junk levels means certain investors such as pension funds can no longer buy Greek bonds. The Athens government's most pressing problem is to find nine billion euros to pay debt maturing bu May 19. Prime Minister George Papandreou told his cabinet a common effort was needed from the EU and eurozone to prevent a fire that flared up with the global crisis from spreading to the entire European and world economy.But with the General Workers Confederation announcing a general strike for May 5 against neo-liberal blackmail, his government is still holding out against proposals by the EU and IMF to cut salaries. We have been asked for a cut which we do not accept, Labour Minister Andreas Loverdos said. Greek radio technicians launched a 48-hour strike on Wednesday, halting news broadcasts, while teachers also launched stoppages.

Oil prices turn mixed after DoE report
APR 28,10

LONDON (AFP) – World oil prices, shaken by the Greek crisis and the strengthening dollar, turned mixed on Wednesday as traders digested rising crude oil reserves in key energy consumer the United States.London's Brent North Sea crude for June fell 18 cents to 85.60 dollars per barrel.New York's main contract, light sweet crude for June, rose 42 cents to 82.86 dollars a barrel.The US Department of Energy (DoE) said Wednesday that crude reserves increased by 1.9 million barrels in the week ending April 23, indicating weaker demand.Market expectations had been for a gain of 800,000 barrels, according to analysts polled by Dow Jones Newswires.Distillates, which include diesel and heating fuel, rose by 2.9 million barrels last week, which was higher than expectations for an increase of 1.2 million.The DoE added that gasoline or petrol stockpiles fell 1,2 million barrels, confounding forecasts of a 600,000-barrel gain.Crude oil had fallen Tuesday and earlier Wednesday on heightened concerns about a Greek financial crisis after its sovereign debt was slashed to junk status, fanning fears of a default.Barclays Capital analysts said that the market was sharply pressurised by rising concerns over Greece?s debt problems.A fierce global equities sell-off began Tuesday after ratings agency Standard & Poor's cut Greek debt to junk, while a downgrade to Portugal also stoked concerns about a widening eurozone crisis.

In the foreign exchange market on Wednesday, the European single currency plunged to 1.3143 dollars -- a low last seen in April 2009.A stronger US currency makes dollar-denominated crude oil more expensive to holders of weaker units, dampening demand and leading to lower prices.S&P's cutting Greek sovereign debt to junk status, along with their downgrading of Portugal's rating, sent shivers through the euro against other currencies and global markets, with all the expected consequences,said PVM oil analyst Philip Wiper.Stock markets worldwide fell more than two percent (on Tuesday) and oil prices inevitably went with them.Greece faces a May 19 deadline to repay nine billion euros (12 billion dollars) in maturing debt. The downgrade by credit ratings agency S&P effectively shuts down its access to private capital.Investors are meanwhile looking to the results later Wednesday of a US Federal Reserve board meeting on whether or not to raise its main interest rate.

MUSLIM NATIONS

EZEKIEL 38:1-12
1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog,(RULER) the land of Magog,(RUSSIA) the chief prince of Meshech(MOSCOW)and Tubal,(TOBOLSK) and prophesy against him,
3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech(MOSCOW) and Tubal:
4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws,(GOD FORCES THE RUSSIA-MUSLIMS TO MARCH) and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:
5 Persia,(IRAN,IRAQ) Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:
6 Gomer,(GERMANY) and all his bands; the house of Togarmah (TURKEY)of the north quarters, and all his bands:(SUDAN,AFRICA) and many people with thee.
7 Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.
8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.
9 Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.(RUSSIA-EGYPT AND MUSLIMS)
10 Thus saith the Lord GOD; It shall also come to pass, that at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think an evil thought:
11 And thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates,
12 To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land.

ISAIAH 17:1
1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

PSALMS 83:3-7
3 They (ARABS,MUSLIMS) have taken crafty counsel against thy people,(ISRAEL) and consulted against thy hidden ones.
4 They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.
5 For they (MUSLIMS) have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:(TREATIES)
6 The tabernacles of Edom,(JORDAN) and the Ishmaelites;(ARABS) of Moab, PALESTINIANS,JORDAN) and the Hagarenes;(EGYPT)
7 Gebal,(HEZZBALLOH,LEBANON) and Ammon,(JORDAN) and Amalek;(SYRIA,ARABS,SINAI) the Philistines (PALESTINIANS) with the inhabitants of Tyre;(LEBANON)

DANIEL 11:40-43
40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south( EGYPT) push at him:(EU DICTATOR IN ISRAEL) and the king of the north (RUSSIA AND MUSLIM HORDES OF EZEK 38+39) shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.
41 He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.(JORDAN)
42 He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.
43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

EZEKIEL 39:1-8
1 Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog,(LEADER OF RUSSIA) and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech (MOSCOW) and Tubal: (TUBOLSK)
2 And I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee, and will cause thee to come up from the north parts,(RUSSIA) and will bring thee upon the mountains of Israel:
3 And I will smite thy bow out of thy left hand, and will cause thine arrows to fall out of thy right hand.
4 Thou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands,( ARABS) and the people that is with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, and to the beasts of the field to be devoured.
5 Thou shalt fall upon the open field: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD.
6 And I will send a fire on Magog,(NUCLEAR BOMB) and among them that dwell carelessly in the isles: and they shall know that I am the LORD.
7 So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.
8 Behold, it is come, and it is done, saith the Lord GOD; this is the day whereof I have spoken.

JOEL 2:3,20,30-31
3 A fire(NUCLEAR BOMB) devoureth before them;(RUSSIA-ARABS) and behind them a flame burneth: the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and behind them a desolate wilderness; yea, and nothing shall escape them.
20 But I will remove far off from you the northern army,(RUSSIA,MUSLIMS) and will drive him into a land barren and desolate, with his face toward the east sea, and his hinder part toward the utmost sea, and his stink shall come up, and his ill savour shall come up, because he hath done great things.(SIBERIAN DESERT)
30 And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.(NUCLEAR BOMB)
31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.

Hezbollah slams Gates' remarks over weapons By ZEINA KARAM, Associated Press Writer –Wed Apr 28, 9:03 am ET

BEIRUT – A Hezbollah official on Wednesday slammed comments by the U.S. defense secretary accusing the militant group of having more weapons than most governments in the world, and pledged to continue arming.Lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah said Hezbollah's weapons and those of the U.S. and its ally Israel are not to be compared.

His remarks, which were published by the Lebanese daily As-Safir, came in response to statements made by Defense Secretary Robert Gates accusing Syria and Iran of supplying Hezbollah with increasingly sophisticated weaponry.We are at a point now where Hezbollah has far more rockets and missiles than most governments in the world, Gates said Tuesday in Washington after a meeting with the Israeli Defense Minister, Ehud Barak.Israel has accused Syria of providing Hezbollah with Scud missiles, which have a greater range and can carry a much bigger warhead than the rockets Hezbollah fired at Israel in the past. Syria has denied the allegations, as has Lebanon's Western-backed prime minister.Our choice was and still is to secure all the arms of resistance that we can, Fadlallah said.There is a great difference between weapons that only serve invasions, occupations and aggressions, such as those of the United States and its ally Israel ... and weapons of an honorable resistance that liberates, protects, and defends.The reports prompted the Obama administration to say last week that it has repeatedly warned Syria that transferring ballistic missiles to Hezbollah could spark a new war in the Middle East.

Obama's homeland security and counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, expressed concern over reports of weapons smuggling to Hezbollah through Syria, calling the alleged arms transfers a threat to the stability and security of Lebanon and the region.Brennan, who met with Lebanese officials Tuesday as part of a visit to several countries in the region, said the only legitimate weapons in the country are those held by the Lebanese state.

UN promotes illicit affairs: Ahmadinejad's wife
APR 28,10

TEHRAN (AFP) – The wife of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has accused Western countries of using the United Nations to promote illicit affairs, the official IRNA news agency reported on Wednesday.Westerners exploit the United Nations structure to promote illicit affairs, Azam-ol-Sadat Farahi told a conference of Muslim women thinkers on Tuesday without elaborating.The family, which is the main pillar of every society, has collapsed in the West and they are seeking to extend their problem to the Islamic world by spreading decadent schemes, she said.Westerners pursue their improper schemes under the name of development and (alleviating) social discrimination,she added.Iran hardliners are fierce critics of Western culture and feminism, and since Ahmadinejad came to power in 2005 his government has sought to encourage women to stick to the traditional roles as mothers and wives.Iran has refused to join the convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, despite attempts by a reformist parliament during its 2000 to 2004 mandate.

Conservatives find the treaty at odds with Islamic law and teachings.Under Iran's Sharia-based law a woman's blood money, testimony and inheritance are half of a man's and women suffer inequalities in marriage, divorce and child custody.Women rights activists campaigning for equal status with men in Iran have faced pressure and intimidation in recent years and several have landed in jail over calling for changes to the law.Iran imposes a strict Islamic dress code, requiring women to cover their hair and body in public or face punishment but this has not stopped urban women to sport figure-hugging coats and loose scarves showing locks of hair.

The authorities, who frown upon man-woman relationships out of wedlock, are also concerned about the divorce rate, which has risen steadily in recent years.According to officials and experts there was one divorce for every seven marriages across Iran in 2009, while one in every four marriages break up in the capital Tehran.

Israel warns against giving Iran too much time By ANNE GEARAN, AP National Security Writer – Tue Apr 27, 5:42 pm ET AP

WASHINGTON – The United States is doing the right thing by pursuing a diplomatic solution to the threat that Iran may soon gain a nuclear weapon, but the world cannot afford to wait too long, Israel's defense minister said Tuesday.Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said he supports the U.S. focus on tougher economic sanctions against Tehran and that the United States is the only world power that can muster a coordinated global effort to deter Iran through economic pressure.Only time will tell to what extent they are really effective,Barak said following meetings at the Pentagon with the top U.S. civilian and uniformed officials. He warned that if the international community waits too long, Iran could acquire a nuclear weapon that would change the landscape of the entire world, not just of the Middle East.U.S. defense officials walk a fine line when discussing Iran and Israel, quick to say that a nuclear Iran is intolerable and a direct threat to Israel, but also firm that a pre-emptive U.S. or Israeli military strike would be counterproductive now.Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned in a secret memo in January that the United States needed more forethought and more options as Iran edges closer to the time when it could build a weapon. He declined to go further Tuesday.

I'm very satisfied with the planning process at the Pentagon and elsewhere within the Obama administration, Gates said during a news conference with Barak. We spend a lot of time on Iran, and we'll continue to do so.Iran and the rearming of the Hezbollah militia were major topics of Barak's session at the Pentagon. He met earlier Tuesday with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.Barak's three-day visit to Washington is partly intended to project a better image of U.S.-Israeli relations than what emerged from the tense visit of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last month.The traditionally close alliance between United States and Israel has been strained by the Netanyahu government's move to expand Jewish housing on land claimed by Palestinians for their future capital. The United States sees the move as a direct affront to peacemaking. Peace talks remain stalled.

US downplays Iran threat in Latin America By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer – Tue Apr 27, 5:38 pm ET

WASHINGTON – U.S. military officials said Tuesday that Iran is trying to expand its influence in Latin America but that Tehran's presence there doesn't yet pose a military threat to the United States.The Pentagon last week released a 12-page report that identified an increased presence by Iran's elite military Qods Force in Latin America, particularly in Venezuela.Washington has accused Iran, and the Qods Force in particular, of aiding militant groups like Hezbollah and trying to destabilize the Iraqi government.The report raised fears in some quarters that Tehran's hardline regime could seek to confront the U.S. in the Western hemisphere.

It also prompted accusations of war mongering by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who on Monday called it totally false. Chavez suggested the U.S. was looking for an excuse to attack his country.Air Force Gen. Douglas Fraser, who oversees U.S. military operations in Latin America as head of U.S. Southern Command, told reporters on Tuesday that he personally hasn't seen an increase in Iran's military presence in the region.It's a diplomatic, it's a commercial presence. I haven't seen evidence of a military presence,Fraser told reporters.But Fraser said he didn't think his assessment contradicted the Pentagon report. He said he sees an increasing presence of Iran in Latin America but that he didn't have all the details.Other senior U.S. defense officials have described the military presence in the region as limited and possibly under the cover of commercial and diplomatic fronts.Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Congress last year that Iran was opening a lot of offices and a lot of fronts behind which they interfere with what is going on in some of these countries in Latin America.During a trip to South America earlier this month, Gates also played down any potential military threat Iran might pose in the Western Hemisphere.I haven't seen much evidence of that in Latin America, in terms of Iran having proxies or terrorist proxies,Gates said.

Brazil urges Iran to issue nuclear pledge
Buzz up!0 votes Send
Email IM .Share
Facebook Twitter Delicious Digg Fark Newsvine Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks .Print .. AFP/File – Iranian technicians remove a container of radioactive uranium from the Isfahan nuclear facility in 2005. …
. Play Video Iran Video:WCCO-TV @ Your Desk For 04/28 WCCO Minneapolis .
Play Video Iran Video:Sarkozy and Hu bury hatchet in Beijing talks AFP .
Play Video Iran Video:"Satisfied" with US plan for Iran Reuters .
by Jay Deshmukh Jay Deshmukh – Tue Apr 27, 12:00 pm ET
TEHRAN (AFP) – UN Security Council member Brazil demanded on Tuesday that Iran guarantee its nuclear programme has no military aims, saying the crisis has become the single most important security issue in the world.

Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim said his country will work to avoid new sanctions against Iran, but urged Tehran and world powers to show "flexibility" over an atomic fuel deal stalled for several months.

He also objected to the structure of the group of nations negotiating with Iran over its nuclear programme, and indicated that nations such as Brazil and Turkey can be "political guarantors" to resolve the crisis.

"Iran should have peaceful nuclear activities, but the international community should be given guarantees that there will not be violation and diversion (of nuclear technology) towards military aims," Amorim, who is on a two-day visit, told a Tehran press conference.

Brazil, a temporary member of the 15-strong Security Council, has consistently defended Iran's nuclear programme.

But on Tuesday, Amorim said guarantees were necessary as the Iranian nuclear crisis "is the single most important security issue in the world today" and it was obligatory for council members such as Brazil and Turkey to ensure that it is resolved.

"Everybody has to give guarantees. It could be by way of more (UN) inspectors (on the ground in Iran) and inspections of facilities," he told reporters from Western news media in a separate briefing.

"There are other ways of giving assurances that there are no deviations (of nuclear work) and at the same time giving satisfaction to Iran."

Amorim insisted that the impasse, which has "dragged for seven years," must be resolved.

"We want a solution to this impasse. Brazil is interested in having a role in settling Iran's nuclear issue. I heard the explanation from Iranian sides in my long meeting (with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki). It was constructive," he said.

The minister took serious exception to the presence of Western countries in the P5+1 group negotiating with Iran. The group consists of permanent Security Council members Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, plus Germany.

"Why P5 plus one? Forget about Brazil, why not a European country which is nearer and able to understand Iran ... It has always been like the West will resolve this question," he said.

"We accept China and Russia because they are permanent members and have veto powers anyway so they can come to discussion, but apart from that no other country."

He said Brazil and Turkey could be possible "political guarantors" to help resolve the issue, adding that Ankara could even be the host to exchange nuclear fuel as part of a UN-drafted deal that has been stalled for months.

Later on Tuesday, Ahmadinejad told Amorim during their meeting that "Iran and Brazil have to play a big role in setting up a new just world order," the official IRNA news agency said.

For his part, the Brazilian reiterated that it was Tehran's "right like Brazil to pursue a civilian atomic programme."

Earlier, Amorim told IRNA Brazil could consider hosting the fuel exchange if asked to do so.

World powers and Iran have been at loggerheads for months over the deal, which envisages supplying nuclear fuel for a Tehran research reactor in exchange for low-enriched uranium from Iran.

The deal stalled after Iran insisted the two materials be exchanged simultaneously within its borders. That was rejected by the world powers, who accuse Iran of masking a weapons drive under the guise of what Tehran says is a purely civilian atomic programme.

Washington is leading a push for a new set of UN sanctions against Iran. For sanctions to pass, nine of the 15 UN Security Council members would have to vote in favour and none of the five permanent members veto it. Amorim told IRNA Brazil would work to prevent the new sanctions, because they are ineffective and the only thing the sanctions achieve is that they hurt people, especially the lower class of people.

U.S. says no G8 split with Canada over abortion
Wed Apr 28, 8:35 am ET

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia (Reuters) – The United States is not at odds with Canada despite Ottawa's announcement that it will refuse to fund groups that provide abortions in poor countries, the top U.S. aid official said on Tuesday.Canada's right-wing Conservative government, which says it will use its position as chair of the Group of Eight leading nations to boost maternal health in the developing world, said on Monday it would have nothing to do with abortion funding.This means Canada is at odds with other G8 members such as the United States and Britain, which back access to safe abortions. Canada is hosting a three-day meeting of G8 aid ministers in the Atlantic city of Halifax.Dr. Rajiv Shah, head of the United States Agency for International Development, noted the Obama administration had lifted a ban on aid for groups that funded abortions.Asked whether this meant the United States and Canada were at odds over the issue, he replied: No, not at all.Canadian International Development Minister Bev Oda said both countries backed the use of family planning to help improve the health of mothers.We do not disagree on the definition of family planning that the international community uses,she said.Oda said other G8 members around the table had asked for flexibility so that they can pick and choose what approaches they would back.

I know they (the Americans) will support Canada's G8 initiative to save the lives of mothers and children, to ensure that they have safe births, healthy children and we reduce their mortality,she said.Critics in Canada say the government's stance on abortion will harm women in the Third World.(Reporting by Richard Woodbury; writing by David Ljunggren; editing by Mohammad Zargham)

STORMS HURRICANES-TORNADOES

LUKE 21:25-26
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity;(MASS CONFUSION) the sea and the waves roaring;(FIERCE WINDS)
26 Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

Nearly 2 feet of snow falls in NY, New England By WILSON RING, Associated Press Writer – Wed Apr 28, 10:53 am ET

MONTPELIER, Vt. – A late-season snowstorm dumped up to 2 feet of heavy, wet snow on northern New York, Vermont and New Hampshire by Wednesday morning, cutting off power to thousands, closing some schools and leaving roads slippery.It definitely caught people off guard, considering we had 80 degrees back in March. It's a problem because some people swapped their (snow) tires out already,said Vermont highway dispatcher Greg Fox.About 30,000 customers were without power in Vermont, New Hampshire and northern New York at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday. Utility officials said it could be Thursday before power is fully restored.We've been hammered all night, said New York State Police Trooper Eric LaValley of the Ray Brook barracks, in the Adirondack Mountains.Large storms so late in the season are rare. On April 23, 1993, 22 inches of snow was reported in Malone, N.Y., and on April 27, 1874, 24 inches of snow was reported in Bellows Falls, Vt., said Mark Breen, the senior meteorologist at the Fairbanks Museum and Planetarium in St. Johnsbury.You really do have to stretch to find events like this, Breen said.Many trees across the region have already started to bud, but temperatures didn't fall much below freezing.

The green part isn't a problem. Snow is basically protecting leaves from temperatures getting colder, Breen said.Instead, the danger to the trees comes because the leaves gives the snow more surface area to cling to, making them more susceptible to breaking under the weight of the snow.Snowfall records were set Tuesday and Wednesday at the Burlington International Airport, the National Weather Service said. Tuesday's 2.8 inches at the airport eclipsed the record of 1.3 inches set on the date in 1946, and by 7 a.m. Wednesday 2.7 inches had fallen, beating the record of seven-tenths of an inch set on the date in 1966, said meteorologist Brooke Taber.