Sunday, March 20, 2011

Daily Digest March 20, 2011



>>>>>>>>>>INFOS <<<<<<<<<<


There are over all results and then there are trends on factors influencing outcomes
look at all the subsets as well as the headline.
Richard has stated his prognostications and his reasons why - respond or make your own.

Sun Mar 20, 11:22 PM

Conservatives 39, Liberals 28 in latest poll News Staff

The Conservatives have a strong lead with 39 per cent support ahead of a possible spring election, according to a new poll, despite the opposition parties hammering away at the Tories on ethics issues.

With seemingly all signs pointing to the government's fall, a new Nanos Research poll for CTV and the Globe and Mail shows that support for the Conservatives is 11 percentage points ahead of the Liberals.

Pollster Nik Nanos said the results suggest that if an election were held today, "Canadians could spend $300 million… and we still have a very similar outcome" to the 2008 vote.

The telephone survey of committed voters was conducted between March 12 and 15, a few days after House Speaker Peter Milliken ruled against the government on two issues of Parliamentary privilege.

When respondents were asked which party they supported, about 39 per cent said Conservative. Here are the results (percentage-point change from last month in brackets):
  • Conservatives: 38.6 per cent (-1.1)
  • Liberals: 27.6 per cent (+1)
  • NDP: 19.9 per cent (+1)
  • Bloc Quebecois: 10.1 per cent (+0.2)
  • Greens: 3.8 per cent (-1.1)

However, the Nanos Leadership Index suggests that the raucous atmosphere on Parliament Hill -- with a rash of scandals and attack ads in the past month -- may have had a negative impact on Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

The index looks at how committed voters rank the leaders on three main qualities: trust, competence and vision.

When respondents were asked which leader they thought was the most competent, Stephen Harper dropped by 7 percentage points from last month:
  • Stephen Harper, Conservative: 29.8 per cent (-7.1)
  • Jack Layton, NDP: 15.9 per cent (+3.8)
  • Michael Ignatieff, Liberal: 12.5 per cent (-0.2)
  • Gilles Duceppe, Bloc: 8.6 per cent (+1.7)
  • Elizabeth May, Green: 3.4 per cent (+0.8)
  • None / Undecided: 29.8 per cent (+0.9)

When respondents were asked which leader they viewed as the most trustworthy, Harper had a slight decline from last month's poll, although still within the error of margin. But nearly a third of respondents were either undecided or chose none:
  • Stephen Harper, Conservative: 26.6 per cent (-2.5)
  • Jack Layton, NDP: 17.2 per cent (+0.5)
  • Michael Ignatieff, Liberal: 12.7 per cent (+1.8)
  • Gilles Duceppe, Bloc: 8.5 per cent (+0.8)
  • Elizabeth May, Green: 4.3 per cent (+1.5)
  • None / Undecided: 30.6 per cent (+0.8)

On the issue of which leader had the best vision for Canada's future, Harper also showed a drop:
  • Stephen Harper, Conservative: 26.4 per cent (-6.5)
  • Jack Layton, NDP: 18.3 per cent (+3.5)
  • Michael Ignatieff, Liberal: 14.5 per cent (+1.2)
  • Gilles Duceppe, Bloc: 4.4 per cent (+1.3)
  • Elizabeth May, Green: 3.9 per cent (-0.4)
  • None / Undecided: 32.5 (+0.7)

Results from those three questions are compiled for the Leadership Score Index. It has Harper again in the lead -- but down 16 points:
  • Stephen Harper, Conservative: 82.8 (-16.1)
  • Jack Layton, NDP: 51.4 (+7.8)
  • Michael Ignatieff, Liberal: 39.7 (+2.8)
  • Gilles Duceppe, Bloc: 21.5 (+3.8)
  • Elizabeth May, Green: 11.6 (-1.1)

However, the Nanos poll suggests party policies, and not the strongest leader, may decide the next federal election.

Respondents were asked which factor was most important in influencing their vote: the local candidate, party policies, the party leader, or their traditional support for a party. Only 20 per cent said it was the leader:
  • Party policies: 40 per cent
  • Party leader: 20 per cent
  • Local candidate: 12 per cent
  • Traditional support: 10 per cent
  • Unsure: 10 per cent

Those results suggest that "Canadians are looking for ideas to kind of latch onto, in terms of where Canada should go in the future," Nanos said.

  • The survey involved 1,216 Canadians 18 years of age and older
  • It was conducted between March 12 and 15
  • Results are accurate to within 2.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20
  • For the Leadership Score Index, data was weighted for gender and age to match Canadian census results
From: "Richard & Alley Neumann"
Subject: Re: Daily Digest March 19, 2011

Well Joe, it looks like there's gonna be a gun fight (intentional reference to the registry) this week on the Hill, the political equivalent to the Stanley Cup Playoffs for all of us junkies (or should I say politically engaged).
If the writ comes, and I've been saying for some time that it will and have not waivered from that opinion, the question becomes what will the ballot question be?  According to the pundits (the best job in the world for my money) it will be ethics versus the economy.  The fact that Canadians again list health care as their number one priority will, of course, have nothing to do with it.  Given that Below 30 offers a forum where I am not constricted by the number of words I type, this is the best place to put my thoughts to the record, if only to allow a few friends who also receive this digest to use it against me when I am proven completely wrong...
On the question of the economy, I continue to hold the opinion that the Conservatives have this issue hands-down.  The Liberals can't argue deficits as everyone knows they would have spent more than the Conservatives had they been given the chance, and everyone knows that their platform will contain lots of new, uncosted spending promises in which they spend their "corporate tax" dividend about twenty times over.  The Liberals will likely avoid reference to taxes at all beyond the corporate tax issue, mostly because they have every intention of raising them.  As for the budget, it will show the Conservatives ahead of last year's budget projections (a trick learned well from Paul Martin), giving an excuse to expand a few strategic funding initiatives mostly to seniors and the unemployed.  Not enough to entice the NDP, but enough to say they gave it the ole college try.
As for ethics, the other choice ballot issue, what do we really have in the minds of the average voter?  Lets go from worst to first, if we can measure these issues in this manner...
1.  Contempt of Parliament.  Unless the Conservatives can engineer their own defeat before Friday, the government will fall on this issue, not the budget.  The Liberals will then incorporate this issue in their own attack ads and do all they can to make it the ballot issue.  Unfortunately, it's an uphill battle for a number of reasons:
       a.    The Liberal sponsorship scandal is still within common memory, which means at best the voter can conclude that the Conservatives are no better than the Liberals (which is why Jack will let them both throw mud at each other while he spins the airwaves with the only "positive" ad campaign);
       b.    The issues are numerous but complicated to understand to the average Canadian, each requiring a more detailed explanation to do it justice than either the Liberal ad budget or the six week campaign will allow;
       c.    The Chief defender of democracy for Liberals, Michael Ignatieff, is a leader unelected by his own party.  In other words, his own Liberal backroom boys had to engineer his selection because they couldn't even trust their own membership with a vote after the debacle of Stephane Dion's leadership.  This hasn't been played up much by the Conservatives yet, but I suspect they've been holding the argument in reserve for just such a moment.  Defender of democracy, my eye, they will say.  At least Harper was elected and not appointed!; and
       d.    The public has already concluded this government is over-controlling and secretive, so it adds little to the argument and thus won't be driving the polls.  The public doesn't like it, but they almost view it as a necessary evil, in that they respect the leadership and management, if not the means by which it is being carried out.
2.    Oda's document blunder was no more altering a document than a "funding denied" stamp would have been.  Tthe issue was her testimony at committee being less than forthcoming and that, at least in part, could be put down to the poor quality of the questions asked of her.  ("It depends on what the definition of "is" is", to coin Bill Clinton).  As for the actual funding issue behind it, it saved taxpayers money, it didn't cost them any.  The issue is contained to the Minister herself, and although a reasonable argument can be made for resignation (not that I agree), it's not an issue to bring down the government on.
3.  As for providing financial documents for the costing of crime, defence, and other initiatives, while that certainly sets a tone for how the Conservatives view political opportunism at committees, none of that detailed information was ever demanded by committees in the past, because in majority governments committees are dominated by the government.  The Conservatives might even point to the Afghanistan document issue, and reasonably ask why nothing has ever come of that?  On top of it all, the issue of costing the F35 will be a tough sell when, behind it all, will be the whole question of the actual need to replace the CF18, at a time when the aircraft is actually deployed in a combat theatre over Libya.  Not good optics at all for the Liberals.  As for the cost of a tough on crime agenda, that would play directly into another Conservative strength, particularly in Southern Ontario, so bring it on the Conservative braintrust will say.  In other words, as the LIbs try to make an argument of a democratic deficit on each of these issues, the Conservatives will turn it around and make it on the very spending issue raised.  On crime documents, they will talk about being tough on crime.  On the F35, they will speak of the need to replace an aging fighter and allow its current deployment to speak for itself.  Too easy...
4.  The "In and Out" issue is not only old (2006), but is complex in that the "in" part is engaged in by all parties who routinely transfer funds from national to local campaigns, and the "out" part is likewise routine, only it usually applies only to print media and signs, vice tv and radio ads.  It is the proximity of the "in" to the "out" that matters, and that's a pretty tough argument to accurately depict in a sound bite.  Once again, the issue can be portrayed as how Conservatives decided to spend Conservative money.  Making the leap to public money in terms of campaign rebates is another complex step, and will only open the door to a more general debate on party financing, and the Conservative plan to end the federal subsidy to parties.  Sounds like the Conservatives would be fine going there...
5.  Finally, Carson is about as important an issue as Bernier was.  It has a sexy woman mingled into it, but it would be great press if the rest of the world weren't going to hell in a handbasket, and we were at a different point in the election cycle when the press had less to write about.  The Conservatives might also point out that if it were not for their own "Accountability Act", it wouldn't be an issue at all, and it was the Prime Minister who called in the Mounties, not the opposition, meaning all is working precisely as it was designed to work.  Nowhere to go with it for the Liberals...
The coming election, in the end, will not be about any of this, but rather all of this.  In what is sure to be a particularly nasty election, the public will ultimately decide whether they want change or not, rather than why they want change.  If the polls are any indication, there is no desire for change right now, and Canadians are being told that an election will change little anyways.  So while the national parties scrap endlessly for our votes, much will be determined at the local level, in particular in the battleground ridings where a relatively small shift can result in big change.  I continue to be of the view that this represents an advantage to the Conservatives, where they were on the losing end of many tight races last time around.  On top of all of this, our election will take place in the backdrop of some rather serious issues in Japan and in the Middle East.  Canadians may just conclude that we've got it pretty good right now, and that there is always risk in change.
As a Conservative, I'd be mildly ticked off were the government to survive the week.  I, for one, want to see a Conservative majority and I believe that this represents the last, best chance for that to happen.  Further, I believe that this is an election for Conservatives to lose, meaning that barring a disastrous campaign the worst case scenario is another Conservative minority of sufficient size to prevent an opposition coalition.  Contrary to the opinion of most of your regular editorialists, I believe the boss looks Prime Ministerial, a quality that bodes well when crisis strike the world.  Not everyone loves the PM, but a sufficient number view him as capable and decisive, qualities most want to see in their leaders, and a quality most seem to believe is absent from the alternative.  And we all know that during an election, when a defined issue is not present (ie Free Tade) then the leader becomes the most compelling factor.
From the Conservative point of view, bring it on now.  On the economy, leadership, crime and defence, the Conservatives have the edge.  Further, unpopular Liberal brands in Ontario and BC, combined with modest gains in Atlantic Canada make this Spring the time to capitalize.  The carbon tax made the Liberals abandon the environment as an issue, and nobody is talking health care other than, of course, the Canadian public, but what does that matter to the major parties. 
Gonna be an interesting week.  I look forward to looking like a fool and getting everything wrong, but then again I'm not a pundit, I'm just a trench guy with an opinion, and thanks to you Joe, a place to put it.

From: "Brian D. Marlatt"
Subject: Ipsos-Reid poll main link to federal politics, week of March 14-18

Federal politics ipsos-reid polls this past week.

Much more than the current poll is on the site. Take a look.
From: Larry Kazdan
Subject: Letter to Editor re:  Does hike in minimum wage cut poverty? Findings say no, Stephen Gordon, March 18, 2011

Re:  Does hike in minimum wage cut poverty? Findings say no, Stephen Gordon, March 18, 2011

Stephen Gordon maintains that minimum wage increases have little effect on alleviating poverty but will paradoxically lead to more families living under Low Income Cut Offs (LICOs). However, 650 U.S. economists, including five Nobel laureates stated in 2006 that "A modest increase in the minimum wage would improve the well-being of low-wage workers and would not have the adverse effects that critics have claimed."  Other studies have shown several benefits of higher minimum wages including a "trickle-up" effect (whereby many non-minimum-wage workers also get raises), reduced turnover; and higher productivity.  Those so concerned about the poor but who fear the deleterious effects of raising low income wages should put their money where their mouth is and join the call for a national poverty reduction strategy with legislated targets and timelines.
<![end if]-->
Larry Kazdan CGA,

From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: DD
Joe--I imagine the Libyan people are much less dead and much happier to be maimed and killed by bombs from the West than they are to be killed by Gadhafi's forces?  Look at Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq to see how indiscriminately the US kills to 'save the people'.

From: dave & barb
Subject: Re: Daily Digest March 18, 2011

Hi Joe, 
Re: Radiation
Thanks for the smile and chuckle.
I've got to say most of the political commentary has about the same credibility.
Thanks for the news.


From: Jacob Rempel 

New Libya 'Ceasefire' as Jets Continue Attacks

Modern History Of Libya

Arab League Backtracks Over No-Fly Zone

From: Larry Kazdan
Subject: Letter to Editor re:  Harper still wants facts on ex-adviser Carson, but defends lobbying rules,  Mike Blanchfield,  03/19/2011

Re:  Harper still wants facts on ex-adviser Carson, but defends lobbying rules,  Mike Blanchfield,  03/19/2011

Stephen Harper still doesn't know all the facts about the scandal which erupted around his former top adviser, Bruce Carson.  And for the longest time, Bev Oda didn't know who inserted the infamous "not" into the letter that originally recommended funding the non-profit group Kairos.  The Harper Conservatives seem to be pretty adept at seeing no evil and hearing no evil.  Too bad about those nasty attack ads on Michael Ignatieff's patriotism.
Larry Kazdan,

From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: This is being done in our name to save the Libyans?

Rothschild Globalist Killers Pour DU On Libyans In Nuclear War
US, UK Butchers Extend Talons Of Death Over Libya By Peter Eyre

Look at the pictures of the children born contaminated with DU and then tell me again how we are doing bombing them to save them from Gadhaffi!

From: Mahmood Elahi
To: "Kate Malloy" <>
Subject: Fikushima nuclear disaster shows Japan is paying for ignoring lessons from Chernobyl

Ms Kate Malloy
Editor, The Hill Times, Ottawa
Copy to: Ms Angela Bischoff, Awarness Director, Ontario Clean Air Association: You are doing a great to prod politicians to stop building of new nuclear reactors in Ontario. It is time the politicians realize that nuclear power is fraught with so many dangers that it is not worth spending billions of tax dollars in subsidizing it. They should learn from what is happening at Fukushima nuclear plant. Ihave separately written to Premier McGuinty.
Fukushima nuclear disaster shows Japan is paying for ignoring lessons from Chernobyl
The catastrophic nuclear accident at Fukushima in the wake of tsunami may leave behind far more damage to Japan than the tsunami which caused a thousands of death and injuries. While homes and hearths destroyed by the tsunami can be rebuilt, the nuclear legacy will be hard to eliminate. As Japan battles the aftermath of the accident, the reactors continue to burn and the situation at Fukushima remains grim. Thousands have fled the area and possibly will never return. The governor of Fukushima prefecture was first to show signs of cracking. "The people of Fukushima have limits of their tolerance of fear and anxiety, and I hope that the people of Japan understand this," Yuhei Sato said in a televised statement. He complained that not enough aid is reaching the 100,000 evacuees living in shelters just outside the nuclear exclusion zone. Katsunobo Sakurai, mayor of the town of Minamasoma, where residents have been told to stay in their homes just 20 kilometres from the plant, was even more blunt. "The government doesn't tell us anything," he said. "We're isolated. They're leaving us to die."
More than 200,000 people living close to the crippled nuclear plant have been forced to flee radiation leaks, while another 140,000 living inside a 30-kilometre isolation zone have been told to stay indoors. In many ways, Japan is facing a catastrphe not seen since a-bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Cities have seen their power cut. Japan's famed bullet trains face disruption. Supermarket shelves in being stripped bare of rice, bread, noodles and bottled water as people are resorting to hoarding. Gasoline shortage is causing disruption in trasportation, making supplies uncertain. To complicate the matter, radioactive contamination has been found in milk and river water. The Japanese are fearful of everyting exposed to the environment. I have a personal issue with the Fukushima nuclear disaster. I bought tickets to visit  Japan in the middle of April and  had to reluctantly cancel my trip because of the nuclear accident.
The catastrophic nuclear accident at Fukushima shows Japan is paying for ignoring Chernobyl in the same way the Soviet Union paid dearly for ignoring Three Mile Island. After the 1979 near meltdown at Three Mile Island near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the Soviet authorities assured the world that such an accident was unlikely in the Soviet Union. In 1985, a year before the Chernobyl, the officials at the plant were interviewed for an article in Soviet Life, (an English-language magazine for distribution in the United States) aimed at readers who had grown sceptical after the near meltdown at Three Mile Island. Nikolai Fomin, Chernobyl's chief engineer, assured the world that his plant was "completely safe" for both people and the environment. Boris Chernov, a turbine operator, assured his interlocutors,"There is more emotion in the fear of nuclear power plants than real danger."
The article in Soviet Life kept returing Vitaly Skiyerov, the Ukranian energy minister, told the visiting journalists, "The environment is securely protected. Hermetically sealed buildings, closed cycles for technological processes with radioactive agents and systems for purification and harmless waste disposal, preclude any accidental discharge into the external environment." Validimir Voloshko, the mayor of Pripyat, where the reactor is located, even sounded an environmental note while talking about car-parking problems, "We don't want the cars to squeeze out the people. We believe the town of Pripyat should be as safe and clean as the power plant." The rest belongs to history.
When he was in Moscow just after Three Mile Island, the governor of Pennsylvania, Dick Thornburgh, made, it astute analogy between the Soviet nuclear establishment and enthusiasts of nuclear power in the West. He was right to wonder whether accident at Three Mile Island would make a difference in the Soviet Union. Would the unbridled enthusiasm for nuclear power of the Soviet specialists be moved by questions of safety raised by a serious accident -- particularly if it happened on their own doorstep? Let's hope after the catastrophic accident at Fukushima, the Japanese will be finally moved by questions of safety. This applies to Ontario as well.

It is said nuclear weapon is too dangerous and should never be used. Similarly, nuclear power is fraught with too many dangers and should be used only sparingly. Three guidelines must be used for nuclear power: No nuclear plant should be built in earthquake-prone areas (this means whole of Japan), no nuclear plant should be built near large urban areas and no public subsidies should be used to build any nuclear power plant. If the market is allowed to determine the viability of nuclear energy, it will eliminate this costly source of power. One can only hope that before the next meltdown, the authorities around the world will finally recognize that when one is at the edge of a pricice, the onlly sane move is a step backward.

 Mahmood Elahi

Subject: Re: Daily Digest March 19, 2011
From: Geoffrey West

Good morning Joe and all those in the DD;

With regards to the last posting by The Natroses in the DD of 19MAR,  I would definitely be one of those who are classified as being 'hardwired to change the world'.  So, I continue with that here.

First of the issue of nuclear energy, and whether or not it has value.  Let's be clear on a point:  Within the CURRENT paradigm, the only energies that will receive active promotion and support are those that benefit the needs of the elitists and the establishment.  Nuclear energy is costly to build (which wastes more tax money), and it has the potential to be dangerous to humans (fulfilling the population control agenda of the establishment) while providing a cozy justification to the masses ("we're creating a 'cleaner' energy that has the capability to give you more for living')

This logic follows the same line of reasoning as to why 'peace' (as most are desiring to experience it) is impossible within the current paradigm.  It is impossible because true holistic peace is not profitable, and it certainly does not fit within the paradigm of control, fear and separation, from which the leaders and leadership institutions derive their power.   In my self-published book, I listed at least 15-20 various groups and 'declarations' that have been made in the name of 'peace'.  Here are a few of them:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNHDR);   Seville Statement on Violence;   The 'Brundtland Commission';    UN Agenda For Peace;   Earth Summit/Agenda 21 and commissions;   Kyoto Accord;   UN Decade-Peace/Non-Violence for Kids;   Millennium Declaration;   World Summit on Sustainable Development;   Millennium Development Goals;   Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; World Conference on Religions
Many, many, many more….

One group was the World Council on Religions. They have been meeting since the '70's to discuss ways to unite religions on the issue of 'peace'.  Yet, the vast number of wars that have been fought have been done so in the name of 'God'.  The declarations listed above, among countless others since 1948 when the UNHDR was signed, have been set up to pass off the illusion that leaders are truly committed to a better world.  Yet we are consistently witnessing humans being increasingly stripped of their rights, and especially so in the U.S., Canada and other western countries, under the veil of a 'war on terror' - more accurately referred to as a 'war OF terror'.

Despite ALL of these alleged 'declarations' and all these alleged affirmations of leaders and leadership institutions wanting 'peace' - despite all this and more:
"In reflection, the 20th century was a period marked by tremendous technological and economic progress - but it was also the most violent century in human history"
 ~ Lundstedt and Njølstad

"Even today, with all your powers of instant communication and total connection…..and marvellous miracles, you can't produce the simple, humble experience for which humanity has yearned from the beginning of time.  You can't produce peace"
~ Neale Donald Walsch

Here is one source who is not worried about Japan's nuclear reactors.  It is a perspective worth being aware of...even if one chooses not to resonate with it:

Even this author points out early how these events are attempting to distract people from the populist uprisings that are taking place at the moment.  Given the uprisings in the US, it may not be surprising that the establishment would try to scare people with media stories of radiation.   One has to wonder what is going on however, when TWO governments both on the same continent give differing 'official information' to the peoples of their respective countries regarding an alleged 'issue' that is of such importance.

Returning to my original point:  YouTube now has a number of videos demonstrating how to build magnetic devices that can capitalize on FREE ENERGY.  They are not expensive to build either.  The question may be as to why leaders promote expensive, potentially dangerous sources of energy when there are cheaper and vastly more effective sources that could be produced and made available to ALL.  Why would leaders NOT want to have all their people having a good standard of living?

The answer is that it takes away their power!  Their campaign donations come from the organizations that control major sources of energy or pharmaceuticals.  Leaders of the old paradigm get their 'power' from maintaining states of fear, separation and control, as mentioned above.  If all humans had access to equal abundance – in this case, electricity – there would be less of a need to go and steal it, or try to destroy sources to prevent others from controlling it.

The mainstream media for the most part is still controlled by the establishment, although Hilary Clinton recently made an admission that the US is now losing the 'infowar' because the public no longer trusts the US mainstream media.  ( ) The media establishment is losing its effectiveness as a tool for brainwashing the masses, because people are now going to sources like Russia Today (RT) and Al-Jazeera, among many others.  They are even going to sources like Alex Jones.  Although he claims to be pushing the truth movement, and I think to a degree he does, he is perpetuating negative energies and anger within people to support his truth movement, and I do not resonate with this.

Okay, nuclear energy, and the truth movement aside for a moment, let's take a look at what is happening in Japan.  First, I would like to offer a link that shows all the earthquake activity worldwide in the last 7 days:  (it says that there are approximately 450 earthquakes in the last week.  Yesterday it said 550, which means that the major earthquakes around Sendai occurred about a week ago, and I have now missed them.)

Now, here is a link to the earthquake map for the Asian region:

If we go in closer, let's take a look at the region around Sendai, Japan:

There are several HUNDRED happening right around the Sendai area.  This kind of activity is highly unusual.  Given the amount of disinformation that is coming out, even I am having difficulty trying to find something that is meaningful at this time.  Here are some thoughts on some POSSIBILITIES to consider:
1. The U.S. Mainstream media has been focusing on the fear element, getting people into a panic mode, which may drive them to panic actions, which may allow the establishment to bring in the military to control them and incarcerate them.

2. The establishment knows that most citizens of the US do not pay attention to Canadian media, so they may be instructing Harper to play the opposite side, to see what happens.  IF there is no radiation, then Harper looks good, calls his election, and gets his majority because he is seen to be the 'wise one'.  IF there is radiation, then the establishment gets an opportunity to establish a guideline based on the response of those in the US to those in Canada using different strategies.

3. Benjamin Fulford, a Canadian living in Japan and former writer for Forbes magazine and others has been using his contacts within Japan over the years to help expose the elitists and the dark cabal.  (I personally do not resonate with his use of the word 'satanists', since we are all ONE)  He claims to be a representative for another secret group that has been working behind the scenes to help take down this dark cabal, and he alleges that they have been able to start cutting off their access to funding for numerous events that the dark cabal has been trying to do to continue their campaign of fear, terror, and separation.  He names George Bush Sr., Henry Kissinger, the Rockefellers, the Pope, Prince Charles as being among one of the groups participating in this enslavement of humanity.  He also claims that there are elements within numerous governments, secret service agencies, financiers and other organizations that are working with this group to help create a ring that is slowly being tightened around this group to shut them down.  We will see and possibly hear more on this in the near future.

4.  There is a source that alleges that the dark cabal also detonated underwater nuclear devices near Japan in an attempt to sink the island, because Japan has taken such an aggressive stance on issue like:  9/11; free-energy devices; refusing to give the banking cartel (US Fed Reserve Board) control of the Japanese currency and other things.  If true, this may explain why Japan was targeted.  This would explain the fear-mongering over radiation.  It is not coming from the reactors but is coming from the ocean, and this may also explain why US soldiers on their ships had measurements of radiation while sources at the site seem to claim that radiation levels are low.  It is a POSSIBLE smear campaign against the Japanese government to blame them for covering up radiation, when the radiation is not theirs at all – it was from another device set off by the dark cabal to help  destroy Japan.   Although this sounds very plausible to me, I find myself still thinking about various messages that have allegedly been delivered by our galactic family that there will be NO nuclear war or detonation of nuclear devices to harm the surface of the Earth.  

There are sources saying that it is a natural event.  To some degree this may be true, although the amount of activity in the region seems to suggest otherwise.  This opens a door for the possibility that it was a human-created event.  Is this possible?  Apparently, it is possible.  It is alleged that Haiti was also human-created.  The world funnelled millions of dollars into donations of foreign aid...and yet...the people of Haiti are STILL suffering!  It is alleged that Clinton and Bush raced to the scene as 'goodwill ambassadors' to set up their foundations for donations...but that money does not appear to have been made available to the people.  This would fit in then with the funding sources being cut off for the establishment.  They go and create a natural disaster in order to capitalize on the generosity of people around the world.  Can this be proven?  Not exactly...except to look at the people of Haiti and wonder why there has yet to be any significant change there, even so long after the event occurred. most of the world, I am not quite sure what to believe at the moment.  What I DO know and believe is this:  whatever happens in the short term, regardless of how terrible it may is helping to collapse what is left of this destructive paradigm of living and being.  As it collapses, it opens doors for the rule-breakers, the visionaries, and those who DO have solutions to bring them forth, as the dark cabal continues to lose its power grip over humanity.  This will help to make the future brighter, instead of one involving continued enslavement.  Given my choice of enslavement for the rest of my life....OR  short-term hardship and possibly pain as my paradigm of living collapses and evolves...  I joyfully choose the latter!  I've already released so much from my life, and I have very little now in terms of personal possessions compared to all of you.   I have already begun to learn to live with less, knowing that in the future, I will then be able to have much much more! 

We can continue to address 'petty' issues that keep popping up in parliament, just like we have been doing since the beginning of the parliamentary system.  I might suggest that this is not the best possible use of time, money and resources.  They want to keep people distracted with smaller things, and make people think that they are addressing the bigger things.  .....and things never change because everyone is so busy trying to keep things the same.  The irony in this statement is that nothing ever stays the same...regardless of one's attempt to preserve it.  It is time to focus on the 'jugular vein' so to speak, the lifeline or source of all that is no longer working in this world, and that would be the leaders and governments...until they are willing to admit who it is who has hijacked and controlled them.

Thus...the current paradigm is collapsing...and it will continue to collapse.  It is only up to those who have the ability to choose leaders to awaken to all that is now happening and begin speaking up.  There is sufficient truth 'out there' now to help begin to legitimately question their governments 'right to govern'.  Everything that we are currently experiencing can be directly or indirectly tied back to 9/11.  This is perhaps the biggest lie, and the western governments must be held accountable to this, and brought down for their involvement in this lie and travesty.  Even a BBC documentary now has the courage to say that Al-Qaeda never existed, thus invalidating everything since 9/11.
( )They can be held accountable to the alleged 'declarations' that were signed by numerous countries of the world.  In doing so, watch how the lawyers of the leaders will begin to reveal just how many loopholes are within those documents as they defend the leader.

It is no longer about trusting leaders to choose what is right for us.  They've demonstrated that they are not willing nor capable of doing this.  Therefore, it can ONLY be up to you, me and others around us to make new choices.

Like it or not...responsbility and accountability is now falling on the shoulders of the masses...and we must now step up with the rest of the world in claiming what is rightfully ours while honouring all the rights of others to what is rightfully theirs also.  Bring free-energy devices to the world, and this will help eliminate many of the smaller conflicts that are related to basic survival.  This will in turn begin to empower other changes that will create a domino-effect of change.  Someone has to take the first step.

My first step is in being the 'rule-breaker' and the visionary...among those who are 'hard-wired' to help bring a new human and planetary consciousness.  This is who I AM.

Namaste, peace and love to all!

Geoffrey "Geoff" West
Lecturer/Facilitator, A Greenprint For LIFE, Galactic, Global and Inner Peace/Healing

Masters, Peace Education – UN-mandated University For Peace
Bachelors, Radio and Television
SKYPE:  greenprint4life