WHO Scientist: Swine Flu Pandemic Was “Completely Exaggerated”

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, Jan 28th, 2010

A scientist with the World Health Organisation has testified, during ongoing hearings in Strasbourg, France, that the swine flu pandemic was part of an overblown “angst campaign”, devised in conjunction with major drug companies to boost profits for vaccine manufacturers.

Professor Ulrich Keil, director of the WHO’s Collaborating Centre for Epidemiology, slammed the organization and its flu chief, Dr Keiji Fukuda while giving evidence before The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE).

“With SARS, with avian flu, always the predictions are wrong…Why don’t we learn from history?” Keil said. “It [swine flu] produced a lot of turmoil in the pubic and was completely exaggerated in contrast with all the really important matters we have to deal with in public health.”

The WHO adviser on heart disease, added that the decision had led to a “gigantic misallocation” of health budgets.

“We know the great killers are hypertension, smoking, high cholesterol, high body mass index, physical inactivity and low fruit and vegetable intake,” he said. “In spite of all these facts, governments instead wasted huge amounts of money by investing in pandemic scenarios whose evidence base is weak.”

PACE, a 47 nation body encompassing democratically elected members of parliament, will determine whether a “falsified pandemic” was declared by WHO in June 2009 on the advice of medical advisors, many of whom have close financial ties to the very pharmaceutical giants – GlaxoSmithKline, Roche, Novartis, – that produced the H1N1 vaccines.

It will also look into the controversy surrounding the fact that two shots were initially advised when it was later revealed that one dose was entirely suitable, as well as investigating concerns over hastily developed vaccines containing adjuvants.

Pharmaceutical companies are thought to have made a profit of somewhere in the region of $7.5-$10 billion on H1N1 vaccines, recouping the billions they had invested in researching and developing pandemic vaccines after the bird flu scares in 2006 and 2007.

The worldwide death toll from H1N1 is thought to be around 13,500, just over a third of the number who die from regular flu every year in the U.S. alone.

Heading the hearings is the former chairman of the Health Committee of PACE, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg. A former German lawmaker, a medical doctor and epidemiologist. Wodarg has referred to the swine flu pandemic as “one of the greatest medical scandals of the century.”

Wodarg has pointed out that the WHO softened the definition of a pandemic from an outbreak in several continents at once with an above-average death rate, to one where the spread of the disease is constant.

Just one month after changing the definition, and with just 144 people having died from H1N1, the flu was given the highest threat classification possible, a “stage-six pandemic alert”. By comparison, the mildest 20th Century pandemic killed a million people.

“I have never heard such a worldwide echo to a health political action,” Wodarg, an epidemiologist who formerly led the health committee for the Council of Europe, said at Tuesday’s hearing.

“It was stated in panic- stricken terms that this was a flu that could threaten humanity and a great number of humans could fall ill. This is why billions of dollars of medications were bought.” Wodarg said.

He added that the the change in definition “made it possible for the pharmaceutical industry to transform this opportunity into cash, under contracts which were mainly secret.”

“In my view, the WHO undertook an incomprehensible action, which cannot be justified by scientific evidence. The Council of Europe should investigate this to see how WHO can undertake this kind of dangerous nonsense,” said Dr Wodarg.

WHO’s flu chief, Dr Fukuda, insisted that its swine flu scientists do not have conflicts of interest owing to close links with pharmaceutical companies.

“Let me state clearly for the record – the influenza pandemic policies and responses recommended and taken by WHO were not improperly influenced by the pharmaceutical industry.” Fukuda told the inquiry.

He said those calling the epidemic fake were wrong and irresponsible.

PACE’s findings are expected to be announced January 29 and will likely be followed by an in-depth study and recommendations to European governments.

Sources for this story and further reading:

Swine Flu Didn’t Fly

Drug firms ‘drove swine flu pandemic warning to recoup £billions spent on research’

Research related links

1. International Hearings Begin On “Falsified” Swine Flu Pandemic
2. The ‘false’ pandemic: Drug firms cashed in on scare over swine flu, claims Euro health chief
3. Drug firms manipulated WHO into downgrading pandemic definition
4. European Parliament to Investigate WHO and “Pandemic” Scandal
5. Did leak from a laboratory cause swine flu pandemic?
6. Swine flu cases in Australia could force WHO to declare pandemic
7. Pharmaceutical companies accused of crying wolf over swine flu
8. Drug firms made ‘false H1N1 claims’
9. WHO getting close to declaring H1N1 pandemic
10. Scientist predicted swine flu in 2004
11. Mexican Swine Flu Pandemic Risk
12. Obama gets billions for ‘pandemic’ Swine Flu

European Parliament to Investigate WHO and “Pandemic” Scandal

by F. William Engdahl
Global Research, December 31, 2009

The Council of Europe member states will launch an inquiry in January 2010 on the influence of the pharmaceutical companies on the global swine flu campaign, focusing especially on extent of the pharma‘s industry’s influence on WHO. The Health Committee of the EU Parliament has unanimously passed a resolution calling for the inquiry. The step is a long-overdue move to public transparency of a “Golden Triangle” of drug corruption between WHO, the pharma industry and academic scientists that has permanently damaged the lives of millions and even caused death.

The parliament motion was introduced by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, former SPD Member of the German Bundestag and now Chairman of the European Parliament Health Committee. Wodarg is a medical doctor and epidemiologist, a specialist in lung disease and environmental medicine, who considers the current “pandemic” Swine Flu campaign of the WHO to be “one of the greatest medicine scandals of the Century.”[1]

The text of the resolution just passed by a sufficient number in the Council of Europe Parliament says among other things, “In order to promote their patented drugs and vaccines against flu, pharmaceutical companies influenced scientists and official agencies, responsible for public health standards to alarm governments worldwide and make them squander tight health resources for inefficient vaccine strategies and needlessly expose millions of healthy people to the risk of an unknown amount of side-effects of insufficiently tested vaccines. The "bird-flu"-campaign (2005/06) combined with the "swine-flu"-campaign seem to have caused a great deal of damage not only to some vaccinated patients and to public health-budgets, but to the credibility and accountability of important international health-agencies.”[2]

The Parliamentary inquiry will look into the issue of „falsified pandemic“ that was declared by WHO in June 2009 on the advice of its group of academic experts, SAGE, many of whose members have been documented to have intense financial ties to the same pharmaceutical giants such as GlaxoSmithKline, Roche, Novartis, who benefit from the production of drugs and untested H1N1 vaccines. They will investigate the influence of the pharma industry in creation of a worldwide campaign against the so-called H5N1 “Avian Flu” and H1N1 Swine Flu. The inquiry will be given “urgent” priority in the general assembly of the parliament.

In his official statement to the Committee, Wodarg criticized the influence of the pharma industry on scientists and officials of WHO, stating that it has led to the situation where “unnecessarily millions of healthy people are exposed to the risk of poorly tested vaccines,” and that, for a flu strain that is “vastly less harmful” than all previous flu epidemics.

Wodarg says the role of the WHO and its the pandemic emergency declaration in June needs to be the special focus of the European Parliamentary inquiry. For the first time, the WHO criteria for a pandemic was changed in April 2009 as the first Mexico cases were reported, to make not the actual risk of a disease but the number of cases of the disease basis to declare “Pandemic.” By classifying the swine flu as pandemic, nations were compelled to implement pandemic plans and also the purchase swine flu vaccines. Because WHO is not subject to any parliamentary control, Wodarg argues it is necessary for governments to insist on accountability. The inquiry will also to look at the role of the two critical agencies in Germany issuing guidelines on the pandemic, the Paul-Ehrlich and the Robert-Koch Institute.

Bravo!

F. William Engdahl is author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order. He may be contacted through his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.

Notes

1. Rainer Woratschka, Schweinerei mit der Grippe, Der Tagesspiegel, 16 December, 2009, accessed in http://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/international/Schweinegrippe-Europarat;art123,2976433.

2. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, Motion for a Resolution and a Recommendation: Faked Pandemics - a threat for health, accessed in http://www.wodarg.de/english/2948146.html.

EU/IMF Revolt: Greece, Iceland, Latvia May Lead the Way

Ellen Brown
Web of Debt
December 22, 2009

Europe’s small, debt-strapped countries could follow the lead of Argentina and simply walk away from their debts. That would shift the burden to the creditor countries, which could solve the problem merely by a change in accounting rules.

Total financial collapse, once a problem only for developing countries, has now come to Europe. The International Monetary Fund is imposing its “austerity measures” on the outer circle of the European Union, with Greece, Iceland and Latvia the hardest hit. But these are not your ordinary third world debtor supplicants. Historically, Iceland was settled by the Vikings, who successfully invaded Britain; Latvian tribes repulsed even the Vikings; and the Greeks conquered the whole Persian empire. If anyone can stand up to the IMF, these stalwart European warriors can.

Dozens of countries have defaulted on their debts in recent decades, the most recent being Dubai, which declared a debt moratorium on November 26, 2009. If the once lavishly-rich Arab emirate can default, more desperate countries can; and when the alternative is to destroy the local economy, it is hard to argue that they shouldn’t. That is particularly true when the creditors are largely responsible for the debtor’s troubles, and there are good grounds for arguing the debts are not owed. Greece’s troubles originated when low interest rates that were inappropriate for Greece were maintained to rescue Germany from an economic slump. And Iceland and Latvia have been saddled with responsibility for private obligations to which they were not parties. Economist Michael Hudson writes:

Read entire article

Research related links

1. Greece, Ireland May Leave Euro
2. Britain: the New Iceland
3. Address On Iceland &The IMF, Debt Moratorium, And Tobin Tax
4. Iceland Political Leader Calls For Debt Moratorium As Government Crumbles
5. Latvia’s government collapses
6. A near-riot and parliament besieged: Iceland boiling mad at credit crunch
7. Greece To Enforce Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccinations
8. CIA Preparing To Install Military Government In Greece?
9. Greece: We did not prepare for Iran war
10. General strike adds to protest woes in Greece
11. Failure to save East Europe will lead to worldwide meltdown
12. Bilderbergers to Meet in Greece

There’ll be nowhere to run from the new world government

Janet Daley
London Telegraph
Monday December 21, 2009

There is scope for debate – and innumerable newspaper quizzes – about who was the most influential public figure of the year, or which the most significant event. But there can be little doubt which word won the prize for most important adjective. 2009 was the year in which “global” swept the rest of the political lexicon into obscurity. There were “global crises” and “global challenges”, the only possible resolution to which lay in “global solutions” necessitating “global agreements”. Gordon Brown actually suggested something called a “global alliance” in response to climate change. (Would this be an alliance against the Axis of Extra-Terrestrials?)

Some of this was sheer hokum: when uttered by Gordon Brown, the word “global”, as in “global economic crisis”, meant: “It’s not my fault”. To the extent that the word had intelligible meaning, it also had political ramifications that were scarcely examined by those who bandied it about with such ponderous self-importance. The mere utterance of it was assumed to sweep away any consideration of what was once assumed to be the most basic principle of modern democracy: that elected national governments are responsible to their own people – that the right to govern derives from the consent of the electorate.

The dangerous idea that the democratic accountability of national governments should simply be dispensed with in favour of “global agreements” reached after closed negotiations between world leaders never, so far as I recall, entered into the arena of public discussion. Except in the United States, where it became a very contentious talking point, the US still holding firmly to the 18th-century idea that power should lie with the will of the people.

Nor was much consideration given to the logical conclusion of all this grandiose talk of global consensus as unquestionably desirable: if there was no popular choice about approving supranational “legally binding agreements”, what would happen to dissenters who did not accept their premises (on climate change, for example) when there was no possibility of fleeing to another country in protest? Was this to be regarded as the emergence of world government? And would it have powers of policing and enforcement that would supersede the authority of elected national governments? In effect, this was the infamous “democratic deficit” of the European Union elevated on to a planetary scale. And if the EU model is anything to go by, then the agencies of global authority will involve vast tracts of power being handed to unelected officials. Forget the relatively petty irritations of Euro‑bureaucracy: welcome to the era of Earth-bureaucracy, when there will be literally nowhere to run.

Full article here

Major Corporations Control European Union

David Cronin
The Guardian
November 27, 2009

It is little wonder that José Manuel Barroso is seldom seen without a grin on his face these days. For the European commission chief is one of the luckiest guys in international politics. First, the appointment of a low-profile Belgian as the EU’s first permanent president has meant that Barroso will be able to keep on behaving as if he is the most powerful man in Brussels. And now, it looks likely that Barroso won’t need to lose any sleep about assembling his new team of commissioners (even if they don’t formally start work until January, a few months later than originally expected)

Theoretically, it’s still possible that MEPs will cause him difficulties as they did in 2004, when they objected to the nomination of Rocco Buttiglione as justice commissioner because the Italian equated homosexuality with sin. The signals from the European parliament have been that if it wanted to embarrass Barroso this time around, it would take issue with the grotesque gender imbalance in the EU executive. However, the probability of this happening has lessened in the past few days as the final composition of his 27-strong team emerged. It features nine women – one more than the outgoing commission.

Read entire article

EU Hands Over Water to Corporations

Reuters
August 7, 2009

French water distribution firm Lyonnaise des Eaux, a unit of GDF Suez (GSZ.PA) won permission from the European Commission on Wednesday to acquire six firms active in water collection, treatment and supply in France.

Lyonnaise des Eaux (LDE) is to buy shares held by Veolia Eau-Compagnie Générale des Eaux (Veolia Eau) in six subsidiaries owned jointly with Veolia Eau (VIE.PA).

The executive arm of the 27-nation European Union said in a statement that its investigation had revealed the proposed deal would not harm competition in the markets concerned.

Read entire article

The Iceland Conspiracy

aangirfan 
Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Iceland appears to have vast oil and gas reserves in the Arctic.

Iceland is in a strategically important position.

Most Icelanders have, in the past, opposed getting tied up with the European Community and NATO.

Iceland has no standing army.

In 2002-03, Iceland’s three major banks were privatized ‘in a series of insider dealings’.

These banks then went under ‘owing nearly $100 billions.’

In April 2009, Iceland’s election was won by the ‘centre-left’ which wants to join the European Community.

Professor Michael Hudson, at Global Research, on 29 April 2009, wrote:

In the Wake of Economic Collapse. Iceland’s Election: It’s not about Left and Right

Among the points made:

1. The election in Iceland, in April 2009, was not about ‘right’ versus ‘left’.

It was largely about reckless banks.

The neoliberals wanted banks privatised; crooks were able to wreck the financial system.

2. Some voters want Iceland to join the European Community in order to get a more stable currency (the euro).

If Iceland joins the EC it will most likely lose control over its North Atlantic fishing waters and its taxes will most likely rise.

3. Iceland is a small country and may be ripe for plucking.

For many voters the idea of joining the European Union is ‘an attractive fantasy’.

Reykjavík by Wurzeller

4. The alternative is for Iceland to change its bank rules and ‘reverse the giveaways made in times past to politically connected insiders.’

5. Countries such as Romania and Bulgaria voted to join the EU in the early 1990s.

The EU leadership apparently turned a blind eye to ‘the Soviet-style kleptocrats who dominated these economies’.

6. The case of Latvia and its Baltic neighbors ‘is instructive’

Much like Iceland, they were burdened with mortgage debts denominated in foreign currency.

Joaqim Almunia of the European Commission, in a letter of 26 January2009, to Latvia’s Prime Minister, spelt out the terms on which Europe would bail out the foreign banks operating in Latvia – at Latvia’s own expense.

He was clear that Latvia was not to use EU loans to develop its economy or to lighten the tax burden, but only to pay off debts to its creditors in the West (mainly Scandinavian banks) and to buy imports from them.

This leaves Latvia ‘in much the position of a nation defeated in war and having to pay reparations.’

7. “Instead of helping the post-Soviet nations develop self-reliant economies, the West viewed them as economic oysters to be broken up, indebting them to extract interest charges and capital gains, leaving them empty shells.”

Iceland might end up replacing “a domestic kleptocracy with foreign economic occupiers.”

8. “The failure of EU tutelage in the Baltics and Central Europe suggests that Iceland would do best to set about solving its own problems, pursuing its national interest while cleaning up the residue from its disastrous neoliberal experiment.”

VIDEO OF PROTESTS WHEN ICELAND JOINED NATO IN 1949

Reportedly, Iceland borrowed too much money.

Might someone have wanted to weaken Iceland and make it easier to control?

1. In 2005, Icelandic media reports alleged that CIA planes had landed in Iceland at least 67 times since 2001. (BBC - Nordic states probe ‘CIA flights’)

2. Bobby Fischer arrived in Iceland in March 2005.

Bobby Fischer “spent his final years raging against an Icelandic bank and ‘the filthy dirty CIA-controlled Icelandic government’“. (Cached)

3. According to The Reykjavik Grapevine:

In a 9 page classified CIA document called “Current Situation in Iceland” published 18 October 1949 and declassified 23 January 1978, the CIA makes political observations regarding security, the communist threat and the economic status of the country:

“Icelanders are opposed to the establishment of foreign military bases on their island in time of peace, but would probably be willing to receive NATO forces if war or the threat of war made Iceland’s involvement seem imminent.

 

“Solely because of its strategic location, Iceland has been drawn into the current of world affairs, albeit unwillingly and hesitantly. Icelanders desire only to be left alone, but it is as clear to them as to others that their island will not be left alone in war; perhaps not even in peace.”

4. 21 August 2008: “Iceland is to join the growing rush of countries aiming to tap into the potentially vast oil and gas reserves of the Arctic. Reykjavik is hoping to attract investment from some of the world’s biggest oil companies as it finalises the terms for its first offshore licences.” (Iceland to offer offshore drilling licences in race for Arctic’s …)

Drilling licences for big untapped oilfields that Iceland shares with Norway were last month offered to prospectors and oil companies. US and Russian companies are sure to be interested. (Nato fears as Iceland turns to Moscow for £3bn loan Mail Online)

5. Jon Asgeir Johannesson … “there were wild allegations in a Miami courtroom in 2003 about exotic parties on a yacht.” (Business big shot: Jon Asgeir Johannesson - Times Online)

Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson: The Nazi Roots Of The EU

Youtube
Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

Top Nazis Planned EU-Style Fourth Reich

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, May 11, 2009

A writer who was collecting material for a fictional book based around the premise that top Nazis, seeking to preserve their power at the end of the second world war, conspired to create a Fourth Reich under the auspices of the European Union, actually discovered documents proving the plot to be true.

In a Daily Mail piece, Adam Lebor reveals how he uncovered US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128, also known as The Red House Report, which details how top Nazis secretly met at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944 and, knowing Germany was on the brink of military defeat, conspired to create a Fourth Reich - a pan-European economic empire based around a European common market.

Top Nazi industrialists were ordered by SS Obergruppenfuhrer Dr Scheid to set up front companies abroad and pose as democrats in order to achieve economic penetration and lay the foundations for the re-emergence of the Nazi party.

“The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration,” writes Lebor.

Wealthy Nazi industrialists like Alfried Krupp of Krupp Industries and Friedrich Flick, as well as front companies like BMW, Siemens and Volkswagen, set about the task of building a new pan-European business empire. According to historian Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, an adviser to Jewish former slave labourers, “For many leading industrial figures close to the Nazi regime, Europe became a cover for pursuing German national interests after the defeat of Hitler….The continuity of the economy of Germany and the economies of post-war Europe is striking. Some of the leading figures in the Nazi economy became leading builders of the European Union.”

Banking titan Hermann Abs, who joined board of Deutsche Bank during the rise of Nazis, also sat on the supervisory board of I.G. Farben, the company that made the Zyklon B gas used to kill concentration camp victims. “Abs was put in charge of allocating Marshall Aid - reconstruction funds - to German industry. By 1948 he was effectively managing Germany’s economic recovery,” writes Lebor.

“Crucially, Abs was also a member of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union.”

The European League for Economic Co-operation developed policies for European integration that almost mirrored those proposed by Nazis just years previously.

In his book “Europe’s Full Circle,” Rodney Atkinson provides a list of policies proposed by Nazis and their similarity to today’s European Union.

• Europaische Wirtshaftsgemeinschaft
• European Economic Community
• European Currency System
• European Exchange Rate Mechanism
• Europabank (Berlin)
• European Central Bank (Frankfurt)
• European Regional Principle
• Committee of the Regions
• Common Labour Policy
• Social Chapter
• Economic and Trading Agreements
• Single Market

“Is it possible that the Fourth Reich those Nazi industrialists foresaw has, in some part at least, come to pass?” asks Lebor.

“These three typewritten pages are a reminder that today’s drive towards a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich - an economic rather than military imperium.”

As we have highlighted in the past, Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

The foundations for the EU and ultimately the Euro single currency were laid by the secretive Bilderberg Group in the mid-1950’s. Bilderberg’s owned leaked documents prove that the agenda to create a European common market and a single currency were formulated by Bilderberg in 1955. One of the group’s principle founders was H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a former Nazi SS officer.

But the ideological framework for the European Union goes back even further, to the 1940’s when top Nazi economists and academics outlined the plan for a single European economic community, an agenda that was duly followed after the end of the second world war.

In his 1940 book The European Community, Nazi Economics Minister and war criminal Walther Funk wrote about the need to create a “Central European Union” and “European Economic Area” and for fixed exchange rates, stating “No nation in Europe can achieve on its own the highest level of economic freedom which is compatible with all social requirements…The formation of very large economic areas follows a natural law of development….interstate agreements in Europe will control [economic forces generally]…There must be a readiness to subordinate one’s own interests in certain cases to those of [the EC].”

Funk’s co-authors echoed his sentiments. Nazi academic Heinrich Hunke wrote, “Classic national economy..is dead…community of fate which is the European economy…fate and extent of European co-operation depends on a new unity economic plan”.

Fellow Nazi Gustav Koenig observed, “We have a real European Community task before us…I am convinced that this Community effort will last beyond the end of the war.”

In 1940, Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels ordered the creation of the “large-scale economic unification of Europe,” believing that “in fifty years’ time [people would] no longer think in terms of countries.” Just 53 years later, the European Union in its current form was established.

Other top Nazis who called for the creation of a pan-European federal economic superstate include
Ribbentrop, Quisling and Seyss-Inquart, who spoke of “The new Europe of solidarity and co-operation among all its people… will find…rapidly increasing prosperity once national economic boundaries are removed.”

Such rhetoric would not look out of place at a present day Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission or CFR confab.

The Nazis killed people who spoke out against the Third Reich, whereas the EU has implemented an altogether more efficient solution - simply kill their free speech instead.

A Dutch MP was recently refused entry to Britain because his political opinions were deemed offensive under EU laws. Euro MP’s have consistently attempted to ban the “dangerous and unregulated blogosphere” in an attempt to shut down free speech on the Internet. Under the 1999 ruling of the European Court Of Justice (case 274/99), it is illegal to criticize the EU and the EU is on a mission to outlaw any national political parties that do not pander to the European federal superstate agenda.

Most of the individuals who hold the reigns of power in the European Union are not Nazis, indeed, they probably believe themselves to be fair-minded liberals working for the “greater good”. However, the European Union by its very nature is totalitarian, because it seeks to remove power from national governments accountable to their electorate and centralize it into the hands of supra-national entities that are accountable to nobody but themselves. It also seeks to remove the right of free speech for anyone in a position of influence who criticizes this agenda.

The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.

This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which will again be put before Irish voters later this year despite them already rejecting it in a national referendum, which prevented the treaty from being enforced.

Brain scanning may be used in security checks

Owen Bowcott
The Guardian
May 11, 2009

Distinctive brain patterns could become the latest subject of biometric scanning after EU researchers successfully tested technology to verify identities for security checks.

The experiments, which also examined the potential of heart rhythms to authenticate individuals, were conducted under an EU-funded inquiry into biometric systems that could be deployed at airports, borders and in sensitive locations to screen out terrorist suspects.

Another series of tests fitted a “sensing seat” to a truck to record each driver’s characteristic seated posture in an attempt to spot whether commercial vehicles had been hijacked.

Details of the Humabio (Human Monitoring and Authentication using Biodynamic Indicators and Behaviourial Analysis) pilot projects have been published amid further evidence of biometric technologies penetrating everyday lives.

Read entire article

Leaked 1955 Bilderberg Docs Outline Plan For Single European Currency

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet.com

Friday, May 8, 2009

Leaked documents from the 1955 Bilderberg Group conference held in Germany discuss the agenda to create a European Union and a single EU currency, decades before they were introduced, disproving once again debunkers who claim that Bilderberg has no influence over world events.

	The full document can be read by clicking the above image (the password is ‘dynbase’).

Leaked papers from the meeting which took place from September 23-25 1955 at the Grand Hotel Sonnenbichl in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, West Germany, were released by the Wikileaks website yesterday.

As we first reported in 2003,  a BBC investigative team were allowed to access Bilderberg files which confirmed that the EU and the Euro were the brainchild of Bilderberg. They were probably reading from the same documents that were released by Wikileaks.

It was only last month that Belgian viscount and current Bilderberg-chairman Étienne Davignon braggedthat Bilderberg helped create the Euro by first introducing the policy agenda for a single currency in the early 1990’s.

However, the documents show that the agenda to create a European common market and a single currency go back decades earlier.

The summary report of the 1955 meeting talks of the “Pressing need to bring the German people, together with the other peoples of Europe, into a common market.”

The document also outlines the plan, “To arrive in the shortest possible time at the highest degree of integration, beginning with a common European market.”

Just two years later, in 1957, the first incarnation of the European Economic Community (EEC) was born, which comprised of a single market between Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. The EEC gradually enlarged over the next few decades until it became the European Community, one of the three pillars of the European Union, which was officially created in 1993.

The 1955 Bilderberg summary outlines a consensus that, “It might be better to proceed through the development of a common market by treaty rather than by the creation of new high authorities.” The EEC was duly created via the Treaty of Rome, which was signed on 25 March 1957.

The same process is still being followed to this day with the Lisbon Treaty, which hands over vast swathes of national sovereignty to the EU by means of the consent of Presidents and Prime Ministers of European countries, rather than by the arbitrary creation of new authorities, a method that would more obviously lay bare the fact that the creation of a federal EU superstate is totalitarian by its very nature.

Even so, debunkers will probably still try and claim that the idea of a common European market was floating around in the early 1950’s and that Bilderberg were merely debating contemporary political ideas.

However, the same cannot be said for the single European currency, which wasn’t even introduced in the form of notes and coins until January 2002, having been first codified in the 1992 Maastricht Treaty. The documents prove that Bilderberg members were pushing for its introduction nearly 40 years earlier.

“A European speaker expressed concern about the need to achieve a common currency, and indicated that in his view this necessarily implied the creation of a central political authority,” states the summary document.

True to form, the single European currency, the Euro, was not introduced until after the creation of a central political authority - the EU itself.

The document also stresses, “The necessity to bring the German people into a common European market as quickly as possible,” adding that the future was in danger without a “United Europe”.

We also learn that, “A United States participant confirmed that the United States had not weakened in its enthusiastic support for the idea of integration, although there was considerable diffidence in America as to how this enthusiasm should be manifested. Another United States participant urged his European friends to go ahead with the unification of Europe with less emphasis on ideological considerations and, above all, to be practical and work fast.”

Despite the plethora of manifestly provable examples of where Bilderberg’s agenda has later played out in actual policies and geopolitical developments on the world stage, establishment media debunkers still scoff and sneer at independent researchers who dare claim that 150 of the world’s most influential powerbrokers meeting in secret to discuss the future of the planet might equate to something more than an informal talking shop, calling such assertions “conspiracy theories”.

Indeed, the sheer stupidity of debunkers to suggest that an event that attracts the titans of government, industry, banking, business and academia, at which the most pressing global issues of the day are vigorously discussed under the cloak of a mutually agreed media blackout, has no bearing on future world events, is the most laughable “conspiracy theory” ever uttered.

Bilderberg’s 2009 agenda has already been leaked before their May 14-17 meeting in Vouliagmeni, Greece. According to investigative journalist Daniel Estulin, one of Bilderberg’s aims is to smear anti-Lisbon Treaty activists and politicians by planting derogatory stories in the media, enabling them to silence opposition to an EU federal superstate that Bilderberg has been carefully cultivating since their very first meetings in the 1950’s - a fact, not a conspiracy theory, proven by Bilderberg’s own internal documents.

Iceland to be fast-tracked into the EU

Neil Comment: This is a wonderful example of The Hegelian Dialectics which can me summed up as: Problem, Reaction, Solution (Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis).

Create the problem. Get the reaction. Supply the solution!

Plan for cash-strapped state to become member by 2011

• Ian Traynor in Brussels, additional reporting by Valur Gunnarsson in Reykjavik
• The Guardian, Friday 30 January 2009

Iceland will be put on a fast track to joining the European Union to rescue the small Arctic state from financial collapse amid rising expectations that it will apply for membership within months, senior policy-makers in Brussels and Reykjavik have told the Guardian.

The European commission is preparing itself for a membership bid, depending on the outcome of a snap general election expected in May. An application would be viewed very favourably in Brussels and the negotiations, which normally take many years, would be fast-forwarded to make Iceland the EU's 29th member in record time, probably in 2011.

Olli Rehn, the European commissioner in charge of enlargement, said: "The EU prefers two countries joining at the same time rather than individually. If Iceland applies shortly and the negotiations are rapid, Croatia and Iceland could join the EU in parallel. On Iceland, I hope I will be busier. It is one of the oldest democracies in the world and its strategic and economic positions would be an asset to the EU."

Rehn's support for swift Icelandic membership was echoed by senior European diplomats in Brussels. "We would like to see Iceland join the EU," said one. The current and next holders of the EU presidency, the Czechs and then the Swedes, are also strong supporters of EU enlargement and will deploy their agenda-setting powers to help Iceland.

The conservative government in Reykjavik, in power for 18 years, collapsed this week, the first government to fall as a result of the financial meltdown which has wrecked the Icelandic currency, the krona, wiped out savings and pensions, required a massive IMF bailout, sparked unprecedented riots in Reykjavik, and forced the formation of a caretaker centre-left government until new elections can be held, probably on 9 May.

EU membership will be a central theme of the election campaign, with the social democrats - the senior partner in the coalition interim government with the anti-EU Left Greens - pushing to join the EU and to swap the krona for the single European currency as soon as possible.

"The krona is dead. We need a new currency. The only serious option is the euro," said a senior Icelandic official.

The financial disaster in Iceland has triggered extreme volatility among voters. While there is support for joining the euro as a currency safe haven to protect Iceland from a battering by the markets, there is less enthusiasm for full EU membership, particularly among those in the vital fishing sector. This factor has fuelled talk of "unilateral euroisation", meaning that Iceland might join or use the single currency without being admitted to the EU. This is dismissed in Brussels as nonsense.

Though deeply indebted and in dire straits, the Icelandic economy is minuscule compared with the main EU member states and therefore unlikely to prove a destabilising force. Iceland has already secured a multibillion pound IMF loan and is unlikely to prove a drain on the EU budget.

But joining the euro is a different question. Despite growing sentiment in Iceland that Brussels and the single currency might be the remedy to the worst crisis the country has seen, the road to the euro is likely to be fraught with problems because of the strict rules governing the eurozone under the Maastrict treaty. Although the economic and financial crisis has seen a loosening of the single currency rulebook, current Icelandic interest rates of 18% would pose big problems for mainstream single currency members.

Already Christian Democrats in the Netherlands, the party of the prime minister, are coupling their hostility with Turkey's membership of the EU to criticism of Iceland's ambitions. Such hostility might increase but senior figures in the European commission believe that Reykjavik brings more assets than liabilities to the EU.