Saturday, January 23, 2010

How to Save Fuel by Learning to Drive Your Car Like Children Drive Their Bicycle

Forward thinking or anticipation is the crux of good driving skills. However many of us are not taught that when we learn to drive.

Merely knowing how to steer is not the real test of driving. The real test is to drive a car as well as children learn to drive their bicycles. Yes, drive your car as children drive their bicycles! You may be pondering how the two are connected. But consider this…

From where does the bicycle get all its energy? You know that. The bicycle gets the energy that sets it in motion from your legs. As you learn to ride a bicycle at first you may pay particular attention to keep your balance. But bike riding becomes a second nature as time passes by.

Do you remember when you where younger how you let your bicycle roll from a distance and how you automatically tried to use up the least amount of energy to cover the distance?

Why can we not do the same as effortlessly with cars? Maybe because the mind that guides you through an efficient bike ride does not have to put up with anything you could call an ‘accelerator ache’ just as it has to deal with leg aches it tries to spare the body.

However with the rising fuel prices, just try calculating the fuel and the consequent money you waste because of rash driving and you can bet your bottom dollar that the missing ‘accelerator ache’ will develop soon enough.

Napoleon Miles is an expert author mainly interested in the automotive industry. If you enjoyed reading this article and wish to learn more about how you can further save on fuel please go to Water Fuel Guides Reviewed

Alternative Fuel Sources - We Need Cheaper, Greener Fuel!

As responsible human beings it is our moral duty that we leave this world a better place than we got it from our ancestors. There is an ardent need for saving the environment that is being polluted by emissions given out by the extensive use of gasoline.

The conventional and traditional fuel sources are becoming more and more expensive to extract and their indiscriminate use in the past century has resulted in their depletion. Alarm bells have already started ringing that these storehouses of natural fuel sources will reach critically low levels and precipitate a crisis much earlier than we think.

However there are promising discoveries that give hope that before any crisis occurs, mankind would have perfected and commercialized alternate sources of fuel that will be eco- friendly and affordable too.

Bio-diesel is one such alternate fuel source that is extracted from plants. Also known as E 85, bio-diesel is partly renewable. Its contents of 15% gasoline and 85% ethanol mean that it is at least better than using pure gasoline.

Although such alternate fuel sources like E 85 score above gasoline, they still pollute and require a vast amount of corn to be grown which in turn translates into availability of lesser land for growing food for people.

Presently, electric cars seem to be the best alternate fuel source that we have, if we are to conserve our natural fuel sources. They are efficient because all of the electricity that they need can be generated at one central location. It is a much better option than consuming petroleum derivatives and polluting more by using small and inefficient combustion motors. Electricity can be produced in any manner that suits the needs on a particular location depending on the resources it has. One can use coal, hydro-electric or wind to produce this electricity that is required for electric cars.

The ultimate alternate fuel source, of course is your own legs on bike peddles. Peddle power is becoming increasingly popular as none of the other alternate fuel sources has completely panned out. Bio-diesel is not widely available and the power that the electric cars allow has not been perfected as yet. The bike is really a flawless machine for short to medium commutes. You will be in better shape, save some money, and do the environment a favor as well.

So, before switching on the ignition of the vehicle, ask yourself if it would not be easier to walk or ride.

Save fuel costs

Following are some useful tips for saving on fuel costs for your car -
    Check the air pressure on your tires:  Keep the air pressure on all the 4 wheels at the recommended levels. Under-inflated tires are a drag on your fuel efficiency.
    Check your speed: Most cars are built for operating within 60-70 kilometers per hour. If you don't maintain this range and drive over this range, then you are decreasing the fuel efficiency of your car.
    Use of Cruise Control: Use cruise control while driving on the highways or on long stretches. This helps keep your fuel consumption at a lower level by keeping your speed constant.
    Reduce Idling: If you are in an idle position for more than 15-20 seconds, then idling uses more fuel than it would take to restart the engine. If you need to stop your car for more than 15-20 seconds, then it would be better to switch off the engine.
    Plan your trip in advance: Plan your trip before hand and use a good GPS system so that you can use the shortest routes and also use less congested routes.
    Watch the weight you are carrying: Remove un-necessary items from your car if you don't need them. Heavier the car, more fuel it needs to accelerate.
    Maintenance: Keep your car in top condition by regular repairs and maintenance as per schedule. This helps in saving fuel.
    Carpooling: Try the option of carpooling with your colleagues or your neighbors. Rotate carpooling amongst yourselves.
    Public Transit or bikes: Try using the public transit or bike for short trips, like going to a corner store etc.
    Try working from home: Check with your employer if they have an option for you to work from home at least for one or two days in a week.
    Breaking: Don't be hard on your brakes. Hard breaking causes you to lose on fuel efficiency
    Be wise while using additional attachments such as battery chargers,air conditioners etc, these suck power and hence require more fuel.

Extreme Bike - Choosing a Great Bike for Your Needs

Churn the bike a hell of a bumpy ride!

The mud flying, cheering spectators, catching some air just a few of the benefits of heart-pounding a dirt bike. All children dream of owning your own bike and dirt can not find that adrenaline too early. There are very few men in the world who longed for the excitement of not traveling, waiting until the next exit. Some things to consider when choosing your new enthusiasm and finder why we are offering this book for you! To make the best decisions on his bike and relax and have fun! Therefore, relax and learn what you need to know about making a purchase that will leave you with a smile!

What do you look for in a Honda

When you buy a dirt bike is important to put that time to research your purchase. The Internet is a good place to start searching for tips on how to buy a dirt bike with the manufacturer assessment model. It is important factor in the experience of passengers is choosing between two or four stroke engine. A two-stroke engine has more power and a lightweight but the evidence was compromised. So if you're talking to a horseman who has no experience in words, the throttle control, the result is that they learn it the hard way - injuring themselves and their bikes, a double whammy in your checkbook.

In a four-stroke engine to see dirt bike is sturdy and durable, perfect for a rookie pilot who is likely to be familiar with the term crash and burn. The four-stroke engine will also have better fuel efficiency. Just remember, if your child wants to ride some wicked jumps and Wheelies, a bicycle into a four-stroke engines tend to be heavier and can make things more difficult. It's better to pay more attention to the appearance of height and ability to mount a higher cc.

The largest cc bike that gives it a strong dirt, but heavy and probably not the ideal bike for a novice rider. Dirt bikes, obviously, have lower CCS than a motorcycle, usually less than 500 CCS, and it is advisable to ensure that young runners do not travel more extremely conservative who 50ccs or 85ccs pick up some size and experience. And then your child grow and get better in Bicycle earth can move them. You will learn more about the mini dirt bikes and continue to read.


Sometimes buying a new dirt bike can be costly. A new brand of high-powered dirt bike that can run up to $ 8,000 - $ 11,000. The key advantage of buying a new dirt bike is aware that it is not used or abused. There is no need to worry about how many people the owner had a bicycle or the way it deals before buying. This is the new manufacturer. Traders and manufacturers to provide warranty repairs, engine, transmission and creation. However, for some people, especially if your budget is tight, or buy a bike for a rookie driver, which uses a dirt bike may be the best option.

Be sure to carefully inspect the dirt bike before the delivery of money. Time the seller is looking to unload the bike without putting a lot (if any) money in the restoration. You may think you are getting a huge agreement on a used dirt bike, but probably not if you factor in the costs of spare parts.

Carefully examine the framework for the hair cracks, rust, holes or something more unusual. There are also more than a dirt bike used beyond the inspection of the evaluation of the body and chassis. Do not be shy to ask questions about maintenance, and the previous owners or if dirt bike is not excessive or abused. Asked things like the frequency with which it is mounted on a bicycle, if stored inside or outside and how often you changed the air filter or delivery of oil. Also, ask specifically if the bike is always used for racing purposes of any length of time, which means that the machine was tired. If you stumble around their response or say something like this is the change of oil in the engine of 4-stroke engine for 1,000 miles, it may be best to continue their search elsewhere. Such as how questions are answered will tell you more about what kind of bike ownership question and that may happen in terms of internal transmission and clutch. It's better to learn these things before disposing of your money!

Maybe bring a friend or acquaintance who knows a thing or two on bicycles to collect all be absent. A bicycle can come up in his hand as well. The bike will to stand and bearings can be controlled. Company seize the wheel and try to wiggle them. If there is movement of the bearings are bad, and is likely to need replacement. Try to rotate the front and rear wheels as well. If there is wobbling is an indication that the blade is folded.

Do not buy a dirt bike that is not allowed to test ride! You must ensure that all the arts in the work for you to know that there are no problems with shipping. If you feel you can be excessive vibration through his arms and shoulders is a sign bearing the problem. When you're riding the bike to hear strange sounds like any slap or even as these may indicate problems or cylinder piston. Make sure that the suspension did not link the problem of bouncing up and down in the seat. Listen out loud squeaking or feel that the suspension is sticky when it's big.

The important thing to remember when buying a used dirt bike from a private party has no guarantees and no returns, then detailed in the questions and reviewing the bike before spending money!



For your Bikes needs and Hub kits parts. We have an online store of electric bikes and electric bike hub kits and parts for you to check out. Please visit http://www.electricbicyclecenter.com/

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Protect our Oil Supply

The costs of running America have been rising with higher oil prices. Trucks that ship food products across the nation are paying more for diesel fuel. This means consumers will also be paying higher prices for food. Keeping a home warm in the winter, and cool in the summer, now costs extra money. And those costs will also be going up. Filling a twenty gallon automobile tank will soon cost eighty dollars. People are getting angry and they want our government to do something about it. That is what the war in Iraq is about.

It doesn’t take a financial wizard to know what will happen to the American economy and its people if oil prices go up much further. We would experience an inflation that has never been witnessed before. Our dollars will buy much less food and our heating and cooling costs will become unaffordable. Bicycles will have to be used by workers who couldn’t afford the expenses of getting to their job. It sounds like a nightmare but all these problems and much more will happen if energy costs keep rising.

The Middle Eastern countries are sitting on more than half of the known oil reserves; fortunately it is controlled by fair minded business people that keep the price of oil as low as possible. But if these oil supplies would ever fall into the hands of radical politicians they would charge as much as they can get for the oil. It would make the radical politicians rich and destroy the economies of the rest of the world. This would be bad news and it must not be allowed to happen.

Radical Arab politicians are calling for unity. They want to establish an Iranian Empire that would encompass the oil rich nations of the Middle East. Only a fool can be blind to their motives. They promise their poor followers riches beyond their wildest dreams. They say it would be possible if they could own the oil fields. They are liars because if successful these politicians would follow their Arab brothers who keep the billions in oil profits for themselves. The poor would remain poor.

It is the duty of world leaders to prevent the oil fields in the Middle East from falling into the hands of radical politicians. If they let that happen they are neglecting their responsibilities to the people. There are those that say that we should get out of the area and let the radical politicians take possession of the oil fields. I am sure that our wise leaders would never let that happen. We must be prepared to stay in the area until the price of oil is sure to be affordable.
melpol

Untapped: the Scramble for Africa's Oil

The following is an excerpt from the book Untapped
by John Ghazvinian
Published by Harcourt, Inc.; April 2007;$25.00US; 978-0-15-101138-4
Copyright © 2007 John Ghazvinian

Since 1990 alone, the petroleum industry has invested more than $20 billion in exploration and production activity in Africa . A further $50 billion will be spent between now and the end of the decade, the largest investment in the continent's history -- and around one-third of it will come from the United States . Three of the world's largest oil companies -- the British-Dutch consortium Shell, France's Total, and America's Chevron -- are spending 15 percent, 30 percent, and 35 percent respectively of their global exploration and production budgets in Africa. Chevron alone is in the process of rolling out $20 billion in African projects over a five-year period.

The overwhelming majority of this new drilling activity has taken place in the so-called "deep water" and the "ultradeep" of the Gulf of Guinea , the roughly 90-degree bend along the west coast of Africa that can best be visualized as the continent's "armpit." Its littoral zone passes through the territorial waters of a dozen countries, from Ivory Coast in the northwest down to Angola in the south, and a good deal of its geology shares the characteristics that have made Nigeria a prolific producer for decades. Indeed, a number of unexpectedly productive fields have been discovered in the Gulf over the past decade. But although the Gulf of Guinea has lately been sub-Saharan Africa 's most exciting region for the oil industry, it is hardly the only "prospective" part of the continent (to borrow the industry term). The parched semideserts of southern Chad and southern Sudan have recently added hundreds of thousands of barrels a day to global markets, and a growing chorus of voices is now touting the East African margin as the industry's "next big thing."

But be it east or west, jungle or desert, it is a safe bet that where the drillers go, the politicians, strategists, and lobbyists are not far behind. Washington in particular has taken a keen interest in Africa 's growing significance as an oil-producing region since the headline discoveries of the late 1990s. In December 2000 the National Intelligence Council, an internal CIA think tank, published a report in which it declared unambiguously that sub-Saharan Africa "will play an increasing role in global energy markets," and predicted that the region would provide 25 percent of North American oil imports by 2015, up from the 15 percent or so at the time. (This would put Africa well ahead of Saudi Arabia as a source of oil for the United States .) In May 2001 a controversial and fairly secretive energy task force put together by U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney declared in its report: " West Africa is expected to be one of the fastest-growing sources of oil and gas for the American market."

In the following months, a group of congressmen, lobbyists, and defense strategists came together under the umbrella of the African Oil Policy Initiative Group, and began preaching the message that the Gulf of Guinea was the new Persian Gulf, and that it should become a strategic priority for the United States, even to the point of requiring an expanded military presence. A series of well-placed articles in the American media followed, some breathlessly announcing the inauguration of a new Middle East off the shores of Africa . Before long, the influential Center for Strategic and International Studies had chimed in with a couple of reports, its most recent, in July 2005, claiming that "an exceptional mix of U.S. interests is at play in West Africa's Gulf of Guinea ."

During these years, a number of prominent lawmakers in Washington began getting excited about the possibility of shifting some of America 's oil dependence from the Middle East to Africa . One former senior official charged with African affairs recalls Kansas Senator Sam Brownback rushing up to him one afternoon in October 2002, positively glowing with excitement. "What do you think about bases in Africa ?" Brownback asked. "Wouldn't that be great?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But does Africa measure up to the hype? After all, the entire continent is believed to contain, at best, 10 percent of the world's proven oil reserves, making it a minnow swimming in an ocean of seasoned sharks. Africa is unlikely ever to "replace" the Middle East or any other major oil-producing region. So why the song and dance? Why all the goose bumps? Why do so many influential people in Washington let themselves get so carried away when they talk about African oil?

The answer has very little to do with geology. Africa 's significance as an oil "play," to borrow the industry lingo, lies beyond the number of barrels that may or may not be buried under its cretaceous rock. Instead, what makes the African oil boom interesting to energy security strategists in both Washington and Europe (and, increasingly, Beijing ) is a series of serendipitous and unrelated factors that, together, tell a story of unfolding opportunity.

To begin with, one of the more attractive attributes of Africa 's oil boom is the quality of the oil itself. The variety of crude found in the Gulf of Guinea is known in industry parlance as "light" and "sweet," meaning it is viscous and low in sulfur, and therefore easier and cheaper to refine than, say, Middle Eastern crude, which tends to be lacking in lower hydrocarbons and is therefore very "sticky." This is particularly appealing to American and European refineries, which have to contend with strict environmental regulations that make it difficult to refine heavier and sourer varieties of crude without running up costs that make the entire proposition worthless.

Then there is the geographic accident of Africa 's being almost entirely surrounded by water, which significantly cuts transport-related costs and risks. The Gulf of Guinea , in particular, is well positioned to allow speedy transport to the major trading ports of Europe and North America . Existing sea-lanes can be used for quick, cheap delivery, so there is no need to worry about the Suez Canal , for instance, or to build expensive pipelines through unpredictable countries. This may seem a minor point, until you look at Central Asia, where the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, stretching from Azerbaijan through Georgia and into Turkey , and intended to deliver Caspian crude into the Mediterranean, had to navigate a minefield of Middle East politics, antiglobalization protests, and red tape before it could be opened. African oil faces none of those issues. It is simply loaded onto a tanker at the point of production and begins its smooth, unmolested journey on the high seas, arriving just days later in Shreveport , Southampton, or Le Havre .

A third advantage, from the perspective of the oil companies, is that Africa offers a tremendously favorable contractual environment. Unlike in, say, Saudi Arabia, where the state-owned oil company Saudi Aramco has a monopoly on the exploration, production, and distribution of the country's crude oil, most sub-Saharan African countries operate on the basis of so-called production-sharing agreements, or PSAs. In these arrangements, a foreign oil company is awarded a license to look for petroleum on the condition that it assume the up-front costs of exploration and production. If oil is discovered in that block, the oil company will share the revenues with the host government, but only after its initial costs have been recouped. PSAs are generally offered to impoverished countries that would never be able to amass either the technical expertise or the billions in capital investment required to drill for oil themselves. For the oil company, a relatively small up-front investment can quickly turn into untold billions in profits.

Yet another strategic benefit, particularly from the perspective of American politicians, is that, until recently, with the exception of Nigeria , none of the oil-producing countries of sub-Saharan Africa had belonged to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Thus they have not been subject to the strict limits on output OPEC imposes on its members in an attempt to keep the price of oil artificially high. The more non-OPEC oil that comes onto the global market, the more difficult it becomes for OPEC countries to sell their crude at high prices, and the lower the overall price of oil. Put more simply, if new reserves are discovered in Venezuela , they have very little effect on the price of oil because Venezuela 's OPEC commitments will not allow it to increase its output very much. But if new reserves are discovered in Gabon , it means more cheap oil for everybody.

But probably the most attractive of all the attributes of Africa's oil boom, for Western governments and oil companies alike, is that virtually all the big discoveries of recent years have been made offshore, in deepwater reserves that are often many miles from populated land. This means that even if a civil war or violent insurrection breaks out onshore (always a concern in Africa ), the oil companies can continue to pump out oil with little likelihood of sabotage, banditry, or nationalist fervor getting in the way. Given the hundreds of thousands of barrels of Nigerian crude that are lost every year as a result of fighting, community protests, and organized crime, this is something the industry gets rather excited about.

Finally, there is the sheer speed of growth in African oil production, and the fact that Africa is one of the world's last underexplored regions. In a world used to hearing that there are no more big oil discoveries out there, and few truly untapped reserves to look forward to, the ferocious pace and scale of Africa 's oil boom has proved a bracing tonic. One-third of the world's new oil discoveries since the year 2000 have taken place in Africa . Of the 8 billion barrels of new oil reserves discovered in 2001, 7 billion were found there. In the years between 2005 and 2010, 20 percent of the world's new production capacity is expected to come from Africa . And there is now an almost contagious feeling in the oil industry that no one really knows just how much oil might be there, since no one's ever really bothered to check.

All these factors add up to a convincing value proposition: African oil is cheaper, safer, and more accessible than its competitors, and there seems to be more of it every day. And, though Africa may not be able to compete with the Persian Gulf at the level of proven reserves, it has just enough up its sleeve to make it a potential "swing" region -- an oil province that can kick in just enough production to keep markets calm when supplies elsewhere in the world are unpredictable. Diversification of the oil supply has been a goal -- even an obsession -- in the United States since the Arab oil embargo of the 1970s. Successive U.S. administrations have understood that if the world is overly reliant on two or three hot spots for its energy security, there is a greater risk of supply disruptions and price volatility. And for obvious reasons, the effort to distribute America 's energy-security portfolio across multiple nodes has taken on a new urgency since September 11, 2001. In his State of the Union address in January 2006, President Bush said he wanted to reduce America 's dependence on Middle East crude by 75 percent by 2025.

Copyright © 2007 John Ghazvinian
 

Of Iran and Oil

Among the few countries that have a substantial influence over the prices of crude oil and natural gas, Iran is probably the most feared by the international community due to its strategic, geographic and geopolitical position in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Regularly coming into economic conflict with the United States over the last few years, Iran has successively rebuffed calls for it to expand the production level of the OPEC, threatened to take control of the Strait of Hormuz - where half of the world’s oil production is transported weekly, allegedly supported terrorist groups in Lebanon and Palestine and, in 2007, threatened to bomb half of the off-shore oil and natural gas platforms in the Caspian Sea if the Americans didn’t remove their troops from Azerbaijan.

There are a wide range of factors that influence oil prices, from piracy in the Indian Ocean to a rise in Chinese demand. But Iran now holds a special spot on the list since geopolitics have moved it center-stage.

It’s important to remember that Iran is the world’s fourth largest oil producer and also possesses the world’s second largest natural gas reserve. By such standards, Iran could hold half of the world hostage in terms of energy. So why hasn’t it happened yet?


Iran needs the Western world to buy its oil and its natural gas because, just like every country across the globe that relies on natural resources for the survival of its economy, the Islamic Republic needs to eat, needs to finance its infrastructures, needs to pay for its nuclear program and its military equipment.

The problem is that Iran has allied itself with one of the most feared countries in the world in terms of energy and military power, the one and only motherland: Russia. The same Russia that has been providing Iran with unique missile guiding systems, with the latest Sukhoï and MIG combat planes, with access to some information on civil nuclear engineering, and the same country that was given an offer to join the OPEC two months ago by the same man who represents the Islamic Republic: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Furthering this process, Iran recently offered Russia, Venezuela and a few Caspian Sea countries a place in the formation of a new cartel to control natural gas markets, using the same model as the OPEC. The day following this announcement, oil prices soared by $10 and natural gas prices followed by about the same amount.

From a technical point of view, Iran cannot by itself determine the new crude oil prices, it requires the agreement of a majority of the OPEC council. From a practical point of view, it can influence it greatly, and at a very impressive speed.
Over the course of 2008, crude oil price went up six times, leading to a ceiling price of $147 per barrel before going down again. Every single time, the rise in prices was the direct result of an action taken by Iran: testing new mid-range missiles, announcing the possibility of a cut in OPEC production, announcing civil nuclear tests, etc.

Overall, Iran has a considerable influence over crude oil and natural gas prices, but it’s never been very technical. One must understand the nature of Iranian provocation, and not respond to it by creating a “risk premium” or “fear premium” of $15. The western world still needs to learn how to do that, and it could take a few lessons from Russia on the matter.
Find out more on http://www.eastern-intelligence.com

Ancient Oil Practices

There is a vast underground oil reserve in the Middle East region of the world. It has been in use for over 6,500 years. In ancient times, it seeped to the surface in sticky black pools and lumps. Oil springs, bitumen seeps and oil-bearing rock made petroleum readily available all over the region.

Stone Age dwellers used bitumen (pitch or tar) to seal cracked pots and water containers. They also used it to fasten arrowheads to their shafts. In what is now Iraq, people lived in the marshes. They used oil to make bricks and mortar for waterproof homes, helping them to survive floods. In Babylonian times, entire civilizations used millions of these bricks to build their cities. The "black gold" trade was the driving force of this industrialization throughout the Middle East.

People eventually realized that they could use bitumen to coat their reed boats, inside and out, sealing out water. This idea, called caulking, was eventually spread and used on wooden boats all over the world. The bitumen would stain the sailors’ clothes, adopting them the nickname, "tars". This practice of caulking was used right up until modern days when metal and fiberglass hulled boats took the place of wooden ones.

In the beginning, people only used the sticky bitumen form of oil for gluing and waterproofing. They believed that the thinner forms of oil were too flammable and thin to be useful. By the 6th century BCE, the Persians realized that this thinner substance, which they called "naft", could be very useful in battle. Persian archers dipped their arrows, sending flaming missiles toward their enemies. Later in the century, Byzantine warriors developed explosive fire bombs called "Greek Fire" made from bitumen, sulfur and quicklime.

Ancient Egyptians mummified their dead with a mixture of salt, beeswax, cedar resin and bitumen. Scholars believe that the word "mummy" comes from the Arabic word "mumya", after the Mumya Mountain in Persia where bitumen was found. We didn’t believe that bitumen was used in mummification until recent chemical analysis proved that it was used to preserve bodies during the Ptolemaic period. Before that, we thought that the word "mummy" came from the black appearance that the remains took on after being exposed to the air.

Oil that was used in ancient times was usually found on the surface. The Chinese were the first to drill for oil. They actually made drills from bamboo dipped in iron. They drilled for salty brine water which they needed to preserve food and to make medicines. When they drilled deeply enough, they found oil. We don’t know if they actually used the oil that they found, but they did use the natural gas to boil the brine to extract the salt. Large companies such as Western Pipeline Corp use the same basic idea to drill for oil today.

Friday, January 15, 2010

Close Encounters of the Bush Kind

Excerpt
The following is an excerpt from the book Peace Mom
by Cindy Sheehan
Published by Atria; September 2006;$22.95US/$31.50CAN; 0-7432-9791-1
Copyright © 2006 Cindy Sheehan

Chapter 6

Close Encounters of the Bush Kind

We were a little late getting to the bus the next morning because at first we couldn't get Andy up -- either by phone or by knocking on his door. When we boarded the bus we were greeted by approximately sixty people, making up fourteen or fifteen families like ours. All the others had the same sad look around their eyes. There was no jocularity or singing on this bus.

I met a young woman whose husband had been blown to vapor and they'd recovered nothing of him to bury. His mom and dad were also on the bus. They were so hurt and fragile.

But sitting right in front of me was another woman whom I have grown to dislike very strongly. I soon found out that she was the stepmother of a soldier who was killed, but she introduced herself and her husband as the parents of "Ed." She then pointed out another woman who she said was Ed's "sort of foster mother"-- who I found out later was Ed's real mother. The first woman was his stepmother, who didn't have a very good relationship with Ed before he was killed. But ever since he was killed, she has been a tireless supporter of the war and the president. She is so "brave and valiant" to keep her chin up after her stepson was killed.

This stepmother and her husband became active participants in one of the most bizarre protests in history: The "Cindy doesn't speak for me" tour. I can't believe that these people's views, beliefs, and intellect are so wee that they can't even have a "We speak for ourselves" tour. Ed's real mother, who is very antiwar and anti-Bush, is in my organization and her heart aches every time this woman claims Ed as her own and exploits his name and sacrifice to prop up the president and his misguided war.

We arrived at Fort Lewis about forty-five minutes after we left the hotel. Then we had to stand in the parking lot of the post hospital, where the meetings were to occur, for another hour because they weren't ready to let us in yet. I was beginning to feel the Washington State "heat wave" more acutely as we stood on asphalt without shade or water.

This interlude, though, is when I found out that my soon to be new friend was Ed's mother, not his "sort of foster mother." I found out that she was even more deeply opposed to George Bush and the war than I was at the time. Her son was KIA back in 2003, so she'd had a little more time to ponder the reasons and lies. She even had a letter that she wanted to give George, accusing him of lying and taking our country to war for oil. Damn it, I thought to myself, I wish I had thought of that!

My new friend "Donna" requested, and received, a meeting with George Bush that was separate from the one with her flag-waving, red-white-and-blue-wearing ex-husband and his wife. She gave the letter to one of the president's aides and waited in a room by herself until George had met with all of the other families. I wish to recount her meeting before I recount ours. Then maybe, dear reader, you won't be so horrified by our little "tea party" with George.

Donna was waiting in her little curtained-off area for the president to appear. When he did, he strode right up to her and put his face an inch from hers -- there they stood, nose to nose, and Donna, God bless her, did not back off. He sneered at her and said in his most intimidating (he thinks) voice, "I'm George W. Bush, I am president of the United States, and I hear you have something to say to me."

Donna looked him squarely in the eye and said, "You bet I do."

She then went on to outline her grievances against him, asking the question that I would try to ask George a year later: "Why did my son have to die?"

Donna told him that Ed had a good life and if he had lived, he would have been a productive and wonderful citizen of our society. Then Bush said the coldest thing to her that I have ever heard. After Donna got through talking about her dear boy, George, unbelievably and incredibly, said, "If your son came home from Iraq alive, how do you know he would have had a good life?"

When Donna told me that, I wondered how she didn't slap him or spit in his face. President or not, that was a rude and coldhearted and pitiless thing to say. She said she was too shocked to even say anything in reply.

Our meeting with George was disturbing, but it took us a while to realize it because we were still in too much shock at the time to process it.

We were moved from a big room in the post hospital to a little room with a couch, chair, a coffee table, and a fake potted tree. The room was a curtained-off space that was barely big enough for the five of us. I had brought five pictures of Casey, ranging from when he was a baby to when he was a big soldier man.

The smiling pictures of a cheerful and chubby-cheeked baby break my heart. Why did I let my sunny, wonderful boy join Uncle Sam's army? The pictures of Casey when he was a beautiful boy are heartbreaking, too. Then he became an awkward teenager -- tall and skinny and all "asses and elbows," as I used to say to him -- with braces and acne, to boot! When the braces came off and the acne cleared, he was a handsome young man.

So we were sitting in this tiny room at Fort Lewis with the pictures of Casey on the coffee table. The scene was like some tragic and smaller version of our home and our decimated family. We were nervously waiting for George Bush to appear -- when in walked Arizona senator John McCain.

The events that I am about to relate were later disputed by John McCain, but I know they are the truth. Up to that point in my life, I had never even met one senator, let alone one with the stature of John McCain, and I treasured what he said to us.

The senator was very personable and he sat right down on the couch and complimented the girls on how pretty they were and on how handsome Andy was -- he called us all by our first names -- then he looked at the pictures of Casey and had tears in his eyes.

I asked McCain why Casey had to die, and he told me, "Well, Cindy, I am afraid it's going to be for nothing, like my buddies in Vietnam." I was stunned by his openness and honesty, but I deeply appreciated it. However, he denies having said this.

We chatted with some small talk and then he asked us if there was anything else he could do for us and I said, "Yes, you can run with Senator Kerry as his vice president." He chuckled and said, "Anything but that, Cindy. The country is too divided as it is." Senator McCain remembers this exchange. We had quite a spirited talk about this, our first meeting, when I met with him again in his Washington, D.C., office in September.

I had a lot of respect for Senator McCain, and I love what he did in the Senate to try to limit George and Dick's reign of torture. But after what the Rove team did to John McCain during the 2000 campaign when they smeared him and tried to aver that he had a black baby and demeaned his war record as a prisoner of war in Vietnam -- trying to make him look as if he gave up national secrets under torture -- then John McCain bends over and lets George Bush kiss him. He even campaigned for Bush in 2004. That's when I lost respect for the senator, but in June 2004, I still had a lot of regard for him. Now, with the senator's unending support for another Vietnam-style war, I fear that every shred of goodness and humanity in him has been lost.

After the senator left our little "living room," we looked at each other, and Carly said, "I wonder if he is the president's warm-up act." And Pat said, "I wonder what Casey has in store for us next."

After what seemed like hours, the curtain finally opened and in walked George. I was face-to-face with the devil, but I didn't even know how monstrous this person really was yet.

The president of the United States of America, arguably the most powerful man in the world, walked into the room wearing a blue suit that looked straight off a Wal-Mart rack. His entire tone was one of being at a tea party, and the first thing he uttered was, "So, who are we honorin' here?"

We all looked at one another in disbelief, and later, when we compared notes, we couldn't believe that the so-called leader of the so-called free world didn't even know Casey's name. And unlike the senator, he didn't know our names, because right before George entered they had us take off our name tags. I think this was to make it a better photo op, but I'm not really sure. At the very least, we couldn't believe that an aide didn't whisper, "Mr. President, this is the Sheehan family. Their son, Specialist Casey Sheehan, was killed in Iraq."

So we told him who we were and who we were "honorin'." We are still not sure who he honors, and I am not sure we really want to know.

I tried to get George to look at the pictures that we had brought of Casey, but he wouldn't. We tried to talk about Casey and what a valuable member of our family he was, but he didn't want to hear it. He didn't want to know anything about Casey, and I feel he didn't want to see the face of someone his lies killed. I believe George does not want to humanize his cannon fodder, or bullet sponges, as the soldiers call themselves.

At one point he approached Carly and said, "Who are you to the loved one?" (He always called Casey the "loved one.") Carly replied, "Casey was my brother."

George then said a very stupid thing, which he is famous for: "I wish I could bring your loved one back to fill the hole in your hearts."

"So do we, Mr. President," Carly agreed. At which point he gave her what Carly says was the "dirtiest look I ever received from another human being" and said to her, "I'm sure you do." Then he dismissed Carly with a turn of his back and never spoke to her again for the rest of the meeting.

We had some presidential small talk. He wanted to know what we did for a living and was particularly interested in Andy's career as a surveyor. We took some pictures with him, and he said to the kids, "Take care of your mama, she has a very sweet soul."

Then he approached me for our infamous exchange. He took my right hand in both of his and said, "Mom" -- he called me Mom -- "I can't imagine losin' a loved one. Whether it is an aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, brother, sister . . ."

Before he could go through the entire litany of how Casey could be related to me without actually saying the word son, I stopped him and said, "Mr. President" -- that's when I still called him that -- "Casey was my son. I think you can imagine it -- you have two daughters -- try to imagine one of them being killed." I saw a brief flicker of humanity in his eyes, then it was gone. I said, "Trust me, Mr. President, you don't want to go there."

And he said, "You're right, I don't."

At least, and I think for the first time, he was honest. I was stunned at his coldhearted statement and all I could mutter was, "Well, thanks for putting me there."

George Bush stammered some things about everyone on earth deserving "freedom and democracy" and slobbered something else about "expressing the thanks of a grateful nation." Trust me, we didn't say "You're welcome." Then as fast as he swept in, the tea party was over.

When I say George pretended to have compassion it is because everything he said did not match his eyes. Speaking to him was like speaking to someone who is disconnected from reality. It is very disconcerting to talk to people when the heart light of their eyes does not match what they are saying.

It was a very disordered event, not quite but almost as disordered as burying a child.

One of the things I asked him when we were speaking was, "Why were we invited here? We didn't vote for you in 2000 and we are certainly not going to vote for you this year!" His answer to me was, "Mom, this is not about politics." For some unknown but totally forgivable reason I believed him. That is, until the Republican National Convention, when he betrayed my trust again.

In his acceptance speech for the nomination for president, he said something like, "I meet with the families of the fallen. I feel their pain. They tell me that they are praying for me and to complete the mission in Iraq so their loved ones don't die in vain." That is what tore it for me. He told me he wasn't meeting us for political reasons, but that's exactly what it was for. The so-called commander in chief doesn't allow the showing of images of flag-draped coffins coming home from Iraq nor has he attended a single funeral.

He was trying to assure the nation that he had compassion. He was trying to tell the nation that we wanted more children killed just because Casey was dead.

Again, and again, and again, and again, he was lying. That's when I decided to become involved in the 2004 presidential campaign. Not to campaign for John Kerry, but to campaign against George Bush.

Copyright © 2006 Cindy Sheehan

Author
Cindy Sheehan, mother of the late Specialist Casey Sheehan, U.S. Army, is cofounder of Gold Star Families for Peace, an organization devoted to families who have lost loved ones in Iraq.

Why Bush Can't Leave

This is not yet another discussion about whether or not we should have gone into Iraq. (Bad move.) Nor is this a conversation about the tactics employed after the war. (Worse still)
Or about the devastating politi-zation that placed ideology above competence in staffing the provincial government after the war (some would say “moronic”).

It also isn’t about the rhetoric that is being vulgarly brandished about in all corners regarding the "fight for democracy and freedom". Anyone who actually believes that democracy and freedom have anything at all to do with our ongoing involvement in Iraq might as well stop reading now. We’re way to far apart for you to get what I’m saying here.

It would be so easy to talk about the oil, presidential politics, neo-conservative doctrines, the war profiteering, and all that other self-serving blather. But at this stage of the game, none of that is driving Bush, nor will it define his actions from now till the end of his Presidency. And that’s what this article is about.

I disagree with those who suggest Bush isn’t very smart. Okay, maybe he’s not sophisticated, but he’s definitely not shallow. Personally, I think he would be a great guest to have at a backyard barbecue, and I’m pretty damn picky about who I invite to my house. He's plenty smart, but more than that, he is a visionary. And like many visionaries, he is painfully susceptible to the fawning advice given by those around him who will use (and ultimately corrupt) the magic of his vision to promote their own agendas.

In spite of any thing that may cause one to conclude otherwise, President Bush understands, at a painful, soulful and deeply personal level, the disastrous consequences of his actions in launching this war. In that dark and lonely realm of realization, it simply doesn’t matter whether he thought he was right (I believe he did). Nor does it matter that he may have resorted to manipulation or dishonesty in marketing the whole war mythology to the US public and the rest of the world.

At the most intuitive level, Bush believed in the moral and strategic rightness of his actions. He believed it so strongly that he was willing to carve his vision out of stone if need be, no matter the consequences. That kind of determination takes guts and honor. He was not driven by some divine mission of doing God’s work. When George Bush stood on the frontiers of history, he saw a vision of a shining city and he took off.

In many ways, history may well congratulate the president for the boldness and expanse of his vision. And in many others it will castigate him for the same thing. But, contrary to the conventional wisdom, Bush isn’t even thinking about how history will regard him. You see, what ever public comments, justifications or endless spin there are that pollute the airwaves and conversations, the President knows something that no one in his camp is willing to acknowledge. As sure as he knows that he must connect Iraq to terrorism, he knows that he started it all. And the pain of that knowledge is brutal and relentless.

It provides him very little consolation to speak the words that he speaks about why we must stay. As much as he drives the talking points home day after day, he simply cannot escape the fact that he and he alone, opened Pandora’s Box. In the still of the night when the pundits and advisors are silent and the adoring neo-con supporters have gone off to dinner, he must be with himself, and he knows. When he reads about the horrendous suffering of 2,000 people being killed or maimed by pissed-off Sunnis and their bombs in the Northern Iraq Yazidi villages, he knows that this senseless act is a consequence of opening the box, even though it has nothing to do with terrorists or democracy or even the solidarity of the Iraqi Parliament. For all the rhetoric, it's impossible to find any comfort whatsoever in that kind of stupid brutality, no matter how useful it may be in supporting a position. And he knows there will be more.

In the Greek myth, sweet Pandora, who was wise and noble and fatally curious, pressed her ear next to the box and heard the faint voices inside pleading for release. "Help us. Please open the box and let us out, Pandora. We need to be free." In spite of knowing that she shouldn’t do so, she opened the box. The nasty, liberated spirits attacked and mauled her before visiting untold anguish on her innocent husband (who had beseeched her to NOT open the box in the first place). As they flew off in gleeful malice to torment the rest of humanity, Pandora was crushed with the realization that, despite the passionate warnings to leave it alone, she had unleashed the worst evil imaginable on her fellow humans. Despite her innocence and her longing for the world to be a beautiful, peaceful place, she was forever burdened with the yolk of knowing that she had opened that box. There simply is no escaping that burden.

Just as with the ill-fated Pandora, Bush unleashed some horrifically bad energy when he authorized the invasion of Iraq. In spite of pleas and admonishments from so many around him to “not open that box”, he could not suppress his inner self and, with the best of intentions, he opened the box. Centuries of hatred, repression, fear, insult and vengeance erupted, and mankind has been forever changed by the bites and stings of those spiteful forces.

For years now, supporters have rushed to the defense of that decision. But as the debates rage, and America searches for the right answer and the world stands in judgment, the president stands alone, knee deep in the blood and carnage, because he knows that he opened that box and he could have stopped it from happening.

Mu Guiying, the remarkable Woman General of The House of Yang in 947 AD, is quoted as saying:

“Before going to war, the general must be so sure of the rightness of his actions that he is willing to be hated and despised by millions of innocent people for the suffering he will cause them.”

No way was this president prepared for the suffering he would unleash on millions of innocent people. And while a president may be able to justify unleashing a holocaust for a good cause, it is a terrible burden for a man to face. At least it is for a good man, and George Bush is a good man. And the damnable hell of it is that, as he sees corruption, greed and megalomania hijacking his noble vision, he has no certainty that his actions were worthy enough to justify the hatred of millions of people who have suffered because of them. Indeed, evidence to the contrary mounts daily. Making matters worse, in the midst of the death and suffering, all around him greedy, power-hungry people are profiting from the mayhem and couldn’t really care less about his vision. It was just a fortuitous vehicle and he was an unwitting front man. And he has to live with that.

After Pandora realized the consequences of her deed “She cried softly as she sat on the green grass under the pale sun and leaned against the box. Tears stained her beautiful face and she hung her head in shame. For though the creatures had not identified themselves, something in her knew who they were.

There is a final turn to the Greek story, and this is the part that Bush is holding out for. When all “the sprites of disease, hunger, hopelessness, cruelty, and the rest” had fled the box, there remained on last energy - Hope. Here alone rested the only antidote for what had been done. Pandora embraced Hope and knew that she must now spend her days using it to heal the wounds caused by her actions, even till the end of time if that’s what it took. That’s why Bush can’t leave.

To leave now would be to open the box, and then head off to Olympus, safe from the day to day carnage. To leave now would be to turn his back on the desperate, damaged Iraqis who are being ravaged by the unconscionable violence and suffering that has been unleashed. He can’t live with that shame. And so he will do the best he can to bring some level of harmony to the tattered and bloody remains of his vision – a vision that held so much promise, was so noble in its pure self. A vision that has been corrupted and butchered by the same voices that pleaded with him to open the box in the first place, and have now moved on.

One of the things I like about W is his cockiness and his sense of bravado. He is an Alpha Male, and he is unashamed about that. And, for good or bad, he doesn’t quit. Even when it makes theoretical sense to quit, he’s not gonna. Under other circumstances, we Americans would applaud that as a high virtue, as we did right after 9/11. But, now it's different. Still, he won’t quit.

At this point, Bush doesn’t give a flip about his popularity or the neo-cons or the Republican prospects for future political triumphs. He only cares about the damage he has done and he now feels he must do what ever he can, with whatever time he has left, to bring Hope to a hopeless situation. He’ll let the politicians and the strategists duke it out, he’ll say what he needs to say to whoever listens. He’ll risk anger and venom from the citizens of his country, the world, and his party. But he won’t leave.

Because he just can’t.

US Military Adventures in the Middle East

US’ constant quest for the control of world’s energy, serves as the main motive behind its arms deals with several Middle Eastern countries.



US economic interests can be summarized as to a steadfast quest for the exploitation and control of the world's oil and energy supplies. This is the reason it invaded Iraq under the pretext of combating terrorism after the events of the September 11, 2001.

Maintaining access to Iraq’s oil is not the whole story. No matter how many young Americans or coalition soldiers get killed in Iraq, Pakistan or Afghanistan, and simply ignoring the death tolls on civilians, Obama administration seeks to perform its energy agenda throughout the oil rich Middle East by the use of military force.

Corporate USA needs to spread its tentacles in and around strategic locations that are known to be so vital to its trades and transactions. After Bush declared ‘mission accomplished’, he announced his plan for a US – Middle East Free Trade Zone to complete the corporate invasion of Iraq to the rest of the Middle East.

US economic agenda is accomplished through the use of military power. The latest arms deal with several of the Persian Gulf states, known by the US as 'allies', show that multinationals and arms manufacturers need the government to pave the ground to justify their presence in the region.

From a quote by the former US president, Dwight D. Eisenhower who said: "The military-industrial-complex [would] cause military spending to be driven not by national security needs but by a network of weapons makers, lobbyists and elected officials." one can clearly see what really fuels US policies in the Persian Gulf region.

US Navy Seal Operations in Iraq

In the recent past the US Navy SEALs has been in the news for its operations in Iraq. It all began in the year 2003 when President George Bush ordered the Navy SEALs to invade Iraq. This Navy SEALs operation was called ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom’.

Why it started

It was generally believed at the time in 2003 that Iraq possessed and was also developing on an active basis, weapons of mass destruction or WMD. This was strictly in violation of the 1991 agreement between the US and Iraq that stated these WMDs needed to be given up unconditionally. Bush’s aim was to get rid of Saddam Hussein’s support of terrorism and eventually free the citizens of Iraq. This is how the Navy SEALs mission began. While this mission was led by the US it also had the backing of Britain, Poland as well as Australia.

The fated day

On March 20th in the year 2003 at around 2:30 UTC, a series of explosions were heard from Baghdad. It has only recently been found that these explosions were a result of the group of special forces such as British SAS, US Delta Force, US Navy SEALs, Australian 4RAR as well as SASR etc. It has recently been proven that these troops headed straight for Baghdad even before the air war had started.

The Shock and Awe technique

In military parlance this term is commonly used to refer to the use of overwhelming force, dominant maneuvers and power displays to cripple the enemy’s power to fight. In order to accomplish victory as soon as possible the US strategy in Iraq involved the simultaneous usage of ground and air attacks to immobilize the Iraqi forces. Thus while the US army was attacking, the US Navy SEALs were also assaulting the forces in Iraq. Many Iraqi military units were bypassed successfully as part of the Navy SEALs operation.

Crippling the center

The idea behind the strategy of attack in Iraq was to immobilize the center of the Iraqi command as soon as possible while also ensuring that civilian deaths and loss of infrastructure were kept to a bare minimum. It was also estimated that once the leadership of Saddam Hussein was weakened it would automatically entail crippling of the Iraqi forces. The US Navy SEALs also hoped that in this context the Iraqi native people would be open to the US instead of Saddam’s terrorist rule.

The closing

During the closing hours of March 20th there were several amphibious attacks, as well as assaults carried out simultaneously by the British 3 Commando Brigade, the Royal Marines as well as US Navy SEALs to secure oil fields in Iraq. However in the course of this Navy SEALs mission close to 44 oil wells were destroyed and exploded by accident or by explosives launched by the Iraqi forces.

OBAMA CONSIDERS CHEMTRAILS

President Obama is full of surprises. But even expectant reporters were taken aback when White House science adviser John Holdren used his first interview on April 18, 2009 to announce, “Global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air.”

With the first feedback effects from methane releases starting to kick in and our space colony’s atmospheric CO2 levels surging toward the “Do Not Exceed” redline of 440 parts per million, Holdren declared that the Obama administration is considering “last resort” technologies to chill the global greenhouse village – aka the worldwide ‘hood.

Is the Obama administration about to “out” chemtrails?

Referring to “radical” technologies that include spreading a sunlight-reflecting artificial cloud cover, Holdren declared, “It's got to be looked at. We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table.”

Invoking the image of a souped-up sedan careening toward an abyss in a fog of mass marketing exhortations for more speed, the White House science adviser suggested that reasonable passengers would stop arguing if there really was a cliff, how close and how big the drop long enough to urge applying some brakes – while chanting “Our lifestyle is sacred!” and keeping the carbon accelerator jammed to the floorboards.

Instead of the deep, urgent reductions in carbon emissions urged by frightened scientists, drowning polar bears, still homeless Katrina survivors, and drought-stricken farmers everywhere, the White House decision to embrace climate geoengineering “represents the ultimate moral bankruptcy of institutions and a failure of democracy,” charged Dr. Andrew Glikson.

http://www.willthomasonline.net/willthomasonline/Obama_Considers_Chemtrails.html

WHAT’S NEW?

In 1965, a report urging President Johnson to head off atmospheric warming instead of the Viet Cong did not even mention cutting emissions. Urging a silver bullet instead of biting the climate change bullet, the National Academy of Science went on to issue studies in 1977, 1982 and 1990 championing space mirrors and atmospheric sunscreens. In 1979, physicist Freeman Dyson leveraged his considerable scientific creds to propose deliberate, large-scale introduction of fine particles into the upper atmosphere to offset global warming. [Technology, Entertainment, Design conference New York City Sept/07; Wall Street Journal Oct 17/97]

In 1992, the National Academy of Science’s $80 992-page report on “mitigating” greenhouse warming included a “Geoengineering” chapter that discussed “Screening Out Some Sunlight”. Computer simulations showed that an increase in albedo of just half a percent would be “sufficient to halve the effect of a CO2 doubling.” This would “involve changing the quantity or character of cloud cover.”

Such a grandiose fantasy would also greatly increase the scientists’ libido.

Since only a fraction of incoming solar radiation reaches the Earth's surface, this chemical sunscreen “would have more impact if done high in the atmosphere,” the NAS said. It might even “destroy stratospheric ozone.”

Why? 

Because spraying megatons of fine particles into the stratosphere clumps chlorine compounds into giant ice clouds. When struck by sunlight, these chemical clouds refract prismatic fragments like rainbows. And become highly corrosive to ozone.

Ken Caldeira was the climate expert who ran the computer simulations at the Lawrence Livermore atom bomb labs. He too warned that the stratospheric spraying of sunlight-reflecting chemicals could “destroy the ozone layer” – as well as posing human health risks.


CHEAP THRILLS

Nevertheless, the NAS enthused, “Perhaps one of the surprises of this analysis is the relatively low costs at which some of the geoengineering options might be implemented.”

Each “dust distribution mission” would require a 500-mile flight lasting about an hour and a half at a delivery cost of just $500 per ton of sunlight-reflecting chemicals. [Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming chapter 28]


OWNING THE WEATHER 

In 1996, the United States Air Force released its own feasibility study. Produced by seven high-ranking officers, “Owning The Weather In 2025” described this “high-risk, high-reward endeavor” in terms of “splitting of the atom” – before going on to describe how “Weather Force Specialists” could lay down “aerial obscuration” materials behind tanker aircraft.


SKY SHIELDS

The following year, Dr. Edward Teller urged an International Seminar on Planetary Emergencies to consider deploying an aerial “sky shield” costing $1 billion a year. The Father of the Atom Bomb said his cheap and easy plan would allow everyone to keep polluting as usual.

Speaking like someone out of Horton’s Hooverville, Teller was a senior research fellow at the government policy-making Hoover Institute. Known for “forging strong ties between right-wing ideologues, right-wing think tanks and right-wing policy makers,” recent “friends of Hoover” have included Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, GW Bush and Karl Rove. [rightwingwatch.org]

“Global warming is too serious to be left to the politicians,” Teller later told the Wall Street Journal. “Injecting sunlight-scattering particles into the stratosphere appears to be a promising approach. Why not do that?” [Wall Street Journal Oct 17/97; Hoover Digest 1998 No. 1]

In fact, it was already being done.


CHEMTRAILS DISCOVERED

First popularized by this reporter on Coast-To-Coast radio in January 1998, “chemtrails” is now commonly used to describe the brilliant white plumes laid down by U.S. Air Force tanker planes over North America and more than a dozen other allied nations - and viewed with alarm by many people long familiar with normal aircraft condensation trails called “contrails”.

In November, 1999, Defense critic Gordon Earle presented a petition signed by 550 Espanola, Ontario residents to the Canadian Parliament demanding “an end to aerial spraying by commercial or military aircraft, foreign or domestic,” which appeared to be making many people sick. The Department of National Defense eventually replied, “It's not us.”

When the Environment Ministry refused to release its Espanola air sample findings, the chemtrails fallout was independently lab tested and found to contain levels of aluminum five-times higher than Ontario's maximum permissible health safety standards.

These particles matched the 10 micron aluminum oxide called for in a 1994 patent issued to Hughes Aircraft Company. “Welsbach Seeding for Reduction of Global Warming” called for spreading highly reflective materials in the atmosphere to reflect enough incoming sunlight (about 1%) to slow global warming despite an anticipated doubling in CO2 emissions. High levels of quartz particles were also found. Very high readings of bacteria, molds and fungi hitchhiking on these particles from the upper atmosphere down to the ground were also found. [Chemtrails Confirmed by William Thomas]


TAR SOD 

Issued for peer review on May 15, 2000, Chapter 4 of the IPCC’s WGIII TAR SOD report looked at deliberate, large-scale manipulations of Earth processes. Intended to advise policy makers around the globe, the IPCC report pointed to the plausible “potential” of Ken Caldeira’s computer models and Teller’s sunscreen scenario. Though a few specks of the proposed chemical spray could have severe human health impacts, Teller and his cohorts proposed spreading 10 million tons of these shiny particulates to send about 1% of incoming sunshine back into space.”

Hold it, the IPCC cautioned. Two key problems are “the potential impact on atmospheric chemistry,” loss of sunlight required for all life, a citizenry upset by “the associated whitening of the visual appearance of the sky.”

A few other concerns included: “Unexpected environmental impacts, our lack of complete understanding of the systems involved, and our concerns with the legal and ethical implications.”
[Chemtrails Confirmed]


CHEMTRAILS CONFIRMED

First confirmed by Airport Authority Terry Stewart at the Victoria International Airport on Dec. 8, 2000 as a “joint Canada-U.S. military operation” - and stridently denied by senior officers at Canadian Forces Base, where Stewart later told the Vancouver Courier he had received his information) - these tanker plane missions were verified in March, 2001 by the Air Traffic Control manager for the northeastern seaboard of the United States.

In three taped interviews with veteran radio journalist S.T. Brendt, our “Deep Sky” source said he had been ordered to divert incoming commercial flights away from USAF tankers spraying a reflective substance showing up on ATC radars as a 'haze'.

This FAA disclosure came on March 12, 2001 as squadrons of radar-identified air force tankers saturated skies over the northeastern United States with characteristic Xs, grids and parallel rows of broad, expanding chemical plumes.

After counting more than 30 big jets spreading persistent plumes within 45 minutes over remote rural Maine, ST Brendt called her assistant WMWV news director. Richard Dean and his staff went outside and counted 370 chemical trails over the next six-and-a-half hours. During this time, local Air Traffic Controllers reported only nine commercial jets on their radars. [lifeboatnews.com Apr 3/01; Chemtrails Confirmed by William Thomas 2007]


9/11

For 15 years Dr. David Travis has been looking at the effects of contrails left by aircraft on the climate. Around the twelfth of September, 2001, he recalls, “Later on in the day, when I was driving to work, and I noticed how bright blue and clear the sky was. And at first I didn't think about it. Then I realized the sky was unusually clear.”

During the three days the U.S. commercial air fleet was grounded, this atmospheric specialist found temperatures warming more than 1 degree C. One degree in just three days - no one had ever seen such a change happen so fast. “From a climate perspective that is huge,” Travis says.

Could common contrails cool the atmosphere by a full degree? “Here are some examples of what we call outbreaks of contrails,” Dr. Travis later told the BBC. “These are large clusters of contrails. And here's a particularly good one from Southern California. Here's the west coast of the United States. And you can see here this lacing network of contrails covering at least 50%, if not 75% or more of the sky in that area. It doesn't take an expert to realize that if, if you look at the satellite picture and see this kind of contrail coverage that they've got to be having an effect on temperature at the surface.” [BBC Apr 19/09]

Ditto chemtrail “obscuration”.


AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS CONCERNED OVER CHEMTRAILS

One month after the 9/11 attacks, Deep Sky began phoning Air Traffic Controllers. At Chicago's O'Hare airport, all three major airports in New York, as well as Los Angeles LAX, San Francisco, Atlanta, Cleveland, San Diego, Washington DC's Dulles and Jacksonville, Florida controllers were being ordered to route airliners beneath formations of air force tanker planes spraying chemicals that clouded their screens.

Several smaller but busy airports at Westchester County in New York state and Manchester in New Hampshire confirmed similar experiences. Every controller, without exception, was being told to divert commercial traffic away from these military aircraft, and bring them in lower to avoid “experiments” that could degrade their radars.

Cleveland airport controllers were surprised by the extent of obscuration on their radars.


CHEMTRAIL SCIENTISTS SPEAK OUT

Ohio is the home of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base tasked with developing Tesla, HAARP and related weather modification technology. In December 2001, a Lawrence Livermore scientist on loan to Wright-Pat told Columbus Alive reporter Bob Fitrakis that two different projects were being conducted. One involved spraying microscopic aluminum particles parallel lines, X-patterns and grids to create artificial cloud cover and lessen global warming. Barium chemtrails were being used to direct the military's beam weapon in Alaska called HAARP for 3-D imaging, electronic warfare – and steering the jet stream. [Columbus Alive Dec 6/01]


HR2977

Just two months before, Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich had ignited a Congressional firestorm by introducing HR2977. His “Space Preservation Act” called for the peaceful uses of space and a ban on “exotic weapons”. Section 7 specifically sought to prohibit “chemtrails”.

Kucinich later told Columbus Alive that despite official denials, as head of the Armed Services oversight committee he was well acquainted with chemtrail projects. “The truth is there's an entire program in the Department of Defense - 'Vision for 2020' - that's developing these weapons,” Kucinich told Fitrakis. The U.S. Space Command mission statement calls for “full-spectrum dominance of space, land, sea and air.”

According to Kucinich, Section 7 naming chemtrails, HAARP and other planet-threatening weapons was omitted in a substitute bill under pressure from scientists who did not want their own funding cut. [“Air Traffic Controllers Concerned Over Chemtrails” by William Thomas lifeboatnews.com Mar 4/02; Columbus Alive Jan 24/02]


TANKERS OVER EDMONTON

Dave Dickie’s company performs contract landscape work for the City of Edmonton. In November 2002 his crews began finding widespread nutrient deficiency in soils that could cause severe problems for plant life, including trees.

Soils analysis came back with showing extreme Electrical Conductivity readings. A November 18, 2002 lab test of snow falling through chemtrails also confirmed elevated levels of aluminum and barium. Norwest Labs lab report #336566 dated November 14. 2002 found:

? aluminum levels: 0.148 milligrams/litre
? barium levels: 0.006 milligrams/litre

As Dickie confirmed to this reporter, “It is the scientific opinion of the lab that the aluminum content of the sample is high and unusual. Elevated levels of aluminum and barium are not usually found in Alberta precipitation.”

Dickie regularly visits Air Traffic Control at the Edmonton municipal airport to watch the chemplanes making repeated passes over the city. Blessed with good friends at work in the tower, he has watched radar-identified KC-135s “on many occasions.”

On Father’s Day 2002, Dickie and an excited group of 12 year-olds watched two KC-135s tracked by radar as HA (High Altitude) targets flying at 34,000 and 36,000 feet – “one to the south, and one to the north of the city.”

Both USAF tankers had flown south out of Alaska. As Dickie, the kids and the controllers watched, the big jets began making patterns over Edmonton – “circuits” the controllers called it. “Petro 011” and “Petro 012” were working alone in “commanded airspace” from which all other aircraft were excluded.

And they were leaving chemtrails.

“The signature is significant,” one radar operator commented, referring to a trail clearly visible on the scope extending for miles behind the KC-135. In contrast, a JAL flight on the display left no contrail.

Going outside, Dickie and several controllers scanned clear blue skies. They easily located the KC-135 leaving its characteristic white-plume “signature”. Visibility was outstanding. They also clearly identified the JAL airliner at a similar flight level. It left no contrail at all.

“We see these guys up here a lot,” the radar techs told Dickie. “You should have seen it when they had the big summit up in Calgary. It was exciting to watch them.”

Was the U.S. Air Force spraying barium to enhance radio and radar surveillance over that G-8 gathering – or for some other purpose?

There could be no doubt about what was being left in the tankers’ wake. Showing up on radar as “birdie feet” triangles, the reflective plumes also showed up as “as a concentration of dots” in the radar-visible plume. Focusing on each plane with the click of cursor, “we could see different contrails,” Dickie described. Some were short and quickly vanished from the ‘scopes. Other trails were thick, long and lingering – not contrails at all. [Chemtrails Confirmed]


U.S. PUSHES FOR PLANETARY SUNSCREEN

In 2007, as the IPCC’s latest report was being drafted to guide international negotiators in devising a successor to the Kyoto emissions treaty, the Sydney Morning Herald reported U.S. representatives were pressing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to steer “away from conclusions that would support a new worldwide climate treaty based on binding targets to reduce emissions.”

Instead, Washington sought to legitimize its clandestine chemtrails program by urging inclusion in the “Summary For Policymakers” prefacing each chapter in the IPCC report - “techniques such as reflective dust pumped into the atmosphere to block sunlight as a last-ditch way to halt global warming.”

The IPCC draft report called these ideas “speculative, uncosted and with potential unknown side-effects.”

But Professor Stephen Schneider, a 30-year climate consultant to the U.S. government and key IPCC player, insisted the world was “playing Russian roulette” by failing to address Climate Change. [Sydney Morning Herald Jan 29/07]

But the Obama administration realizes that even drastically cutting emissions will not immediately cut accumulated atmospheric CO2 concentrations - which will take another 30 years to decline.

“Assuming CO2 emissions are reduced by even 40% relative to 2000, it would keep rising by a minimum of 1.2 ppm/year, reaching levels near or above 450 ppm by 2050,” Dr. Glikson explains. “And this is without even accounting for the effects of methane, likely reduced CO2 intake by the oceans, and increases in positive feedbacks from the biosphere. At 450 ppm, with lag effects, polar ice sheets undergo advanced melting, with consequent major sea level rise.” [Truthout Apr 18/09]

Chemtrails promise a quick fix.

And an even weaker commitment to cutting emissions now.


WITH ARMED MILITIAS AND SCIENCE WHORES ON OUR SIDE, WHO NEEDS REALITY?

Even our current feeble attempts at maintaining hyper-wasteful lifestyles under the fig-leaf of “recycling” and switching to extremely toxic and electromagnetically polluting “curly” fluorescent bulbs are being quashed by the Oil Mafia’s disinformation campaign. And threats by such luminaries as Republican Representative Michelle Bachmann, who is exhorting her Minnesota constituents to be “armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax.”

As she puts it, “The science is on our side on this one.” [Truthout Apr 18/09]

Rigged science funded by corporations heavily invested in carbon emissions may be on the side of Climate Holocaust Deniers. But Ms. Bachmann ought to run her rant by the scientists watching their test rigs disappear into suddenly appearing ice-sheet fissures, oceangoing reporters describing audible methane farts from thawing seafloor gases trapping 20-times more atmospheric heat than carbon dioxide. She could also try selling her “Climate-Change-Is-A-Hoax” hoax to fishers gazing at an empty acidic ocean, and farmers plowing dust in Australia, India and the USA.


WHERE HAVE ALL THE GLACIERS GONE? (Sung to the Peter, Paul and Mary hit)

In the hullabaloo over collapsing banks, did anyone happen to catch the collapse of the Wilkins ice shelf? Its already floating mass won’t add to sea-level rise. But removing a cork the size of Jamaica from the continental glaciers will allow them to flow even faster into the sea. [Truthout Apr 18/09]

While we are busy with other concerns, Antarctica is busy disintegrating. The Wordle Ice Shelf is gone, the northern Larsen Ice Shelf no longer exists, and “uncorked” inland glaciers already discharging 103 billion tons of water and ice into the ocean every year are now sliding into the sea even faster because the 650 to 980 feet-thick floating ice-shelf that normally blocks them is… gone.

Oops!

“We didn't realize it was moving that fast,” says a chagrined Colin Summerhayes, executive director of the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research and a member of International Polar Year's steering committee.

Add the melting Greenland ice sheet, and these ocean runoff numbers double. [theenergycollective.com; China Daily; Xinhua Feb 26/09]

The U.S. Geological Survey and the British Antarctic Survey Climate blame this accelerating fiasco on “Climate Change.” [pubs.usgs.gov/imap/2600/B]


CLIMATE TRIGGER

Better make that “Climate Shift”. Like a slowly squeezed trigger, the vast ocean covering three-quarters of this planet absorbs heat very s-l-o-w-l-y. Then BANG! Temperatures jump 10 degrees in 10 to 30 years. Eventually, sea-levels from all that melting ice slosh over every coastline, carrying saltwater on average 300-feet inland for every foot of rise.

At least this is what ice core samples show happened the last time Earth underwent a major warming event. Unlike a stock market downtick, “Mom” stayed overheated for 222,000 years. Temperatures persisted more than 11F above normal. Sea life in an acidic ocean was devastated.

The Runaway Global Warming that happened 55 million years ago was most likely caused by major volcanic eruptions following abrupt tectonic shifts. This time around, our car emissions already exceed those prehistoric volcanic releases...

Put another way, the last time the 95,200 cubic-kilometer Western Antarctic Ice Sheet melted into the ocean, and trees and bushes flourished in Antarctica, atmospheric CO2 concentration was around 400 ppm. Unless we stop adding more CO2 and nitrogen fertilizer emissions to the atmosphere RIGHT NOW, we’ll be at 400 ppm by 2020. [Reuters Apr 27/07; AP July 12/06]

The usually reserved Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in England calls this, “Catastrophic”.


TILT…

Onboard a planet that is three-quarters covered by water, sea level rise is a very big deal. With most people, agriculture and industries concentrated near a coastline, a three-foot sea-level rise is considered disastrous. The Wilkins meltdown means that sea levels are going to rise at least 20 feet sometime after 2100.

Or maybe sooner. Invest in life-rafts now, because if the rapidly melting Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets slide into the sea, Mother Ocean will come wading ashore in a slow-motion 200-foot-high tsunami that will not recedes for eons. [Climate, Climate Change 2007; PNAS Vol. 106 No.10]

One other thing: Remove the pivotal weight of the entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet and the Earth’s rotational axis is expected to shift “rather dramatically” – at least 500 meters. Besides causing everyone caught in the lurch to clutch for handholds, this tilt would tip water from the southern ocean northward. Meanwhile, the bedrock depressed by all that ice will gradually spring back, displacing still more water northward. The result will be sea-levels along the Indian subcontinent and North American seaboard at least 25% higher than current “worst-case” predictions.

No wonder the Obama team is preparing the way for a major “chemtrails” announcement.

But can renewed “aerial obscuration” stop this ongoing meltdown?


CHOKING ON GLOBAL DIMMING

“If we carried on pumping out the particles, it would have terrible impact on human health, I mean particles are involved in all sorts of respiratory diseases,” Dr. Travis continued, referring to everyday air pollution.

He’s not kidding. Calling sub-micron particulate pollution the size of aluminum and barium chemtrail chemicals “an extreme human health hazard,” the EPA warns that when this tiny airborne fallout evades lung filters and enters the blood stream, it can trigger acute respiratory reactions, high blood pressure, and cause heart attacks within two hours of inhalation. Researchers in Taiwan have documented “a significant increase” in the number of stroke victims when PM pollutant levels rise. [Idaho Observer May/04]

Dr. David Travis could have been referring to chemtrails when this contrails scientist said, “If you fiddle with the balance of the planet, the radiative balance of the planet, you affect all sorts of circulation patterns like monsoons, which would have horrible effects on people. So it would be extremely difficult, in fact impossible, to cancel out the greenhouse effect just by carrying on pumping out particles, even if it wasn't for the fact that particles are damaging for human health.”

Don’t bother telling this to the people of the Sahel. When the African monsoons failed in 1984, the resulting Ethiopian famine that stunned obese nations was caused by something called “Global Dimming”.

Dr. Gerald Stanhill coined this term after finding that between the 1950s and the early 1990s, the solar energy reaching Earth's surface dropped 9% in Antarctica, 10% in the USA, by almost 30% in Russia, and by 16% in parts of the British Isles. [BBC Apr 19/09]

It turns out that air polluted by ground level carbon emissions, high-flying jetliners and chemtrails provides ten-times more particles for small water droplets to form. Acting like mirrors, many small droplets reflect much more sunlight back into space than fewer big ones.

This was before the “Jet Age” - and chemtrails - really took off.


UNHAPPY ANNIVERSARY

“Delivering enough particles from high-flying aircraft to mitigate warming and further erode Earth’s protective solar radiation shielding would take at least 10 years,” predicted the 1999 NAS report on climate mitigation.

That anniversary passed last year.

Eleven years after chemtrail “laydowns” began in earnest over the United States, the effects of global warming are accelerating. But scientists like Dr. Peter Cox from the Hadley Centre Meteorological Office are convinced that sunlight-reflecting pollutants of all types have offset global warming with counteractive cooling.

So… as increasingly regulated pollution levels fall, and commercial air traffic dwindles from prolonged economic collapse and resurgent oil prices…

“We're gonna be in a situation unless we act where the cooling pollutant is dropping off while the warming pollutant is going up, CO2 will be going up and particles will be dropping off and that means we'll get an accelerated warming. We’ll get a double whammy, we'll get reducing cooling and increased heating at the same time,” Cox warns.

Is this why many observers have been reporting increased chemtrail activity over many North American locations? Is this why the Obama White House is coming closer to “outing” chemtrails?

What are you doing to reduce carbon emissions at home, at work and in-between right now?

True reasons of the world economic crisis

Until 1971 dollar was tied to gold content, so the US currency was supported with gold reserves of the USA. However since 1971 dollar and gold correlation was canceled and dollars were produced in unlimited amount. Dollar purchasing power was ensured not only with the USA GDP (as it usually happens) but also with the GDP of other countries in the world.

It is ok, but the states which indirectly supported the power of dollar with their economies never had control on volume of dollar emission. The USA government doesn’t have such control either. The right of control has only the Fed of the USA.

The Federal Reserve System (which is the central bank of the USA) is a privately owned organization and it is a property of 20 private banks of the USA. Their principal business is to produce the world money. The Fed owners devoted a lot of time (decades, even centuries) and efforts to achieve that privilege. Here we can mention the 1-st and the 2-nd World Wars and Breton Woods Agreement in 1944 etc., and certainly the establishment of the Fed in1907.

Thus finally a group of private individuals obtained a right to produce dollars, determine the volume and terms of production etc. In the period since 1971 till 2009 the volume of dollars in the world was increased in dozens of times, it exceeded the real volume of products in the world in many times.

Fed owners as private organization first of all and secondly the USA held all the aces in this situation. The advantages of the Fed owners we will discuss later. As for the benefits of the USA, this is the opportunity during the last 38 years (since 1944 and especially since 1971) to live beyond their means.
The USA GDP makes up 20% of the world’s production, and consumption of the USA is 40% of goods produced yearly in the world. How is it possible? It’s possible only as result of dollar emission without production increase and great demand for dollar in countries of the whole world. Exchange of goods and tangible assets for uncovered but popular dollars seems to be very similar to the situation when the Island of Manhattan was bought for $24 (in trinkets and beads) from the American Indians.
Many countries build in their economies to the system of dollar purchasing power support. If they also had a right to provide the control of dollar emission as well as if the USA government had the right of control, the world economy would never undergo a crisis. Real volume of dollars would correspond to the volume of assets, which support the currency.

However dollar emission control is provided only by several private individuals. After all, it is well-known that private individuals have private interests.

I didn’t mean to criticize the Fed, the United States of America or someone else. Let’s not rake anyone over the coals. However we should be realistic to get at a true picture of the world we live in. A true picture of the world will help you understand what is going on, what is doing to be next and what you can do to avoid crisis consequences or make them as soft as possible.

Now we have a question. What made the Fed to produce more dollars than the world economy required for stability?

The matter is that if you are a private individual and have a right to issue dollar, which is supported with the world economy, so you are tempted to start overproduction (if only you are no saint like Maria Theresa, but bankers of Fed are certainly not), as it gives you fantastic opportunities and privileges. That was the real purpose the Fed was established for, that was the real aim of affords to make dollar to become the world currency. Your dollar overproduction is your own business. It is the best business in the world. It is much more profitable than any other way to make money. Drugs, prostitution and arms traffic look like childish sports comparing with the right of dollar production.

Dollar overproduction was organized to get rich (what can be other reason?). With help of this actually virtual money you can buy not virtual but really liquid assets (companies, plants, gold and other asset).

In order to prevent the influence of unsecured part of dollar emission on the product market, which can lead to dollar devaluation (and this will inevitably happen if there are more dollars than products and assets in the world) genius Fed owners invented very effective ways to tie up, to freeze the considerable proportion of dollars in a virtual product.

First of all, they used stock market for this purpose. Usual and normal stock market was changed to a great extent into virtual. Shares of a firm really have a certain price. However, the main and almost the only shares value on a normal market depends on business profitability; that means that shareholders get their income as a part of company profit shared between shareholders. Shares grow in prices in case if annual profit from laid-down capital grows. That is the situation on normal stock market.

The situation will be different on a virtual stock market. You will be explained that profitability is not of a great importance. These 2, 3, 4 or 5% of corporate profit, which earn a corporation, and 10, 20 or 50% of this profit which are shared between shareholders don’t mean anything.

The key condition is increase of capitalization and increase of shares value correspondingly. It’s important that your share holding increased in value. That is the main income from investment. Actually that is a trick for chumps. And don’t be disappointed with a fact that very smart and competent people are among these chumps. "The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived."

Unfortunately, this rule is universal, has no exception and applies to very clever people too.

The situation on a virtual stock market is the following:

Imagine that a businessman made one or several million dollars. He starts thinking about widening of investment, for example about building of a new plant. For this purpose he has to go out of his way to develop a high-quality product which will be on demand, to find a building land, to build a plant, to hire personnel, to train them, to lay in supplies of raw materials, to produce some products, to promote own trademark, to sale own products etc. These are huge inputs of own labor, time and health, and you get only petty money from the investment. This kind of work requires your attention and forces daily, monthly and yearly. No pains, no gains. However, a ‘sweet’ stock market comes to hand as an alternative. You don’t have to make any efforts. Your money and your share holdings rise in prices annually. Actually 10-15% annually is added to initial price for you just on paper. No headaches, no special muscle or mental efforts.

It is easy and clear, as free cheese in a well-known device. It is really difficult not to get deceived and not to trust economic analysts, who explain that the main thing is not a company’s profitability but increase of rate value.

This is really very important for those who changed stock market into virtual. Stock market based of increase of stock price can “utilize” or “tie up” dollar in dozen times more than stock market based on shares value evaluation according to the real corporate profitability. It is really important for virtual stock market creators as they count tens of trillions of dollars.

By the way, options, futures and other stock rubbish are also acts in the same performance which we call “virtual stock market”.

That’s why even very smart businessmen were interested in being deceived and in believing in stock market, they had a hope to lighten their burden. In fact, real money you earned doing a job of work were changed in such market into virtual capital.

A stock market trick founders solved not only the problem of ‘freezing’ dollars. Such market provided other fantastic opportunities for them; it provided them with chance to make vast sums of money.
If you control key events of this market and you are a man of means (if you publish dollars you have surely no problem with money as you can always open long-term credit account for yourself), if you create news which will influence the market, and if you set time and order for news to be broadcasted, you will make fantastic sums of money. For all that, your money (in spite of money of those chumps who also try to gamble on a stock exchange) will be not virtual at all, your real profitability will be not 10-15 virtual percents but real  40, 50, 60,…,100%. And it happens year by year.

The main thing is that you always know exactly when you are going to collapse the market after your money is derived from it. And until that moment you will buy up controlling stocks of really profitable enterprises year by year in order to have a great part of real actives in your hands after economy collapse.

Stock market for other participants can be compared with Russian roulette in its most extreme variant when there are five bullets in a six-shot revolver. That is also a gamble, and even in such kind of gambles there are chumps who win, but there will be not many of them as results are determined with certain starting rules.

Stock market was really ensured with money only by 1-2%.  That means that only 1-2% of money can be taken out by invertors without losses, as this market is virtual and it wasn’t supposed that investors could leave this market simultaneously and take out at least the sum they paid at the entry.
This situation is similar to situation at a bank when all clients decide to take their deposits simultaneously. Such bank comes very close to bankruptcy. However, usually a bank should have assets which exceed its liability, and when a bank doesn’t have enough cash to pay clients’ deposits back, this bank is supposed to sell assets in order to meet commitments. In any case a bank will pay at least 80-90 % of deposit back to its clients.

Stock market is totally different, there is no liability at all, nothing is guaranteed and nothing will be paid back ever.

The lowest price of stock market is a real price for shares, which depends on profitability of an enterprise. This price is dozen times lower than shares price on a virtual market.

That’s why I smile when I hear that the USA will assign 700 billion dollars to save their stock market and experts claim that it would be enough.

They need to publish 100 trillion dollars to save virtual stock market; this sum should cover the whole value of the market. But if this money is published the dollar will tumble in 10 times. That’s why nobody is going to save stock market in the form it existed during last decades. It is simply impossible.
Stock market fulfilled certain tasks and its creators don’t need it anymore.

Certainly the market creators are very clever and they will imitate attempts to save stock market until a convenient moment. Prices on stock market will grow for several days (by the way, stock market creators can earn some more money once again as time and volume of growth is determined indeed by them). No stranger will be allowed to win in this gamble.

By the way, did you ever analyze the information given by ‘sophisticated’ experts and analysts about reasons of stock price or oil quotation growth and fall?

For instance, a sophisticated person claims on CNN channel (or any other channel) that the oil price increased $10 per barrel, and the reason of such increase was the information that oil supply in the USA oil storages appeared to be 1 million barrels less than it was expected. Who and in which volume “expected” this and why “expectations” level should be the starting point for published supplies evaluation? Nobody tries to answer this question, but this is another question of the same performance.

First of all, let us say couple words about these 1 million barrels. That is about 131 thousand tons for Brent trademark (or about 2500 tank-wagons of oil). Really such volume of oil is to be consumed in the USA during one hour. There was consumed about 21 million barrels of oil per day in the USA in 2005. Now this is about 24 million barrels. 1 million barrels is 1/8760 part or about 0,012% of annual oil consumption in the USA. One million barrels costs 100 million dollars (if price is 100 dollars per barrel). These 100 million barrels are not lost, they didn’t disappear. This oil is just not brought to oil storages yet. Actually it’s not really certain that oil is still not brought and there is no oil in the storages. He who knows nothing, doubts nothing. What we have here is a piece of informative news for the market. This ‘striking information’ results in cost increase of annual world oil production up to 228 million of dollars (10 dollars x 7,6 barrels in ton x 3 billion tons).

You can evaluate experts’ intelligence yourself when they explain you the reason of price increase up to10 dollars per oil barrel. 99% of other comments by financial experts from stock markets are of the same nature. And now you can make your own conclusion about how much was earned due to this piece of news and who did it.

And now let’s talk about high price of oil. During last 8-10 years we could observe an increase of oil price. High price of oil solved during this period the same tasks as a stock market. It tied up dollars, but in spite of stock market it tied up dollars in real commodity.

Oil is the best choice to tie great amounts of money. It is possible to choose a wrong object and increase price for commodity, which will not be in demand in case price is too high. Oil is really the only commodity which is always in demand. Each citizen driving his own car can hardly be forced to use public transport, it’s practically impossible. Such person would better prefer to stay hungry but save this money to buy petrol and drive his car further more. Actually 69% of oil is refined into petrol or diesel fuel. But for all that oil ties not only money of big corporations but also money of usual citizens, as during last 10 years people possessed too much money and these means became also an early danger for dollar, which is the main commodity of the Fed owners.

Apart from direct tying up several trillion dollars, high oil price is also the best tool to increase prices for other goods (food, mechanical engineering etc.), as each price includes also energy and transport constituents.

Such annual additional rise in prices gave the opportunity to tie up several trillion dollars more.

So the only reason of extremely high price of oil during the last decades was the dollar publishers’ interest. They needed to delay a downfall for several years and get prepared to ‘the managed collapse’ of the world economy.

In order to increase prices so much and clearly explain this fact later they organized a war in Iraq for ‘cheap oil’. But the real purpose was not oil control. The real purpose was to organize that Iraq oil wouldn’t come to the market for several years and that instability in this region would influence on rise in world oil prices.

Let’s continue.

It was ridiculous to observe the messages during spring and summer 2008 that special commission in the USA is looking for traders who are guilty of high oil prices, which makes economy of the USA suffer. Actually these traders were not found.

We shouldn’t blame the Fed of the USA owners. These are just smart as a whip people, who achieved fantastic financial, political and military opportunities to influence our world. They are not obliged to take care of the whole humanity; they are not God after all. They didn’t assume such obligations and don’t have any duties for anybody. They just do their business and build mechanisms for their business to develop and prosper. The purpose of this article is not to accuse anyone; the purpose is to show you a real situation and to help you save your money. Money of those of you who earned them with hard work and saved an average sum of money: 100 thousand up to 1-2 million of dollars. You will not save this money keeping cash. But that is a point for further discussion. And now we shall continue.

Do you know how ‘exchange’ price of gold is set?

Do you think that there are trades on the gold-exchange and balance of supply price and demand price is actually exchange rate? You are wrong. Gold price is set by very clever and respectful people (and that is not irony as people who created such mechanism are really smart and powerful).

Gold price is set by Rothschilds, who meet in their private residence in London. According to exchange bids, which origin is actually unknown, they set gold price. I applauded them in my mind 6-7 years ago when they gradually cut gold price until it became 250 dollars per troy ounce.  Than as if somebody waved a magic wand there appeared a lot of articles claiming that gold doesn’t serve as treasure anymore, that gold lost its ensuring function of a part of gold and foreign currency reserves, and that central banks should get rid of gold. As result central banks of Switzerland and England sold half of their gold reserves to investors. This is about 2500 tones, as far as I know (just guess who bought it). Also as far as I know, central banks not only of England and Switzerland made such decision.

During next 3 years gold price increased to more than $1000 per ounce.

Now the price is about $ 750-800. But don’t worry, it will rise up to $2000 and $3000 if it is necessary. Actually the price will be claimed not in dollars but in other currency which will replace dollar.

Everyone can imagine the perspectives of his own welfare if he had the right to set gold price for the whole world. Would he need to have any other business or this business is worth all other businesses in the world?

And now it’s time to tell what is going on now in the world and what is going to be next.

Now we can observe a ‘managed collapse’. We should understand that there is nothing awful for virtual market creators. Everything is under control. This stage of ‘managed collapse’ is called to bring huge incomes and strengthen positions of the Fed owners in the whole world. A stage of collapse is inevitable as laws of Physics are at work and any financial pyramid is always breaks down in a certain time. Egyptian pyramids are for centuries, but financial pyramids are called to collapse.

It would collapse automatically a little bit later, actually 2-3 years later. But in that case the process wouldn’t be managed and could injure the interest of pyramid creators. A managed collapse was prepared for years. The matter is that during this stage the aim is to get the most important and the most profitable companies for peanuts. It is necessary to control all financial flows and to have a possibility to stop those which can damage interests of buying enterprises (we are talking about financial flows which can help an interesting for buyers enterprise to continue work until the end of crisis).

Can we talk about any preparation? Can we see the traces? We can. In the middle and at the latter half of the 90th bank secrecy was practically cancelled. The official cause for bank secrecy revision was the urgent need to fight against non-payment of taxes. Under the threat of losing USA, Canada and some other bank markets Switzerland and other declaring bank secrecy countries refused to deal with it.

However, it is not enough just to know that some money are transferred from one place to another. It is important to be able to influence the situation if necessary. The next step was September 11, 2001. Events which happened that day solved several tasks, but we shall speak about the only one we are interested in at this article. These events resulted in passing the laws for fighting terrorism financing. It’s easy to realize that terrorists are almost always financed not through banks at all. Actually terror acts need quite moderate sums of money to be organized, usually this are no more than several tens of thousands of dollars.

Actually the main purpose of these laws was to create the mechanism for long-term blockage of any sum of money without court decisions, if it is suspected to be finally a mean for terrorists. Judicial procedure in this case is inconvenient, there should be produced evidence that this was really terrorist money and it’s quite difficult to control a lot of trials around the world. That was the way they received a real tool of necessary influence on situation in future ‘managed collapse’.

It was important for successful forthcoming buying up of important assets that big interesting enterprises didn’t accumulate considerable reserves of money until the moment of decline, which would enable them to survive during the period of ‘managed collapse’.

The possible mechanism for enterprisers to accumulate such hidden reserves is nonpayment of taxes or cash.

As you remember since 2000 it was launched a serious world campaign against enterprises which don’t pay taxes. Do you remember WorldCom and others? They were learned from bitter experience that they should pay in any case, even if accounting situation really allows to have different interpretation and not to pay tax in certain conditions. Someone became a bankrupt, someone was imprisoned. That was demonstrative imprisoning.

The super-profits, which could be earned by companies due to high oil prices and due to trading on the exchange, were withdrawn by means of excise duties and other taxes. Companies actually earned about 20 % of earnings so that they could function and just a little bit prosper. That’s why extremely strict control on tax paying was very important. It was necessary to collect as much taxes as possible.
What purposes were tax sources for (except for financing of budget expenses)? They were the source for various reserved and other funds.

During last 3 years there also was a fight for cash. This solved two strategic tasks. The first task is that no one could make big cash supply, which would support business in case of crisis. The second task is to earn huge sums of money as cash cost was 11-12% of a sum.

From the one hand we can state that fight for taxes is a job of any civilized state and it’s not really preparation to ‘managed collapse’. It is really so. But we should mention that the strictest form of the fight for taxes and oil price grow started simultaneously. We must pay our attention also to the forms of taxpaying fight: they choose demonstrative victim (WorldCom), its relations with big bosses leads to conclusion that the main object of fight are big companies. We also should monitor the purpose this money was sent for (USA stock market, USA mortgage bonds etc.). All these facts lead us to the conclusion which has been already made.

Finally, the day which was expected so much by somebody came. A crisis occurred.

The way European and American banks lost their liquidity is well-known and there is no reason to talk about it once again.

With a wave of a magic wand (and you know whose hands hold this wand) demand on metal production fell down, oil also fell in price, capitalization of companies fell rapidly in several times, banks started credits recalling, mortgage lending and bank loans were stopped.

In other words, the process which can be called ‘the managed collapse’ started at full speed.

Stock market collapsed.  Problems with products distribution made metallurgy, car, building, chemical and other industries suffer. There is no reason to look through all aroused problems; you can find a lot of such information in headlines.

However there are interesting peculiarities: stock markets collapsed immediately (during 1-2 days) and extent of collapse was great enough to make serious even fatal holes in liquidity of enterprises and banks.

Banks were the first target. Making their life easier banks didn’t like taking the trouble to credit real business sector; it was much more comfortable for them to gamble on a stock exchange with spare money of their clients. Since virtual stock market grew readily and rapidly. And one day it fell rapidly in 20%. If we say it in simple words – banks lost the fifth part of that client money which they gambled on a stock market. Selling shares at the new lower prices would mean setting huge losses and saying good-bye to all hopes that it was occasional fall and everything is going to be ok in a week. Everybody waited for previous prices. Prices however fell in a week more than in twice. The volume of losses became disastrous (prices on virtual stock markets fell in 5 times in some states for today).
Banks got in result big holes in their balances, banks can’t give credits anymore because they are lack of money. European banks start to recall credits which were given to foreign banks and companies because of problems in their countries, which make the situation even more disaster.

The biggest companies lose rapidly their capitalization, which is calculated according to share rates of the company on the virtual stock market. That is the next reason for banks to recall some credits and for rating agencies to decrease a company rating. Credit scale depends on ratings and on capitalization. If these indexes fall down some credits are recalled automatically and a company has no opportunity to take another credit anywhere to survive difficult times.

In general, banks and big companies which depended much on credits found themselves in a very difficult situation.

Actually in working economic model of the world no big enterprise or bank could work without credits during last decades. Credit recourses were widely available and interest rate was sweet for business. However enterprises and banks get in real trouble if they are required to pay credits back before due date. The reasons of recall are very objective; these reasons are mentioned in credit contract– «company's capitalization falls in 10 %». And we know that capitalization of all companies fell down.
By the way, doesn’t it remind you the beginning of the Great Depression, the crisis in 1929? There also was a situation that according to the share purchase credit conditions a creditor could call his money back during 24 hours (that is called marginal credit). When such requests were made unexpected and simultaneously, borrowers were forced to sell their shares urgently, which lead to immediate market default.

If this scheme worked in the thirties, why shouldn’t it be used today with some variations? Actually it is happening.

Now there is a task to buy up the most interesting and most profitable enterprises for peanuts. How can it be done? Should we just go to an owner and propose him to buy his business at a low price? Even if he has some problems, he will not agree for sure. He will probably wait until crisis is over. He will ignore court actions of creditors, delay legal procedures (which really can be delayed for 2-3 years).

That is not a way for the Fed.

In spite of its intellectual and financial power they don’t have enough resources to carry on thousands of lawsuits with people who would protect their business by hook or by crook. Time factor is also very important here. The whole operation should be finished in the short run, as after buying-up is finished the next more important stage will start. This will be discussed a little bit later.

How to buy-up enterprises and the whole branches of business in short terms and at reasonable prices?

It is simple: a state should save ‘damaged’ owners of big business, their banks and companies. A state would propose some ‘saving’ credits for strategically important companies.

The big business owner will have now a difficult choice:

– either the company’s bankruptcy of will start right now when there are no credits, no sales, and current expenses of the company so huge that they will kill the company in couple months even in case all production is stopped

– or he has to take a state credit and try to hold on as soon as all analysts and experts predict forthcoming upturn in spring and all rates will be of level as in July 2008

However, the matter is that when all expected companies will take credits and sign payment, finances will suffer really serious. When the term to pay credits will come, they will not have enough money to pay. Shares will fall in prices, oil prices also will fall up to 20 dollars per barrel, and demand will be really low. That is a scheme of global property redistribution, which is the main purpose of the stage of ‘managed collapse’. Certainly businesses will become state property first (officials will be strict towards non-paying owners), but later they will be bought by those who are expected to do this.

Now let’s talk about a ‘powerful’ dollar.

Dollar will be ‘strong’ all the time until big and not very big companies will have to pay their dollar credits back. There are a lot of such credits not only in the USA but also in other counties where a myth of the dollar as a strong currency is alive. A ‘strong’ dollar is much more difficult to be paid back and it is much more difficult to be bought in necessary volume for devaluating national currency. Dollar will be strong until the credited big enterprises will not change their owners.

Besides dollar will be ‘strong’ until this ‘strong’ dollar is needed to buy an interesting business. We are talking about profitable middle-size business, which will not become the state property until that moment. When business situation becomes really hopeless and businessmen will be close to lose their business, they will be proposed good sum of ‘strong’ dollars and they will be happy to sell their business.

When these two stages are done, the next in turn is the most interesting and the most dangerous stage.

I would like to mention that this article is for people who have some savings, for small and middle-size businessmen who saved $100 000 up to $2 000 000 with their own hard work. Today global processes can be destructive for results of their hard work. In order to avoid this destructive influence it’s very important to understand what is really going on in the world and what is going to be next. Knowing facts you will be able to make favorable decision in time and save the results of your long-term work.
It is a global property redistribution, which will lead to new configuration of the world with new centers of force. The main purpose of redistribution is of cause big companies, banks and enterprises, but not small and midsize business. Anyway everyone will feel a certain negative influence of redistribution and it’s necessary to get ready to avoid influence or at least to make it moderate.

Let’s continue our description of what s going to be after property redistribution.

Next is going an imminent event, which is dollar default. It’s imminently in any occasion, as dollar over-production by the Federal Reserve System is smart and huge, but still is a pyramid. Thus pyramid fulfilled its tasks and brought incredible profits to the creators, but it’s impossible from the one hand and unnecessary from the other to save it. It’s time for a new scheme to make money; it’s time for new Breton Woods agreements.

It’s impossible to pass to the new world system without rejection of the previous world currency, which is dollar.

There are not so many goods and real assets in the world as published dollars. The total quantity of dollars which were put in circulation is ten times more than the total cost of real assets.

There is no variant of further events left in which America could refuse from dollar default.

That’s why default and dollar rejection is going to happen within the next few months, whatever say different ‘experts’ and ‘analysts’.

The question is how it is going to happen, as it should be very serious and dangerous event for all people including organizers of dollar pyramid. Many of those who will lose everything will possibly reflect on who is guilty in this? The strongest move to solve this problem (and the safest for them) would be realization of default through “big blood”.

I think that they can organize a state of emergency on a world scale with hundred thousand of dead. The attack will be made on the territory of the USA or Israel. Attack on the territory of Europe is less possible, probably, together with the USA and Israel but not separately. Separate attack of Europe only would not meet the task to collapse dollar. The attack will be made probably with nuclear weapon or other ‘dirty’ bombs as there should be hundred thousand people dead and radioactive pollutions of large territories (a similar case in September 11, 2001 with 3 thousand people dead is not right for this time, the scale is too small for default).

Who and how will attack?

I suppose that nuclear weapon of Pakistan will be used in this operation, as it is the only muslim country which possess nuclear weapon. The powerful President Musharraf removed from this post for this purpose in August 2008 (actually the USA participated in that). Several months before Benazir Bhutto was killed (she also was a good leader and nuclear weapon couldn’t get out of hand). Zardari, the widower of Bhotto, came to the power after her death. That is ridiculous personality. A year ago he was a patient of a psychiatrist. While Bhotto twice served as Prime Minister of Pakistan, Zardari was kept in jail on corruption charges and accusations of murder, even his wife couldn’t help him to get cleared. This is the best kind of a governor to pass nuclear weapon to terrorists or to organize that Iranians could ‘buy’ or ‘steal’ it and use for bombing the USA or Israel.

I would remind that Zardari was actually a protege of the USA. In fact the USA today do a lot to provoke anti-American sentiments in Pakistan. How would you evaluate weekly attacks of Pakistan villages at the Afghanistan border by the USA air force, which is explained as pursuit of the talibs? There are 20-40 people dead each time, and usually these are women and children. And how would you evaluate recently published secret order dated July 2008 by Bush, which allows the USA air forces to cross Pakistan border and attack Pakistan territory for fighting with terrorist talibs without Pakistan authority permission.

Such actions have great influence on attitude towards the USA. Pakistan people as well as Pakistan air forces, which possess nuclear weapon, are actually provoked to have negative attitude.

It is obvious that after bombing the USA (or Israel) there will be a war with millions of victims. Since those who will attack America must be punished. It is doesn’t really matter who will attack – Iran with nuclear weapon of Pakistan, or Pakistan itself, or both states together, or Ben Laden who can in one way or another take the nuclear bomb. That will be such kind of important events that the question “if the dollar could be saved” will be inappropriate. You will be given a positive answer that that was a quilt of ‘damned terrorists’ or ‘aggressive states’ etc. They will state that they did everything they could: gave 700 billion of USA dollars in support of stock market, and that actions were proved to have positive influence (Dow Jones Index varies during the last time 8100 up to 9600 points). There was a summit of 20 states and we decided to reform International Monetary Fund and the World Bank to control ‘greedy’ bankers, who are the main crisis initiators, in a proper way. We did a lot to plaster and paint the front of the world financial system (a building which has blasted foundation and cracked bearing wall indeed). As plaster and pain are really two main ways to solve such problems.

We need to understand that humanity deals with genius and very influential group of people, who created the world structure which we live in. In order to understand a sense of their actions we should consider their occupation peculiarities. This will help us to understand their actions and forecast future events.

Accountancy is their education, ideology and mission. And such non-account values as ‘humanism’, ‘kindness’ and ‘compassion’ are outside of their vision.

The main things are figures, profit and bargains.

In situation which requires scarify people to get more profit they wouldn’t hesitate in what should be done. The only really important result for them is profit.

That is a great power of those people and their strategic susceptibility as well. The situation is that during hundred years their principles brought huge profits for them and made them powerful. However one day these principles will work against them and will cause damage to them or their business which their lives were devoted to.

Attendant expenses of their operations cost sometimes dozens million lives: the First World War – 20 million, the Second World War – 60 million of lives.

I hope that dollar collapse will be made in other way without war and without blood of innocent people.

It’s difficult to imagine other scenarios. However, everything is possible, everything is real. It depends only on intellect of the authors.

There are various variants. The most stupid is if the USA refuse dollar, announce default giving the reason that dollar can’t be the world currency anymore because of financial crisis and economic recession. ‘Experts’ and ‘analytics’ as well as a huge number of controlled by the Fed owners mass media outlets will tell stories for the whole world that it’s a historical truth that dollar became world currency for 90% and home currency only for 10%. And as dollar can’t be the world currency anymore (because of very objective reasons, because of the serious world crisis, which happened accidentally), it can’t also remain home currency of the USA. In order to save the most important world economy, which is the economy of the USA (in other words: in order to save the USA economy from a huge flow of dollars from the whole world) – only this great and humane mission makes the USA to refuse dollar and set ‘new dollar’ as home currency.

If during next three months after such announcement the world mass media outlets will promote such ideas 99,9% of people will really start to think that it was real the only and the best way to overcome the situation caused by the most impressive in the whole world history crisis.

In any case, there are much more humane ways to achieve a set purpose (without blood of innocent people of Israel, USA, Iran etc.)

They are also much cheaper than a war (only PR expenses).

This variant is acceptable for decision-makers only if after elimination of a one-polar world they will provide a many-polar world with other principles of getting their profit, other principles of their influence and other principles of world finance system correspondingly.

It seems to me for a while that everything is going to fall back into place: virtual stock markets, building of financial pyramids (using several currencies instead of a single), and so on according to the list.

However, there are also other world models, in which they can save their influence, but they don’t see them or just don’t want to.

If it is true, then the only variant of further events is blood. Only this variant allows claiming that everything was well organized and only due to ‘terrorist’, ‘enemies’ etc. everything was broken.

In other variants the truth will be surely revealed, so it would be rather difficult to prove the necessity to create new pyramids which pretty much similar to previous.

In general, dollar collapse and dollar rejection and default are inevitable.  Inevitability is determined with the fact that today world finance system is build according to finance pyramid principle.

Whatever will be said by ‘experts’, who really work for pyramid creators, this pyramid can’t be saved and now it’s a time of it to collapse. This will happen in the next few months.

Be sure that it is going to happen 100 % unexpectedly for all except those who manage the process. Until the last moment dollar will be strong and everything will go quite all right.

Euro, ruble and other currencies will collapse simultaneously. There will be no default for these currencies but they will to go down in price in 10-15 times because of a great hole in world finances.

When everybody will feel lack of money a new world economic system will be grounded.

The main positions will have those who have profitable assets (real enterprises etc.). Correctly chosen assets will earn new money for owners fast and in great quantities. Such owners will outdo others.
And now let’s talk how you can save your savings if you have such. You can save your savings in today conditions only obtaining real asset. What does ‘real assets’ mean after currency actually is depreciated?

You can save your money buying property, which will be valuable even after the current events. Cars, furnishings or clothing can be in demand, but you should remember that these goods are not good to save your capital. Car becomes cheaper 15% next week after purchase and 50% in three years, so buying a car you are going to have losses. Your money will not be saved and for sure will not increase. Only really valuable assets, which are people’s bare necessities and which are always in demand, should be considered in the situation of crisis.

Works of art (paintings, sculptures) of famous artists are rather good variant. But ‘entrance ticket’ for such purchase is more than million dollars. Forgery is rather possible, so you can buy just a pig in a poke. You also will need very big bank cell which cost 5-6 thousand dollars per month. And actually at time of world economic turmoil people rarely appreciate art giving their preferences to supply daily needs.

There are pros and cons for jewelry. A work of a jeweler makes up a great part of jewelry cost that is why it’s quite difficult to forecast if a certain piece of jewelry is in price in few years, or it will to the contrary fall in price.

High-quality precious stones are good investment to wait till crisis is over. The only disadvantage is that after such global crisis they will be on demand not immediately but during next 3-5 years as people need to solve more important tasks first, such as food, shelter, clothes, business and only after all some money can be saved to buy precious stones.

Good variant would be real estate investment as people always need shelter to live in and offices to work in. Life goes on even during crisis. However, we probably shouldn’t talk here about any profitability as paying capacity of tenants is quite low during crisis and will grow gradually in compliance with growth of economy. You can’t earn on real estate within the next few years as mortgage lending is temporary stopped and there is almost no solvent demand. So real estate investment can be good long-term freezing of capital.

Gold bullions is one of the best variants considering very special attitude to gold of a certain group of people. They love and respect gold during almost thousand years. They will never let gold fall too much in price. But this rule is for their personal gold, the gold they posses, not for your gold or for gold of someone. Gold is the perpetual value, so you can wait for increase in price for ever, or probably 5-7-10 years. In a certain moment gold price will be 2 or 3 thousand dollars instead of $800 for today. I have already mentioned who and how set gold prices.

Are you sure that price is set for you in order you earned too much profit? I wouldn’t play that game. This is historical business of a certain group of people and it for authorized persons only.

The most logical and correct decision would be investment in production of the resources which people will always be in need in shifting sands – food, water, dwelling and tools for production of these goods. Whatever is going on with economy or currency – people will always consume these goods. Investment in these goods production will not only save your savings but also will give you advantage in hard times, when daily needs are brought to the forefront.

The decision should be made as soon as possible, until currency is not and financial systems functionate. Rich for resources Europe is already in a deep crisis, dozens of states are under the threat of default, and recourses of countries in Eastern Europe, where capital deficit is reality, are de facto for sale. Not only useless luxury goods but also lands, plants and farms here are cheap at half the price at the moment. Resources which are of state importance found new owners at the moment.
Ukraine and Eastern Europe are examples. Hundreds of the most valuable resources of this country are for sale now as local owners are on the beach. They just don’t have enough money to maintain their work. There are machine-building plants with several hundred hectares of land, expensive equipment with dozen million dollars potential output! Chemical plants also held up their work because of lack of capital, but there are only few plants like this in the world… Fertile lands, big farms – at the moment their price is thousand times lower then real price. Each invested dollar will bring thousand dollars next year! At http://www.uinvest.com.ua you can check the list of such profitable investments
Certainly it will come to the end soon. Sagacious American and European investors are buying up these resources in great amounts straight away. Buy low sell high. While many people try to squeeze vestiges of virtual money out of stock exchanges, affiliated mutual funds and investment banks, smart investors buy real assets for a mere song. Such assets will cost tomorrow dozen billion dollars again. Actions, which all this project was started for, are being carried out. This is a change of ownership.

Our team attracts capital for buying such kind of assets. People having average income can legally increase their capital in dozen and hundred times. Today they have real chance to do this.

Visit our website http://www.uinvest.com.ua

Seismic Energy Dissipation Devices

Seismic Energy Dissipation Devices