This and That...

[Warph]

[Warph]

Queer Agriculture

When Joseph Stalin applied ideology to agriculture, it was called "Lysenkoism," and resulted in the aggravation of famine caused by collectivism. His fellow leftists have learned nothing, or they would not be leftists. Now agriculture is being subjected to the bizarre adulation of sexual deviancy that predominates at liberal elite strongholds like Berkeley:


The Center for the Study of Sexual Culture at the University of California, Berkeley, is presenting a talk [this] week on "Queering Agriculture," dedicated to the proposition that "it is absolutely crucial queer and transgender studies begin to deal more seriously with the subject of agriculture." ...

The talk's presenter, a Ph.D. candidate in American studies at the University of Maryland, will allegedly show that "the growing popularity of sustainable food is laden with anthroheterocentric assumptions of the 'good life' coupled with idealized images and ideas of the American farm, and gender, radicalized and normative standards of health, family, and nation."

When these malevolent lunatics manage to use the federal government to take control of food production, people are going to starve.

No corner of America is safe.

[Warph]

~The Truth About the Crusades~

Traitors against Western Civilization reflexively side with its historic enemy, Islam. Those who are ignorant or assume their audience to be ignorant of history will often evoke the Crusades as a great sin against the peaceful Muslim world. Last week Obama appalled descent people when he attempted to justify the Islamic State's atrocities by denouncing Christianity. Naturally he mentioned the Crusades, as Bill Clinton did right after 9/11 for the same malign purpose.


In reality, the Crusaders were heroes who fought a defensive war against the same menace of expansionist Islam that is on horrific display today. Dr. Bill Warner provides some visual perspective:

Bill Warner, PhD: Jihad vs Crusades

VIDEO:

First Principles debunks four myths anti-Western liars have propagated regarding the noble Crusades:
http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.com/articles.aspx?article=1483


Myth #1: The crusades represented an unprovoked attack by Western Christians on the Muslim world.

Myth #2: Western Christians went on crusade because their greed led them to plunder Muslims in order to get rich.

Myth #3: Crusaders were a cynical lot who did not really believe their own religious propaganda; rather, they had ulterior, materialistic motives.

Myth #4: The crusades taught Muslims to hate and attack Christians.

To learn what really happened, read God's Battalions by Rodney Stark. If you don't have time for a whole book, there is an excellent historical overview at Crisis Magazine. Highlights:

Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity — and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion — has no abode. Christians and Jews can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years.

And beyond, to the present day (e.g., al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden, Iran's Ali Khamenei, the Islamic State's Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi).

With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed's death. They were extremely successful. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt — once the most heavily Christian areas in the world — quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East.

That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.

We face a similar choice between self-defense and annihilation today. If this isn't obvious already, it will be when Obama has finished facilitating Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons.

[Warph]

~~~Government Explained~~~

An inquisitive alien visits the planet to check on our progress as a species, and gets into a conversation with the first person he meets.  The alien discovers that we live under the rule of a thing called "government", and wants to understand more about what "government" is, what it does, and why it exists.

VIDEO:

**Transcript for Government Explained**

Human: Hey, an alien!

Alien: Yes, I have travelled across space to check on the progress of your species.

H: Cool.  Shall I take you to our leader?

A: Your what?

H: Our leader - the guy in charge.

A: The guy in charge of what?

H: Well, in charge of everything.

A: You have one guy in charge of everything?

H: No, no, he's in charge of government.

A: What is government?

H: Well, government makes the rules for us.  It tells us what we can do and what we can't do.

A: So government is really smart?  They come up with wise rules for you to follow?

H: Well mostly, but some of its rules are really stupid.

A: Do you disregard those rules?

H: No, we have to follow the rules, even if they are stupid, or we disagree with them.  Government punishes anyone who disobeys the rules.

A: So you are slaves to government?

H: No, no, no, it's not like that at all.  Government works for us, the people.  It serves us.  We're the boss.

A: It tells you what to do, and it punishes you with violence if you disobey it, and yet you're its boss?

H: Yeah. 

A: But there are some things government does that you don't like?

H: Well, yeah, not everything government does is popular.  Like spending on wars, for example.

A: What is a war?

H: It's when government basically spends the peoples' money on weapons and soldiers, and then sends them over to the other side of the world to kill a bunch of people over there and destroy their country.  I don't like it that government does this.

A: Well I can see why you might not like that.  Have you humans reached the stage where you generally consider stealing, enslaving and killing each other to be bad things?

H: Oh yeah, we know that.  Don't steal.  Don't attack.  Don't assault.

A: But you give money to government and they use it to kill people.

H: Well yeah, but government does good things with tax money as well.

A: Why don't you stop paying for the things you don't like and only pay for the good things it does?

H: No, we can't do that.  You can't just decide to stop paying taxes, because the rules say that everyone has to pay taxes.

A: But the rules come from government though, don't they?

H: Yeah.

A: So government made a rule which says that everyone has to pay them money?  So everybody pays taxes because if they didn't, government would punish them using violence?

H: Well yes, but most people don't mind paying taxes; most people feel obligated to pay taxes and obey government laws, because it's for the good of society.  Society needs government, and that means we all have to pay taxes.

A: So just to make sure I've got this straight.  Government makes the rules and you feel obligated to follow the rules, even the ones you don't like, and it tells you what to do, and threatens to punish you if you don't do what it says.  And it uses some of the money that it has taken from you using threats of violence to pay for things you don't like and actually think are immoral, like mass murder.

H: Yeah, but we can ask it to please tell us to do smart things, and please don't take our money and use it to kill people.  We're allowed to ask them to tell us to do what we want them to tell us to do.

A: Are you guys just scared of this thing?  Is government some huge monster that can just squish you at any moment if you disobey? 

H: No, government isn't a monster.

A: Well what is it then?  Could you draw me a picture of it? 

H: Government isn't really the sort of thing you can draw a picture of.

A: Maybe you could take me to it.  Where is government?

H: You mean the building?

A: Government is a building?

H: No, but the politicians who make up the government have buildings they work from.

A: So government is a group of these politicians?

H: Yeah.

A: OK, so what species are these politicians?

H: Well they're... human.

A: Like you?!

H: Yeah.

A: So politicians are humans, and they're government.  You're a human, but you're not government?

H: No.

A: So it's the politicians, they are the ones that boss the rest of you around, and make you do things you don't want to do and take your money using threats of violence.  But even though you're all humans – you're not allowed to boss them around and take their money?

H: No, they'd put us in a cage if we did that.  But look, it's not like the politicians can just do whatever they want.  Like, a politician can't just come up to me on the street and make me give him money.  They can't do that.  Politicians can only do things like that in their job, when they're working for government. 

A: Oh, so politicians aren't government.  They're just work for government. 

H: Yeah.

A: OK, so government isn't a monster, and it isn't building, and its not politicians, it's something else.  And it employs politicians who are just regular humans, who get to order everyone else around and take their money.  How does a regular human become a politician?

H: Well that's the great thing about our government.  It's a democracy, and that means that the people actually have the power, because we get to decide who among us get to be the politicians, we get to vote.  And if a politician starts doing things we don't like, we can just replace him with someone else in the next election. 

A: So the people that get chosen to be politicians only get to boss people around and take their money for a short time, and then they go back to being regular humans?

H: Exactly.

A: That sounds like a powerful position to be in.  But if you get to choose who does that, I assume that politicians are always the wisest, most honest, caring and respected people among you...

H: Well, no, not really.  I wouldn't say politicians are known for being honest, or wise, or caring, and they're certainly not the most respected people among us.  Come to think of it, most politicians are lying, power-hungry crooks.

A: The ones you chose?

H: Yeah, they're always doing things we don't like.  They use taxpayers' money to enrich themselves and their friends, and they never keep their promises to voters.  They've been caught stealing and lying and taking bribes, and they mostly do what the big corporations want.   Yeah, they're always doing stuff like that.  They're completely corrupt.  They're a bunch of lying crooks.

A: But you said that most humans know that stealing and beating each other up and killing are wrong.  And you said that you have the power because you can change who's in charge.  So why don't you just replace the lying, thieving, murderous crooked politicians with some regular people?

H: Well we don't try to elect lying crooks.  It just always turns out that way.  But we have to have a government, because some humans are nasty, and might kill, or enslave or steal.  Civilization just couldn't survive without government.

A: Let me get this straight.  Because you're worried about the small number of nasty people that are willing to kill, enslave and steal, you think it's necessary for your survival to have a system where some humans among you, for a short while, get to call themselves the government, and they get to order everyone else around like slaves and, if they want, commit mass murder, using money they stole, using threats of violence.  Politicians get to kill, enslave and steal, because if they didn't, someone else might?  And you try to elect good honest people to be politicians but what happens every time is that the people you elect turn out to be corrupt, evil, lying crooks.  That's your system?

H: Yeah, that's pretty much government.

[Warph]

"YIKE" STORY OF THE DAY

Secret Meetings between Aliens, Dwight Eisenhower & Richard Nixon 

http://strangetimesusa.blogspot.com/2012/02/secret-meetings-between-aliens-dwight.html

by Miguel Saucedo - Strange Times U.S.A. - Editor

On February 14th, 2012 the Huffington Post reported about 3 secret meetings that happened between Dwight Eisenhower and Grey Aliens.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/02/14/eisenhower-and-the-aliens-former-us-president-had-three-secret-meetings-with-extra-terrestrials_n_1275692.html?ref=uk

According to lecturer and author Timothy Good, a former U.S. Government consultant has claimed that the 34th President of the United States of America met extraterrestrials at a remote base in New Mexico in 1954.


Eisenhower (one of the few U.S. Presidents to believe in other worldly beings) and a few F.B.I. agents are said to have communicated with these beings through 'telepathic messages'.  They communicated back and forth until deciding on a place to meet.

The two parties finally met at Holloman Air Force Base and there were 'many witnesses'.


"Aliens have made both formal and informal contact with thousands of people throughout the world from all walks of life,"
This meeting was said to have taken place while officials were told that he was on a small vacation in Palm Springs, Ca. in February 1954.  Only a few officials have known about this meeting.

Brothers and Sister "Jill", "Donn" and "Valiant Thor"

http://theuniversalseduction.com/articles/valiant-thor-the-human-alien-from-venus-washington-dc-vip-during-late-50s

VIDEO OF VALIANT THOR: 

UFO theorists and researchers have recently theorized that the meetings took place to sign 'intergalactic' treaties.  There has long been a speculation that these other worldly beings have also exchanged technological and medical advancements.  Advancements such as the cure for cancer, propulsion technologies and unlimited safe, environmental energy.  If so, why haven't we cured cancer yet?  Pharmaceutical and oil company greed could be a possibility as to why we haven't put those 'secrets' in to practice.

The first race of aliens that Eisenhower met with looked of Nordic descent.  One of the prime examples of these 'human aliens' would be 'Valiant Thor' who visited the Pentagon and had meetings with the President Eisenhower and Richard Nixon over a period of 3 years.

  The late Dr. Frank E. Stranges had a chance to interview Valiant Thor and chronicled his half hour meeting in his famous book 'Stranger at the Pentagon':

He told me his name was Valiant Thor.  He grabbed my hand.  His skin as soft as a baby's skin but his grip as hard as a man.  We spent 30 minutes; mostly me asking questions and he giving answers.  He claimed that he was from the inside of the planet that our bible calls the 'Morning and the Evening' star.  "The planet Venus?"  He says, "Yes". 

All of this time Mr. Thor was at the Pentagon for three years mind you and he was coming and going at will.  He was brought to the President of the United States Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon, offered to give them information on how our people can successfully live without sickness, without poverty, without disease and without death.

They told him, "I'm sorry we cannot accept the information that you are freely giving us because it will ruin the economy of this nation." 

Commander Thor left on the morning of March 16th, 1960 on the outskirts of Alexandria, Virginia where his 'spaceship' came down, he went into the 'spaceship' and disappeared from sight.

(Ah yeah... Okay... I think it was a hoax...
but, then again, we have a community organizer as President.  Anything is possible.  Think about it... maybe Jarhead could explain it...)

http://www.bing.com/search?q=valiant+thor+hoax&qs=AS&sk=LS1&pq=valiant+thor+&sc=8-13&sp=2&cvid=573b24d3d5f94014b83ee87b8ebf71c5&FORM=QBRE

Images of Valiant Thor
http://www.bing.com/search?q=valiant+thor+photos&qs=SS&sk=HS1SS1&pq=valiant+thor+&sc=8-13&sp=3&cvid=769806dcd63041b29b8b2c0c91ce4263&FORM=QBRE

[jarhead]

Warph,
I think it is all bull hockey---unless ol Raisin Head came from Venus because the sorry POS sure aint from this world.

[Warph]

Axelrod book: Obama lied on same-sex marriage

By Jeremy Diamond, CNN

W.H. responds to claim that Obama lied on gay marriage

(FoxNews.com/: "Axelrod: Obama misled on early gay marriage opposition"
Wall Street Journal headline: "Axelrod Book: Obama Misled Public on Gay-Marriage Position"...

Misled??  Give me a break.  He LIED to the American Voters for political reasons.... A$$hole! 

These sites got it right with their headline:
The Christian Science Monitor: "Axelrod book: Obama lied about opposing gay marriage"...
CNN: "Axelrod book: Obama lied on same-sex marriage"...
Christian Post.com: Obama Lied About Supporting Traditional Marriage in 2008" ...)



Washington (CNN)— http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/10/politics/obama-gay-marriage-axelrod/index.html


President Barack Obama didn't actually evolve on same-sex marriage, according to one of Obama's closest former top aides.

Obama had actually supported it for years, David Axelrod writes in his new book, "Believer: My Forty Years in Poltics," released Tuesday.

But Obama, Axelrod writes, opposed same-sex marriage during his 2008 presidential campaign and throughout most of his first term as President due to political concerns.

"Gay marriage was a particularly nagging issue. For as long as we had been working together, Obama had felt a tug between his personal views and the politics of gay marriage," Axelrod writes. "Opposition to gay marriage was particularly strong in the black church, and as he ran for higher office, he grudgingly accepted the counsel of more pragmatic folks like me, and modified his position to support civil unions rather than marriage, which he would term a 'sacred union.'"

Obama started saying in 2010 that his views were evolving on the issue and in May 2012 Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage, citing "the evolution that I went through."

But privately, Axelrod wrote that Obama made no secret of his support for same-sex marriage.

"I just don't feel my marriage is somehow threatened by the gay couple next door," Obama said, according to Axelrod's book.


In the chapter, in which he notes the "recurring tension between Obama the idealist and Obama the politician," Axelrod writes that Obama's public stance didn't seem to sit well with him.

"Obama never felt comfortable with his compromise and, no doubt, compromised position," Axelrod writes. "He routinely stumbled over the question when it came up in debates or interviews. 'I'm just not very good at bulls---ting,' he said with a sigh after one such awkward exchange."

Axelrod's book only confirms previous reports that Obama had, in fact, supported gay marriage for a long time.

While running for his first term in the Illinois State Senate, Obama signed a questionnaire in which he answered that he "favored legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight to prohibit such marriages." The questionnaire came to light in 2009, days before Obama's inauguration.

"I had no doubt that this was his heartfelt belief," Axelrod said of the questionnaire. "He also knew his view was way out in front of the public's."

[Warph]

America's Colleges Have Become Political Correctness Indoctrination Centers

By Michael Snyder, on February 9th, 2015

Most parents assume that when they send their kids to college that they will receive training which will prepare them for a lifetime of employment.  Sadly, the truth is that very little time is actually spent imparting practical skills to students at most of America's colleges.  Instead, an extraordinary amount of classroom time is spent telling students what they should think and what they should believe.  At this point, most institutions of "higher learning" in this country have been transformed into political correctness indoctrination centers.  There is a reason why college towns have a reputation for being extremely liberal.  The truth is that they are bastions for "progressive" thought.  Each and every day, millions of young adults all across America are literally being systematically brainwashed.  In case you are wondering, I know what I am talking about.  I spent eight years getting three degrees at public universities.  And it doesn't even really matter what area of the country you attend school.  The "education" that students are receiving at schools in very liberal states is virtually the same as the "education" that students are receiving at schools in very conservative states.  Our young adults represent the future of this nation, and they are receiving a level of indoctrination that is so comprehensive that it would make Joseph Goebbels proud.

Colleges and universities all across this nation spend an extraordinary amount of time and effort to alter the belief systems of their students.  This even extends to teaching them what words are "appropriate" to use and which words are not.  For example, just check out what is happening at the University of Michigan...

Dozens of posters plastered across the University of Michigan caution students not to say things that might hurt others' feelings, part of a new "Inclusive Language Campaign" at the state's flagship public university that cost $16,000 to implement.

Words declared unacceptable through the campaign include "crazy," "insane," "retarded," "gay," "tranny," "gypped," "illegal alien," "fag," "ghetto" and "raghead." Phrases such as "I want to die" and "that test raped me" are also verboten.

But this isn't just an advertising campaign.  In fact, University of Michigan students are actually being asked to sign a pledge that they will use "inclusive language" from now on...
Students have been asked to sign a pledge to "use inclusive language" and to help their peers "understand the importance of using inclusive language," according to campaign materials.

If you think that this is just an isolated incident, you would be wrong.

One survey of 409 colleges conducted in 2013 discovered that 62 percent of them have "speech codes" that "severely departed from First Amendment standards".

Meanwhile, these "institutions of higher learning" are failing miserably at what is supposedly their primary task.

Today, the average college freshman reads at a 7th grade level.  In a desperate attempt to get as many students through the system as possible, most college courses have been so "dumbed down" that the family cat could pass them.

If only parents knew.  The amount of useful knowledge that their kids are actually receiving is very small.  But most parents are utterly clueless and they just keep writing huge tuition checks semester after semester.

It would be hard to describe how utterly useless some of these college courses are.  For instance, there is one college in upstate New York that is offering a course entitled "The Sociology of Miley Cyrus: Race, Class, Gender and Media".

Do you think that is going to prepare your child for the real world?

And here is a list of some other actual college courses that have been taught at U.S. colleges in recent years...

-"What If Harry Potter Is Real?"

-"Lady Gaga and the Sociology of Fame"

-"Philosophy And Star Trek"

-"Learning From YouTube"

-"How To Watch Television"

-"Oh, Look, a Chicken!"

Are you starting to get the picture?

No wonder so many students "graduate from college" but are still dumb as a rock.



The following are some numbers about the quality of college education in the United States that come from an article that appeared in USA Today...

-"After two years in college, 45% of students showed no significant gains in learning; after four years, 36% showed little change."

-"Students also spent 50% less time studying compared with students a few decades ago"

-"35% of students report spending five or fewer hours per week studying alone."

-"50% said they never took a class in a typical semester where they wrote more than 20 pages"

-"32% never took a course in a typical semester where they read more than 40 pages per week."

But even with so little being demanded of them, most college students in the United States still cannot manage to graduate from school on time.

Federal statistics show that only 36 percent of all full-time students receive a bachelor's degree within four years, and only 77 percent of all full-time students have earned a degree by the end of six years.

Instead of studying hard, most college students treat college like one giant party.

No wonder so many of them want to extend it for another year or two or three.

And when these kids get away from their parents, their morality tends to go into the toilet.

For example, just check out what one survey discovered about male college students...
A third of male students questioned in a survey admitted they would rape a woman if they could get away with it.

The study found that 31.7 per cent of the mostly white American participants questioned admitted they would force a woman to have sex in a 'consequence-free situation'.

Academics quizzed volunteers on how they would act in a situation where they could have sex with a woman against her will 'if nobody would ever know there wouldn't be any consequences'.

These are the leaders of tomorrow?  Are you kidding me?[/b]


Our system of college education is deeply, deeply broken.  Like I stated above, I speak from experience.  I earned three degrees from "good schools", and I saw firsthand how pathetic the system is.

[Warph]

What Do They Know? Why Are So Many Of The Super Wealthy Preparing Bug Out Locations?

By Michael Snyder, on January 27th, 2015

Gulfstream - Photo by Andre WadmanA lot of ultra-rich people are quietly preparing to "bug out" when the time comes.  They are buying survival properties, they are buying farms in far away countries and they are buying deep underground bunkers.  In fact, a prominent insider at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland says that "very powerful people are telling us they're scared" and he shocked his audience when he revealed that he knows "hedge fund managers all over the world who are buying airstrips and farms in places like New Zealand".  So what do they know?  Why are so many of the super wealthy suddenly preparing bug out locations?  When the elite of the world start preparing for doomsday, that is a very troubling sign.  And right now the elite appear to be quietly preparing for disaster like never before.

The insider that I mentioned above is named Robert Johnson.  He is the president of the Institute of New Economic Thinking, and what he recently told a packed audience in Davos is making headlines all over the planet...

With growing inequality and the civil unrest from Ferguson and the Occupy protests fresh in people's mind, the world's super rich are already preparing for the consequences. At a packed session in Davos, former hedge fund director Robert Johnson revealed that worried hedge fund managers were already planning their escapes. "I know hedge fund managers all over the world who are buying airstrips and farms in places like New Zealand because they think they need a getaway," he said.

But he didn't stop there.

In a separate interview, Johnson admitted that "very powerful people are telling us they're scared" and that the elite "see increasing evidence of social instability and violence".  You can watch video of the entire interview below...

VIDEO:

Wow.

And Johnson is not the only one saying these things.

The following quote comes from the Mirror...
His comments were backed up by Stewart Wallis, executive director of the New Economics Foundation, who when asked about the comments told CNBC Africa: "Getaway cars the airstrips in New Zealand and all that sort of thing, so basically a way to get off.  If they can get off, onto another planet, some of them would."

Of course not all elitists are planning to jet off to the other side of the globe.

Some are planning to go deep underground when things hit the fan.

For example, there is an underground decommissioned missile silo in Kansas that has been transformed into luxury survival condos by a real estate developer.  The following is from a Wall Street Journal article about those condos...
The so-called Survival Condo complex boasts full and half-floor units that cost $1.5 million to $3 million each. The building can accommodate up to 75 people, and buyers include doctors, scientists and entrepreneurs, says developer Larry Hall.

Mr. Hall, who lives in a Denver suburb, bought his first missile-silo site in Kansas in 2008 and completed construction in December 2012. A year later, he says, the development had sold out. Work on the second security compound—the one where Mr. Allen bought a unit—is under way, and Mr. Hall says he is considering additional sites in Texas and elsewhere.

As former nuclear missile sites built under the supervision of the Army Corps of Engineers, the structures were originally designed to withstand a direct hit by a nuclear bomb. At ground level, they can be sealed up by two armored doors weighing 16,000 pounds each. Mr. Hall added sophisticated water and air-treatment facilities, state-of-the-art computer network technology and several alternate power generation capabilities.

Other wealthy individuals are turning their current homes into high tech security fortresses.

Those that are involved in providing these kinds of services have seen business absolutely soar in recent years...


Wealthy families across the country are shelling out millions to protect their loved ones from intruders, natural disasters or the apocalypse as home security goes increasingly sci-fi.

Companies that provide concerned homeowners with futuristic gadgets – and a priceless peace of mind – have revealed the growing demand of costly bunkers, passageways, panic rooms and recognition software.

Chris Pollack – president of Pollack+Partners, a design and construction adviser in Purchase, New York – told Forbes that, while security has always been important for the wealthiest clients, the spending on home security has noticeably grown in the past five years.

And the options available on the market are like something from a Bond film.

For much more on this, please see my previous article entitled "Why Are So Many Wealthy People Building Futuristic High Tech Security Bunkers?"

So why are all of these wealthy people so alarmed?

Well, the truth is that they can see what is happening.

They can see that millions of people are falling out of the middle class.  They can see that society is breaking down in thousands of different ways.  They can see that anger and frustration are rising to unprecedented levels.  And they can see that things are likely to boil over once the next major economic crisis strikes.

Even though the economy is still fairly stable for the moment, signs of increasing economic suffering are everywhere.  For example, the Los Angeles Times is reporting that homeless encampments are rapidly spreading throughout the Los Angeles area...
Over the last two years, street encampments have jumped their historic boundaries in downtown Los Angeles, lining freeways and filling underpasses from Echo Park to South Los Angeles. The Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, a city-county agency, received 767 calls about street encampments in 2014, up 60% from the 479 in 2013.

We live at a time when almost everyone is getting poorer except for the elite.  The top 1 percent now have close to 50 percent of the wealth in the entire world, and each year wealth becomes even more concentrated in their hands.

The elite know that eventually a breaking point is going to come.  Those that are smart don't want to be around when that happens.

And we got a few clues about what things might look like what that time comes from the recent "snow scare" in New York.  Frightened consumers wiped out supplies of bread, milk and eggs within just a few hours.  People started to take advantage of one another, even the journalists seemed like they were on the verge of panic, and virtually the entire city shut down.

All of this over just a few snowflakes.

So what is going to happen when we have a real crisis?

If the elite are preparing to bug out, it is hard to blame them.

I wouldn't want to be right in the middle of a volcano when it erupts either.

Life is about to dramatically change, and signs of the coming storm are everywhere.

I hope that you are getting prepared for what is about to hit us while you still can.

*********************************************************

Panicked super rich buying boltholes with private airstrips to escape if poor rise up

26 January 2015 
By Alex Wellman

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/panicked-super-rich-buying-boltholes-5044084

Hedge fund managers are buying up remote ranches and land in places like New Zealand to flee to in event of wide-spread civil unrest

Escape: Rich financiers have put plans in place to getaway from rioters

Super rich hedge fund managers are buying 'secret boltholes' where they can hideout in the event of civil uprising against growing inequality, it has been claimed.

Nervous financiers from across the globe have begun purchasing landing strips, homes and land in areas such as New Zealand so they can flee should people rise up.

With growing inequality and riots such as those in London in 2011 and in Ferguson and other parts of the USA last year, many financial leaders fear they could become targets for public fury.

Robert Johnson, president of the Institute of New Economic Thinking, told people at the World Economic Forum in Davos that many hedge fund managers were already planning their escapes.

Hideaway: Rich people are plotting to escape to remote parts of the world

Mr Johnson, said the economic situation could soon become intolerable as even in the richest countries inequality was increasing.

He said: "People need to know there are possibilities for their children – that they will have the same opportunity as anyone else.

"There is a wicked feedback loop. Politicians who get more money tend to use it to get more even money."

His comments were backed up by Stewart Wallis, executive director of the New Economics Foundation, who when asked about the comments told CNBC Africa: "Getaway cars the airstrips in New Zealand and all that sort of thing, so basically a way to get off.  If they can get off, onto another planet, some of them would."

He added: "I think the rich are worried and they should be worried. I mean inequality, why does it matter?

"Most people have heard the Oxfam statistics that now we've got 80, the 80 richest people in the world, having more wealth that the bottom three-point-five billion, and very soon we'll get a situation where that one percent, one percent of the richest people have more wealth than everybody else, the 99."

[Warph]

Obuma: Oh Yeah, I Tried To Rescue Kayla Jean Mueller Last Year

(Obama misremembered her being one of the hostages to be rescued along with Foley in August...)

Via Stars and Stripes


Kayla Jean Mueller, the U.S. aid worker whose death as a captive of Islamic State extremists was confirmed Tuesday, was among the hostages sought in a failed U.S. rescue attempt last year, President Barack Obama said.

Obama, in an interview with the website BuzzFeed on Tuesday, confirmed for the first time publicly that Mueller was in the group that included journalist James Foley that U.S. special operations forces tried to rescue in northern Syria last August, only to discover they had been moved.

The raid was initially disclosed by the White House after Islamic State on Aug. 19 released a video of Foley's beheading.

"We devoted enormous resources and always devote enormous resources to freeing captives or hostages anywhere in the world," Obama said in the interview.

He said the U.S. will continue to refuse ransom demands from terrorists even though denying them is "as tough as anything I do."[...]

At least one more U.S. hostage still is being held in the region, Earnest said. While he declined to identify the hostage, the family of freelance journalist Austin Tice has said he's being held in Syria, though not by Islamic State.

Tice's parents have pushed for more family involvement in hostage recovery and for families to have a say in the review Obama ordered of U.S. hostage policy. That review will be finished later this spring, Earnest said.