by Roger Marsh

Points from the Veritas Show interview:

Clif High discussed predictions about the economy, and U.S. and world events for the summer of 2010 and beyond. The predictions are based on High’s Web Bot technology which gives archetype descriptors of future events by tracking language pattern changes within Internet discussions forums. Here are some of the prediction highlights:

*No warfare between Israel and Iran, at least not until November.

*Six very large earthquakes are yet to come during the rest of 2010.

*A major tipping point will occur between November 8th – 11th, 2010, followed by a 2-3 month release period. This tipping point appears to be U.S.-centric, and could be a dramatic world-changing event like 9-11 that will have rippling after-effects. The collapse of the dollar might occur in November.

*From July 8th, 2010 onward, civil unrest will take place, possibly driven by food prices skyrocketing, and the devaluation of the dollar.

*A second depression, triggered by mass layoffs, bankruptcies, and the popping of the “derivatives bubble,” will see people moving out of cities.

*After March 2011, the revolution wave will settle down into a period of reformation.

*A “data gap” has been found between early 2012 running through May 2013. One explanation is that “our civilization gets knocked back to a pre-electronic state,” such as brought about by devastating solar activity.

internet site reference: LINK

Special to The Canadian

The Origin of ‘Disc’ shaped craft come directly out of the Third Reich. Hitler’s Scientists had developed these craft towards the end of the Second World War, so disc shaped flying craft do exist. This is one of the main reasons under operation Paperclip that so many Nazis were given Vatican passports and moved to South America.

Other members of “OPERATION PAPERCLIP were taken from the rocket research programmes, and those involved within the concentration camps dealing in human research leading to the mind control operations associated with alleged elite and alien collaborations.

Read more?

internet site reference:  LINK

Are some UFO’s hollographic projections orchestrated by human elite and regressive alien interest designed  to corall global population groups into buying into an elite-driven fascist agenda?

Special to The Canadian

Advanced human made Satellite systems have the ability to create massive ‘HOLOGRAPHIC IMAGES’. This is what you are often seeing with all the supposed ‘UFO’s’ across the globe.  This strategy us also being used to in  so-called meteor showers. 

In one recorded incident there was a meteor captured on CCTV in America. It showed a streak of light and fire and a flash, yet when people went to the place of impact… there was nothing there?

More recently this very same scenario was played out in Sydney Australia, but this one was massive and the flash was so great, it prompted all fire, police and rescue services to race to the scene. When they arrived.. yes you guessed it, there was no apparent evidence of meteors.

The one thing you should keep in mind in relation to all these holograms, is the ‘LACK OF SOUND’, there is no sound whatever in relation to either UFO’s or these meteor showers. This operation is known as  ‘PROJECT BLUEBEAM’ and these holographic satellite projectors are also able to place holograms of, ‘JESUS, KRISHNA, MOHAMED, and BUDDHA’ to excite the populations to except Manipulative Extraterrestrial interests as the representatives of each respective prophet.

internet site reference: LINK

Special to The Canadian

OTTAWA — The Green Party of Canada strongly denounces the decision by the Conservative Government to reject the Senate’s poverty report, which was unanimously approved by the Senate on April 29, 2010.  The report, entitled In from the Margins: A Call to Action on Poverty, Housing and Homelessness provided seventy-four specific recommendations on how to reduce poverty in Canada.

The recommendations included many initiatives that are already part of the Green Party’s policy platform, such as increasing the Guaranteed Income Supplement for seniors, increasing funding for the National Affordable Housing program, and making the Disability Tax Credit refundable.

“While this move was not a surprise given the Government’s track record on poverty reduction issues, I am still disappointed,” said Green Party Poverty Elimination Critic Rebecca Harrison. “This report was non-partisan and drew reference from think tanks, NGOs, as well as direct testimony from Canadians living in poverty, many of whom were homeless.”

The report states boldly, “We believe that eradicating poverty and homelessness is not only the humane and decent priority of a civilized democracy, but absolutely essential to a productive and expanding economy benefiting from the strengths and abilities of all its people.” 

“This is a huge setback for poverty elimination in Canada,” said Green Party Leader Elizabeth May.  “Thankfully provinces like Newfoundland are forging ahead with their plans to help eliminate poverty within their borders. However, we still need action at the federal level to help lift the countless number of Canadians living below the poverty line from coast to coast.”

Special to The Canadian

A noted psychiatrist was a guest speaker at an academic function where Nancy Pelosi happened to appear. Ms Pelosi took the opportunity to schmooze the good doctor a bit and asked him a question with which he was most at ease.

‘Would you mind telling me, Doctor,’ she asked, ‘how you detect a mental deficiency in somebody who appears completely normal?’

‘Nothing is easier,’ he replied. ‘You ask a simple question which anyone should answer with no trouble. If the person hesitates, that puts you on the track..’

‘What sort of question?’ asked Pelosi.

Well, you might ask, ‘Captain Cook made three trips around the world and died during one of them. Which one?”

Pelosi thought a moment, and then said with a nervous laugh, ‘You wouldn’t happen to have another example would you? I must confess I don’t know much about history.’

Professor Michel Chossudovsky suggested that the cell phone calls between the alleged airplanes and loved ones was faudulently presented, because that technology was not even available at the time.

Special to The Canadian

Given the prevailing technology in September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place a wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000 feet:

“Wireless communications networks weren’t designed for ground-to-air communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they’re surprised the calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they lasted as long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground. LINK

Expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry casts serious doubt on “the findings” of the 9/11 Commission. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks:

“[I]t was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations… From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a certain altitude” LINK

Wireless Technology

While serious doubts regarding the cell calls were expressed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless telecom industry has further contributed to upsetting the Commission’s credibility. Within days of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July, American Airlines and Qualcomm, proudly announced the development of a new wireless technology –which will at some future date allow airline passengers using their cell phones to contact family and friends from a commercial aircraft (no doubt at a special rate aerial roaming charge) (see LINK)

“Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls.” (WP, July 27, 2004)

Aviation Week (07/20/04) described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July 2004:

“Qualcomm and American Airlines are exploring [July 2004] ways for passengers to use commercial cell phones inflight for air-to-ground communication. In a recent 2-hr. proof-of-concept flight, representatives from government and the media used commercial Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place and receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground.

For the test flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the front and rear of the cabin to transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station. This “pico cell”  transmitted cell phone calls from the aircraft via a Globalstar satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone network”

Needless to say, neither the service, nor the “third generation” hardware, nor the “Picco cell” CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001.

internet site reference: LINK

Professor Michel Chossudovsky suggested that the cell phone calls between the alleged airplanes and loved ones was faudulently presented, because that technology was not even available at the time.

Special to The Canadian

Given the prevailing technology in September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place a wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000 feet:

“Wireless communications networks weren’t designed for ground-to-air communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they’re surprised the calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they lasted as long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground. LINK

Expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry casts serious doubt on “the findings” of the 9/11 Commission. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks:

“[I]t was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations… From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a certain altitude” LINK

Wireless Technology

While serious doubts regarding the cell calls were expressed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless telecom industry has further contributed to upsetting the Commission’s credibility. Within days of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July, American Airlines and Qualcomm, proudly announced the development of a new wireless technology –which will at some future date allow airline passengers using their cell phones to contact family and friends from a commercial aircraft (no doubt at a special rate aerial roaming charge) (see LINK)

“Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls.” (WP, July 27, 2004)

Aviation Week (07/20/04) described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July 2004:

“Qualcomm and American Airlines are exploring [July 2004] ways for passengers to use commercial cell phones inflight for air-to-ground communication. In a recent 2-hr. proof-of-concept flight, representatives from government and the media used commercial Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place and receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground.

For the test flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the front and rear of the cabin to transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station. This “pico cell”  transmitted cell phone calls from the aircraft via a Globalstar satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone network”

Needless to say, neither the service, nor the “third generation” hardware, nor the “Picco cell” CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001.

internet site reference: LINK

According to Dr. John Lash, 9/11 was orchestrated with the use of “special effects”.    Vincent Sammartino reinforces Dr. Lash allegations that the” lives lost on the planes which terrorists used” are part of a contructed myth to support an elite-driven agenda.

Please see:  http://lecanadian.com/2010/10/12/ufo-researcher-says-911-was-executed-by-virtual-reality-illusion-special-effects/

by Vincent Sammartino – WING TV.com

As everyone who is involved in exposing the 9-11 cover-up knows, nothing concerning 9-11 is as it seems. Whether it’s the magic jet that our government told us crashed into the Pentagon, the obvious missing jet at Shanksville (Flight 93), the three perfect demolitions of the World Trade Center towers, or the fact that Arab hijackers are still alive and their supposed ring leader Osama bin Laden has the ability to change his facial features at will. Nothing, I repeat, nothing about the government/controlled media version of 9-11 makes any sense.

So, let’s get one thing straight and out of the way right now. There are no such things as physical inconsistencies in the world we live in. We can always depend on the laws of physics to be consistent and unchanging. Coincidence is a self-contained human concept; and the real world – the atoms, molecules and planets that whiz around – don’t care if you understand them. Likewise, they aren’t concerned if their movement happens to favor you or not. I say this because, as Victor Thorn and Lisa Guliani know (WING TV), this is the key to understanding what is real and what is contrived.

With that said, let me go back to sometime in February, 2004. At that time I had pretty much figured out that what had happened at the Pentagon and the WTC was a lie. I was still toying with the idea, though, that maybe (just maybe) our government had shot down Flight 93 in Shanksville in order to protect us from the real terrorists.

Then a few websites started to pop-up showing videos of what appeared to be a “pod” under Flight 175, along with an unexplained flash that happened just before the jet hit the South Tower. To me, this was just as damning as the Pentagon and the WTC collapses. There is no good reason for us to be seeing what we saw if the official government story was true. Think about this point for a minute. If what we saw was just an anomaly, then there must be millions of photos/videos of 757s taking off and landing at airports all over the world that look JUST LIKE THAT! If anybody has any jet photo anomalies they would like to share with us, please send them to Victor and Lisa at WING TV so we can clear this stuff up.

Which brings me to Ellen Mariani: she’s the woman who lost her husband Louis on Flight 175 that crashed into the South Tower on 9-11. With the help of a lawyer named Phil Berg, she filed a lawsuit against President Bush and company under the RICO act. Also, she refused to take the hush money that was offered to her under the 9-11 Victims Compensation fund.

In addition, I had just discovered Black Op Radio earlier in the year and found an interesting show in their archives (# 156) on which Ellen and Mr. Berg appeared as guests. This may be the single biggest point concerning 9-11, and hopefully the last nail in the coffin of our government’s lies. During this broadcast, Mrs. Mariani said that she was the only relative of all the passengers that died on Flight 175 that crashed into the South Tower. Her lawyer, Phil Berg, repeated this statement.

I listened to this show over and over again and couldn’t believe what she had just said. Everything came together at this point. That’s when it dawned on me that not only had our government lied about the physics of 9-11; they may very well have taken it one step farther by faking the number of people that died that day. I believed what she and Mr. Berg had just said. Nothing about 9-11 made any sense. Why should it start now?

Not knowing then what I know now, Ellen and Phil believed that for some reason the government was holding back the names of the people that had died on Flight 175. She had tried to get in touch with the relatives of other family members, but to no avail. You see, she and her lawyer believed, just like most other people believe, that four jets had been hijacked by Arab terrorists and crashed into buildings and into the ground at Shanksville. I, on the other hand, had already swept those lies aside.

Their statement also gave credence to the Fox News reporter who said that the jet which crashed into the South Tower had no windows. Hey, this jet appeared to have a “pod” under it anyway. The pieces of the puzzle were starting to fit.

Now, we come to most interesting stuff – the Social Security Death Index, and thanks to Victor Thorn’s idea, the September 11th Victim’s Compensation Fund. After all, it’s one thing to say that the flight lists are not on the up and up, but it’s another thing to prove it.

The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) (Social Security Death Index) is a privately-owned website that is not affiliated with Social Security. It boasts an accuracy rate of about 83% (e-mail them any questions you may have). Anyway, to check its reliability, I inputted the names of people I knew that had died in my family, along with friends and neighbors. Being a true skeptic, I had no way of knowing whether they were telling the truth or not. With the exception of a cousin, I found everyone I was looking for. (Be sure you have the person’s true first name – they may not be listed by the state they last lived in, but can be found in the state where their social security number was issued.) By all means try it yourself.

Which brings us to the 9-11 Victims Compensation Fund (also known as the Shut Up and Take the Money Fund), which most of you have heard about.

9-11 Victims Compensation Fund

This is where our government opened up the Treasury and gave family members of those who lost their lives that day lots of money. In return, these families were basically told to shut up about anything else concerning 9-11. (Considering all the lies surrounding this horrific event, you can see why.)

At this point there is one thing we should never forget, and that is how powerful the notion of human greed is. Remember this concept as you read the number of victims whose family members sought compensation.

The names of the victims can be found on the CNN website.

Here are the results:

Flight 11: of the 92 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 20 are listed in the SSDI (22%)

Of these 20 people, only three are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

Judy Larocque
Laurie Neira
Candace Lee Williams

Flight 77: of the 64 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 14 are listed in the SSDI (22%)

Of these 64 people, only five on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

William Caswell
Eddie Dillard
Ian Gray
John Sammartino
Leonard Taylor

Flight 175: of the 65 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 18 are listed in the SSDI (28%)

Of these 65 people, only three are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

Michael C. Tarrou
Gloria Debarrera
Timothy Ward

Flight 93: of the 45 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 6 are listed in the SSDI (13%)

Of these 45 people, none are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

No one

Have you noticed anything strange yet? Of the passengers and crew of Flight 11, 77, 175 & 93, only 22%, 22%, 28%, 13% respectively are in the SSDI.

Remember human greed? Of the 266 people that we were told died on these jets, only 11 relatives applied for compensation. Can you believe that not a single relative from Flight 93 applied for compensation? I can’t. Were all the relatives of the victims so rich that they weren’t eligible to receive compensation? No, that’s not it. (The minimum federal award was $250,000, and the average pay-out was about $1.8 million. The recipients only had to make agreement: they couldn’t sue the airlines.)

You should also know that most lawyers told their clients to take the money and run (which is what most lawyers would do – take the sure money). Ellen Mariani clearly elaborated on this point during her appearance on the radio show mentioned above.

Finally, during the past week, thanks to Lisa Guliani’s insatiable quest for the truth, the 9-11 Victims Compensation Final Report has come to light.

9-11 Victims Compensation Final Report

Oddly, but consistent with everything concerning 9-11, the actual complete list of the people who benefited has been omitted from this report. Even without this, it does contain an interesting fact. According to the report, 98% of all the people who suffered a loss on 9-11 took the fund money. The average payment was $1.8 million.

But here’s where it gets strange. According to the government, here are the number of people who accepted the compensation fund:

Out of a total of 92 people on Flight 11, only 65 accepted the 9-11 fund (71%)
Out of a total of 65 people on Flight 175, only 46 accepted the 9-11 fund (71%)
Out of a total of 64 people on Flight 77, only 33 accepted the 9-11 fund (52%)
Out of a total of 45 people on Flight 93, only 25 accepted the 9-11 fund (56%)

Does any of this seem a little odd to you? Or is it possible that not only were the jets on 9-11 magical, but their passengers as well?

So there you have it; yet another glaring 9-11 inconsistency – just maybe the biggest of them all?

internet site reference: LINK

by Paul Rogat Loeb

I’ve been going door-to-door canvassing, and it’s not that bad—really. It’s actually kind of fun. But only because I’ve found a way to break through people’s cynicism.

No wonder people are cynical. Crashing from the sky-high hopes of two years ago, people are worried about jobs, the economy and their own uncertain futures, about the wars we’re bogged down in and the threats to our planet. They don’t like where America is headed, don’t like most politicians or candidates, and are often uncertain whether their vote even matters. But when I talked about the takeover of our politics by destructive corporate interests, culminating in the barrage of anonymous attack ads unleashed by the Supreme Court’s ghastly Citizens United decision, they quickly became willing to listen.

So I’m delighted the Democrats are finally hitting back at the US Chamber of Commerce and other Republican front groups for dumping millions of dollars of untraceable corporate contributions into the election, with the total likely to exceed $300 million. But the Democrats need to do more, and we do as well, as ordinary citizens. We need to make the buying of our democracy the salient issue of the coming election and beyond, because it affects everything else that we need to change.

So how do we do this in the few remaining weeks before the elections? We need to talk about the ads of all the front groups from the Chamber of Commerce to Karl Rove’s American Crossroads and the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity. But we also need to highlight the Republican justices who overruled a century of precedent to enact Citizens United. And talk about how Republican Senators have stood in unison to prevent requiring corporate interests to at least put their names on their ads.

From what I can tell, most Americans are most vaguely aware of the DISCLOSE Act, the transparency legislation that a Republican filibuster blocked by a single vote. When they do find out, they’re outraged, because anonymous attack ads are an affront to even the barest standards of fairness, whatever one’s political beliefs. In fact, Republican leaders like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have long argued that so long as people knew who was paying for campaign ads, there was no need to regulate them through campaign finance reform or counterbalance them with public financing. “We ought to have full disclosure,” said Boehner in 2007, “full disclosure of all of the money that we raise and how it is spent. And I think that sunlight is the best disinfectant.” Yet since Citizens United opened the floodgates for monied interests to drown out the rest of our voices, Republican leaders and their key allies have done everything they can to foster anonymous and untraceable attacks from the shadows.

Frustrated as voters are with the state of America, including with the Democrats’ own frequent capitulation to corporate interests, most still don’t want our government to become the wholly owned property of BP, EXXON, AIG, Goldman Sachs, Verizon, and all the other corporations (including foreign ones) who can now buy our elections without people even knowing they’re involved. Obama, the Democrats, and progressive organizations therefore need to keep talking about the issue repeatedly and forcefully, through their speeches, debate points, and ads, and through the talking points they circulate for campaign volunteers. As ordinary citizens we have to do our part as well–knocking on doors, making phone calls and talking to friends, neighbors and coworkers who may be discontented with the Democrats, but would draw the line at furthering the total capture of our democracy by the most powerful economic interests on the planet. Or at least they would if we gave them the chance to have a conversation. But we can’t just leave the issue up to the candidates.

Of course we also need to tackle the issue beyond November. Public financing of campaigns would help immensely, using the model of $5 contributions and public matching funds that’s worked wonderfully in Maine, Vermont and even Arizona. This model remains legal even under the new Supreme Court rules, would reduce the corporate influence on both parties, and can complement a push to reverse Citizens United through Congressional legislation, grassroots organizing, and perhaps a constitutional amendment. But for now, we need to focus on whether or not those running to represent us at least recognize our right to know who is trying to buy our votes. The political allegiances are clear from the DISCLOSE Act. If we work well enough at explaining why the money matters, it could tip race after close race, and help us begin to rein in the power of unaccountable greed.

Paul Loeb is the author of the wholly updated new edition of Soul of a Citizen: Living with Conviction in Challenging Times (St Martin’s Press, April 2010), and The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen’s Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, which the History Channel and the American Book Association named the #3 political book of 2004. See www.paulloeb.org.

.