Daily Archives: May 11, 2007

Poll shows 39% of Americans support impeachment

Raw Story | May 8, 2007

A poll published Tuesday shows that close to 40% of Americans favor the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, according to an article at Townhall.com.

“Few serious observers think things will ever get to actual impeachment. And yet the American public seems more open to the concept than many imagine, according to a new national poll,” wrote Matt Towery, CEO of InsiderAdvantage, which commissioned the poll. “The implications of this public sentiment could be huge for the 2008 presidential elections.”

The poll from InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion asked a sample of 621 Americans, “Would you favor or oppose the impeachment by Congress of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney?”

A total of 39% who answered said they favored impeachment, according to Towery. In opposition were 55% of respondents, with 6% answering undecided or don’t know. There was a 4% margin of error.

Towery noted that a high proportion of independent voters, who traditionally decide elections, favored impeachment.

“Forty-two percent of independents want Bush and Cheney impeached. These aren’t just voters who disapprove of the White House. Instead, they’re for initiating a process that could remove them from office,” he wrote.

InsiderAdvantage has “been praised by national media ranging from CNN’s Judy Woodruff to Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly, and have appeared in Knight-Ridder newspapers, The Washington Post, Washington Times, New York Post, Business Week, US News and World Report, and CBS News/CBS Marketwatch,” according to the company’s website .

Towery’s full article can be found at t his link .

German Biologist: Global Warming Is Good For Us

Der Spiegel | May 9, 2007


Biologist Josef Reichholf discusses the benefits of a warmer climate for animals and plants, large cities as centers of biological diversity and the myth of the return of malaria.

Josef Reichholf is unconvinced by those who argue that global warming will threaten animals and plants with extinction, and cause malaria to spread in Europe.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Reichholf, are you worried about global warming?

Josef Reichholf: No. Personally, I’m even looking forward to a milder climate. But it will also not pose any major problems for mankind as a whole.

SPIEGEL: Where does your optimism come from?

Reichholf: The vast majority of people today already live under warmer and, in many cases, far more extreme conditions than we pampered Central Europeans. Homo sapiens is the only biological species that can handle practically any type of climate on earth — from the deserts to the polar regions, from the constantly humid tropics to the high altitudes of the Andes. Not even the animals that follow human society most closely, the rats, have developed such an astonishing ability to adapt in the course of evolution.

SPIEGEL: In what sort of climate does man feel most comfortable?

Reichholf: Biologically speaking, we are children of the tropics. Wherever man lives, he artificially creates tropical living conditions. We do this with warm clothing, and with heated offices and homes. A tropical temperature of about 27 degrees Celsius (80 degrees Fahrenheit) constantly prevails underneath our clothing.

SPIEGEL: But, as an ecologist, aren’t you at least concerned about animals and plants?

Reichholf: Many species are certainly threatened, but not by climate change. The true danger comes from the destruction of habitats, such as the rampant deforestation of species-rich tropical forests. Particularly as a conservationist, I believe that focusing on the greenhouse effect is very dangerous. The climate is increasingly being turned into a scapegoat, to deflect attention from other environmental crimes. A typical example is the misleading debate over catastrophic flooding, which is in fact caused by too much development along rivers and not by more extreme weather events, which we can’t change anyway.

SPIEGEL: What do you see as the greatest threat to plants and animals?

Reichholf: Industrial agriculture is the number one killer of species in Germany. With their monocultures and over-fertilized fields, farmers have radically impaired the living conditions for many animals and plants. Many species have already fled from the countryside to the cities, which have been transformed into havens of biodiversity. We are also seeing another interesting phenomenon: Major cities, like Hamburg, Berlin and Munich, have formed heat islands where the climate has been two or three degrees warmer than in the surrounding countryside for decades. If higher temperatures are truly so bad, why do more and more animals and plants feel so comfortable in our cities?

SPIEGEL: And what is your view of the prognoses that global warming will cause up to 30 percent of all animal species to become extinct?

Reichholf: It’s nothing but fear-mongering, for which there is no concrete evidence. On the contrary, there is much to be said for the argument that warming temperatures promote biodiversity. There is a clear relationship between biodiversity and temperature. The number of species increases exponentially from the regions near the poles across the moderate latitudes and to the equator. To put it succinctly, the warmer a region is, the more diverse are its species.

SPIEGEL: Are you saying that the greenhouse effect could even help improve biodiversity in the long term?

Reichholf: Exactly. And this can also be clearly inferred from the insights of evolutionary biology. Biodiversity reached its peak at the end of the tertiary age, a few million years ago, when it was much warmer than it is today. The development went in a completely different direction when the ice ages came and temperatures dropped, causing a massive extinction of species, especially in the north. This also explains why Europe has such a high capacity to absorb species from warmer regions. It just so happens that we have many unoccupied ecological niches in our less biodiverse part of the world.

SPIEGEL: In other words, for you global warming means more flourishing landscapes on the planet?

Reichholf: Indeed. When it becomes warmer, many species receive new habitats. The overall picture is clearly positive, as long as we don’t destroy the newly developing habitats right away by intervening in nature in other ways. It’s no accident that most of the species on Germany’s red list of endangered species are the heat-loving species. Many of them could be given new opportunities to survive in Germany.

SPIEGEL: But aren’t you underestimating the rapid pace of the current warming? Many animals and plants are unable to adapt quickly enough to a changing climate.

Reichholf: This claim is already contradicted by the fact that there have been much faster climate fluctuations in the past, which did not automatically lead to a global extinction of species. As a biologist, I can tell you that only the fewest animals and plants are accustomed to rigid climate conditions. Take our little wren, for example. Many would call it a sensitive little songbird. But the wren thrives just as well in Stockholm as it does in Munich or Rome. It even lives above the tree line in the Alps. The only places we don’t see wrens are where there are no bushes or trees growing at all.

SPIEGEL: But there are certainly animals that live in very limited niches. For example, how would polar bears survive global warming?

Reichholf: Then let me ask you in return: How did the polar bear survive the last warm period? Perhaps Knut at the Berlin Zoo is an exception, but polar bears in the wild don’t exactly survive by sucking on ice. Seals are the polar bear’s most important source of food, and the Canadians slaughter tens of thousands of them every spring. That’s why life is becoming more and more difficult for polar bears, and not because it’s getting warmer. Look at the polar bear’s close relative, the brown bear. It is found across a broad geographic region, ranging from Europe across the Near East and North Asia, to Canada and the United States. Whether bears survive will depend on human beings, not the climate.

SPIEGEL: Is there really no plant or animal species that isn’t at risk of extinction because of a further rise in temperatures?

Reichholf: I certainly can’t think of any. There are a few flatworms that can only exist in icy cold springs. These creatures do in fact appear to be disappearing in places where the springs are warming up. But this could also be a coincidence, because the closest relatives of these worms tolerate a much broader temperature spectrum.

SPIEGEL: Conversely, should we be worried that malaria, as a result of global warming, will break out in our latitudes once again?

Reichholf: That’s another one of those myths. Many people truly believe that malaria will spread as temperatures rise. But malaria isn’t even a true tropical disease. In the 19th century, thousands of people in Europe, including Germany, the Netherlands and even Scandinavia, died of malaria, even though they had never gone abroad. That’s because this disease was still prevalent in northern and central Europe in previous centuries. We only managed to eliminate malaria in Europe by quarantining the sick, improving hygiene and draining swamps. That’s why I consider it virtually impossible that malaria would return to us purely because of climate change. If it does appear, it’ll be because it has been brought in somewhere.

SPIEGEL: Why has it become a dogma that we should be afraid of warmer times?

Reichholf: It’s a mystery to me. As recently as the 1960s, people were more concerned about a new ice age — and that would indeed pose a great danger to us. The most catastrophic eras were those in which the weather became worse, not phases of warmer climates. Precisely because we have to feed a growing population on this planet, we should in fact embrace a warmer climate. In warmer regions it takes far less effort to ensure survival.

The interview was conducted by Olaf Stampf and Gerald Traufetter.

The British Monarchy Has Its Roots in Nazism

Prison Planet | May 9, 2007

I am personally disgusted that Queen Elizabeth II and her husband Prince Phillip are even allowed to visit the United States. The British monarchy should be abolished and not one member of their so called royal family should be allowed to set foot on American soil. The idea of a royal or elite class that believes they are entitled to rule over the people is an abomination and contradicts the very idea of individual freedom. Queen Elizabeth’s husband Prince Phillip who holds the ridiculous title of Duke of Edinburgh is heavily involved in implementing the plan for a New World Order that we see before us today. He has been linked with the Bilderberg group, has advocated widespread population reduction and helped start the World Wildlife Fund with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. The House of Windsor also has other historical ties to supporting Nazi Germany, most notably dealing with King Edward VIII’s abdication of the British throne.

King Edward VIII was actually forced to abdicate the British throne in 1938, due to his support for Hitler and the Nazis. The House of Windsor through a devious propaganda campaign said that King Edward VIII was an aberration. This was a lie as the British monarchy combined with London bankers helped fund Adolf Hitler and built up the Nazi war machine. The British monarchy wanted to build up Hitler to fight Russia in an effort to consolidate power.

It was also revealed that following his abdication, King Edward VIII had been in close collaboration with the Nazis in Spain and Portugal to create a British revolution, overthrow the Churchill government and regain the throne from his brother King George VI. This was reported in the Washington Post and London Observer in the mid 1990s.

King Edward VIII’s abdication eventually allowed Queen Elizabeth II to ascend to the throne in 1952. Five years before, she married her second cousin Prince Phillip who had siblings with numerous ties to Nazis. Prince Phillip was actually trained in the Hilter Youth and his brothers-in-law became high profile members of the Nazi party. His belief in Nazi ideology is clear when one looks at what he has said on the subject of overpopulation.

Here is one particular quote where Prince Phillips talks about his views on overpopulation.

In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.

Prince Phillips quoted in the Deutsche Press Agenture, August 1988

What sort of sick individual would want to be reincarnated as a virus to solve overpopulation? Prince Phillips is clearly obsessed with reducing the world’s population much like how Hitler wanted to kill off the world’s population and form a master race.

Prince Phillips also helped create the World Wildlife Fund with Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands who was a former Nazi SS officer. Prince Bernhard was also instrumental in helping create the secretive Bilderberg group where the elites of the western world meet on a yearly basis to agree on policy that helps further their New World Order agenda. Julian Huxley the original director of UNESCO and a proponent of eugenics also aided in the formation of the World Wildlife Fund. The World Wildlife Fund exists to this day acting as a multinational front to implement Nazi inspired environmental policies to limit human progress and potential. This organization is clearly designed to help the fraudulent global warming agenda that is being used to try and implement a global carbon tax. The global carbon tax would be used to help fund the United Nations and cement a one world government. The House of Windsor routinely hypes why we should care about global warming for a reason, and this is undoubtedly the real agenda behind it.

What’s really strange is the fact that the House of Windsor is more German than anything. In the 1800s, Queen Victoria married Albert of Saxe-Coburg which had its roots in Germany creating the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. The name was changed to the House of Windsor by King George V to renounce its German ancestry in light of World War I. Amazingly, King George V was actually an honorary Field Marshal in the German army.

It is clear that Queen Elizabeth II and the House of Windsor has numerous links to Nazis. Prince Harry dressing up in a Nazi outfit a few years ago was actually reflective of what these so called British royals are all about. These are disgusting creatures that are heavily involved with the creation of the New World Order. The mainstream news maintains that Queen Elizabeth II and these other royals only have symbolic power, but that is clearly an illusion. Queen Elizabeth II is officially the head of state of sixteen countries and is believed to have total net worth in the billions if not higher. Her husband’s involvement with the Bilderberg group, the World Wildlife Fund among other things is a clear indication that the House of Windsor is involved in trying to form a New World Order. Much like the Rockefeller family, the House of Windsor rules in secret and utilize front men like Tony Blair to implement policy and absorb the brunt of public anger.

It was sickening watching President Bush refer to Queen Elizabeth II as her majesty and Prince Phillip as his royal highness. At least Bush didn’t entirely bow down to her majesty slipping up in his speech saying that the Queen helped celebrate the nation’s bicentennial in 1776. Queen Elizabeth II was not amused by the slip up because she is an elitist piece of garbage. These people should be referred to as royal Nazi trash and deported from the country immediately. The United States of America is supposed to be a free country and the idea of a royal lineage is in direct conflict with freedom. Even more disgusting was watching a CNN news piece lecturing us on appropriate protocol when dealing with the Queen. Royal families and elites have established these anal protocols only as a mechanism of control. Military institutions also establish protocol like this so people don’t question orders. It is nothing more than social engineering, training people to be enslaved.

Queen Elizabeth II and her husband Prince Phillip are human garbage and have clear links to Nazism. The sooner these inbred clowns leave the country the better.

King Edward VIII’s Nazi Ties

Prince Phillip Admired Nazis

Bilderberg Group Strikes Again

Bill Clinton Ponders a Role as First Gentleman

New York Times | May 10, 2007

Bill Clinton and his spouse are getting ready to take their turn back in the Whitehouse again. To them and their propaganda minister Rupert Murdoch, it is already a done deal, in the bag.

If you include Bush Sr’s powerful and influential position as VP during the Reagan (who was Bush’s puppet) years beginning in 1981, and if you take it for granted that Hillary Clinton will be in office for two terms from 2009 to 2017, you will realize that by then, just two families will have ruled the Whitehouse for at least 36 years.

That’s more than three and a half decades in power.

Now, even if you believe they are at odds with each other, this should begin to make you wonder if there is really any such thing as a real choice when it involves the highest positions in the US government. But the fact is, there is no essential difference between them. It’s just one long, fake Hegelian tag-team match, tacking our ship of state alternately to the Right and to the Left, on a zigzag course straght to Hell.

They vacation together, Barbara Bush (who some speculate is the moon-child of Aleister Crowley) calls Bill Clinton (who some speculate is the moon-child of Winthrop Rockefeller) “my son”, they are part of the Rockefeller elite inner circle, members of Skull and Bones, Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, all ruling over us like kings and queens and they do indeed have close connections to European royalty. In fact, with the Queen’s recent pompous visit to Washington, greeted ecstatically by throngs of gushing psycho-phants, some have suggested this throws the doors open for monarchy in the United States. Well, the truth is, it is already a covert monarchy and they might try to make it an overtly feudal system if we let them. They have waged war on the middle class, destroyed our economic independence, opened up the borders to a flood of illegal immigration and drugs, systematically chipped away at our constitutional rights and sovereignty, merged us with Mexico and the EU, set up an militarized Orwellian police state, engaged in state-terror and involved us in bloody wars that nobody in their right minds really wanted. And the list just goes on and on.

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton … Who Needs Elections?

Mo Rocca on The Bushes and Clintons as the Royal House of Republicrats

How much more do we have to take before we turn against them and drive them out of power? The only solution is a gathering storm of grassroots activism to back Congressman Ron Paul who is the only candidate that can beat Hillary Clinton next year and break this cycle once and for all. He is the only person who can take the helm and steer us away from this neofeudal disaster. He is the only candidate you can vote for because you actually believe in him, rather than voting for a lesser of evils.

Please go to http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ and support him. If you are poor, send him ten bucks. If you are doing okay, send him $100. And if you are well off, send him $1000 or more. That is what he needs more than anything else and his success will our success.


Bill Clinton plans to be a first gentleman for the 21st century: a post-modern, post-ego presidential spouse who does not earn an income of his own, but rather pays the bills from family savings and does what he can to help the missus down in the Oval Office.

“I’ve tried to get in a position where, you know, I — I won’t — I’ll be able to do what she did when I was president — that is, I don’t want to spend any time making a living,” Mr. Clinton said in an interview on CNN late Tuesday, when asked about his activities if Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the presidency in 2008.

“I hope I will have saved enough by then, if she is elected, that we can just, you know, pay our bills and — I’d like to keep our two homes, our home in Washington, our home in Chappaqua,” Mr. Clinton added. “And otherwise, I’d like to devote whatever time she wants to whatever she wants me to do, and I should be able to have probably two to three days a week to do in the foundation. I certainly hope so.”

Mrs. Clinton has been fairly explicit that she will keep Mr. Clinton busy if she becomes president, saying he could become “ambassador to the world” — with the William J. Clinton Foundation and missions to improve ties with other nations and tackle foreign policy hot spots.

A non-earning Mr. Clinton would be a big change for the couple, but it would also reduce apparent or actual conflicts of interest if she was president and he had decided instead to remain in a money-making position.

Mr. Clinton gives dozens of paid speeches a year, mostly to corporations and philanthropic groups in North America and Europe, typically earning from $100,000 to $200,000 per speech. He earned more than $30 million in speaking fees from 2001 to 2005, according to his wife’s Senate ethics reports.

He has been an adviser to a family of funds run by the Yucaipa Companies, a California private equity firm controlled by a friend, the billionaire Ronald W. Burkle. Under terms described by Mr. Clinton’s aides and Mr. Burkle, Mr. Clinton stands to earn tens of millions of dollars from the arrangement over time, depending on the funds’ growth.